Why is the interpretation of Omar Khayyam's ruba'i so different? A Swede, an Englishman, a Russian, and an Iranian together compared the original and translations of his ruba'i.
And we didn't find any of them that have the same meaning and content! Or was the meaning changed or the content changed? In addition, the number of imitations of Khayyam exceeds 100 times the true number of rubai Khayyam and 100 times-48 was written, now 5000 rubai have been published. And this number will continue to grow.
But the meaning and sound of a poetic translation into different languages is completely different-all languages have different semantics and phonetics.Moreover, I read different translations of Khayyam by Russian-speaking translators-the same rubai sounded completely different.I like G. Plisetsky's translations best of all.No wonder Zhukovsky (who translated a lot himself)he said: “A translator in prose is a slave,a translator in poetry is a rival.”It seems that if you want to know the real author, you need to learn the original language.And then instead of Shakespeare, we read,for example,Marshak..As for the Khayyam fakes,this is the first time I've heard them.I hope that's not the case-although it could be.Then the forgers were talented-it is impossible to distinguish..