cladking Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So exactly what sort of empirical evidence do you
> have that Faulkner, Allen, Shmakov et al are
> getting closer and closer to author intent?
That is not the way it works. The authors you mention have each presented their own cases for their interpretations - neither I, nor anyone else, need to justify their translations. However, if you should disagree with any part of their translations, then the onus falls on you, the disagreer, to make the case in each instance as to where and how they may have erred, and how and why your alternate interpretation is to be considered more valid.
Shmakov's work is a perfect example of this approach. You cite Shmakov, but have you actually read his "New Readings"? He disagrees with many of the specifics of Allen's PT translations, and in each case he then details his argument - providing numerous textual examples to help explain and support his reasoning behind each suggested improvement. He is very clear, very specific, and very thorough. There is much to be learned by studying his approach. May I suggest that such a methodology would serve you infinitely better than your apparent penchant for simply relying on Mercer as your touchstone.