Art. 32. Frederic.
author: Elizabeth Moody
source date: June 1806

Elizabeth Moody Art. 32. Frederic. Translated from the French of M. Fiévée. 3 Vols. 12mo. 12s. Boards. Wallis. [The Monthly Review , second series, vol. 50, June 1806, pp. 221. Moody gave the French original a somewhat more extensive treatment in The Monthly Review , Vol. 34, Foreign Appendix, 1801, pp. 531-532. Benjamin Nangle identifies Elizabeth Moody as the author of this review from an editor's marked copy of The Monthly Review . See Nangle, The Montly Review, Second Series, 1790-1815: Indexes of Contributors and Articles , Clarendon Press, 1955. This edition of the article was prepared for The Criticism Archive by Jonathan Pinkerton and Mary A. Waters.]

The chief merit of a translator is, in the first place, to adhere closely to the narrative; the second is to dress his version in elegant and polished language. Both of these circumstances are peculiarly interesting to the author of the original work, who necessarily feels (in some degree) his own fame connected with that of his translator; the triumph and the gale, if not equally divided, being in a great measure participated.

The translator of these volumes has performed his first task with commendable accuracy: but we cannot, with justice, pay the same tribute of praise to the last requisite accomplishment, namely, language. Here, however, we will not be fastidious, because the French author himself allows his style to have no claim to be ranked in the first class for elegance, and very candidly acknowledges 'aukward faults:'—yet we think that the translator might have spared the reader the aggravation of these defects by increasing their number.—We are here too often disgusted with 'aukward' expressions; for example: ' Well adjusted ornaments improve every one:' ' It is impressed on the minds of trades people:' ' 'Twas then he set up for an enemy.' ' Said I, embracing his neck,' &c.

These are certainly inelegancies: yet we would not discourage the translator from persevering in his very useful though laborious path, since in this field of literature these labourers are very beneficial to the Republic of Letters.

We noticed the original in our xxxivth Vol. N. S. p. 531.