The verbs in 'Discipline and Punish' are both infinitives, not present tense
verbs. English has two infinitive forms, with and without 'to'; words like
'can', 'must', etc require the bare infinitive as it is called, otherwise
the 'infinitive without 'to''. So from the grammatical point of view we
could have had 'Survey and Punish', though of course there are objections to
'survey' on other grounds, as various people have already pointed out.
Tim
On 8/5/09 11:33 PM, "David Shumway" <shumway@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> The English translation is DISCIPLINE AND PUNISH, not "punishment."
> Both terms are verbs, but not infinitives as are those in the French
> title. There is no exact equivalent to "Surveiller" in English; it does
> not mean surveillance in the usual sense of that word in English.
> Moreover a title that used the exact cognates, "To survey and to
> punish," would neither be clear nor catchy. Thus the choice of present
> tense verbs, for which again, "survey" does not work. Finally, one could
> argue that the English title actually better reflects the focus of the
> book because "discipline" is a more important concept there than is
> surveillance.
>
> David
>
> Tamir Sorek wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Does anyone can help me to solve the following puzzle: Why did Michel
>> Foucault ask to translate the title of his book "Surveiller Et Punir" to
>> "Discipline and Punishment" in English, instead of "Surveillance and
>> Punishment"? Did he think that his French title was misunderstood?
>>
>> Thank you in advance for your help,
>>
>> Tamir Sorek
>>
>>
>>
--
Professor Tim McNamara
Discipline Chair, Linguistics and Applied Linguistics
School of Languages and Linguistics
The University of Melbourne
Victoria 3010
Australia
Tel (+ 61 3) 8344 4207
Fax (+ 61 3) 8344 8990
Web: www.linguistics.unimelb.edu.au/about/staff/profiles/mcnamara/index.html
verbs. English has two infinitive forms, with and without 'to'; words like
'can', 'must', etc require the bare infinitive as it is called, otherwise
the 'infinitive without 'to''. So from the grammatical point of view we
could have had 'Survey and Punish', though of course there are objections to
'survey' on other grounds, as various people have already pointed out.
Tim
On 8/5/09 11:33 PM, "David Shumway" <shumway@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> The English translation is DISCIPLINE AND PUNISH, not "punishment."
> Both terms are verbs, but not infinitives as are those in the French
> title. There is no exact equivalent to "Surveiller" in English; it does
> not mean surveillance in the usual sense of that word in English.
> Moreover a title that used the exact cognates, "To survey and to
> punish," would neither be clear nor catchy. Thus the choice of present
> tense verbs, for which again, "survey" does not work. Finally, one could
> argue that the English title actually better reflects the focus of the
> book because "discipline" is a more important concept there than is
> surveillance.
>
> David
>
> Tamir Sorek wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Does anyone can help me to solve the following puzzle: Why did Michel
>> Foucault ask to translate the title of his book "Surveiller Et Punir" to
>> "Discipline and Punishment" in English, instead of "Surveillance and
>> Punishment"? Did he think that his French title was misunderstood?
>>
>> Thank you in advance for your help,
>>
>> Tamir Sorek
>>
>>
>>
--
Professor Tim McNamara
Discipline Chair, Linguistics and Applied Linguistics
School of Languages and Linguistics
The University of Melbourne
Victoria 3010
Australia
Tel (+ 61 3) 8344 4207
Fax (+ 61 3) 8344 8990
Web: www.linguistics.unimelb.edu.au/about/staff/profiles/mcnamara/index.html