My Thoughts

Translator’s Note

xix Translator’s Note The style of Mes Pensées, especially in the early part of the collection , often featured a Latinate syntax with long sentences and complex participial phrases. With reluctance, I have mostly abandoned this syntax , instead opting for a somewhat simpler construction that would more likely be accessible to the kind of readership Montesquieu sought in his lifetime. For in the language of his age, his intended audience was clearly mondain (worldly) rather than strictly érudit (learned). Otherwise I have attempted a translation that is as close to the tone and literal meaning of the text as possible. Where two renderings of a passage seemed about equally plausible, this is indicated in the footnotes. It should also be noted that on some occasions where Montesquieu seems to be writing down a passage from memory, the translation is presented from the correct text rather than from the author’s faulty memory. One pitfall for the Montesquieu translator is distinguishing between the descriptive and the normative. As an inveterate comparativist, Montesquieu was concerned both to describe in detail the objects of his capacious observation and to detect general similarities or differences between them—some of which were intended to have normative force, but not all. The ambiguities in the French verb devoir have sometimes made it difficult to tell these two voices apart, for devoir can mean “ought,” “should,” or “must,” but it can also mean “is supposed to” or “is bound to,” as in “All men are bound to die” (Littré). In these instances, the translator is perforce an interpreter. Montesquieu was rather careful about making normative commitments, so this translation attempts to be careful about attributing them to him. The text contains a number of terms and concepts that pose particular translation problems. Instead of deciding upon a single rendering of any given term and adhering to it throughout, I have taken my cue from the context, following in this regard Montesquieu himself, who notes that a word like esprit will mean different things in English, depending on the xx Translator’s Note circumstances (pensées 685, 1160, and 1682). Since the Pensées cover a full gamut of topics, the problematic terms are also eclectic in scope. A number of recurring words raised special difficulties: admirer; admiration. More likely “to marvel,” “to feel wonder at,” rather than “to regard with approval.” bel esprit; beaux esprits. Usually a “polite and well-adorned mind,” but often used ironically and disparagingly. In the latter cases, it is not always clear whether Montesquieu means to disparage the content of the mind or the elegant manner of its presentation, so sometimes I have gone with “dandy” and other times with “know-it-all.” climat. Usually translated as “climate,” but where the meaning seems to be a place where the weather occurs rather than merely the weather itself, “clime” has sometimes been used. dégout; dégouter. Although “disgust” is the closest literal equivalent, that is too strong a word for what Montesquieu generally has in mind, so I have usually resorted to terms such as “distaste,” “aversion,” or being “put off.” disais. Montesquieu begins a sizeable number of entries with je disais or its third-person equivalents. This imperfect indicative would normally suggest “I was saying” or “I used to say.” But the context rarely seemed to fit these phrases, so I have generally settled for “I said.” droit. What is right or just. Often translated here as “law,” as in “divine law,” “civil law,” “natural law,” “canon law,” “the law of nations,” and the like. Sometimes it means a moral or legal claim, in which case I have translated it as “right.” Also used for taxes, tariffs, or duties, as in le droit d’entrée (“the import duty”). esprit. Philosophically, this notoriously multivalent word can mean spirit (vs. matter) or mind (vs. body). But in Montesquieu’s text, the difficult decision has more often hinged on social qualities (“wit,” conversational prowess) vs. intellectual qualities (being “intelligent” or “smart”). At pensées 1160 and, especially, 1682, Montesquieu defines the term, gently chiding his fellow Frenchmen along the way while explaining why it is so problematic (see also pensées 685 and 686). Sometimes, it has seemed prudent to leave the term untranslated (pensées 213, 1062, 1122, 1145, 1160, 1218, 1370, 1426, and 2239). état. Politically, the “regime” or “government” and usually capitalized here, [3.139.82.23] Project MUSE (2024-04-24...