3

Which English translation of Hegel's 'Science of Logic' would you recommend?

I have a translation by A. V. Miller, and another one by George di Giovanni.

Ion Buzu
  • 31
  • 2
  • 1
    To what end are you reading 'Science of Logic'? For almost all research purposes, the di Giovanni translation is considered superior. – virmaior Feb 15 '18 at 23:51
  • I want the translation to make the text comprehensible to me, and preserve the main ideas and lines of thoughts (the translation in my native tongue is horrible). – Ion Buzu Feb 16 '18 at 00:02

1 Answers1

3

I have di Giovanni and Miller open in front of me. Considerable portions of di Giovanni are word for word the same as Miller (the first page of 'The Doctrine of Being' is an example). However, I should not hesitate to prefer di Giovanni for three reasons.

In the first place, Miller has only an embarrassingly brief introduction by the late doyen of Hegel studies, J.N. Finday, and two pages of Translator's preface. di Giovanni's 44-page introduction (xii-xliv) completely out-distances Miller's edition in this respect.

Secondly, di Giovanni's historical and explanatory notes are fuller and more accurate than Miller's.

Thirdly, one generation of scholars builds on the work of the preceding. Miller, 1969, had W.H. Johnston and L.G. Struthers' 1929 translation on which to improve (not a difficult task); and di Giovanni (2010) not only has Miller in the background but uses the Hegel scholarship of good, sometimes outstanding, quality that has been published in considerable quantity since Miller produced his translation. Miller's translation was in its day better than any other English translation and for this we should be grateful, but its day has passed.

Geoffrey Thomas
  • 35,647
  • 4
  • 43
  • 146