Excerpt
This way of translating offended scholars who believed that translation must be literal to be accurate. Pound provoked their wrath by stating in print that his version of “The Seafarer” was “as nearly literal” as any translation could be. Obviously it is not. Where the Anglo-Saxon has *wrecan /i, Pound has “reckon.” Where the Anglo-Saxon has *sumeres weard/i, Pound has “summerward.” And so on. Moreover, there are unfortunately some mistakes, as when Pound misreads *purh /i, as *pruh /i.
Nevertheless, Pound’s translation conveys the important meaning of the Anglo-Saxon poem, and does something that a literal translation fails to do - renders it into poetic English, finding new equivalents for old emotions…
[code=english]Question: The author of passage 2 suggests that the “wrath” of the scholars was
A. irrational, because it ignored Pound’s good intentions
B. meaningless, because the scholars were not translators
C. inevitable, because Pound’s method had attracted considerable attention
D. genuine, because the scholars felt personally insulted
E. understandable, because Pound’s claim could be disputed
Basically, I was able to cross out B, C, and D. However, both A and E are right. I chose A and got it wrong. Why? Doesn't the paragraph starting with *Nevertheless* supporting the fact that Pound had good intentions when writing and being as literal as possible with showing both poetic and spirit similarities? Why is E the correct choice (when A is correct too)?