By Their Epithets Shall Ye Know Them

“As a journalist, he knew the value of concise speech. Every word counted, as each one had to be paid for when telegraphed to the news desk. Every decorative, non-informative adjective should be axed.” If you want proof, read newspaper columns from before the advent of the telegraph, and from just after. Before, the writing was expansive, a bit rambling, almost poetic. After, they are barely longer than a tweet in some cases. There are online examples of these, but the real paper copies cost less (per unit in quantity) than an expensive coffee drink.

I didn’t understand Borges’ point here. That the translations seem completely disconnected from the source text, and only provide the general tone of it?

> Or take the explanation Borges gave for abandoning the Oriental studies he had begun around 1916:

> Working with enthusiasm and credulity through the English version of a certain Chinese philosopher, I came across this memorable passage: ‘A man condemned to death doesn’t care that he is standing at the edge of a precipice, for he has already renounced life.’ Here the translator attached an asterisk, and his note informed me that this interpretation was preferable to that of a rival Sinologist, who had translated the passage thus: ‘The servants destroy the works of art, so that they will not have to judge their beauties and defects.’ Then, like Paolo and Francesca, I read no more. A mysterious scepticism had slipped into my soul.

No, that the adjective "mysterious" is actually providing something.