Letter to the Committee of the Library of Classics of Philosophy written 01.04.1952

Prof. Roman Ingarden         v           v           v          v                    v             Krakow, 4/1/1952
Department: German philosophy
 v        L 19/52



The Editorial Committee of the Library of Classics of Philosophy at the SPI

Warsaw, Nowy Świat St. 35 apt. 4a


Due to the adjournment of the Editorial Committee meeting until 22nd of the present month I hereby submit a written report on the activities of the head of department / German philosophy + Descartes + Spinoza / over the last two months.
1. On 3/24/1952 J. Gałecki, PhD, has submitted to me the translation of Herder’s work “Ideen zu einer Philosophie der Geschichte der Menscheit” pages: 1 – 103. I will start reviewing this translation in the present month in order to allow for the formalities of admission to be carried out. The relevant translation review will, however, only be possible when the entire translation of the said work is completed.
2. On 3/29/1952 prof. St. Świeżawski has submitted to me the translation of Objectiones et responsies Descartes astr. pp. 33-83. Before that date I had already received p. I of the translation, pp. 1-32.
3. I have discussed matters related to the translation of Descartes’ Objectiones I with prof. Świeżawski in a number of meetings. Result: the translation is a serious and diligent work at a high scientific level. Of course, it requires a number of retouches. We agreed with the translator on a number of issues in the past. A thorough check can only take place after the completion and submission of the entire work. For now, I think that the submitted texts can be formally considered as accepted and prof. Świeżawski can be paid royalties in accordance with his contract /for the submitted 83 pp./.
4. Bornstein-Suchorzewska’s translation of Kant’s Prolegomena is currently undergoing a thorough control by the head of department. So far 95 out of 139 pages have been checked /based on Cassirer’s edition/, introduction and footnotes excluded. The process will require several more weeks.
 v        The head of department held a meeting with Suchorzewska, PhD, and obtained her consent to the proposed changes. I think, therefore, that Ms. Suchorzewska’d work shall be considered admitted by the Committee and the payment of her due royalties shall be made in accordance with the the contract. The matter of the introduction and the index would have to remain on hold, especially since the Committee’s instructions with regards to the index have not yet been issued.
 v        I would like to point out that I did not make any changes to the basic terminology in the translation of Prolegomena /Verstand, Anschauung, Erscheinung etc./. I agree with the position of the Editorial Committee Office that Kant’s terminology should be kept consistent and accepting any changes made to it by Bornstein-Suchorzewska must be postponed until the Committee’s decision on the terminology I have suggested. However, I shall be the one to to it for Prolegomena. Therefore, it should not affect the payment of Suchorzewska’s royalties. I will send my suggestions regarding the corrections of the translation of Prolegomena to the Committee Office as soon as the review has been carried out, which will probably take place before the next meeting of the Editorial Committee.

On this opportunity, I would like to inform that I sent 130 pages of my translation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason yesterday by express post.

Respectfully and with best regards