Read the passage below regarding literary translation.
In traditional literary theory, translation is frequently lamented as a necessary evil—a purely reproductive mechanism that inevitably dilutes the author's authentic voice. However, this purist paradigm ignores the practical realities of linguistic migration. Attempts at strictly literal, word-for-word translation frequently strip historical texts of their emotional and cultural resonance, rendering them sterile and alien to the target audience. Because preserving a work's impact often requires substituting target-culture idioms and reconstructing complex rhetorical devices, effective translation inherently alters the fabric of the text. Consequently, translation must be understood not as a lossy reproduction of an original, but as an independent, creative literary act that ensures the ongoing vitality of a literary tradition.
Based on the author's argument structure, arrange the following claims in order of their logical hierarchy. Start with the initial background context being critiqued, follow with the foundational premise and the intermediate conclusion, and end with the author's overarching main thesis.
- 1Traditional literary purists view translation as a reproductive process that inherently degrades an author's original work.
- 2Strictly literal translations often fail to preserve the emotional and cultural impact of the original text.
- 3To maintain a work's resonance, translators must alter the original text by substituting appropriate cultural idioms.
- 4Translation operates as an autonomous, creative literary endeavor rather than a mere mechanism of reproduction.