A reader has answered my pot about
"Official" translations with the following interesting comment:
This is not so vague as you seem to say , it's just literary translators' lingo. And there may be reasons to say so: just imagine I want to quote Rilke's Herbsttag. If I look for a translation, I will find something like this: http://luxuslinguae.splinder.com/post/5589473
A translation by Pintor, one without any credits, one by an amateur, one by a blogger. Which one is the "official"? Pintor's, I would say (although I know there are is a more recent one, in a beautiful edition of Einaudi's Pleaide, and I would choose it as the official one, in primis because I know the translator, as she was my teacher at university and I know she spent something like 3 years on it). What has made it official: the translator's quality, the fact that it is published by a renowed publishing house, etc. At any rate, one shouldn't compare technical translation with literary translation, and not only because of remuneration. This is, of course, my humble opinion.
An aside: I am not sure where I have made any comparison between technical and literary translations, apart, maybe, by my being a technical translator commenting on something that falls in the province of literary translators.
However, I would like to answer to the main points noted in the comment: If calling something the "official" translation in this sense is current lingo or jargon among literary translators, then I shall defer to my colleague, as I acknowledge that current widespread usage normally trumps abstract rules.
Personally, however, I would prefer to call such translations "authoritative", or even "canonical". I realize that I am probably splitting hairs, but "official", in my mind at least, implies some official body which sanctions what is good and what less so.
Also, my colleague gives a good example of an official translation that is clearly
prima facie better than the other translations found ("
A translation by Pintor, one without any credits, one by an amateur, one by a blogger"). What about the case when there are several different authoritative translations for a given work? Is one of them to be considered the "official" one (and if so, on which grounds)?, or could there be more than one "official" translations?