Genuine question - haven't books been changing forever though? I thought that was why books had 2nd (etc) editions and not just reprintings.
Is this debate over that they're "tamer" rather than that books change?
Is this debate over that they're "tamer" rather than that books change?
Let's not use the wiggle room for correcting typos or translating from middle to modern English as an excuse to change the meaning of the written words while passing it off as the same book by the same author (and hiding behind "Nth edition" to deceive readers that the changes are insignificant).
And in as much as that falsification has been happening forever, it was just as wrong then as what is happening now.
Editions frequently include new or updated information on the topic, not just corrections.
This is a disingenuous argument and I suspect you know it.
This is exactly the kind of excuse I was talking about. An honest translator tries to preserve meaning as much as possible. A dishonest one uses translation as an excuse to tweak meaning to their liking, and accuses objectors that it's either that, or a "nonsensical, word-for-word literal translation".