在欧洲，少数人认为诗歌是不能翻译的：（1）意大利作家（如埃科）所引用的熟语—译者即背叛者（traduttore, traditore. A translator is a traitor）（2）德莱顿《奥维德书信集》译序中引用的邓汉姆的评论—诗具有一种微妙的精神，当你把它从一种语言移入另一种语言的时候，那种精神就会完全消失。你如果不把一种新的精神加入译文，那来，译出来的东西除了一堆渣滓外就什么也没有了。（Sir John Denham (who advised more liberty than he took himself) gives his reason for his innovation, in his admirable preface before the translation of the second Aeneid. “poesie is of so subtle a spirit, that in pouring out of one Language into another, it will all evaporate; and if a new spirit be not added in the transfusion, there will be nothing but a Caput mortuum, ”） The poetical works of John Dryden, Volume 5 p9 （3）雪莱《为诗一辩》的批评—译诗是待劳无益的，把一个诗人的创作从一种语言译成另一种语言，犹如把一朵紫罗兰投入坩埚，企图由此探索它的色泽和香味的构造原理，其为不智一也。（Hence the vanity of translation; it were as wise to cast a violet into a crucible that you might discover the formal principle of its color and odor, as seek to transfuse from one language into another the creations of a poet. The plant must spring again from its seed, or it will bear no flower—and this is the burden of the curse of Babel.）（4）弗洛斯特所谓诗就是翻译中失去的东西。（You've often heard me say – perhaps too often – that poetry is what is lost in translation. It is also what is lost in interpretation.）Louis Untermeyer，Robert Frost: A Backward Look 据泰特勒Tytler《翻译原理》，郑振铎《译文学书的三个问题》（1921）极简略地介绍了前三种说法。戴望舒回应了邓汉姆的评论，《诗论零札》（1944）写道：“说‘诗不能翻译’是一个通常的错误，只有坏诗一经翻译才失去一切。因为实际它并没有‘诗’包涵在内，而只是字眼和声音的炫弄，只是渣滓。真正的诗在任何语言的翻译里都永远保持它的价值。而这价值，不但是地域，就是时间也不能损坏的。翻译可以说是诗的试金石，诗的滤罗。不用说，我是指并不歪曲原作的翻译。”
在欧洲，少数人认为诗歌是不能翻译的：（1）意大利作家（如埃科）所引用的熟语—译者即背叛者（traduttore, traditore. A translator is a traitor）（2）意大利克罗齐《美学》的论点：与这个道理相关的一个道理是翻译的不可能性：如果翻译冒充可以改造某一表现品为另一表现品，如移瓶注酒那样，那是不可能的。在已用审美的办法创作成的东西上面，我们如果再加工，就只能用逻辑的办法；我们不能把已具审美形式的东西化成另一个仍是审美的形式。每一个翻译其实不外乎（一）减少剥损，以及（二）取原文摆在熔炉里，和所谓翻译者亲身的印象融合起来，创造一个新的表现品。就第一个情形说，表现品始终还是原文的那一个，翻译既有几分欠缺，就不是真正的表现品；就第二个情形说，表现品确有两个，但是两个内容不同。‘不是忠实而丑，就是不忠实而美’这一句谚语可以见出每个翻译者所必感到的两难之境。非审美的翻译，例如字对字的翻译，或是义译，对于原文都仅能算注疏。（3）英国约翰·邓亨《埃尼德》译序的评论—我觉得译诗的一个大毛病就在于死译。让这个谨慎给那些从事于忠实的事的人保守着；但是无论什么人如以此为译诗的宗旨，他所做的实在不是必要的，并且他也永不能成就他的试验；因为他的事业不仅是译一种文字而为别一种文字，乃是译这首诗而为别一首诗；而诗呢，则是具有一种奥妙的精神的，由这种文字而转于那种文字上时，他就完全蒸散了；如果没有一种新的精神，加在译文里，那么，除了无用之物以外，更没有什么东西存留着呢。（I conceive it is a vulgar error in translating poets, to affect being fidus interpres; Let that Care be with them who deal in Matters of Fact, or Matters of Faith ; but whosoever aims at it in Poetry, as he attempts what is not required, so shall he never perform what he attempts; for ‘’tis not his business alone to translate language into language, but poesie into poesie’ and poesie is of so subtle a spirit, that in pouring out of one Language into another, it will all evaporate; and if a new spirit be not added in the transfusion, there will be nothing but a Caput mortuum,） Richard Steele,Joseph Addison, The guardian. No. 164 p303 Poems and translations: with The sophy, a tragedy. Written by the Honourable Sir John Denham p15（4）雪莱《为诗一辩》的批评—译诗是待劳无益的，把一个诗人的创作从一种语言译成另一种语言，犹如把一朵紫罗兰投入坩埚，企图由此探索它的色泽和香味的构造原理，其为不智一也。（Hence the vanity of translation; it were as wise to cast a violet into a crucible that you might discover the formal principle of its color and odor, as seek to transfuse from one language into another the creations of a poet. The plant must spring again from its seed, or it will bear no flower—and this is the burden of the curse of Babel.）（5）弗洛斯特所谓诗就是翻译中失去的东西。（You've often heard me say – perhaps too often – that poetry is what is lost in translation. It is also what is lost in interpretation.）Louis Untermeyer，Robert Frost: A Backward Look （6）柏格森《形而上学导言》—又如将一首诗译成各种语言，这些译文在声色气势等方面彼此修饰订正，从而提供一个对于原诗越来越真实的形象，但它们仍然永远无法表现原诗的内在含意。从一定的角度所取的肖像，以一定符号所构成的译文，与所取的那个角度所要摄制的或者说符号所要表达的那个对象相比，永远是不完满的。P3 （7）约翰逊：诗实在是不能译的；所以唯有诗人能保留文字的佳妙。倘若我们能够在译本中寻找原作品的妙处，我们可以不必费神去学习他国的文字了。因为诗的美妙除在本国的原著外，决不能被别国保留着，但是我们能够研究这文字而领会诗的好处。‘You may translate books of science exactly. You may also translate history, in so far as it is not embellished with oratory, which is poetical. Poetry, indeed, cannot be translated; and, therefore, it is the poets that preserve the languages; for we would not be at the trouble to learn a language, if we could have all that is written in it just as well in a translation. But as the beauties of poetry cannot be preserved in any language except that in which it was originally written, we learn the language.’ Johnson to Boswell, Life of Johnson