It is very good, in fact necessary to strictly take into account the quality of everything that is translated (often things are translated more than once, i.e. from another translation and not the original). This is where not only the necessary nihil obstat and/or imprimatur comes into question, but also the personal sensus fidei.
I specifically research this on many translations of the Bible, and in several languages. Also, thanks to various translations in several languages (if you know them) of some revelations or some books of a more modern era from a saint or a "saint", it is much easier to make a distinction. And so in some cases it is even possible to recognize where there is deception.
One should always pray to the Holy Spirit for the gift of discerning spirits. For there are many false teachers, prophets and pastors. Today they not only speak lies and deceptions, but they also leave many things in writings and thus poison a large number of people, even those after their time …More
I agree 100% with your idea of knowing Latin (and I would add Greek): 'It is even better to learn and know Latin, because then you can find a lot of scanned original material, written from the first hand and the pen of many saints in various archives on the Internet.' When I compare different translations of 'The Dialogue' of Saint Catherine of Siena for example I can see huge differences under the guise of 'modern language' or 'science' (She did not know Copernican theory so we have to delete some text or put it in the brackets in the best case). From Google AI about Latin speakers: 'Some estimates suggest there are at least a few thousand fluent speakers, while others suggest a figure as high as a few tens of thousands globally.' In any case not much.
Nice: somebody who thinks.
Now the heavens are like a group of kids playing "broken telephone". The first kid says to the second "God doesn't exist" then the second against the third and so on, until reaching kid number 200. Now the 200th kid is asked: What is the message, and the kid says: "God does exist". And the reason that the kid says this, is because God does exist, lives and is not silent. Human reasoning will always presume that at a certain time "A", God said something to a receptor and then after the traditional lore at moment "B" we presume that information has disappeared or was corrupted, as if the chain of kids were a network-cable with inherent data losses. In that case the message "God doesn't exist" could change to "♪od dΓesnit e▬ist". You see the difference? The problem is that researchers will always investigate theological questions with the premise that God doesn't exist and then run into trouble. However if you take the premise that God exists, then through inductive reasoning you will find that He does exist and is not silent.
So it is with the translators and personal sensus fidei, and more so with the sensus fidelium. If they are inspired, then the 'errors' they commit are God provoked and will make the text they translate only more relevant and true, because God exists.