Jump to content

Translation Theory Thread


Recommended Posts

A falsification of reality? Can I get the number of your pot dealer? Words cover up things only if you are lying, the fact that I'm explaining things doesn't mean I'm covering something up. If I say "Hi, my name is Deacon. Nice to meet you." exactly what am I falsifying by saying that?

Words are lies insofar as they always fall short of signifying the things they aim to describe and often times cover the chasm between the thing and the word. If we are conscious of this, then we are at least true in our lies. If we are not conscious of it, then we lie even when we tell the truth.

My pot dealer comes from Germany; albeit I have momentarily forgotten what city. Will let you know when I remember to look it up.

As to the idioms - thank you for clearing up their meaning. However, please note that in doing so, you only prove my point - which is that I am very interested in literal translations in order to uncover the strangeness of a different language and learn a new way of thinking that has been covered up by words which I use in my language. The fact that I never would have concieved such idioms in english, or would have trouble deducing the meaning of such idioms were they presented in english merely demonstrates that english language/grammar have burdened me and made it impossible to see things differently.

As for hajimemashite meaning "this is the first time" - I think that is a very beautiful greeting.

I also agree that it would be good for me to try to learn Japanese. Perhaps one day I will try to study this language - but as I grow older, I grow more lazy and fall deeper into set patterns and habits. Doing something new is hard. Maybe with the new year, I'll find the time and energy to do it.

Pete

Link to post
Share on other sites
Words are lies insofar as they always fall short of signifying the things they aim to describe and often times cover the chasm between the thing and the word. If we are conscious of this, then we are at least true in our lies. If we are not conscious of it, then we lie even when we tell the truth.

Yet how does introducing myself do just that? What you are saying makes no sense...

As to the idioms - thank you for clearing up their meaning. However, please note that in doing so, you only prove my point - which is that I am very interested in literal translations in order to uncover the strangeness of a different language and learn a new way of thinking that has been covered up by words which I use in my language. The fact that I never would have concieved such idioms in english, or would have trouble deducing the meaning of such idioms were they presented in english merely demonstrates that english language/grammar have burdened me and made it impossible to see things differently.

But you still fail to understand what I\'m trying to say... you shouldn\'t be FORCED to pause a subtitled line and look something like that up, or to ponder about it. This stuff is meant for entertainment, not for literary analysis. You yourself may like it, but had the subtitle of said \"oh he\'s nothin\' but talk\" instead of \"oh he\'s nothing but a meowing cat that doesn\'t catch any rats\", then there wouldn\'t be a problem. English isn\'t to blame here, I\'m pointing out how idioms of another language correlate into that in English... and in those cases, literal is not the best way to go because they are rooted in their culture, their language, therefore something that everyone in English can understand is necessary.

As for hajimemashite meaning \"this is the first time\" - I think that is a very beautiful greeting.

初めまして。私はディーコン・ブルーズと申します。どうぞよろしくお願いします。

This is the first time. I am called Deacon Blues. Please, I\'m kindly and humbly making a request.

^--- So you are saying that literal translation is very beautiful. I sound like I\'m from another planet... and I\'m humbly making a request for... what now? Cookies? Pot? A better translation, perhaps?

Edited by Deacon Blues
Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh I agree that nobody should be forced to suffer through what happens to bring me pleasure. I think I've been pretty careful to make it clear that I am not arguing that there should only be literal translations; I'm simply a) stating my preference and b) giving my reasons.

I also understand the "entertainment" argument - but I agree with Kieth that it's better to listen to the emotions/intonation in the original Japanese. Even if I probably am missing 99% of the meaning - even in the sound of someone's voice - then I still get the feeling that the characters are more vibrant and alive.

And just to repeat - I am basing all of this off of having only ONCE watched a dub - of Macross Plus - and that was just a terrible experience for me :)

Words are lies insofar as they always fall short of signifying the things they aim to describe and often times cover the chasm between the thing and the word. If we are conscious of this, then we are at least true in our lies. If we are not conscious of it, then we lie even when we tell the truth.

Yet how does introducing myself do just that? What you are saying makes no sense...

Well, the words we use in introducing ourselves do not contain the characteristics of the things they supposedly signify; although they often contain allusions based on conventions springing from multiple uses of the word. This goes for all words. (although I grant that there are those who disagree with me for a completely different reason than you - namely; others would say that words do not signify things; and that there are actually no things beyond words - they would argue that words give birth to meaning rather than signifying it - something I disagree with; but as with all things - there is never going to be a consensus.

This is the first time. I am called Deacon Blues. Please, I\'m kindly and humbly making a request.

Yes - I think this sounds very lovely. It makes it seem like people in Japan just talk in arcane poetic verse :) It's great.

Thank you for sharing this,

Pete

Link to post
Share on other sites
And just to repeat - I am basing all of this off of having only ONCE watched a dub - of Macross Plus - and that was just a terrible experience for me :)

That's funny...since that's generally considered one of the first GOOD dubs of an anime...

My advice: Never, ever watch the dub of Eva. You WILL gnaw your own leg off.

For the record (since I think Keith was talking to me when he started talking about watching cartoons in English), of COURSE I like subs better, but I have made a couple of exceptions. Princess Mononoke has very inconsistent voice acting (Billy Crudup and Gilllian Anderson are awesome, Billy Bob Thornton is terrible), but the script is by Neil Gaiman, of whom I'm a big fan. Most of the Disney dubs for Ghibli movies are perfectly serviceable, and I don't mind watching them (although I prefer the original Japanese). I also watched some of the dub for SDFM because of Mari, but...well...

Well, the words we use in introducing ourselves do not contain the characteristics of the things they supposedly signify; although they often contain allusions based on conventions springing from multiple uses of the word. This goes for all words. (although I grant that there are those who disagree with me for a completely different reason than you - namely; others would say that words do not signify things; and that there are actually no things beyond words - they would argue that words give birth to meaning rather than signifying it - something I disagree with; but as with all things - there is never going to be a consensus.

I agree with you if we're talking about language in general...but we're not; we're talking about scripts. A script, being a work of fiction, is MADE of language. Thus, I don't think it's a falsification any more than a painting of a person is a falsification because it's made of paint and not flesh. And before you voice the obvious objection: I don't think fiction or painting are falsifications of reality. They are not trying to BE real, they are trying to be good fiction and good paintings. The paint on a canvas isn't false paint, and the language of a script isn't false language. That's my point.

Yes - I think this sounds very lovely. It makes it seem like people in Japan just talk in arcane poetic verse :) It's great.

Even then, Deacon Blues translation leaves out the fact that the way he says "I am called Deacon Blues" is the humble form. The various hierarchical levels of politeness in Japanese are the bane of any Japanese-learner, and even more so for the translator. Anyway, it's a good example of something in Japanese for which there is no equivalent in English, and thus CANNOT be translated in any literal way. Completely different words are used to convey honor and/or personal humility; there are ways to do it in English ("I am called Deacon Blues, Sir" or "I'm pretty unimportant, but you could call me Deacon Blues if you'd like"), but nothing that would be anything close to literal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

More from the Japanese perspective:

CSI: two versions are broadcast on cable: the Japanese dub, and a subtitled version. The subtitled version even comes with a hip entertainer at the end who takes one or two lines of dialogue from the show and explains the exact meaning of it. Just the one line takes a good 2 minutes to explain.

Can that be done with every line of dialogue in a sub*? Does it need to be done for every line of dialogue?

Of course, in the end, the explanation is really only a long ad for a new educational channel. (Watch us, and you can learn hip English, or something.)

Nevertheless, it raises a good point - why is this thread arguing about idioms, when hip/trendy/cool language is not only much more useful in the long run, but more fun?

*At this point, would there be anything left of the original other than subtitles on the screen???

Link to post
Share on other sites
More from the Japanese perspective:

CSI: two versions are broadcast on cable: the Japanese dub, and a subtitled version. The subtitled version even comes with a hip entertainer at the end who takes one or two lines of dialogue from the show and explains the exact meaning of it. Just the one line takes a good 2 minutes to explain.

Can that be done with every line of dialogue in a sub*? Does it need to be done for every line of dialogue?

Of course, in the end, the explanation is really only a long ad for a new educational channel. (Watch us, and you can learn hip English, or something.)

Nevertheless, it raises a good point - why is this thread arguing about idioms, when hip/trendy/cool language is not only much more useful in the long run, but more fun?

*At this point, would there be anything left of the original other than subtitles on the screen???

Totally. Idioms are KY. ^_^

Link to post
Share on other sites

Gubaba:

I agree with you if we're talking about language in general...but we're not; we're talking about scripts. A script, being a work of fiction, is MADE of language. Thus, I don't think it's a falsification any more than a painting of a person is a falsification because it's made of paint and not flesh. And before you voice the obvious objection: I don't think fiction or painting are falsifications of reality.

Actually, the most obvious objection to me is that flesh itself - embodiment - is also a falsification of a person - pretty much on the same level as a painting. But again, maybe now the word "falsification" is falsifying the thing I'm trying to get at: I am by no means contending that there exists outside of the realm of language (or painting or flesh) something "truth" as such - because to a great extent, the truth of things is dependent on their grasping; and language (like painting and flesh) bring them closer to hand. So of course, it would be just as "false" to claim that we would be closer to "the truth" if we stripped things bear - of art, language, flesh etc - as it is false to claim that we have grasped the truth when covering things with art, language, flesh etc.

In short; my view is not static, but rather I see a dynamic at work; and I find subs, particularly literal subs, more revealing of this dynamic, whereas dubs, particularly interpretive dubs, cover more than they reveal.

As for the contention that we're talking about merely scripts - I disagree. The subs in an anime always come with the original voice work; and in the case of good anime - that means with original very good, emotive and pronounced voice work. Also - there are facial expressions and various forms of animation which convey feelings and moods.

All of this comes together and I enjoy watching, listening and reading it.

To go back to Macross Plus - remember when Guld and Mung were on the mountain -Star hill wasn't it called? - and they were talking. There is a scene where Mung hestitates in the original Japanese and it is OBVIOUS from her tone of voice that she is embarrassed (possibly at admitting that she gave up singing) - or at least that's how I felt watching the original Japanese.

In the sub version - it's totally different. The embarassment is not conveyed by the voice actor - we only see it in the animation (when she hesitates) - but the hesitation is not matched by the voice acting.

To me - this is a touching scene in the original Japanese which was ruined by the dubs.

Again - I agree with Kieth who noted that subbed works are not just about texts, but about also having access to sounds, tones and experiencing the work more naturally.

Pete

Link to post
Share on other sites
Gubaba:

Actually, the most obvious objection to me is that flesh itself - embodiment - is also a falsification of a person - pretty much on the same level as a painting. But again, maybe now the word "falsification" is falsifying the thing I'm trying to get at: I am by no means contending that there exists outside of the realm of language (or painting or flesh) something "truth" as such - because to a great extent, the truth of things is dependent on their grasping; and language (like painting and flesh) bring them closer to hand. So of course, it would be just as "false" to claim that we would be closer to "the truth" if we stripped things bear - of art, language, flesh etc - as it is false to claim that we have grasped the truth when covering things with art, language, flesh etc.

Sweet Jesus, you're a Neo-Platonist, aren't you!

As for the contention that we're talking about merely scripts - I disagree. The subs in an anime always come with the original voice work; and in the case of good anime - that means with original very good, emotive and pronounced voice work. Also - there are facial expressions and various forms of animation which convey feelings and moods.

All of this comes together and I enjoy watching, listening and reading it.

To go back to Macross Plus - remember when Guld and Mung were on the mountain -Star hill wasn't it called? - and they were talking. There is a scene where Mung hestitates in the original Japanese and it is OBVIOUS from her tone of voice that she is embarrassed (possibly at admitting that she gave up singing) - or at least that's how I felt watching the original Japanese.

In the sub version - it's totally different. The embarassment is not conveyed by the voice actor - we only see it in the animation (when she hesitates) - but the hesitation is not matched by the voice acting.

To me - this is a touching scene in the original Japanese which was ruined by the dubs.

Again - I agree with Kieth who noted that subbed works are not just about texts, but about also having access to sounds, tones and experiencing the work more naturally.

Pete

Well...yes, anime is all of those things, the images, the voice acting, AND the script. But this thread is about translation, no? Myung's voice actress hesitating has nothing to do with how the subs are translated, unless the translator wants to put a comma or ellipses in the line to show where that pause takes place...the difference between "I gave it up a long time ago" and "I gave it up...a long time ago."

Link to post
Share on other sites
Sweet Jesus, you're a Neo-Platonist, aren't you!

I don't think so... although I'm completely unfamiliar with what being a "Neo-Platonist" entails (I know what Plato wrote that Socrates said, but I don't have a clue what "Neo-Platonism" entails). In any case, my view differs from Socrates insofar as Socrates contended that the things existed "Kath Alto" (the ancient Greek for "As such" (aka "alone" or without intermediary) and physical objects were always becoming (between being and not being) and at best reflected the thing itself which was pure Being.

My view differs from this insofar as, like I wrote, I think that the path to a thing is in its' grasping, which is a process by which we uncover it - yet in the process - also cover it again (because our grasping disfigures the thing, although without grasping it, we don't even know it is there).

If anything, my view is therefore closer to the evil Martin Heidegger.

Edit:

Gubaba:

Myung's voice actress hesitating has nothing to do with how the subs are translated

I strongly (and respectfully) disagree.

Do you think that a translation of Shakespeare's plays can not take into account how the "voice actress" is going to handle the words? A good dub - if we are going to have dubs - must take this into consideration, ergo a good translation for a dub must take this into consideration.

Pete

Edited by VFTF1
Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't think so... although I'm completely unfamiliar with what being a "Neo-Platonist" entails (I know what Plato wrote that Socrates said, but I don't have a clue what "Neo-Platonism" entails). In any case, my view differs from Socrates insofar as Socrates contended that the things existed "Kath Alto" (the ancient Greek for "As such" (aka "alone" or without intermediary) and physical objects were always becoming (between being and not being) and at best reflected the thing itself which was pure Being.

My view differs from this insofar as, like I wrote, I think that the path to a thing is in its' grasping, which is a process by which we uncover it - yet in the process - also cover it again (because our grasping disfigures the thing, although without grasping it, we don't even know it is there).

If anything, my view is therefore closer to the evil Martin Heidegger.

Any view of Plato that we have is conditioned by Neo-Platonism...we don't know how Plato's works were initially received.

I haven't read Heidegger yet, though. Maybe that'll be next on my list...

Edit:

Gubaba:

I strongly (and respectfully) disagree.

Do you think that a translation of Shakespeare's plays can not take into account how the "voice actress" is going to handle the words? A good dub - if we are going to have dubs - must take this into consideration, ergo a good translation for a dub must take this into consideration.

Pete

I'm confused...are we talking about subs or are we talking about dubs? The translation is different for both, since dubs have to match the lip flaps (which thus restricts the amount of freedom the English voice actor to read the line however they see fit), but a sub script can focus purely on the meaning, without having to take things like lip flaps and timing into account...which is what I thought we were talking about.

Likewise, a translation of Shakespeare into another language could easily have two versions: one for reading and one for performing. (Reminds me of Harrison Ford saying to George Lucas, "You can WRITE these words but no one can SAY them!" about the Star Wars script...)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Holly shiznat a lot of heated debate here.

Before I throw in my 2 cents, let me start by saying I love both language and history... for a while I was doing fan translations of the Sakura Taisen manga... and I learned a lot of new idioms, and historical tidbits which I would have felt cheated had Tokyopop's translation of the manga existed before mine... since they threw most of that out the window. I'm someone who when Oogami is told to meet his contact by "the statue of Lord Saigo Takamori in Ueno Park", I need to look up who Saigo Takamori is when I'm reading in the original Japanese and I come across a term like 大根役者 Which litterally means "Raddish Actor" it's important for me to not only know that it's equivalent to "ham actor" but also find out why.... (though on that one I still havn't been able to find out and I have a friend who's a Japanese linguist).

The same Tokyopop manga really glossed over things, like there's a part where Oogami and Ookata are out on the town and Ookata points out someone and says "See that guy that's an up and comming new novelist Yasunari Kawabata", little things like that really help flesh out the altered history of Sakura Taisen (the guy mentioned was the first Japanese writer to win the nobel prize for literature). Seeing many things like that deleted just irked me... when I've learned a lot of history by expanding on things mentioned in passing in the manga but seeing them deleted for the sake of expeidency in the English version really makes me sad.

I delite in learning how the words are formed... so my views may be slightly skewed.

That said (and I think you'll agree with me here), I find the on-screen fansub notes to be generally distracting. While it's nice to have a note in Macross Frontier episode one explaining the "smoke and idiots both rise" proverb, I really don't need Shinsen Subs telling me that "Fold Sickness" is like motion sickness. First, because that information isn't in the original work, and second because, well...how the hell do they know?

Hmmm...I think you have a very good point here, and I more or less agree with you, except for one thing: not everyone wants to be a linguist; sometimes people just want to sit down and enjoy a good anime without working too hard. I can understand enough Japanese that getting the gist of what was going on in Frontier didn't cause THAT much of a problem (a lot of the more detailed stuff passed me by, though), but it's tiring to watch it that way. I know it's good for me, gets my mind working, imprints more Japanese on my brain, blah blah blah...but it's not fun. And that's what anime is for, right? It's not like they deliberately put it in Japanese to force English speakers to confront cultural and linguistic differences, it's there to be enjoyed. And I think that a too-literal translation leaves the average viewer without an understanding of the work, and consequently, less enjoyment.

Oh god that was the second funniest translation note either... it became my personal joke for months... I watched most of Macross F raw but I'm glad I got to see that put into their fancy translator note box.

The only translator note I ever saw that was funnier explained what the word farce meant... thanks for treating us with respect fansubbers.

And I dunno I hate leaving things untransated but, but I love explanations (see above) if you don't give them to me I'll just find them on my own.

See this is quite interesting... there is no such thing as what you just said. Literal translation is just wrong, plain and simple. I'll give you a perfect example: idioms. In your world of literal translations, Japanese idioms simply would not make sense whatsoever in English when translated literally. I'll cite an example:

「晴れているのに雨が・・・まるで狐の嫁入りだね。」

Raining even though the sun is out... just like a sun shower.

狐の嫁入り literally means "a fox becomes a bride". So your version of a "beautiful literal translation" would be something like... "Raining even though the sun is out... just like a fox becoming a bride." Hah, I think not. I suppose quite a few people are "confused" by the act of translation, so I'll clarify some things based on a recent presentation I did:

I prefer "raining even though the sun is out...just like a fox becoming a bride" to "raining even though the sun is out...just like a sun shower."

Why?

Because the second rendition sounds pretty banal, whereas the first - literal - rendition gives you food for thought - and actually DOES make sense. A fox is cunnin and dangerous and can eat you - and often times this is the nature of women, and yet men take them to be brides, because women can often manipulate men into looking away from their fox-like nature, and not seeing the risk involved.

This is like "raining even though the sun is out" because the presence of the sun makes you almost inclined to forget the rain, like the persistence of a woman makes you almost forget that she could be manipulating you and be dangerous as a fox.

The fact that it sounds "wierd" in english is all the more reason to give the literal translation; it's funner then to think about the relations between foxes and women and sun and rain. Otherwise, with the "dumbed down" translation - all you get is a pretty banal idiom, and clearly the comparison is more sophisticated than that.

As someone who doesn't know Japanese; I would be more interested in getting that more sophisticated strange translation and thinking about how Japanese culture looks on foxs and women, then getting the banal translation that has a seemingly more "normal" ring to it.

hmm there was a very long and sophisticated translator note on this expression in one of the xxxholic books I'm trying to find it... I think you're missing the point of the expression kind of.

But on idioms, some just DO NOT WORK... and I'll give you one that you'd need a translator note or you'd have to gloss over it.

鯱 Shachihoko it is a mythical carp with the head of a lion and the body of a fish, you see them on Japanese castles. NOW if I were to in exasperation call someone this, what would I be saying abou them? I'll let you puzzle that one out and tell you if you're right.

Gad, there's tons to reply to here...this thread is eating up my time off...

僕は行くつもりだ。

Literal: I TOP NOM go intend COP. (I go intend.)

Actual: I intend to go.

TOP = topic marker

NOM = nominalizer

COP = copula

The same can be said for contextual situations. If I were to say 僕はうなぎだ。I'm saying (literally) "I am an eel." That's your literal translation. But, given the context of the situation it's more of "I've decided on eel" or "I want to order eel." The translation range is vast an infinite when the sentence is stand alone, but in your situation you want literal, so you'll get "I am an eel." which does not fit into a NORMAL conversation if you are watching something subbed.

I suggest rereading what I said earlier since you seemed to have glossed over it. But then if translation is a lie then if I said to you 「お前は相変わらずアホだし」, then it wouldn't mean "And you're just as retarded as always" then would it? :p

So basically if I were to translate something from English into Japanese, the Japanese would be a falsification of the original?

This, sir, just blows every argument you have out of the water. All of your points are hereby moot. Quit arguing for something that you clearly have no basis or background in yet claim is correct.

I think you obviously need to take syntax into account you're just getting silly...

Link to post
Share on other sites
Any view of Plato that we have is conditioned by Neo-Platonism...we don't know how Plato's works were initially received

Well - not completely. We have the works of Plato's contemporaries; the most important of which is Xenophon (read Xenophon's rendition of the Apology; it is a radically different version of the events than what Plato presents). Xenophon's Dialogues give us a highly different account of Socrates; which we can consider as a commentary to Plato's works. We also have Aristophanes' Clouds, which you mentioned, which is another commentary by one of Plato's contemporaries.

I would just add that it is impossible for "any view of Plato" to be conditioned by Neo-Platonism. Xenophon's view of Plato, as well as Aristophanes' view of Plato, could not have been conditioned by "Neo-Platonism, since there was no such thing as "Neo-Platonism" in either of their writings.

Edit: Oh..err..and of course we have the works of Aristotle - who was Plato's student... that's a very good example of how Plato's works were initially recieved.

I'm confused...are we talking about subs or are we talking about dubs? The translation is different for both, since dubs have to match the lip flaps (which thus restricts the amount of freedom the English voice actor to read the line however they see fit), but a sub script can focus purely on the meaning, without having to take things like lip flaps and timing into account...which is what I thought we were talking about.

As usual, the cause of the confusion is probably my inability to write coherently, for which I apologize.

So - here I go trying to explain myself (again): Yes, we are talking about subs. But subs do not exist in a vacuum. They always accompany the original visual and audio presentation. Ergo - good subs ought to take into account what is being said, and what the situation is. This is not contradictory to the principle of being literal, since "literal" does not mean, in the case of anime "to the letter," because there are - for the most part - no letters in anime, but rather dialogue which is spoken. If we were translating a book, where EVERYTHING (even context) arises from letters; then yes - we would have to be "to the letter." However, since we are talking about subs for anime, which is an audio and visual presentation, then in order for the subs to be "literal" they need to accord with the whole of what is being presented (this means four elements: the words themselves, the tone/emotion in which they are spoken, the character speaking and the situation).

My comparisson to Shakespeare was specific because Shakespeare's plays are written to be performed. As such, when translating them, we need to look at the words as a theater artist would look at them. Good theater artists do not read plays with their eyes - instead - they read plays aloud, with actors speaking the lines. They do this in order to get a grasp of the theatricality of the material. Ergo - if we are going to translate Shakespeare's plays, we must see them not as merely words on a page, but rather - the words are meant to be spoken and acted - and the translation must try to take this into account.

Shachihoko it is a mythical carp with the head of a lion and the body of a fish, you see them on Japanese castles. NOW if I were to in exasperation call someone this, what would I be saying abou them? I'll let you puzzle that one out and tell you if you're right.

It is somewhat pointless to keep trying to find more and more arcane and remote idioms with which to try to demonstrate to me that their literal translation will not always make immediate sense, because I never denied this. My only point was to say that I prefer a literal translation of idioms which does not make sense and therefore compels me to ask "what is the sense of this idiom for the particular language that it comes from" rather than having the idiom translated into some english language equivalent which is immediately perceptible.

I would rather sit there wondering what someone could have meant by calling someone else a mythical carp with the head of a lion and the body of a fish than getting an interpretive translation which results in a familiar english language idiom.

I haven't read Heidegger yet, though. Maybe that'll be next on my list...

I would not recommend starting from Being and Time. If anything, try and get a hold of Heidegger's book(s) called "Nietzsche" which is a series of interpretive lectures on the works of Nietzsche. These will get you accustomed to Heidegger's specific way of looking at things and his particular vocabulary with which he tends to grasp at things. Because Nietzsche's work is so poetically accessible, then Heidegger is forced to be "more accessible" in discussing them - since he must always reference them, than Heidegger usually is when simply writing about his own ideas.

Pete

Edited by VFTF1
Link to post
Share on other sites
It is somewhat pointless to keep trying to find more and more arcane and remote idioms with which to try to demonstrate to me that their literal translation will not always make immediate sense, because I never denied this. My only point was to say that I prefer a literal translation of idioms which does not make sense and therefore compels me to ask "what is the sense of this idiom for the particular language that it comes from" rather than having the idiom translated into some english language equivalent which is immediately perceptible.

Okay that's understandable there was some tl;dr in there so sorry if I missed that... just to let you know in that context I'd be saying you're hard headed.

Slightly off topic but it seems my Sensei at college has a very odd idea of what is idiomatic and what is not. For example she think that お風呂に入る (to enter a bath) is Idiomatic because it does not litterally mean "Take a bath"... even though entering is a more litteral description of the action. She's actually Japanese too... it's kind of odd.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Okay that's understandable there was some tl;dr in there so sorry if I missed that... just to let you know in that context I'd be saying you're hard headed.

Slightly off topic but it seems my Sensei at college has a very odd idea of what is idiomatic and what is not. For example she think that お風呂に入る (to enter a bath) is Idiomatic because it does not litterally mean "Take a bath"... even though entering is a more litteral description of the action. She's actually Japanese too... it's kind of odd.

Hmm...if that's the case, then "Kusuri o nomu" ("drink medicine" as opposed to "take medicine") would be idiomatic, too...in both languages, because neither means what you actually DO with the medicine (ingest it).

Oh, and VFTF1...I'll PM you about the philosophy stuff because I don't want to derail the thread. Suffice to say here that Xenophon and Aristophanes tell us a lot about Socrates, but nothing about Plato. Aristotle's tricky to use as a source as well, because you can't really tell where Plato's influence ends and Aristotle's own brilliance begins.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hmm...if that's the case, then "Kusuri o nomu" ("drink medicine" as opposed to "take medicine") would be idiomatic, too...in both languages, because neither means what you actually DO with the medicine (ingest it).

Depends on the medicine... sometimes you do drink it. It's just one of my Sensei's quicks though.

Maybe she just thought we'd remember it better if she said it was idiomatic.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Idiomatic how? In Japanese or the English translation?

お風呂の水とか部屋に入り時全然言わへん。ほとんど別の階で言うやな。言う時から「お風呂に入り」はイディオムかな・・・

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just wanted to add, another failings of professional subs just encountered when i'm watching Right Stuf's translation of Irresponsible Captain Tylor. Episode 09, around 3:54 "Sassen Nado, Sassen" translated as "The Drop, I'll Stop" and the crew sighs. It was obviously a japanese lame pun, with the funniness totally lost after the translation. If it was a fansub, the pun would've been explained.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just wanted to add, another failings of professional subs just encountered when i'm watching Right Stuf's translation of Irresponsible Captain Tylor. Episode 09, around 3:54 "Sassen Nado, Sassen" translated as "The Drop, I'll Stop" and the crew sighs. It was obviously a japanese lame pun, with the funniness totally lost after the translation. If it was a fansub, the pun would've been explained.

Reminds me of Fushigi Yuugi... Miaka tries to lighten the mood by saying she brought along a nice walking stick and using the adjective Suteki which sounds like Stick... in the English version she says "Cain you believe it?"

on the flip side the english DUB of Koko Wa Greenwood keeps a pun intact in one episode that's a bit odd.

The main character is standing by a Koi pond and reflecting on if he's in love or not says "Koi, maybe it is koi" then his friend comes up and asks "hey how are the koi?" That's the dailog in the english dub... it sounded quite odd.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Idiomatic how? In Japanese or the English translation?

お風呂の水とか部屋に入り時全然言わへん。ほとんど別の階で言うやな。言う時から「お風呂に入り」はイディオムかな・・・

それは分かっています。もちろん、佐渡先生も分かっている だから、へんですね。

Really I have no idea where she gets the idea it's Idiomatic from... she's not only a native Japanese speeker she's a trained linguist. I think sometimes she gets weird ideas about English though. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...