Seidensticker brought up how one shouldn't fix flaws within the text. I agree if these "flaws" are intentional to bring out a distinct writing style or purpose, but if they are literally errors, I think its the translators job to translate both for accuracy AND comprehension.
I think rhythm is a highly unspoken aspect of translation. English has way less syllables than Japanese, and emphasized stressed syllables rather than, say, intonation. I think you need to make the English natural, no matter how many direct word-to-word translations you want to have.
I noticed that--sometimes--a phrase or word translated in Japanese just doesn't hit as hard as it should in English. It's hard for me to tell what impact the authoer wants in Japanese, but making suring the emotions and IMPACT lands in English can be hard, especially for puns, inside jokes, and cultural things.
I think translation boils down to how much you know the author. Like, if I needed to translate for my brother into Japanese, I know how he acts, so I could do a good job. I feel like you are defined by the language you speak. I have a Japanese Evan, and an English Evan, because I simply can't express myself the exact time both ways.
No comments:
Post a Comment