oh and p.s. I find that 翻る character super annoying, it was in my kanji-learning app a couple of levels back and I keep getting it wrong! So funny that you mentioned it. I do feel that 翻る has the sense of being flipped over or toppled somehow. I think it's the sound of the word. I also keep mixing it up with 覆る, which also has the sense of being flipped over. I love that 翻 is in the word for translation, though, it feels so right.
It does feel so right--I agree! And 訳 is the one that is not used in Chinese. I also LOVED what Jim wrote above! Translation is another really fun word, especially interesting how it has this physical nuance of space and distance. Like how relics are "translated." The Chinese is not like that.
my girls and I just read Yellowface and found it...disturbing. I also read the first of Kuang's fantasy trilogy, but simply cannot get through the second book. I think I need more characterization, it's very plot-focused. I should keep trying, since I have all three books in that series. Maybe Babel is better, since it's newer?
I'm fascinated that you liked Yellowface so much. It was kind of fun to read, but there seemed to be two stories going on, one about racism and one about publishing. I thought it needed a big structural edit that it didn't get, which makes sense given that the author just published Babel last fall. It seemed rushed out, maybe just in time for API month? But anyway, maybe I'll put this other book down and read Babel instead!
I am going to post a short essay about Yellowface and publishing in the US on Monday--I would LOVE to hear what you think? Babel is my favorite of Kuang's books! Right now, though, I am reading this book which tackles very similar themes as Babel but it is more of a thriller than speculative https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/10/books/review/the-centre-ayesha-manazir-siddiqi.html
I don't think it is quite as ambitious as Kuang's book, but I cannot put it down :)
(And Babel I could put down and pick up later again).
can't wait to see your essay! my eldest daughter was so upset by Yellowface, she had to put it down. I'm not sure she finished it, I'll ask. I went to Georgetown so I didn't like the ending much--I won't spoil the ending but if you know Georgetown you almost expect that kind of ending. I'm excited by the book you linked though! can't wait to take a look!
I will post a link to the substack and would love to talk more about it... it's going to be about the publishing industry in the US and other such perils :) I finished it and then re-read Babel.... and Babel is definitely my favorite. I didn't know you went to Georgetown. I LOVE Georgetown so much. I could live there in a second. Dunbarton Oaks is a favorite museum. We had a great dinner at Fiola Mare. Not really Georgetown, I guess...
I think Yellowface is of special interest to writers because it is, unfortunately, so spot on about how the book industry works. I agree that more characterization would have improved it!
The only Shirakawa work I own directly is 字通, whose focus is on explaining the meaning of individual characters (IIRC, Shirakawa’s three major works are 字通, 字統, and 字訓, and each takes a different approach to explaining characters).
字通’s third gloss for 翻 reads: .うつす、ときうつす、うつしかえる。That sounds like a perfect fit for your “trans~” to me, especially after having read what several other authoritative dictionaries say about the meaning of 翻. (And, fwiw, the flattering and fluttering seem to be more closely associated with its 異体字, 飜.)
Meanwhile: I’m not all that confident of the depth of my knowledge, so thanks for the confidence-boosting comment! As far as kanji are concern—well, they’re just a favorite subject. 😂 A milestone in my ability to read them was a little, rather ribald and—these days, probably—totally politically incorrect book by 藤堂明保 called 女へんの漢字. It explained kanji word-families (i.e., 字統) starting from the character in a word-family that is written with 女偏; e.g., he would explain the 免 family starting with 娩, and then move on to other characters whose 音符 is 免: 勉, 晩, 挽, 輓 (the common thread in this family is “exertion,” often by pushing or pulling.
One thing to note in practical kanji usage is that CJK speakers have a tendency to “barrow” characters for their pronunciation to express ideas that, sometimes, are totally unrelated to a character’s “original” meaning. This practice is called 借用 or 転義. For instance, let's look at 免 once again. It is a pictogram of a woman giving birth, which has an associated meanings of ①「やっと抜け出る」(“escape from a tight spot”), 「やっとのがれる」(“barely get away,” “get away by the hair or your chinny-chin chin”) and ② やめさせる (as in 免職). Eventually, 免 got mainly used to express these meanings, necessitating another character for expressing “give birth,” and that’s how we got 娩! (Source: 加納喜光著『漢字の成立ち辞典』新装版、東京堂出版 2009)
A similar phenomenon is in play with 翻 and why it’s “trans~” meanings are unrelated to the character’s original meaning expressing fluttering: 翻 was “borrowed” (借用) to stand in for 反 when 反 came to be chiefly used to express opposition (etc.) rather than ひらがえ・る/す and its connotation of 「表現を裏返しにする」(ibid) or 「別な形にうつしかえる」 as evident in compounds like 翻訳, 翻案, and 翻刻.
HTH, and apologies if I’m overstaying my welcome. 😓 🙇
It’s (well past) my bedtime, so I see what I can dig up for you on 翻 in other 漢字 dictionaries. Flutter is certainly in the character’s etymology, but I’m not sure how far that nuance still exists. In any case, it’s only _one_ aspect of the character’s many.
PS a dictionary cover is in the pictures at the bottom of the post and I was really interested because Kuang led with that in her novel when discussing this. I didn’t really realize it myself until the novel. Anyway oyasumi ne.
I asked about 蘭学事始 because it’s basically about translation, or the sweat and tears that went into translating from Dutch to Japanese a book (Ontleedkundige tafelen, originally DE: Anatomische Tabellen, “Anatomic Tables”; JP: 解体新書) that changed the course of Japanese medicine.
I disagree with you about the term 翻訳 (翻譯—譯 is the 旧字体/繁体字 for 訳) implying some kind of turning over—IMO, that’s a rather cursory take on 翻 [ひるがえる、ひるがえって], since it also has connotations of reformulating (e.g., from a different angle) or reworking, re-interpreting; this semantic thread is apparent in compounds like 翻刻 or 翻案. Another meaning is to swap out, as in swapping one word for anotherm, like in 翻字. Check a couple of 漢和辞典 and I think you’ll catch on to my drift.
That said, I really like the nuance of 通詞 (「コトバを通ずる」「コトバを通す」). When I started JTS, I even thought about using it in the company name or logo—something like those wooden shingles Edo-Period shops hung out in front, with 通詞 written on it instead of 酒 or 呉服. 😁
Meanwhile, I’ll have to get around to reading the novel you reviewed; but I suspect you’d find a lot of parallels in 蘭学事始.
I love the idea of using 通詞 as a company name--though I wonder how many people could understand it properly like you do! I couldn't attach images to these comments so added pictures from Shirakawa's dictionary to the original post about 翻. I learned about the kanji as "flutter" in the novel. Kuang was writing about Chinese nuances. But Shirakawa also included it. I took pictures of the English translation of Shirakawa's dictionary because I didn't want to flatten my gorgeous Japanese version but if you want to see it, I can try and get a photo but I am guessing you have the book. But that said, I also pulled out my Kojien and will check later. Like you, I LOVE these conversations about etymology and linguistic history etc. It is why I used to love our honyaku group before it migrated to Facebook--though I guess it is friendlier now. David Mitchell used that period of time for one of his novels and I always thought it was a romantic time in Japanese history--perfect for a novel.
In an earlier age, translation was also called 通詞. Not sure when 翻訳 (which can also be written 飜訳, though hardly anyone knows the 飜 character anymore) became dominant. Just out of curiosity, have you ever read 蘭学事始?
You are so knowledgeable! I’m really thankful that you read and commented. Thank you ❤️ I have never read beginnings of Dutch learning, although I know the name. Why do you ask about that book in particular? I also didn’t know about the earlier word for translation. I feel like that is closer to the English or I should say Latin with the idea of “to carry across.” The Chinese is 翻譯. The first suggests turning over, which is different from bring across in nuance. It doesn’t make a lot of sense, but the novel has these gaps in translation like the one here being something that fuels the magic of the novel it’s kind of like a Harry Potter book in a way. .
A very interesting post. I did like the question "Fidelity to whom? The text? The audience? The author?", because that is indeed the nub of the issue. And as I have mentioned somewhere, the question is also the PURPOSE of the translation. A translation designed to deliver the gist, for instance, might differ from one designed to deliver all the flavour and aroma of the original.
As for the Japanese distinctions that you refer to, let me remind you that Japanese translation has been heavily skewed to word-for-word translation since the 19th century. Fidelity to English (or French, German, etc.) has resulted in some excruciatingly tortured translation practices that would not be accepted in English.
PS I was going to say that if anyone read my ENGLISH translation of that white paper , they never would have believed it was written by a native speaker of English.... not many months after that, back in LA, I paid a fortune to have a literary editor look at several chapters of my novel manuscript and her basic concluding remarks included her complementing me on my English and that "given English is not your first language, this was not that bad..." WORST DAY EVER! Not really, the laugh of that zinger lives on.
I thought I was going to get an ulcer when I worked on the government white paper and telecommunications for their E Japan policy for prime ministers cabinet or office. It had to be Word for Word translation for legal reasons and it was it without a doubt the most stressful translation project I ever did. I have an essay that is coming out in Aeon magazine. I think it’s an Australian magazine, but the fact checking reminded me so much of my days as a freelance translator working for government. They were so detail oriented in particular I got that burning feeling in my stomach again. I just can’t do that kind of work anymore because I’m too scattered I guess. I found it really stressful and much prefer more literary translation or even advertising. I have absolutely no understanding of translation theory for work that’s translated into Japanese. I am only mildly experience with translations into English!
I am quite partial to word-for-word translations, but it's usually not the best strategy for producing a good translation. I compared my own word-for-word approach with that of a professionally produced translation at http://www.cjvlang.com/Spicks/speech/speech.html. The translation discussed at the link looks like it was originally produced by a translator (either Japanese or non-Japanese) and completely rewritten by a professional rewriter. The style is far more compelling than anything that a run-of-the-mill Japanese translator could produce. (There ARE good translators in Japan who can do this, but as I mention at the link, there are a couple of mistakes that suggest it was rewritten by someone who didn't know Japanese.)
For your interest I refer you to an academic article by David Horton about the translation of the first paragraph of Thomas Manns' "Der Tod in Venedig" (Death in Venice). The article is "Linguistic Structure, Stylistic Value, and Translation Strategy: Introducing Thomas Mann's Aschenbach in English". You should be able to find it at JSTOR or Researchgate.
In it, Horton does a minute -- excruciatingly minute -- analysis of the the sentential structure, sequence of sentences, and stylistic effect of the original German, and translations by Lowe-Porter and David Luke. While it sounds tedious, it is a fascinating analysis of the way that structural choices made by the translator affect the impression made on the reader. I would recommend it. ("Death in Venice" has been a favourite of translation comparison over the years -- just google it!)
The Lowe-Porter translation is this:
Gustave Aschenbach — or von Aschenbach, as he had been known since his fiftieth birthday — had set out along from his house in Prince Regent Street, Munich, for an extended walk. It was a spring afternoon in that year of grace 19-, when Europe sat upon the anxious seat beneath a menace that hung over its head for months. Aschenbach had sought the open soon after tea. He was overwrought by a morning of hard, nerve-taxing work, work which had not ceased to exact his uttermost in the way of sustained concentration, conscientiousness, and tact; and after the noon meal found himself powerless to check the onward sweep of the productive mechanism within him, that motus animi continuus in which, according to Cicero, eloquence resides. He had sought but not found relaxation in sleep — though the wear and tear upon his system had come to make a daily nap more and more imperative — and now undertook a walk, in the hope that air and exercise might send him back refreshed to a good evening’s work.
Luke translates it thus:
On a spring afternoon in 19-, the year in which for months on end so grave a threat seemed to hang over the peace of Europe, Gustav Aschenbach, or von Aschenbach as he had been officially known since his fiftieth birthday, had set out from his apartment on the Prinzregentenstrasse in Munich to take a walk of some length by himself. The morning’s writing had overstimulated him; his work had now reached a difficult and dangerous point which demanded the utmost care and circumspection, the most insistent and precise effort of will, and the productive mechanism in his mind — that motus animi contninuus which according to Cicero is the essence of eloquence — had so pursued its reverberating rhythm that he had been unable to halt it even after lunch, and had missed the refreshing daily siesta which was now so necessary to him as he became increasingly subject to fatigue. And so, soon after taking tea, he had left the house hoping that fresh air and movement would set him to rights and enable him to spend a profitable evening.
Horton argues in minute detail that Lowe-Porter's version distorts the flow and effect of the original German. I found his analysis and arguments fascinating.
Compare that with some Japanese translations, which truly fracture the syntax of Japanese in an attempt to capture the original German. I'll give you the first sentence in three Japanese translations.
There is probably no escaping the difference in word order between German and Japanese, but the three translators all follow the German so faithfully that the result is excruciating to read. Real translationese.
In fact, all of the Japanese translators could easily have made their translation more natural by making the observation about Europe's situation into an attributive clause:
But none of them did. They are so tied to the original that they'd prefer to torture their own language rather than make any modifications in the presentation of facts and events.
I was told that in any kind of international communications that are in any way case of the government they want Word for Word so that it can be back translated for legal reasons also not in this case at your showing but in many cases the English translation is the base translation for Spanish in Italian and French translations so it really needs to be Word for Word for that reason as well. That’s what I was told it was really stressful though
Jul 12, 2023·edited Jul 12, 2023Liked by Leanne Ogasawara
I did read them and they are very interesting. 蘭学事始 also sounds absolutely fascinating.
The Chinese word for 'translation' is also 翻譯 / 翻译. You would need to do a certain amount of research (which I am not able to) to determine whether this term originated in Chinese and was borrowed into Japanese, or whether it was coined in Japan and borrowed back into Chinese. The latter is always a possibility.
Just for interest, Mongolian has two conventional words for 'translate'. One is 'orchuulakh' (орчуулах, ᠣᠷᠴᠢᠭᠤᠯᠬᠤ), the normal term. It is the causative form of 'orchikh' (орчих, ᠣᠷᠴᠢᠬᠤ), a word meaning 'revolve', 'turn around', 'rotate', 'turn over'. The other is 'khörvüülekh' (хөрвүүлэх, ᠬᠥᠷᠪᠡᢉᠦᠯᠬᠦ), the causative of 'khörvökh' (хөрвөх, ᠬᠥᠷᠪᠡᠡᠬᠦ). Хөрвөх means 'to turn over, turn on its side', and can be translated into Chinese as 翻.
I do not know the origins of the Mongolian terms, whether they are completely native concepts or there has been some past influence from Chinese. But the similarity to the concept of 翻 is worth noting.
Similar conundrums face the portrait artist -- to whom should the portrait be faced? (pun intended). -- Though portrait artists don't bear legal issues on their backs. Sounds like you miss doing translation!
I love this book too! Tons of translation theory was stuffed into my head during university but still enjoyed your thoughts! If you're reading books about translators, have you checked out I Am China by Xiaolu Guo? It's absolutely beautiful.
Can't access the NYT article but yes, intriguing! Especially since the author has apparently done some translation work herself. Definitely goes on my list, thank you!
oh and p.s. I find that 翻る character super annoying, it was in my kanji-learning app a couple of levels back and I keep getting it wrong! So funny that you mentioned it. I do feel that 翻る has the sense of being flipped over or toppled somehow. I think it's the sound of the word. I also keep mixing it up with 覆る, which also has the sense of being flipped over. I love that 翻 is in the word for translation, though, it feels so right.
It does feel so right--I agree! And 訳 is the one that is not used in Chinese. I also LOVED what Jim wrote above! Translation is another really fun word, especially interesting how it has this physical nuance of space and distance. Like how relics are "translated." The Chinese is not like that.
Great post! I recently read the book myself and loved its observations about translation.
I love Kuang! I just posted about Yellowface this morning... https://3quarksdaily.com/3quarksdaily/2023/07/rf-kuangs-novel-yellowface-and-diversity-in-us-publishing.html
my girls and I just read Yellowface and found it...disturbing. I also read the first of Kuang's fantasy trilogy, but simply cannot get through the second book. I think I need more characterization, it's very plot-focused. I should keep trying, since I have all three books in that series. Maybe Babel is better, since it's newer?
I'm fascinated that you liked Yellowface so much. It was kind of fun to read, but there seemed to be two stories going on, one about racism and one about publishing. I thought it needed a big structural edit that it didn't get, which makes sense given that the author just published Babel last fall. It seemed rushed out, maybe just in time for API month? But anyway, maybe I'll put this other book down and read Babel instead!
I am going to post a short essay about Yellowface and publishing in the US on Monday--I would LOVE to hear what you think? Babel is my favorite of Kuang's books! Right now, though, I am reading this book which tackles very similar themes as Babel but it is more of a thriller than speculative https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/10/books/review/the-centre-ayesha-manazir-siddiqi.html
I don't think it is quite as ambitious as Kuang's book, but I cannot put it down :)
(And Babel I could put down and pick up later again).
can't wait to see your essay! my eldest daughter was so upset by Yellowface, she had to put it down. I'm not sure she finished it, I'll ask. I went to Georgetown so I didn't like the ending much--I won't spoil the ending but if you know Georgetown you almost expect that kind of ending. I'm excited by the book you linked though! can't wait to take a look!
I will post a link to the substack and would love to talk more about it... it's going to be about the publishing industry in the US and other such perils :) I finished it and then re-read Babel.... and Babel is definitely my favorite. I didn't know you went to Georgetown. I LOVE Georgetown so much. I could live there in a second. Dunbarton Oaks is a favorite museum. We had a great dinner at Fiola Mare. Not really Georgetown, I guess...
I think Yellowface is of special interest to writers because it is, unfortunately, so spot on about how the book industry works. I agree that more characterization would have improved it!
Agree. I wanted to use your phrase "A cautionary tale" since that was also quite apt.
The only Shirakawa work I own directly is 字通, whose focus is on explaining the meaning of individual characters (IIRC, Shirakawa’s three major works are 字通, 字統, and 字訓, and each takes a different approach to explaining characters).
字通’s third gloss for 翻 reads: .うつす、ときうつす、うつしかえる。That sounds like a perfect fit for your “trans~” to me, especially after having read what several other authoritative dictionaries say about the meaning of 翻. (And, fwiw, the flattering and fluttering seem to be more closely associated with its 異体字, 飜.)
Further, 字通’s 解字 says, 「翻覆（はんぷく）の意があり、心を改めることを翻然（ほんぜん）という。翻読は本をひらく、翻刻・翻訳は、 *これより他に移すこと* をいう。飜にもその字の慣用の例がある。」
Cf:
* 対応するものと入れかえる。「翻案・翻刻・翻訳」(大辞泉: https://www.weblio.jp/content/翻)
* つくりかえる。形をかえてうつす。「翻案、翻字、翻刻、翻訳」 (集英社国語辞典 第３版)
* ある国のことばを他の国のことばになおす。(漢語林)
* 入れかえる。つくりかえる。「―案・―訳」(明鏡国語辞典)
* 他国の言葉に改める。「翻訳」(旺文社国語辞典)
* 別の形や体系に改める。「翻刻・翻訳」(新明解国語辞典)
I better stop here. I’m having too much fun going through all these dictionaries—something very likely to make me miss today’s deadlines! 🙄
Jim, the depth of your knowledge has always astonished me. You have always been a linguist in the old school--Thank you so much for this! I am a big fan of Shirakawa (whose favorite kanji was "asobi"). Here is more if you have time, https://3quarksdaily.com/3quarksdaily/2013/06/playing-around-%E0%A4%B2%E0%A5%80%E0%A4%B2%E0%A4%BE.html
I’ll have a look at your quarks daily essay.
Meanwhile: I’m not all that confident of the depth of my knowledge, so thanks for the confidence-boosting comment! As far as kanji are concern—well, they’re just a favorite subject. 😂 A milestone in my ability to read them was a little, rather ribald and—these days, probably—totally politically incorrect book by 藤堂明保 called 女へんの漢字. It explained kanji word-families (i.e., 字統) starting from the character in a word-family that is written with 女偏; e.g., he would explain the 免 family starting with 娩, and then move on to other characters whose 音符 is 免: 勉, 晩, 挽, 輓 (the common thread in this family is “exertion,” often by pushing or pulling.
One thing to note in practical kanji usage is that CJK speakers have a tendency to “barrow” characters for their pronunciation to express ideas that, sometimes, are totally unrelated to a character’s “original” meaning. This practice is called 借用 or 転義. For instance, let's look at 免 once again. It is a pictogram of a woman giving birth, which has an associated meanings of ①「やっと抜け出る」(“escape from a tight spot”), 「やっとのがれる」(“barely get away,” “get away by the hair or your chinny-chin chin”) and ② やめさせる (as in 免職). Eventually, 免 got mainly used to express these meanings, necessitating another character for expressing “give birth,” and that’s how we got 娩! (Source: 加納喜光著『漢字の成立ち辞典』新装版、東京堂出版 2009)
A similar phenomenon is in play with 翻 and why it’s “trans~” meanings are unrelated to the character’s original meaning expressing fluttering: 翻 was “borrowed” (借用) to stand in for 反 when 反 came to be chiefly used to express opposition (etc.) rather than ひらがえ・る/す and its connotation of 「表現を裏返しにする」(ibid) or 「別な形にうつしかえる」 as evident in compounds like 翻訳, 翻案, and 翻刻.
HTH, and apologies if I’m overstaying my welcome. 😓 🙇
Which Shirakawa dictionary?
It’s (well past) my bedtime, so I see what I can dig up for you on 翻 in other 漢字 dictionaries. Flutter is certainly in the character’s etymology, but I’m not sure how far that nuance still exists. In any case, it’s only _one_ aspect of the character’s many.
Later! 👋
PS a dictionary cover is in the pictures at the bottom of the post and I was really interested because Kuang led with that in her novel when discussing this. I didn’t really realize it myself until the novel. Anyway oyasumi ne.
❤️❤️❤️
I asked about 蘭学事始 because it’s basically about translation, or the sweat and tears that went into translating from Dutch to Japanese a book (Ontleedkundige tafelen, originally DE: Anatomische Tabellen, “Anatomic Tables”; JP: 解体新書) that changed the course of Japanese medicine.
I disagree with you about the term 翻訳 (翻譯—譯 is the 旧字体/繁体字 for 訳) implying some kind of turning over—IMO, that’s a rather cursory take on 翻 [ひるがえる、ひるがえって], since it also has connotations of reformulating (e.g., from a different angle) or reworking, re-interpreting; this semantic thread is apparent in compounds like 翻刻 or 翻案. Another meaning is to swap out, as in swapping one word for anotherm, like in 翻字. Check a couple of 漢和辞典 and I think you’ll catch on to my drift.
That said, I really like the nuance of 通詞 (「コトバを通ずる」「コトバを通す」). When I started JTS, I even thought about using it in the company name or logo—something like those wooden shingles Edo-Period shops hung out in front, with 通詞 written on it instead of 酒 or 呉服. 😁
Meanwhile, I’ll have to get around to reading the novel you reviewed; but I suspect you’d find a lot of parallels in 蘭学事始.
I love the idea of using 通詞 as a company name--though I wonder how many people could understand it properly like you do! I couldn't attach images to these comments so added pictures from Shirakawa's dictionary to the original post about 翻. I learned about the kanji as "flutter" in the novel. Kuang was writing about Chinese nuances. But Shirakawa also included it. I took pictures of the English translation of Shirakawa's dictionary because I didn't want to flatten my gorgeous Japanese version but if you want to see it, I can try and get a photo but I am guessing you have the book. But that said, I also pulled out my Kojien and will check later. Like you, I LOVE these conversations about etymology and linguistic history etc. It is why I used to love our honyaku group before it migrated to Facebook--though I guess it is friendlier now. David Mitchell used that period of time for one of his novels and I always thought it was a romantic time in Japanese history--perfect for a novel.
In an earlier age, translation was also called 通詞. Not sure when 翻訳 (which can also be written 飜訳, though hardly anyone knows the 飜 character anymore) became dominant. Just out of curiosity, have you ever read 蘭学事始?
You are so knowledgeable! I’m really thankful that you read and commented. Thank you ❤️ I have never read beginnings of Dutch learning, although I know the name. Why do you ask about that book in particular? I also didn’t know about the earlier word for translation. I feel like that is closer to the English or I should say Latin with the idea of “to carry across.” The Chinese is 翻譯. The first suggests turning over, which is different from bring across in nuance. It doesn’t make a lot of sense, but the novel has these gaps in translation like the one here being something that fuels the magic of the novel it’s kind of like a Harry Potter book in a way. .
A very interesting post. I did like the question "Fidelity to whom? The text? The audience? The author?", because that is indeed the nub of the issue. And as I have mentioned somewhere, the question is also the PURPOSE of the translation. A translation designed to deliver the gist, for instance, might differ from one designed to deliver all the flavour and aroma of the original.
As for the Japanese distinctions that you refer to, let me remind you that Japanese translation has been heavily skewed to word-for-word translation since the 19th century. Fidelity to English (or French, German, etc.) has resulted in some excruciatingly tortured translation practices that would not be accepted in English.
PS I was going to say that if anyone read my ENGLISH translation of that white paper , they never would have believed it was written by a native speaker of English.... not many months after that, back in LA, I paid a fortune to have a literary editor look at several chapters of my novel manuscript and her basic concluding remarks included her complementing me on my English and that "given English is not your first language, this was not that bad..." WORST DAY EVER! Not really, the laugh of that zinger lives on.
I feel for you. Translation is such a cut-and-dried activity in Japan that it quite easily cramps your own ability to write in good, natural English.
I thought I was going to get an ulcer when I worked on the government white paper and telecommunications for their E Japan policy for prime ministers cabinet or office. It had to be Word for Word translation for legal reasons and it was it without a doubt the most stressful translation project I ever did. I have an essay that is coming out in Aeon magazine. I think it’s an Australian magazine, but the fact checking reminded me so much of my days as a freelance translator working for government. They were so detail oriented in particular I got that burning feeling in my stomach again. I just can’t do that kind of work anymore because I’m too scattered I guess. I found it really stressful and much prefer more literary translation or even advertising. I have absolutely no understanding of translation theory for work that’s translated into Japanese. I am only mildly experience with translations into English!
I am quite partial to word-for-word translations, but it's usually not the best strategy for producing a good translation. I compared my own word-for-word approach with that of a professionally produced translation at http://www.cjvlang.com/Spicks/speech/speech.html. The translation discussed at the link looks like it was originally produced by a translator (either Japanese or non-Japanese) and completely rewritten by a professional rewriter. The style is far more compelling than anything that a run-of-the-mill Japanese translator could produce. (There ARE good translators in Japan who can do this, but as I mention at the link, there are a couple of mistakes that suggest it was rewritten by someone who didn't know Japanese.)
For your interest I refer you to an academic article by David Horton about the translation of the first paragraph of Thomas Manns' "Der Tod in Venedig" (Death in Venice). The article is "Linguistic Structure, Stylistic Value, and Translation Strategy: Introducing Thomas Mann's Aschenbach in English". You should be able to find it at JSTOR or Researchgate.
In it, Horton does a minute -- excruciatingly minute -- analysis of the the sentential structure, sequence of sentences, and stylistic effect of the original German, and translations by Lowe-Porter and David Luke. While it sounds tedious, it is a fascinating analysis of the way that structural choices made by the translator affect the impression made on the reader. I would recommend it. ("Death in Venice" has been a favourite of translation comparison over the years -- just google it!)
The Lowe-Porter translation is this:
Gustave Aschenbach — or von Aschenbach, as he had been known since his fiftieth birthday — had set out along from his house in Prince Regent Street, Munich, for an extended walk. It was a spring afternoon in that year of grace 19-, when Europe sat upon the anxious seat beneath a menace that hung over its head for months. Aschenbach had sought the open soon after tea. He was overwrought by a morning of hard, nerve-taxing work, work which had not ceased to exact his uttermost in the way of sustained concentration, conscientiousness, and tact; and after the noon meal found himself powerless to check the onward sweep of the productive mechanism within him, that motus animi continuus in which, according to Cicero, eloquence resides. He had sought but not found relaxation in sleep — though the wear and tear upon his system had come to make a daily nap more and more imperative — and now undertook a walk, in the hope that air and exercise might send him back refreshed to a good evening’s work.
Luke translates it thus:
On a spring afternoon in 19-, the year in which for months on end so grave a threat seemed to hang over the peace of Europe, Gustav Aschenbach, or von Aschenbach as he had been officially known since his fiftieth birthday, had set out from his apartment on the Prinzregentenstrasse in Munich to take a walk of some length by himself. The morning’s writing had overstimulated him; his work had now reached a difficult and dangerous point which demanded the utmost care and circumspection, the most insistent and precise effort of will, and the productive mechanism in his mind — that motus animi contninuus which according to Cicero is the essence of eloquence — had so pursued its reverberating rhythm that he had been unable to halt it even after lunch, and had missed the refreshing daily siesta which was now so necessary to him as he became increasingly subject to fatigue. And so, soon after taking tea, he had left the house hoping that fresh air and movement would set him to rights and enable him to spend a profitable evening.
Horton argues in minute detail that Lowe-Porter's version distorts the flow and effect of the original German. I found his analysis and arguments fascinating.
Compare that with some Japanese translations, which truly fracture the syntax of Japanese in an attempt to capture the original German. I'll give you the first sentence in three Japanese translations.
植田
グスターフ・アッシェンバッハ ... ... あるいは、その五十回目の誕生日このかた、公に呼ばれているとおりにいえば、フォン・アッシェンバッハは、一九xx年... ... この年は、何か月もの間私たちの大陸にとって実に危険な様相を表した年であったが... ... の春のある午後、ミュンヘンのプリンツレゲンテン街の自宅から、ひろりでかなり遠方まで散歩に出かけた。
実吉
グスターフ・アッシェンバッハ ー または、かれの五十回目の誕生日以来、かれの名が公式に呼ばれていたとおりに言うと、フォン・アッシェンバッハは、一九xx年 ー これはわれわれの大陸に対して、幾月ものあいだ、じつに脅威的な様子を見せた年だったが ー その年の春のある午後、ミュンヘンのプリンツレゲンテン街にある自宅から、一人で、かなり遠くまで散歩に出かけた。
美光
グスタフ・アッシェンバッハ、あるいは五十歳の誕生日以降公式に呼ばれた名前によればフォン・アッシェンバッハは一九xx年、この年は数ヶ月に渡って私たちの大陸が危険で威嚇的な顔を見せていたのだが、その年のある春の午後、ミュンヘンのプリンツレゲンテン通りの住まいから、一人でいつもより長い散歩に出かけた。
There is probably no escaping the difference in word order between German and Japanese, but the three translators all follow the German so faithfully that the result is excruciating to read. Real translationese.
In fact, all of the Japanese translators could easily have made their translation more natural by making the observation about Europe's situation into an attributive clause:
われわれの大陸に対して、幾月ものあいだ、じつに脅威的な様子を見せた一九xx年のある春の午後、グスタフ・アッシェンバッハ、あるいは五十歳の誕生日以降公式に呼ばれた名前によればフォン・アッシェンバッハはミュンヘンのプリンツレゲンテン通りの住まいから、一人でいつもより長い散歩に出かけた。
But none of them did. They are so tied to the original that they'd prefer to torture their own language rather than make any modifications in the presentation of facts and events.
I was told that in any kind of international communications that are in any way case of the government they want Word for Word so that it can be back translated for legal reasons also not in this case at your showing but in many cases the English translation is the base translation for Spanish in Italian and French translations so it really needs to be Word for Word for that reason as well. That’s what I was told it was really stressful though
Please see Jim's comments here too if you have time xo
I did read them and they are very interesting. 蘭学事始 also sounds absolutely fascinating.
The Chinese word for 'translation' is also 翻譯 / 翻译. You would need to do a certain amount of research (which I am not able to) to determine whether this term originated in Chinese and was borrowed into Japanese, or whether it was coined in Japan and borrowed back into Chinese. The latter is always a possibility.
Just for interest, Mongolian has two conventional words for 'translate'. One is 'orchuulakh' (орчуулах, ᠣᠷᠴᠢᠭᠤᠯᠬᠤ), the normal term. It is the causative form of 'orchikh' (орчих, ᠣᠷᠴᠢᠬᠤ), a word meaning 'revolve', 'turn around', 'rotate', 'turn over'. The other is 'khörvüülekh' (хөрвүүлэх, ᠬᠥᠷᠪᠡᢉᠦᠯᠬᠦ), the causative of 'khörvökh' (хөрвөх, ᠬᠥᠷᠪᠡᠡᠬᠦ). Хөрвөх means 'to turn over, turn on its side', and can be translated into Chinese as 翻.
I do not know the origins of the Mongolian terms, whether they are completely native concepts or there has been some past influence from Chinese. But the similarity to the concept of 翻 is worth noting.
I think Saint Jerome would differ regard the inherent violence in translation, but it is a fascinating perspective.
That’s why he’s the patron saint of translators! I think you would love the book Babel! ❤️❤️❤️
Similar conundrums face the portrait artist -- to whom should the portrait be faced? (pun intended). -- Though portrait artists don't bear legal issues on their backs. Sounds like you miss doing translation!
I love this book too! Tons of translation theory was stuffed into my head during university but still enjoyed your thoughts! If you're reading books about translators, have you checked out I Am China by Xiaolu Guo? It's absolutely beautiful.
No, I just bought a copy --THANK YOU!!!!
Doesn’t this look good?? https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/10/books/review/the-centre-ayesha-manazir-siddiqi.html
Can't access the NYT article but yes, intriguing! Especially since the author has apparently done some translation work herself. Definitely goes on my list, thank you!