In "A Live Dog", I agree with Terry's argument that stating the obvious and too much repetition is good to avoid in English translations. In my experience growing up in the US, not being repetitive has been heavily emphasized in writing since a young age and I can see how it would become boring quickly. I think it's a bit of an exaggeration though when he says phrases like "needless to say" sounds like bad English, or at least I never thought of them that way. He also says rhetorical questions might sound "childish or pompous" in English- I don't know if I would see it as pompous but maybe childish since it would remind me of essay starter sentences in early childhood. I agree with his stance of not always translating literally especially when there are cultural differences involved. It wouldn't be accurate to translate "muzukashii" to "it would be difficult".
In Riggs' article, I liked her concept of "transmigration" and that there is a difference between a translation that has gone through a "transmigration" and one that hasn't. I agree that essays are very rigidly organized in English so it might seem disorganized if a Japanese essay was translated to English with no structural edits from the translator. I also agree with her stance on abandoning literal translation of the text and creating something new for the sake of effective communication, especially for things like metaphors, historical references, and cultural allusions. Her opinion that the title being one of the more difficult parts of translating resonated with me, as I feel like that is one of the parts I also struggle with the most when there is not a simple answer.
No comments:
Post a Comment