Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations SkipVought on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
'Translating' a book from English to American?
- Thread starter Welshbird
- Start date
With the purpose of showing just how insipid, banal, inane, [small]<insert your favorite description here>[/small] lawyers are. ;-)
James P. Cottingham
-----------------------------------------
[sup]I'm number 1,229!
I'm number 1,229![/sup]
James P. Cottingham
-----------------------------------------
[sup]I'm number 1,229!
I'm number 1,229![/sup]
I think they should be translated. When you're reading a fiction, you don't want to sit there with a dictionary. For example, even after Harry Potter was translated, I got frustrated with the use of the word "row." They paddled a boat? They obtained three ducks in a straight line?
After looking it up, I discovered it basically means "argument" or "fight" in my own terminology. And that was one of the words that actually made it through the translators... Not quite as annoying as some authors who spontaneously erupt in french and leave the user to look it up or skip a page, but close.
If you want to sell books, you need to make the language in that book appeal to the user, and that means not requiring them to have a dictionary handy.
[blue]When birds fly in the correct formation, they need only exert half the effort. Even in nature, teamwork results in collective laziness.[/blue]
After looking it up, I discovered it basically means "argument" or "fight" in my own terminology. And that was one of the words that actually made it through the translators... Not quite as annoying as some authors who spontaneously erupt in french and leave the user to look it up or skip a page, but close.
If you want to sell books, you need to make the language in that book appeal to the user, and that means not requiring them to have a dictionary handy.
[blue]When birds fly in the correct formation, they need only exert half the effort. Even in nature, teamwork results in collective laziness.[/blue]
Chalk it up as a learning experience. You just have to widen your horizons. The more British authors you read, the less you will be scratching your head.pinkgecko said:
And, by the way, in this context, it's pronounced differently (rhymes with "meow", or as our friends across the pond would spell it, "miaou").
Solum potestis prohibere ignes silvarum.
I enjoy looking up words in a dictionary, even for fiction. I've know what a row was since I read it in Narnia books when I was a child. I pronounced it wrong for years, but at least I knew the word.
I'm reasonably competent to read British English and understand it all, simply because I've done enough of it. I guess, all in all, I'd rather have my vocabulary expanded, and see the original words of the author.
I'm reasonably competent to read British English and understand it all, simply because I've done enough of it. I guess, all in all, I'd rather have my vocabulary expanded, and see the original words of the author.
I have a compromise:
Put the potential confusing words in a glossary in the back of the book. Printing 10 extra pages might even cost less than all the work of editing and proofing the Americanized version.
Now we can read the original author's words, but if there is confusion, just open the glossary (no need to keep a separate dictionary around).
Put the potential confusing words in a glossary in the back of the book. Printing 10 extra pages might even cost less than all the work of editing and proofing the Americanized version.
Now we can read the original author's words, but if there is confusion, just open the glossary (no need to keep a separate dictionary around).
AnotherHiggins
Technical User
I honestly can't tell if that is a joke or not. Why should children, who are, after all, the main target audience, and who obviously haven't had the benefit of Mrs. Beaty's Freshman Latin class, be expected to know such an arcane reference?LNBruno said:
And as for the educational system, I vote that they work on teaching kids current science before alchemy.
pinkgecko: "Row" is used that way in "American", too.
I say leave them as is, with the possible exceptions of words that already mean something different in the US (as pointed out by traingamer) and maybe spelling (as pointed out by flapeyre).
It sounds like I'm wrong on this, but I thought the Harry Potter books contained a decent amount of Britishisms. It wouldn't "sound" right for everyone in the book to speak American English. Yet millions of kids and adults have enjoyed reading them and seem to be able to get past any language differences.
For any who advocate translations, what about works such as Huckleberry Finn? That's hard to read at first, too. Should that book be "translated" into standard American English?
[tt]_____
[blue]-John[/blue][/tt]
[tab][red]The plural of anecdote is not data[/red]
Help us help you. Please read FAQ 181-2886 before posting.
- Thread starter
- #29
I read (I believe) the original version of Huck Finn and didn't find it too difficult.
I like the idea of a glossary - but I have to agree with the majority - it's not actually a different language - so surely it IS understandable 'as is'.
Fee
The question should be [red]Is it worth trying to do?[/red] not [blue] Can it be done?[/blue]
I like the idea of a glossary - but I have to agree with the majority - it's not actually a different language - so surely it IS understandable 'as is'.
Fee
The question should be [red]Is it worth trying to do?[/red] not [blue] Can it be done?[/blue]
I learned this use of the word 'Row' from the same source that taught me the word 'Pub' Andy Capp cartoon strips 
[small]Sometimes you gotta leave your zone of safety. You have to manufacture Inspirado. You gotta get out of the apartment. You've got to run with the wolves. You've got to dive into the ocean and fight with the sharks. Or just treat yourself to a delicious hot fudge sundae........ with nuts. - Jack Black[/small]
[small]Sometimes you gotta leave your zone of safety. You have to manufacture Inspirado. You gotta get out of the apartment. You've got to run with the wolves. You've got to dive into the ocean and fight with the sharks. Or just treat yourself to a delicious hot fudge sundae........ with nuts. - Jack Black[/small]
So we should translate Shakespeare too? I hate to think how that would read;
"To be or what? That's the deal,
Whether its cool to have the,
WMD's of outrageous big bucks,
Or to pick up a gun in a bad situation
Step back and let 'em have it? To die, to sleep;
No way dude! The PITA and the monster rumble
That our own guts and stuff belongs to,
Thats the deal I'm hangin out for
etc. etc."
"To be or what? That's the deal,
Whether its cool to have the,
WMD's of outrageous big bucks,
Or to pick up a gun in a bad situation
Step back and let 'em have it? To die, to sleep;
No way dude! The PITA and the monster rumble
That our own guts and stuff belongs to,
Thats the deal I'm hangin out for
etc. etc."
- Thread starter
- #34
Yes they are Fee!
Don't movies really only do that because they are doing a modern re-working and will translate into the language of the people who put hte most money in?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Whoever battles with monsters had better see that it does not turn him into a monster. And if you gaze long into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you. ~ Nietzsche"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
AndrewTait
MIS
The Bible is already a translation to get it into English, from Hebrew, Latin and Greek. Therefore, to translate it into American English rather than British English is no different than translating it into French or Spanish.
=======================================
I got to the edge of sanity....then i fell off
======================================
That has been done already. The New American Bible was published back in 1970. The difference is that it was translated from the original languages, and not from British English.AndrewTait said:
But that's neither here nor there. My point with the link in my previous post was that it's possible to get somewhat carried away with translation. The link was to a humo(u)r site. As a practical matter, we do not normally need to translate between British English and American English in order to be able to understand the meaning.
However, we will run into problems when excessive cliches, slang, or jargon are used.
Solum potestis prohibere ignes silvarum.
If I'm reading the Bible or Shakespeare, I'm not looking for light reading. But for children's books or fiction, I want something I can come home and read after a day of programming without really needing to stretch my mind. Sometimes, I just like fluff, and fluff that requires a dictionary isn't really fluff. And while I can see your argument about classics by late authors, I see absolutely no problem with an author releasing an official British English and another official American English translation. They are both using the author's words; they just chose different words to use.
For all of you Lords of the Rings fans, The Hobbit has gone through several editions, published by different companies in UK and US. Both editions during each publish were authorized, but not necessarily the same (can't find anything to indicate either way). Tolkien changed entire chapters of The Hobbit once LotR was released. [sarcasm]Shame on you for reading those revised versions that were more consistent. You should have stuck with the author's original.[/sarcasm]
[blue]When birds fly in the correct formation, they need only exert half the effort. Even in nature, teamwork results in collective laziness.[/blue]
For all of you Lords of the Rings fans, The Hobbit has gone through several editions, published by different companies in UK and US. Both editions during each publish were authorized, but not necessarily the same (can't find anything to indicate either way). Tolkien changed entire chapters of The Hobbit once LotR was released. [sarcasm]Shame on you for reading those revised versions that were more consistent. You should have stuck with the author's original.[/sarcasm]
[blue]When birds fly in the correct formation, they need only exert half the effort. Even in nature, teamwork results in collective laziness.[/blue]
AnotherHiggins
Technical User
-> They are both using the author's words
In the case that launched this thread - the book mentioned in the article linked to in the OP - it seems that the author isn't pleased about an "Americanized" version being released. It certainly doesn't sound like they are "her words" being used, as she is quite surprised to see some of the change notes.
[tt]_____
[blue]-John[/blue][/tt]
[tab][red]The plural of anecdote is not data[/red]
Help us help you. Please read FAQ 181-2886 before posting.
In the case that launched this thread - the book mentioned in the article linked to in the OP - it seems that the author isn't pleased about an "Americanized" version being released. It certainly doesn't sound like they are "her words" being used, as she is quite surprised to see some of the change notes.
[tt]_____
[blue]-John[/blue][/tt]
[tab][red]The plural of anecdote is not data[/red]
Help us help you. Please read FAQ 181-2886 before posting.
- Status
