The title could just as easily be "So I'm a spider. What about it?"
"So" in front of a sentence is really not all that rare. Grammatically not great, but colloquially fine.
The title could just as easily be "So I'm a spider. What about it?"
"So" in front of a sentence is really not all that rare. Grammatically not great, but colloquially fine.
If it's not Isuzu-chan Mii~
Pls read what I wrote. I criticize the double usw of "so". That's what makes it sound bad.Originally Posted by Buffalobiian
"She's the only non-loli girl in the show, your honor!" will be my defense in court
And since when are Japanese titles translated exactly the same? I mean, the premise of your problem with the title was not that it was translated wrongly, but that it made no sense in English... and on this particular regard, you'd be wrong. It's perfectly fine in English.
#AttackOnTitan
Is it "perfectly fine" though? If I were an English teacher, I'd put a red marker on that first "so" and write a comment next to it saying "try to avoid repeating the same word in the same sentence".
"She's the only non-loli girl in the show, your honor!" will be my defense in court
I agree with Mfauli. Just removing the first "So" is enough to make it better without losing any accuracy. The translation is lazy.
Peace.
We're not writing an essay or thesis or anything. It's just a title and a phrase mentioned colloquially just fine. This is not worth the discussion.
No one is really disputing that there weren't better alternatives, or that the translation is as accurate as it could be though. The basis of his complaint was that it sounded bad, as in it made no sense in English... as if the first "So" couldn't convey a different meaning than the second one. Or that in English no one can put sentences like that together, particularly colloquially.
The first "So" DOES convey a different meaning, that it had better alternatives? Sure, but that's a matter of taste. For titles, sometimes the repetition is what brings it to life and makes it stand out... kinda like an internal rhyme.
I mean, if all this discussion is simply to lead us to believe that there were better ways about it, then...OK, sure? Good job everyone.
Last edited by Munsu; Sat, 02-20-2021 at 09:27 PM.
Thanks. I find it compelling to give my opinion about translation matters given my study and experience. Maybe it might even help others interested in learning Japanese.
Peace.
I have no problem with discussing whether the translation is accurate or not, in fact I welcome it. It's the idea that a sentence constructed as it was in English is intrinsically wrong, which was the meat of what was being discussed, which is in dispute. That's two different issues. Going beyond what is meant literally, we should always be aware that there are nuances in Japanese that are can't be properly conveyed by a straight up translation, and that's where editorial freedom comes in. Pretty much true for all languages.
Not that I'm disputing that aspect (or anyone that I'm aware of), and I'm not disputing that it could have a more appropriate straightforward translation (which again isn't in dispute)... what was being disputed was that merely having "So" two times in the title just made it a English error outright, also the insinuation that both times it was used it conveyed the same meaning, so one could substitute the other (it doesn't).
And now I feel like shit for overusing "dispute".
----------------------------
Your specific criticism is that the unnecessary "So" is the one in front. My specific response to this, is that keeping the first "So" and dropping the second works fine.
Similar uses in English can be "So I fucked up. And?"
If it's not Isuzu-chan Mii~
No :/
Both you and Munsu interpret my postings in bizarre ways
As I wrote several times by now: Having 2 "so" in such a short title just sounds bad. That you could change the second "so" is true, but then the translation would be less precise. The first "so" simply doesn't convey anything that's present in the Japanese title.
Again, and that's gonna be the last time: The first "so" just sounds bad. This is a professional company doing translations for fincancial gain, so I figure they'd want the best possible translation, not just one that "still makes sense". Therefore, "I'm a Spider, so what?" would have been the more professional translation. That's it.
That is incorrect. My complaint was about it sounding bad, yes. Not that it was un-understandable in English.No one is really disputing that there weren't better alternatives, or that the translation is as accurate as it could be though. The basis of his complaint was that it sounded bad, as in it made no sense in English
"She's the only non-loli girl in the show, your honor!" will be my defense in court
That's what happens when you continue to move the goalpost in your arguments, which is customary at this point. It makes perfect sense in English, you even admitted that you were WRONG if there was no problem with that type of structure of English (that's why you asked the question in the first place)... discussion on that aspect should've stopped there. But your stubborn streak flared up and doubled down on it being improper English, then mixed it with how it's wrongly TRANSLATED and doubled down once again on that aspect later.No :/
Both you and Munsu interpret my postings in bizarre ways
As I wrote several times by now: Having 2 "so" in such a short title just sounds bad. That you could change the second "so" is true, but then the translation would be less precise. The first "so" simply doesn't convey anything that's present in the Japanese title.
Again, and that's gonna be the last time: The first "so" just sounds bad. This is a professional company doing translations for fincancial gain, so I figure they'd want the best possible translation, not just one that "still makes sense". Therefore, "I'm a Spider, so what?" would have been the more professional translation. That's it.
That is incorrect. My complaint was about it sounding bad, yes. Not that it was un-understandable in English.
Arguing about the English component and how it was bad grammatically and so forth after multiple posters showed you how it was not a problem should have ended the discussion on that regard. If you wanted to later focus on how it wasn't translated as accurate as possible just because they added a bit more flavor (in their opinion) using an additional "so", well.. so be it. But in the end, much ado about nothing really... it's one of the least egregious translations in the history of Japanese title translations for the kind of hoopla it has created in this thread.
And that's all I'll say about this and won't respond to other replies.
Is it next Friday yet?
That's good because you are wrong here. It's a style error to have the "so" word twice in the same sentence. I can also guarantee it was told to you back in school, unless your English teacher was a very peculiar person walking their own path in life and language. Well, like I said before, it must be intentional with this series, seeing how the style is kind of kitschy. The original name is already provocative, so the English version is merely taking it a step further, making it sound like spoken language.
In writing, it is bad. In speaking in casual tones, it is fine.
Native English speakers have ZERO problems with this title. Especially the monoglots.
Translation is always stages of interpretation, edit, and occasionally, rewriting from on culture/audience to another. Literal translations are invariably poor translations, actually no better than fully embellished and retwisted translations.
Damn, picking this point in time to argue against me when I can't reply!!! And bringing a new argument while you're at it LOL. But calling my stance wrong, then I'll just add a bit since I didn't discuss this with you previously, and purely on the technicalities of English as a written and spoken language.
I'll just point out that we mentioned colloquially many times during the discussion, also too much is being made out of rules used mostly for essays and thesis and other types of formal writing. In narration and rhetoric there are a myriad of of literary devices in which repetition is used... and we're talking about a title from an entertainment medium here. So there's really no "style error" as you call it (well there is, but it's subjective), it is very dependent on how formal of a work we're talking about and what the intention of the repetition is all about. But yes, in general, repetition should be avoided when possible, particularly if there are perfectly good synonyms that can be used as substitute (which I believe many of us have agreed to already). And I'd be the first to criticize a novel when a word is overused, but... from there to it being WRONG in English, then that's a step too far.
In fact, if this was a formal essay or thesis, I wouldn't use even one instance of "so" anywhere.
I think now I've touched upon all the elements of interest. Don't agree, that's fine, but wrong it isn't.
Last edited by Munsu; Sun, 02-21-2021 at 12:11 PM.
Well, I hope Mushoku is spicy again this week so we can talk about that instead of this lol
"She's the only non-loli girl in the show, your honor!" will be my defense in court
Or they aren't dead at all and just got, like, sucked into a virtual world.
Them dying in "a mysterious flash of light" is a hell of a lot less conclusive than the usual visit from truck-kun.
I completely agree and kinda hate it when they do that.
"Yeah I'm a spider. Big whoop. Wanna fight about it?!"
Last edited by DarthEnderX; Mon, 02-22-2021 at 12:55 AM.
If there's a D, does it give more credence that the religious fanatic girl is not all that crazy? At least as far as hearing the Voice of God, she's batshit crazy regardless.
Is she hearing D or Binchou-tan's narrator like Kumoko?
I guess the latter?
Hmm, have we seen any the other characters hearing anything? I thought we had, but now I'm not sure. We know they seem to be in the same system, but it'd be interesting if they're hearing a different voice.
Regardless, does it matter what she's hearing at this point? The existence of a an administrator who can hear and manipulate the system in return already is big step in her favor vs. others that dismiss it.
I can only watch someone else read stats for so long... The story did just get a leap more interesting with the introduction of an admin-type entity. That it listens to the spider's feedback is curious, but it was an effective reveal for maximum emotional impact. This does raise questions like the nature of their existence here and so on, which would be nice if they were at least touched on this season.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
