Which do you prefer?
Are we talking about manga, anime or movies?
Considering the pic.
>>142794093
Depends on the source material.
>>142794093
For subs I prefer a strict translation with notes for more confusing shit.
I watch dubs sometimes and obviously localization works better there, but some would benefit from keeping in honorifics.
I like proper grammar, but I also like seeing a hint of the original figures of speech the author used.
Ultimately, the grammar part wins.
>>142794093
Strict translation every time
>>142794093
Both are bad when taken to the extreme. Ideally, you would aim for accuracy but make whatever adjustments are necessary to convey how someone with no language barrier would experience the material, so if for example a joke doesn't translate into English, you would change it to a rough equivalent and then hopefully leave notes and an explanation for what the original text was at the end of a chapter/volume or some text file if it's anime. Although in the case of material where the Japanese cultural aspect has significant relevance then of course preserve the original meaning. And if the characters are Japanese or are clearly based on their culture then keep the honorifics, if not then replace them with an equivalent.
Honorifics and terminology should be used based on the setting and their meaning.
There was this medieval game that bugged me way too hard because they used Japanese honorifics for the characters, but in the setting, Japan was a foreign country.
You can't just throw around -chan and -kun without making it work. Localize if you have to, but always consider the context.
>>142794093
Case by case, and even maybe line by line.
I tend towards preferring accuracy, but if a character uses a Japanese idiom that's not important to the plot at all, better to use an equivalent English phrase than have a bunch of translation notes.
Obviously, both localization and strict translations can be done badly, though.
The only thing that makes me want to rip my hair out is over-liberalization and localizing puns.
英霊 Eirei: Heroic Spirits or Legendary Souls?
>>142795447
English Ghosts
>>142795447
>>142795459
Yep, English Ghosts
>>142795416
The alternative is localizing puns is a bunch of gibberish with translation notes explaining that it made sense in Japanese.
And, y'know, sometimes the pun is plot-critical and you just need to work with it, and sometimes it's not.
>>142795518
I like the way Shirokuma Cafe was done, just adding the Japanese word in romaji and parentheses next to the English equivalent.
Crunchy roll/horrible subs is good enough for me.
But I hate funimation the typeface is so fucking ugly.
>>142794093
it depends,strict translation works best,but for certain shows that carry heavy themes some aspects may be hard to understand if taken directly across due to language and culture barriers.
>>142794093Commie
Localization often goes too far. Professionals have a tendency to look down on their demographics or completely misunderstand their familiarity with the subject matter. They usually aim for a translation that the LCD will be able to follow even if it's tonally completely different from the author's intention.
>>142795908
Localizations go too far when they alter the tone or insert a joke for what was originally a straightforward line ("rub a dub dub thanks for the grub" for example) but I think it's unwise to not translate something just because you presume your audience is familiar with it. When the author wrote a joke, he intended for the reader to find it funny, not to think "oh, it doesn't work in English." By neglecting to translate the scene's essence you've actually changed it from how the author meant for it to be read, this is why I feel purely strict translations are a bit misguided.
Basically, a good localization preserves the tone of the original when it may not be conveyed by a strict translation. A bad localization alters the tone or inserts bullshit that's unnecessary for the reader to experience how the scene was intended.
Localization without sacrificing original meaning. Also, an additional option of #Commie, because fun things are fun.
Strict translation, because contrary to what Commie would have you believe, strict translation isn't 1:1 switching words from Japanese to English complete with broken grammar, it's translating the sentence, keeping verbiage and tone as much as possible, and conveying the authors intent. Localization marauds under the guise of doing these things, but in reality it hacks up the original dialog and inserts ideas the translator think are funny or pertinent. No one cares what the translator thinks should be said, they care what the author actually said.
Want an example? Compare the Commie and H&D subs of Symphogear. Commie pretends to be all about smooth reading, when in reality they just make everyone talk like an American teenager complete with slang and epic may mays, whereas H&D has natural sounding English that still matches the tone to each character. Here's a line that called for cute, lyrical rhyme said by little girl. H&D saw this, and matched the tone while still not actually changing the verbiage. Commie utterly failed on this front, and then just shoves some shitty memes in later and pretends it "reads natural".
Strict translation can be awkward and localization misses the point. Personally I'd just want minimalist translations with as few words as possible so I can focus on the screen.
>>142794093
Only siths and know-nothings deal in absolutes. Translation is a balancing game. You have to pay attention to the characters, the setting and the intent of the dialogue to see how much you can localize and how much needs to stay literal. Honorifics for example really should stay in
Imo businesses have good reasons to go down further on the localization end of the spectrum and since they need the product to appeal to as many people as possible. Closely matching translations are going read dryly to people so going niggastream/commie by throwing in expletives and tone changes that weren't there in the original would help reach the target audience better.
If you're doing it for free though you should targeting for a style that matches the source material instead of bending the script to what the translator/proofreader thinks would work better. People read the scans for the author's work, not the translator's, so it's best for the translator to keep their own voice out of it.
>>142795908
I'm fairly certain the super bong version was gg.
>>142799117
*Honorifics for example really should stay in for settings based in or on Japan but needs to be taken out if the story takes place in say early Jojo england. Isekai stories can be a bit of a toss-up considering they're written by japs with their take on rpg worlds while anglophones will have their own take on how rpg world linguistics should be like.
>>142794093
Both are extreme. A good translation will keep things true to the source material, except in extreme cases when things have no way of being translated. And translator notes are nbot the evil that people have made them out to be. Its better to have a quick explanation rather than lose the original point entirely.
The main problem with translation is that it is based on the desecration of the translator. Who has their own set of bias and beliefs. Something the translator may feel is a minor change might be a huge change to the viewer. So we're never going to have perfect translations until we finally get a universal translator and perfect computer AI. Or everyone just switches to using one language. Obviously, neither is going to happen.
>>142799506
>And translator notes are nbot the evil that people have made them out to be.
Only retards who take too much pride in being a "real" translator do that. Anyone who went to school and has read and watched foreign media knows they're par for the course.
>>142795518
999 comes to mind
![[a-s]_you're_under_arrest_-_33_-_eeeek!_it's_toki_the_idol!__rs2_[CE1832A6].mkv_snapshot_15.21_[2016.05.31_23.05.33].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/1UhLuuJ.jpg "[a-s]_you're_under_arrest_-_33_-_eeeek!_it's_toki_the_idol!__rs2_[CE1832A6].mkv_snapshot_15.21_[2016.05.31_23.05.33].jpg")
>>142799598
>Only retards who take too much pride in being a "real" translator do that.
So basically all officially licensed translators and half the fun subbers out there.
Holy, crap, I went back to watch a mid 90s show. And the crap they pull in this doesn't make sense, even for a shitty translation. The guy literally just said 'Masaka' and they write out like two whole sentences of 'context'. Why in the world do translators do this?! Its just more work for you and doesn't even match the script.
>>142799829
>So basically all officially licensed translators and half the fun subbers out there.
Yes. People with not real skills who need to feel important because they translate animu. Subbers who do it for fun and love of the medium and not validation are the only good ones.
>>142798614
Both of your examples use localization, it's just that one is bad and the other does what it's supposed to do. You are arbitrarily deciding that a localization can't be a localization unless it's spewing memes and forcing slang everywhere.
>>142800067
>Both of your examples use localization
No, that's wrong. Using the original words is not a localization.
>>142799885
>Subbers who do it for fun and love of the medium and not validation are the only good ones.
So you're saying there's no good subbers?
>>142794093
Localization in most cases.
>>142794093
if it gets the gist of things across i don't really mind either way
>>142800125
There are a couple.
>>142800111
Did she literally say every single one of those words in the original? She said she was afraid? If they rephrased it to make a rhyme while keeping the original meaning intact then it is still a localization.
>>142800304
>They used the same adjectives, and the same device used to explain that she was disappointed with the steak (a point rating system)
>But she didn't say afraid so it's a localization
They added the word in which still kept the exact same meaning and left the original adjectives and "rating system" in tact. Adding the necessary English word in that does not change the meaning or tone is not a localization, it's a translation. You seem to think that translation is just transposing the words 1:1, and that's fucking stupid.
>>142800171
All subbers are in it for epeen or money.
>>142800472
I don't think H&D are, nor is Mori or some groups that do movie releases.
>>142800385
The point of strict translation is to translate as closely to the original text as possible, and inserting/changing notihing beyond grammar or missing context/words. The point of localization is to convey to the reader how the original scene would come across with no language barrier when a strict translation can't, it can be misused but that doesn't negate the times it's done right. I'm assuming the words that rhymed in your example didn't rhyme in English so the sentence was rephrased to get it to work for English speakers, that is localization.
>>142794093
Strict translation because i'm not american.
>>142801070
>The point of strict translation is to translate as closely to the original text as possible
>translation ends at text
No, you don't know how translation works.
>I'm assuming
You're certainly making an ass out of yourself.
>the words that rhymed in your example didn't rhyme in English so the sentence was rephrased to get it to work for English speakers, that is localization.
The language was not changed. The same adjectives were used, and she said "I'm giving you zero points" in Japanese. When no verbs, nouns, adjectives or ideas are changed and they can still keep the tone and intended voice, it's a good translation. Localization is diluting cultural ideas or language for the sake of appealing to a braoder audience in a different country. "Anything other than a 1:1 transposition of words" is not localization.
Strict translation and proper understanding of the Japanese from a Japanese viewpoint, and then embellishment and creative word choice to make it not sound robotic when bringing it to English.
>>142801070
Its never perfect. I expect it to be watchable over the nuances. If you want me to understand nuances that are too difficult to put into conventional english, edit a note scene at the end. Fansubs used to do that sometimes. CR straight won't though and I can't remember seeing a single note, though that might be a plus since some of those were dumb choices.
>>142800472
Of course not anon. Back when fansubbing was far more contentious and necessary there where all types of groups that came and went. CR just cut out those who weren't serious or who got tired of the game. Even among those claiming pure motives they had vast differing styles, CR has consumed them all and now a strict localization in the only route.
This is why sometimes I download [gg]. To remind me of the old days when you could be dumb when fansubbing and people would laugh and get mad, instead of the soulless corporate hash we get produced by probably some chinese guy doing it for ten cents a minute out of his basement in a sweatshop.
>>142794093
日本語です
>>142801184
>You're certainly making an ass out of yourself.
Care to enlighten me what the original dialogue was then?
>Localization is diluting cultural ideas or language for the sake of appealing to a braoder audience in a different country.
It can be that when used incorrectly but that's not its purpose. Translation is still a facet of localization and it's meant to be used when the direct translation doesn't convey something that would have been apparent to the original audience (such as wordplay).
>>142801670
>Care to enlighten me what the original dialogue was then?
"It's bitter, it stinks and it's not delicious. I'm going to have to give you 0 points." and she was lyrical/rhyming with it.
Stop talking about things you don't understand.
>It can be
No, stop that. "Anything other than 1:1 transposition" is not the definition of localization. You're an idiot.
>>142794093
A mix - mostly depending on things like word-play which is extremely difficult to translate
Generally I prefer translation because most stuff isn't dense
>>142794093
Strict translation because I am a fucking weeaboo but I dont complain if the translation is liberal
>>142794093
Neither because I'm not a lazy ass weeaboo who can't speak Japanese. I don't even understand why oeople who can't speak Japanese post in this board. If you really like anime so much, learn Japanese and don't butcher the shows with translations.
>>142801744
>"It's bitter, it stinks and it's not delicious. I'm going to have to give you 0 points." and she was lyrical/rhyming with it.
I meant in moon.
>"Anything other than 1:1 transposition" is not the definition of localization
I'm not saying it is, but you're definition of strict translation is not very strict and your rules for what localization has to be don't make much sense or else no one would be asking if it's an acceptable alternative.
>You're an idiot.
Is this you? >>133156050 You type just like him and have the same opinions.
>>142802118
Transliteration, anyone?
>>142802471
>I meant in moon.
That is what it meant in moon. Seriously, how long are you going to keep this up for? You have no idea what you're talking about.
>I'm not saying it is
Yes you are.
> but you're definition of strict translation is not very strict
Original verbiage, original tone, don't insert any ideas that aren't there, or take out any ideas that aren't. How the hell is that not strict?
>Is this you?
No, there's just more than one person on this board who actually understands how to translate things. Great to see that you've been arguing about it for this long without having any fucking idea what you're talking about. Given that you clear don't know moon, how about you tell us which shitty fansubbing group you're an editor or typesetter in, because no one but a fansubber could be this adamant while being this wrong about translation.
>>142794093
Fairly strict translations. It needs to convey the same info, which may include using local idioms in place of the original ones, but they should have as close a meaning as possible otherwise forget it.
>>142794093
Anyone who says strict translation is a massive fucking idiot that has literally no idea how translation even works. The vast majority of fan translations are localizing without realizing it.
That being said, localizing is the second worst kind of translation, superior only to strict translations, because it corrupts context and meaning. No one with half a brain would pick a localized translation.
The best kind of translation is idiomatic and focuses on capturing context and meaning. There is no other acceptable alternative in the professional translation/interpretation world.
>>142802954
You aren't talking about "strict" translation. You are inventing a definition for a phrase to suit your argument.
The phrase you are looking for is idiomatic translation, which is the process of translating language in a way that retains context and meaning, but is digestible by the native of the language that the source was translated into (context and meaning contain tone and intent).
Source: I'm a certified Spanish/English translator.
>>142803455
99% of anime doesn't have complicated enough writing for this to matter.
>>142803479
meant to quote
>>142803324
but I guess it still applies.
>>142794093
Depends on the original script and the quality of the person localizing it.
If the original script is dry as fuck and the people localizing it can make it entertaining while still keeping the same meaning, then that's fine.
If the "localization" is them just making shit up and changing shit then no, that's not okay.
You let this happen.
This is the future you chose.
>We believe Americans will find nudity offensive, so Motoko will no longer appear naked or scantily clad.
>>142803324
>The best kind of translation is idiomatic and focuses on capturing context and meaning. There is no other acceptable alternative in the professional translation/interpretation world.
Ah yes, the Commie excuse for "I want to butcher the source material and pretend it's to preserve tone."
Fuck off.
>>142803455
>You aren't talking about "strict" translation.
Strict means it adheres to the original. I said a strict translation preserves verbiage, tone and doesn't add or remove ideas. Explain how that isn't strict. You haven't answered a single question, and you completely ignored the fact that you were objectively wrong about the line in question.
>The phrase you are looking for is idiomatic translation
No, idiomatic translation focuses on just putting the ideas across in a way that sounds natural in the target language. It has nothing to do with preserving verbiage, which is what we've been talking about.
>Source: I'm a certified Spanish/English translator.
Great, so we've established that you don't know shit about Japanese (despite arguing a specific line) and now we can assume you're not very good at your job given that you've been spewing nonsense this whole time.
>>142803479
Thanks for demonstrating you utter lack of expertise on the subject!
Tons and tons of anime contains jokes. Humor is incredibly complex, linguistically speaking. The foundation of humor is cultural, and sometimes rooted in literal centuries of history. If I was trying to tell a small dick joke to an alien species, I would have to explain to them the entire history, biological function, psychology, and social ramifications of the male sex organ and it's ties to perceived masculinity, power, and capability for them to even begin to grasp why a human would find a small penis odd. Then I'd have to start explaining our obsession with irony and juxtaposition, and what those two things are, before they'd could understand how it could be humorous.
To tell a dick joke properly.
You have no idea what you're talking about.
>>142803637
>Ultracrediation: The Post
It's not Commie's excuse, they are bad for entirely different reasons.
Go look up the qualifications for any professional translation. Go look up what the expectations are for passing the ATA certification exam. The words "idiomatic", "context", and "meaning" will be popping up, a lot.
I get that you really, honestly believe that you know what you're talking about, but you fucking don't. You're trying to argue mathematics with a mathematician, and you don't even understand PEMDOS.
>you have to know a specific language to know how to translate
Translation is a separate skill from speaking language, as you have thoroughly demonstrated. That's why there's such things as translation certifications.
>arguing a specific line
I haven't argued anything with you except that you're trying to jargonize things and create definitions to fit your argument, and that you have no fucking clue about what you're trying to speak on. You've confused me with a different anon.
in the later chapters of gunslinger girl they started leaving in japanese honorifics instead of italian honorifics as in earlier chapters fucking annoying to read
the italian ones are annoying also
>>142803963
>I have a certificate therefore I am right!
Good for you anon, display absolute no working knowledge of how translation works, ignore all the arguments made, but just say "I speak Spanish and took an awesome certification course, so I'm a pro and everything I say is right!"
>I get that you really, honestly believe that you know what you're talking about, but you fucking don't.
I speak three language and have translated all kinds of fun stuff between them, but that's besides the point. You're an idiot. You "certification" is about as impressive a personal trainer's certification who then goes on to be a crossfit coach and claims to be an expert on fitness. Do you have academic research papers you've authored on the subjected that are cited by the community? No? Then you "qualifications" are fucking worthless.
The word "strict" is not jargon. I'm not trying to invent words, anyone who speaks English would know what a "strict (thing)" was.
You've done a phenomenal job of showing off what an idiot you are. If you can't make an actual point and back it up, falling back on "Well I do this for a living" won't impress anyone, it'll just show how awful you are at your job.
>>142798614
I dont think you know what a strict translation is anon
>>142804179
It's sure as hell not using a dictionary to look up all the words, then replacing in the sentence in the same order.
>>142803963
I hope you see the irony in using a word that doesn't exist while saying what you just said.
>>142804152
>speaking languages is equivalent to translating them
That's fucking cute, I speak three languages, too, and yet I'm only certified to translate from Spanish into English. My certification is also attached to 6 years of experience and a bachelor's degree. You seriously have no idea what you're talking about.
"Strict translation" is jargon in this context, you goddamned jackass. You're literally redefining strict when you're applying to the style of translation you are talking about. You don't even realize that, and I'm supposed to take anything you have to say on the subject seriously?
Here's what I mean when I say you're inventing jargon. Jargon is technical terminology and definitions used in specific fields. In this case, no one who isn't trying to talk about translation would use the word "strict" to modify "translation" how you are trying to (which is why you've had to attempt to redefine it several times now, despite all of us obviously speaking English to some degree and strict being a common word). You don't even realize that you are modifying the word "strict" beyond it's commonly accepted definition. You also don't realize that in the professional translating world "strict definition" doesn't fucking mean anything, because it's not the phrase we use to describe what you're talking about.
>>142804336
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultracrepidarianism
Fuck off, please.
>>142804449
But that's not the word you wrote, idiot.
>>142804529
It doesn't have to be, idiot. Ultracrepidate is the verb, ultracrepidarian describes being an ultracrepidant, and ultracrepidation describes the state of committing ultracrepidarianism.
Like how an amalgamation is the state of something being an amalgam.
I'm literally just adding suffixes to construct words, the way all fucking English does it.
>>142804449
>Muh accreditation
Literally (not figuratively) not an argument.
>"Strict translation" is jargon in this context, you goddamned jackass. You're literally redefining strict when you're applying to the style of translation you are talking about.
God fucking damnit you're stupid.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/strict
>4: exact, precise <in the strict sense of the word>
I've repeatedly said that a strict translation is one that adheres to the original verbiage and tone and doesn't change ideas. That is a translation of the strict variety, per the definition. No, it is not fucking jargon. I know you're really excited about that worthless certification you have, and you think that only esoteric terminology they teach you can be used to describe translation, but that's so wrong that it makes my head hurt. Strict is a word. Translation is a word. I explained in what way a translation can be strict. Instead of refuting that, you said "No that's jargon that doesn't exist, so fuck you."
>no one who isn't trying to talk about translation would use the word "strict" to modify "translation"
Complete and utter bullshit. If you asked any person "What's the difference between a strict translation and liberal one" they would be able to answer the question without asking you to define the jargon. It is not jargon.
>You don't even realize that you are modifying the word "strict" beyond it's commonly accepted definition.
"Precise" is the definition. The type of translation I described is precise. You have not once attempted to refute this.
>I'm a professional, trust me.
No. You don't know how simple words in English work, why would I listen to anything you say? You have yet again utterly failed to make a point.
>>142804635
Aside from the fact that you're trying to nominalize a noun, you spelled the damned word wrong.
Pull your head out of your ass.
>>142802954
>That is what it meant in moon. Seriously, how long are you going to keep this up for? You have no idea what you're talking about.
Okay, I feel like knowing the actual words would allow me to be more informed which seems to be your main issue but I can't force you to do anything.
>Yes you are.
I've said what my definition of localization is and it's not nearly that broad, it's situational.
>How the hell is that not strict?
Your example wouldn't have added something like "I'm afraid" to make the sentence flow more naturally. A strict translation is at odds with preserving tone and sounding natural because you will have to add words and phrases (beyond the basic grammar changes) that weren't in the original. You're using a normal translation for an example and pretending it's strict because it's accurate.
>No, there's just more than one person on this board who actually understands how to translate things.
Yeah, I'm sure it's not you at all considering you posted your example image in that thread. And I can easily believe that there are several people who prefer strict translations since there are people here that argue even the original sentence structure should be unchanged but I didn't think someone else would type in such a specific manner, my mistake.
>Great to see that you've been arguing about it for this long without having any fucking idea what you're talking about.
It's the only other translation debate thread I remember sitting through outside of today and it's because some retard was calling everyone else an idiot for his own mistake and it was pretty funny. It's not difficult to type "transliteration idiot" into archive search.
>Given that you clear don't know moon
I do or else I wouldn't have asked for the example sentence in moon.
>how about you tell us which shitty fansubbing group you're an editor or typesetter in
I do manga.
I'm not going to argue about this all night, you can have the last word if you want.
>>142794093
for something meticulously written as GitS, Definite strict translation.
>>142804668
>muh accreditation isnt an argument
Actually, it fucking is. That's why you go to a doctor for medical advice and not a goddamn physicist. Get your new-age, pseudo-intellectual bullshit out of here.
>the definition of strict, the fourth definition, is "exact, precise"
>the definition of strict "translations" is adheres to the original verbiage and tone and doesnt change ideas
>exact, precise
>adheres to original verbiages and tone
If you cannot see how those two things are not the same, and that you are relying on your own mental context of what "strict" means in terms of "translation", then you are beyond help.
>if you ask any person the difference between strict and liberal
Because you're feeding them context. Go ask 10 people what they think the "actual definition" of "strict translation is", and you'll get 10 dissimilar answers.
>>142804723
I did spell it wrong, you got me there, but there's absolutely nothing wrong with nominalizing nouns. There's no authority defining what is and isn't proper language--time and culture decide that. Especially as long as fucking w00t and lol are in Oxford and Webster's.
>>142804896
And fucking "selfie".
>>142804668
>I've repeatedly said that a strict translation is one that adheres to the original verbiage and tone and doesn't change ideas
I've never seen someone define a 'strict translation' in this way outside of this thread. To my mind a 'strict translation' is essentially a literal translation, which obviously differs from your view on the term. The reason there's incongruity is because 'strict translation' isn't a phrase with an accepted definition like say, 'coffee table' is (which is not a table made of coffee, but a table upon which coffee is commonly put).
The other guy is exactly correct in saying that you're making up/arguing on the basis of personal jargon.
>>142804752
You said the line in question was a localization. It used all the same adjectives and both specified giving zero points. They both rhymed. If ou think that was a localization, then yes, you're arguing that anything outside of a 1:1 word swap is a localization. No, "Well I didn't actually know what the fuck I was talking about" does suddenly give you a point. That's what you were arguing.
>Your example wouldn't have added something like "I'm afraid"
That's the equivalent of the にしか in her speech. It's not an added idea. But I'm sure you know that, otherwise you wouldn't be pretending to know what you're talking about.
>pretending it's strict because it's accurate.
I hope you understand that "strict" and "accurete" both mean "precise".
>I do manga.
So do I. I'm sure you're one of those great groups that releases garbage translations then gets an editor to smooth them over so people don't realize they're incoherent.
>>142804896
>Actually, it fucking is.
It's literally not, you fucking idiot. If a doctor says "The cure to your infection is radiation" then he isn't right by virtue of being a doctor. Simply claiming expertise in a field is literally not an argument.
>If you cannot see how those two things are not the same
>A strict translation is one that uses precise verbiage and precisesly matches tone
Ok, I get it, your English isn't great. That makes sense.
>Go ask 10 people what they think the "actual definition" of "strict translation is", and you'll get 10 dissimilar answers.
As usual, you're pulling more shit out of your ass. Good to see you can't actually make a point outside of "trust me, I'm an expert."
>>142805019
>I've never seen someone define a 'strict translation' in this way outside of this thread.
http://forum.wordreference.com/threads/a-strict-translation.2387925/
Literally 4 seconds on google. There's even a chucklefuck who says that it's a 1:1 swap of words, and then gets told he's wrong.
>The other guy is exactly correct in saying that you're making up/arguing on the basis of personal jargon.
No, you both just don't understand how words in English work.
>>142804896
>I did spell it wrong
You sure did.
>There's no authority defining what is and isn't proper language
>Language evolves so I can make up or redefine words on the fly
I love that meme.
>>142805091
And then there's another chucklefuck who comes along after that and says that a 'strict translation' is doing 1:1 swaps of words, hence why his father told him that you wouldn't make a strict translation of the phrase 'good morning.'
So it's not a term with an accepted definition. The people in the thread you posted can't agree on what it means either.
>>142805035
>its literally not
>if i move my goal posts this into argument to authority fallacy, i can win!
If a doctor says "the cure to your infection is radiation", he may not be right by virtue of being a doctor, but by virtue of being a doctor he knows that radiation can cure certain sicknesses and how it should be applied to cure the fucking disease. Again, get your pseudo-intellectual bullshit out of here.
>a strict translation is one the uses precises verbiage
You literally had to change the fucking words you're using to maintain context. How can you not see that you're using jargon language?
>youre just pulling things out of your ass!
You can't even get multiple people to agree on your definition of "strict translation" in just this thread.
>>142805091
Wordreference is an outstanding source, but not only is your link not fucking describing translations at all, it's discussing the usage of a certain word IN CONTEXT, not the dictionary definition of terminology.
Wordreference is a fantastic source, but it's a dictionary, first and foremost, and the community using it is largely comprised of students.
>>142805161
>you cant just make things up on the fly
We should really go back in time and let Shakespeare know that. Or even 1819, when ultracrepidarianism was apparently used for the first time, and let that guy know he wasn't using the right words.
Fuck off.
>>142805274
Which is stupid, because fixed phrases have accepted translations. If I look up こんにちは in the dictionary, it's going to be "hello" or "good day" and not "this day is". Phrases like that or ritualistic expressions have associated phrases or expressions in other languages. Translating them as such is still strict.
>>142805407
>but by virtue of being a doctor he knows that radiation can cure certain sicknesses and how it should be applied to cure the fucking disease.
>infection
>radiation
I see that example went right the fuck over your head. You're really stupid, and I don't want to waste any more of my time with some dumbass who thinks a piece of paper makes him right, so I'll make it easy. I see a doctor for leg pain, I tell him I think it's a torn mcl, he tells me that he thinks it's a broken bone. I see a different doctor, and he says it's a torn mcl, and confirms with an MRI. Guess what, the first doctor (despite being an expert) was still fucking wrong, and the non-expert was still right.
If you think you're infallible because of a certification, you're a special kind of stupid.
>>142805407
Oh Lord, this little nobody actually thinks he can invent words because he's an """ expert """.
>>142805553
Literally anyone can invent words. The trouble is getting other people to understand their meaning and use them.
>>142805516
Well that guy's definition of a strict translation is just as legitimate as yours (you even linked to him as part of your evidence) but since it isn't in line with yours you reject it.
How are you supposing to convey what you mean when you can't even use terminology that others will accurately understand?
>At long last, today's the day you die, Saiyan.
>Finally... It's the day you'll take your final breath... Saiyan.
Which one do you prefer ?
>>142805766
Top.
>>142805766
The first one sound less retarded but more edgy. Gotta go with the first one.
>>142804829
I don't want to imagine how hard to follow SAC would've been with a lesser dub or set of subs.
>>142805516
The point of strict translation vs. localization is that both have their drawbacks and we're debating which is the lesser of two evils. If someone was using strict to mean perfectly accurate in every way then they wouldn't ask the question in the first place.
>>142794093
A balance of both. For a non-anime example, see problems translating Street Fighter scripts.
>>142794093
>not just learning moon
>>142794093
Raws.
Localization for dubs, strict translation for subs.
>>142794093
I was triggered by the units being converted into the imperial system in Kizumongatai.
I mean, from an economic perspective it's obvious why. America is going to be the largest consumer of this english translation. But for me reading it, it was a bit distracting.
>>142795908
You pic is an example of good tanslation. That's what the language of this setting is like. If fact you shouldn't treat gg's translation of JoJo as a translation but rather as an original of what Araki wrote.
Case by case, these days shit is too localized and has too many shitty memes in them. I can't stand it when someone translating shit shoves pop culture reference or memes into what they're translating. It horribly dates shit.
>>142794093
Localization
Given I'm not a retarded EOP, the original, every time.
But if you were forcing me at gunpoint to choose between a rock and a hard place, I'd pick the localisation every time. At least it won't be stilted and painful to read. People who think they like strict translations are either braindead or don't know what a strict translation actually entails.
>>142811646
>EOP
Fuck off to your containment board.
>>142811887
Seeing a thread full of complete morons talking about how much more "authentic" the experience is when they see shit like itadakimasu and kisama makes the use of the word more than justified, in my opinion. You retards don't understand what you want.
