That makes sense. There's also that in literature when, for example, the author attempts to recreate Shakespearean English, they don't do it right. It's not enough to add e's to the back of 'wordes' or use 'ye' and 'thou' and all of that; they had a different syntax back then too, so rather than just some quirky words, they have slightly different rules too. That's why Shakespeare is so hard to read, the sentence structure is just different, even when he's not using iambic pentameter. Professors of language like Tolkien can get away with writing old English accurately, but most others would butcher it.
I actually read Beowulf sometime in September, and the book was made so that the right pages had the modern translation we were supposed to read, and the left had the original Anglo-Saxon language text. It was totally unrecognizable. But Bara Teacher had this recording of Beowulf being read in original Anglo-Saxon, it was really cool! I also got a chance to hear The Epic of Gilgamesh being read in ancient Akkadian. I love history! Especially ancient history. If there was some place I could take community classes in ancient history, I'd do it.
If you decide to sit down and watch shows to look for old fashioned language, make sure you pick one that's entertaining! They'll probably be old-school anime too, it doesn't seem like the new series that come out are much historical.
"Preserving the spirit over the letter" is a slippery slope because there's a line between making a cultural translation, and putting your own interpretation over it. Like with the "thank you">"I love you" translation, that's kind of similar to finding all kinds of symbolism and double meaning in works that might not have any. It might mean one thing to one person, might mean something else to the other. To leave it ambiguous would be right if that's what the original text is; part of reading something is interpreting it as you think is best, and if you do that on top of someone else's interpretation then you're two interpretations away from the actual meaning.
Adjusting tense because it's more culturally common in English isn't a bad thing; I actually think that it's better because it makes the novel flow easier, whereas if the tenses change it sounds kind of choppy and not as 'smooth' as the original work--which might've been the author's intent. I think if there's a part where the tense change is really significant and helps express the mood of the scene, it won't be so bad to keep that part, but if it doesn't contribute one way or the other just keeping it past tense is fine. I'd still read it either way, but I guess that's how I'd go about translating. Decisions, decisions!
no subject
I actually read Beowulf sometime in September, and the book was made so that the right pages had the modern translation we were supposed to read, and the left had the original Anglo-Saxon language text. It was totally unrecognizable. But Bara Teacher had this recording of Beowulf being read in original Anglo-Saxon, it was really cool! I also got a chance to hear The Epic of Gilgamesh being read in ancient Akkadian. I love history! Especially ancient history. If there was some place I could take community classes in ancient history, I'd do it.
If you decide to sit down and watch shows to look for old fashioned language, make sure you pick one that's entertaining! They'll probably be old-school anime too, it doesn't seem like the new series that come out are much historical.
"Preserving the spirit over the letter" is a slippery slope because there's a line between making a cultural translation, and putting your own interpretation over it. Like with the "thank you">"I love you" translation, that's kind of similar to finding all kinds of symbolism and double meaning in works that might not have any. It might mean one thing to one person, might mean something else to the other. To leave it ambiguous would be right if that's what the original text is; part of reading something is interpreting it as you think is best, and if you do that on top of someone else's interpretation then you're two interpretations away from the actual meaning.
Adjusting tense because it's more culturally common in English isn't a bad thing; I actually think that it's better because it makes the novel flow easier, whereas if the tenses change it sounds kind of choppy and not as 'smooth' as the original work--which might've been the author's intent. I think if there's a part where the tense change is really significant and helps express the mood of the scene, it won't be so bad to keep that part, but if it doesn't contribute one way or the other just keeping it past tense is fine. I'd still read it either way, but I guess that's how I'd go about translating. Decisions, decisions!