Chocolate, Vanilla or Swirl?

[sinnesspiel]

So as I work with the Kakizawa video, I have a few problems. First and foremost, I don't know who to credit for the video; is the 4GB version a condensed version of the one by Magnet from AsiaFull? I used the torrent (and am uploading the 4GB version for DDL presently since I don't think one exists yet) but I don't know who originated the torrent to credit either. Got them credited properly now!

But the more pressing one at the moment is the translation matter.


It's natural you'd try to translate a line to the feel. But Kakizwa-Light happens to do the same lines with a notably rougher feel than Urai who was a preppy Light. I'm torn between leaving the lines the same unless it's a distinct script change and shifting them to fit this Light's verbal inflection. The latter is obviously highly subjective, but word choice for the initial script was too. Must I try to just think of the lines completely removed from either delivery and make a middle-of-the-road sub as I would with a novel? (Even with Manga, you get a feel from visual cues--which of course isn't always a perfectly safe choice as sometimes you get cases like Allen from DGM who picked up another character's speech style and whose speech style does *not* actually match his personality--and it's a plot point!) Or should I make SIX scripts; middle road (+Otaku), Urai Tone (+Otaku) and Kakizawa Tone (+Otaku)?

For a list of actual changes in what's explicitly said in the script, look here. Otherwise, changes are only about tone.

Here you can view Light's solo song and the scene leading up to it first with neutral subs, then with subs slanted towards each actor's portrayal (and also those same subs on the other actor for good measure).

"Death Note Musical Actor and Translation Comparison." (Watch on YouTube)

I don't know that the middle of the road rewrite would be doing a disservice or if translating an admittedly subjective (more so than even the impression of the "flavor" of purely written word) take on the show ultimately helps on some level a translator is responsible for helping on. Is it overstepping a translator's bounds, or is there something linguistic in their delivery that a translator can bring to the table that IS related to an auditory familiarity with the language? Maybe that sense of preppiness in Urai comes from a familiarity with the language to have a jist of what's slurred and what's ennunciated clearly, what words he emotes on, of stereotypes in speech styles, etc. Maybe it's something viewers with functioning eyes and ears can get for themselves.

While I want to do what I can to help fans appreciate the flavor each actor brings across the language barrier, I do not want to add my own flavor to the script more than absolutely necessary.
So my question is, are translations which consider auditory and visual cues in picking the translated tone...

A. Necessary? (For example, does failing to do so mute the impression of the performance to the reading audience, even with the same visual and auditory cues available?)
B. Helpful? (For example, does it provide information those not as familiar with the original language might not pick up, such as word emphasis, speed, or pronunciation differences?)
C. Invasive? (By nature of being ultimately the translator's subjective impression forced on the translation viewing audience, unnecessarily or inaccurately affecting whatever impression they may form?)

Comments

[sinnesspiel]

My concern is that while the way it's said would change the meaning, "Good job" is still "Good job." It's a question of how much to trust to the actor's inflections and how much to change textually.

Let's say the line were in fact "good job" in the original language. Let's also say Urai was condescendingly sarcastic while Kakizawa was brusquely sarcastic. Let's also say the language we're translating to doesn't have a perfect equivalent to "good job."

Translating Urai as saying "Well done" works. It sounds quite condescending as "well" isn't often used for "good" in casual middle-class conversation outside of "get well." "Well" is frequently the realm of the proper, grammar school teachers or decently bred folk who were taught the difference between "can I?" and "may I?" and "I'm doing good" (as in good works) vs. "I'm doing well" (in terms of how I feel or such).

Let's say by contrast Kakizawa said it dry and deadpan; we could translate it as "Nice work." It's phrased in a way that most people wouldn't use the phrase WITHOUT being sarcastic and helps emphasize whatever factor of his pronunciation or drawl makes it seem sarcastic but also from a lower level as opposed to a condescending level from above.

"Nicely done." is a happy medium that could go either way. Maybe it doesn't emphasize either's position well; does that mean something's lost? Or are all audible cues entirely available to a viewer regardless of familiarity with the language?

I suspect that might even change based on the nature of the audience--someone who's even just used to hearing a lot of Japanese will have a certain sense of speech stereotypes even without being able to speak more than ten words of it.

[andeatit]

In my example, I was assuming there was no hard, fast translation for 'good job'. Or, it could fairly be translated in different ways. Obviously, there could be for that specific example, but I meant for words in general. Using boredom for example: in the original, you kept boredom and the other word for boredom which escapes me, and that probably makes me lose points here. Ennuai or something. I think you know what I mean. You kept the Japanese word.

I am really rambling here.

So, applying that, the lines can be translated differently, right? So, pretending 'good job' is one of those words, it could be translated as different things depending on how it was used.

If there's a hard, fast, true translation I would stick that and trust audio cues. I've been assuming there's wiggle room in there. In that case, I would go with the one that fits the acting. As someone who already has to multi-task in reading the words and watching the action, some audio cues are lost if they're more subtle.

[sinnesspiel]

Bitch, you think you ramble? I'll show you a ramble.

Taikutsu's the Japanese word that in every manga/anime translation I've seen has been translated as "boredom." That's not an inaccurate translation by any means, though it loses a bit of context. "Ennui" is an English word (or to be precise a French word closer to "annoyance" that we've kidnapped for our own nefarious purposes) that means a specific kind of boredom. Since you're a roleplayer, think of ennui like being bored with the same memes over and over on Bakerstreet that lead to the same empty threads that don't go anywhere. This is compared to the boredom of having nobody to play with anywhere.

Now while ennui is an English language word, it's not one most people use casually.

Light: "Then why'd you drop the Note?"
Ryuk: "Because of ennui. Why'd you start killing criminals?"
Light: "Because I have ennui too."

...That feels unnatural doesn't it? Espcially for Ryuk. It's accurate, and if somehow there were fewer context cues to tell us that their motivation is, I'd eschew how unnatural it sounds and go with the one that conveys the necessary meaning, ennui (or more likely fed up, but we'll get to that). In the anime, driving the point home a little harder is Light/Ryuk's opening overlap lines being "Day after day, the same thing over and over..." ("...This world is rotten.") That's Ryuk's first line in the manga and musical too.

Because the context makes it absolutely clear that when the two start talking "taikutsu" that their actions are not the equivalent of building a paperclip sculpture at work because there's nothing else to do, I can go with "bored." Though actually in the musical, I went with "fed up" at some junctures. I also went with bored at others--Ryuk whining "I'm bored!" feels more natural as something a person would shout out after rolling around above the orchestra pit. "Fed up" fits his lower tone and flows better into his song, so I translated the same word there differently. If taikutsu were more of a catchphrase, however, I'd use it the same way every time to establish it as a character/arc word; I think Death Note drops it quickly enough after Ryuk's intro to justify not pushing to repeat the word in English. The concept is more present when it comes up again than the word itself.

In English from most to least froofy: Ennui. Boredom. Fed up.
Taikutsu has no particular "feel" to it, whereas in English, ennui has a "high" feel (academic, snooty), bored has no particular feel, and fed up is a touch informal (and also carries a hint of annoyance that sparks a drive to do something or lash out, which I don't think is as present in ennui). I'd say taikutsu could accurately be translated in any of these ways, with bored being the best "tone" choice, but also the one that loses the most raw information in translation. Ennui and fed up both keep the more specific implications but necessarily add a "flavor" to the translation--one you can determine to fit or not based on other cues in the media for the character/scene.

The question is, since all script cues are identical, the words are written exactly the same, and all differential cues are visual and auditory rather than linguistic, should we do a high and low translation for each? Or should we do a middle of the road translation and trust that the cues that lead me to pick the flavors I do are something a viewing audience with no Japanese fluency will pick up on too?

Assuming it's *always* secondary to accuracy and that both options are the same aside from tone ("let's pass judgment on the wicked" vs. "let's pass judgment on evil" for example; no change in meaning, only feeling) is subbing to non-textual character cues NECESSARY? In not doing so or doing so wrongly, would that hurt a viewer's perception of the character or performance? Is it HELPFUL? Say a viewer CAN read all details into verbal and visual cues in a foreign language. Do subs that are too neutral undermine that? Do subs that try to match that when possible add to the experience or do people generally just not notice? It's entirely possible only I am this pedantic.

And most importantly, is it only MY impression I'm putting in place? Viewers have said they feel the Kakizawa rewrite fits him more, but they're also all friends and people tend to cluster about people who think similarly to them. Then again, you who does not like Kakizawa's performance at all, I who so far enjoy him but think Urai better fits my perception of animanga "Light," and another Light player who prefers Kakizawa's performance are all of that opinion.

In summary, those are my three big questions.

1. Is it NECESSARY to sub based on non-linguistic cues? If so, obviously I will. If not, it depends on the next question.
2. Is it HELPFUL? If so, I will. If not, I think I'm obliged to do a neutral one since my Urai subs were definitely done with his take on the character as an influence.
3. Is it inserting my subjective tastes as a translator unnecessarily? If so, I'm obligated to do neutral subs. If not, then it's necessary to do so and is, while perhaps unfortunate (I loathe translators who take liberties and excuse themselves with "translation's an art, not a science" even if it's at least somewhat true), it is unavoidable.

[andeatit]

Address me like the lady I am! Lady-sama is also acceptable.

I'll reply to your summary:

1. Necessary? I wouldn't say so. I would get the same overall story without two sets of subs.

2. Helpful? Yes.

3. I'm a little confused by this question (surprise, huh?). You have to make a judgment call when translating. I don't think you're doing this anymore than what translating normally calls for.

I don't think it's just the way he speaks that builds a different Light. His standing, his facial expressions all seem to match his tone. I feel haughtiness from Urai that I don't from him. Since I skimmed through without subs, I was able to see this because I was focusing on the actors. When watching with subs, I'll be focusing more on reading so I might miss this. When I say might, i mean almost definitely.

[sinnesspiel]

To some degree it's impossible not to put the translator's impression into things--sometimes, surely, a translator isn't even aware that there's another way to take something. Obviously, as much as possible I'd like to avoid telling people how to think of a line, character, or scene. I wonder if, helpful as it is, I'm only helping them to get the impression I do, rather than supporting what's inherent in the performance. Even with neutral subs people would feel a distinct difference in the performance. If everyone agrees they're different, does that mean subs emphasizing that are telling the audience what to think, when that's the actor's jobs?