Some of the portions from this reading I found interesting were the mentioning of feminine hiragana and
masculine katakana used in The Key, and the translation of Manji. Previously, I hadn’t considered
katakana or hiragana to have any inherent connotations in regards to gender, but I can see how the
distinction can be made in a written work. I think that because Japanese has a lot of nuances in its
language to convey things like gender, respect, politeness, etc., it becomes very difficult to translate
those ideas into English subtly. It is the same for the Manji. Apparently in some countries such as India,
this symbol represents spirituality and divinity, depicting various aspects of religion. In Hinduism and
Buddhism, the symbol represents different things, but both have religious connotations. However in
other countries, namely America, this symbol does not have such meaning. This makes me wonder
whether or not a translation of “Manji” can ever truly be accurate from Japanese to English, without
tainting the intended meaning of the word. Even the translations suggested in the reading keep the
meaning, but remove the associated image from the title, opting to use words like Quicksand or
Whirlpool. In cases like these, it might be best to include a footnote or some kind of explanation to
improve the accuracy of the translation, but then it takes away from the reading experience.
I think overall this reading increased the amount of respect I have for translators, I do not think I
would be quite able to make those kinds of decisions when translating titles like Manji. It also
solidifies the idea for me that translation at times is less transposing Japanese language into English
and more so interpreting Japanese culture into something understandable in English.
No comments:
Post a Comment