I've used a couple translated books, novels that I read as a kid, over and over and knew the plot backwards and forwards, including basically quotes people said (I guess some would be books typically preferred by girls, Anne of Green Gables from English, but also moomin troll books from Swedish by Tove Jansson).  Anyway, since I know the stories so well, I can even pick up new vocabulary without using a dictionary, since they are also usually printed for the junior high level with some furigana as well.  This is a great way to carry around one-stop study material without having to bring along dictionaries, computers, etc., for example, on a bus.  Plus it's entertaining - there's a reason those books were enjoyable. 
BUT a very similar source can be found in the books found in Japanese book stores which are actually adapted from TV series (just ask at the counter).  You can watch the show, know the plot, and then get the same reading practice!

Reading books translated into Japanese is an excellent idea.  Especially high-profile works that can't afford any problems in translation.

Think about it--the Harry Potter books need to be easy to understand for the children who read them.  What the translation lacks in accuracy, it will make up for in ease of flow.  There shouldn't be anything strange or sloppy about the translation.  Else, why would they be so popular in Japan?

I think this is true for most novels.  Remember, these are native Japanese people writing the translations.  Even if they don't understand the original English, they'll still be able to write proper, fluent Japanese for their own translation.

I would avoid people who practice Japanese as a 2nd language, though.  For the same reason I wouldn't recommend an English teacher who speaks English as a 2nd language.

No offense to those of us learning Japanese as a 2nd language, or anyone who speaks English as a 2nd language. ;-)

mentat_kgs wrote:

You are confusing. That thread must've advised you not to use untrusted translated material. Katzumoto allways brags about watching Shreck (or something else) in japanese.

No it was explicitly advised against.

danieldesu,abdwef: I should have said high-profile works (I thought me Harry Potter example illustrated my thinking, sorry).  And obviously the translation would be done by a native speaker.  I have heard plenty of people give good reasons.  I am looking for a counter opinion.

Outside of just trying to sound authoritative, what is the reason to tell a person they shouldn't use translated works?  In general, I have trouble understanding when people say you shouldn't do x or y unless they have a good reason (ie You shouldn't use romaji to study because it isn't used in any significant context in Japan and can cripple your studies by becoming an unnecessary crutch).  I usually find, the real reason a person advises against something, is personal bias, and that is something I think should be avoided.

I certainly am not in a position to comment about this, but the only difference I'm noticing from the translated Harry Potter and the Japanese "涼宮ハルヒの憂鬱" is the style.

The translated one obviously has to follow the original sentence style and structure, while the other one is free of constraints.
Maybe that's what they're talking about.

pm215 wrote:

(And I *think* I've heard it claimed that the increased use of 'kare' and 'kanojo' pronouns dates from the rise in translations of English books after the Meiji restoration.)

According to the 大辞林 and 大辞泉, 'kanojo' itself was created to translate pronouns like 'she'. Before the Meiji era 'kare' was used for both men and woman.

彼女
〔補説〕 西欧語の三人称単数の女性をさす代名詞（英語の she など）の翻訳語「彼女(かのおんな)(あのおんな)」から生まれた語

彼
〔補説〕 （ア） は明治以降、英語の he などの訳語として生じたものであるが、日本語では同輩以下のものをさすのが普通

三人称の人代名詞。明治時代まで男女の区別なく用いた。あの人。あれ。

It says both things.

mystes wrote:

Doesn't that text actually say that 'kare' was used starting from the Meiji period to translate "he" and that gender-neutral terms like "ano hito" were used before that?

I think the あの人 is there to back up the meaning and give you another way of saying it. Since it's the entry for 彼, the "男女の区別なく用いた" would be refering to 彼.

Since I just picked bits out of the full definition, here's the full links for 彼 (which have links to 彼女 as well):
http://dic.yahoo.co.jp/dsearch?enc=UTF- … 3997500000
http://dic.yahoo.co.jp/dsearch?enc=UTF- … 7703739900

This thread is in response to one of my previous posts.

pm215 hit the nail on the head. You can't compare Japanese translations to experiences of translations into English or Portuguese or anything else, because different countries/cultures have different norms of translation. The norm in English speaking countries is to translate into natural English, localizing the text. In Japan the norm is to translate quite literally and maintain sentence/paragraph structure as much as possible, resulting in obviously foreign sounding texts. It has nothing to do with translation quality or not being able to afford messing it up. That's the way they WANT the translation to be. Something that is localized to the point where you couldn't tell it was originally written in English would be considered a bad translation. You can consider this trend a continuation of 漢文.

Reading translated works might be useful as reading practice, but it can be dangerous to learn from them, especially if you absorb the writing style. Aside from that I can't really understand WHY you'd want to learn another language just to spend your time reading works from your own culture. Using knowledge of the English version of the story is a crutch. There is a wide world of Japanese literature out there you could be exploring.

I figured that Harry Potter might come up, but I haven't read it myself (in English or Japanese) so I can't comment on it directly.

The main purpose here was to establish if a learner of Japanese would be hurting themselves by reading a translated work.  I am glad that Jarvik7 responded because, as far as I know, he has the strongest dissenting opinion on the topic.  I don't know about anyone else, but I have always found the foreigners, who were really really good at Japanese, read a lot.

It is interesting to hear that good Japanese translation style is so different.  I have to agree with pm215 though, by the time it matters, you will probably be able to be objective.

I think it is important to be encouraging.  In my early studies, I was determined never to read a text translated into Japanese.  I was warned against it by a teacher (a GA actually).  I took his word as law and I tried only to get works of Japanese authors that were way above my ability.  And, it turns out, I found quite boring (Natsume Souseki anyone). The end result is that I just didn't read much at all.  It wasn't until a friend of mine who had no Japanese at all, finished the third Harry Potter book and was understanding and using Japanese at a higher level than me that I took a second look at what I was doing (or not doing).  I agree that a native text is useful, but motivation is far more useful.  I say go ahead and read your bibles,  "baseball" newspapers, Koizumi Yakumo, Harry Potter, and even your Souseki (ack!).  The key point is to read something that keeps you reading.

Last edited by dilandau23 (2008 September 04, 7:22 pm)

個人的な事だけど、I don't absorb styles of speech from what I read.  If anything, I might absorb the style of writing from what I read, but my speech is absorbed mostly from people I speak to.  So in that sense, the "style" of translation would not be very harmful to me, and I would get a lot of good vocabulary and reading practice.

My challenge is that getting Japanese anything is pretty expensive.  So, I'd hate to spend a bunch of money on a book that I'm not going to like.  So, buying a translation of something on a topic that was interesting to me in my first language, fairly well guarantees that it's going to have the vocab in it tied to a topic that I'm going to be interested in.  (It's also a problem for me with anime and manga...I don't know enough about the titles to know what I'd maybe like...imo, you cannot tell from the cover or some of the summaries)

johnzep wrote:

sorry off topic, since he said it makes him cringe I was curious

Sorry off topic again, just to answer the question, I think she started asking if I was going to Target sometime, and then finished the sentence asking if she could go with me, so it ended up coming out wrong.  Probably should have been something like "いつか一緒にTargetに行きませんか."  I know what she means, her Japanese just doesn't "sound" natural (mine doesn't either).  She never uses words like "なんか," "なんて," "あるいは," "って" and she always uses polite forms even with me.  I'm not saying she is bad, but I don't think talking to her in Japanese is practice at all.

Last edited by danieldesu (2008 September 05, 5:48 pm)