You can use whatever kanji and readings you want. It's like 超電磁砲 is read as "railgun" in a certain science.

By the way, kanji used in manuscripts and published versions can be different. I don't know about other fields, but in the novel industry publishers might change kanji and so on for various reasons. They might even change the titles of novels, i.e., the title an author gave to his novel can be ignored and actual copies can have a totally different title when published. I don't know if this is a common practice in another country, but it's not unusual in Japan. Also, publishers can change kanji etc. in reprints/newer editions. So the exact same novel by the same author might have different kanji for the same word depending on copies. The first copy of the first edition might have different kanji than the original manuscript submitted by the author in the first place, so it's not a big deal.

I loved an example I read somewhere (wikipedia?).  The author of a science fiction novel, apparently wrote  地球 with the furigana ふるさと.  (something along those lines anyway) haha

Isn't Haruki Murakami an example of a modern author who's known for playful use of kanji and coining strange words?  Some folks here are into fiction. Hopefully they can add some interesting examples they come across or ask their profs for their views. We might have to wait until Prof Aijin is reunited with her library. :-)

There is a site which has different versions of some famous stories and commentary about the changes. I'll find the link. Just as Magamo describes - changes to kanji, titles and sometimes sentences. Though it appears that recent, better editions aim to be more faithful to original manuscripts or whatever authorial intent the scholarly types can glean. There are some annotated versions. This suggests to me that such arbitrary changes are no longer as common. Is that not the case?

地球 = ふるさと, 接続って = つながって etc. are stylistic examples of 熟字訓 (じゅくじくん).

http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%86%9F% … 7%E8%A8%93

This is fundamentally different from the problem of ください vs. 下さい. This is completely different from older kanji vs. newer kanji either. There are similar unusual kanji usages called 当て字 (あてじ), 仮借 (かしゃく), and 名乗り (なのり).

http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%BD%93% … 6%E5%AD%97
http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E4%BB%AE%E5%80%9F

Publishers have their own policies so you can't argue as if there is only a single set of rules about these in the Japanese language. Usually publishers make changes in editions to "modernize" kanji use, not to be faithful or anything. So, for example, 送り仮名 are changed to follow popular rules used now (e.g., 行なう -> 行う). 夏目漱石's work also gets this kind of edit too. I don't know what a publisher would do when a 熟字訓 word contains need-to-be-edited kanji usage, but probably they change it anyway as long as it works the same way in modern kanji use.

Edit: Oh, title changes are definitely not to be faithful. It's done before ever a manuscript gets published. For example, if you submit a manuscript for a major competition and win the first prize, your work will most likely be published by the publisher that organized it. But the title, sentences etc. can be changed when your work is published so it sells better/appeals the target audience more. That's why you see very similar titles appear each month. When a novel sells extremely well, there is an influx of similar titles.

Last edited by magamo (2010 March 18, 9:28 pm)

magamo wrote:

地球 = ふるさと, 接続って = つながって etc. are stylistic examples of 熟字訓 (じゅくじくん).

http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%86%9F% … 7%E8%A8%93

This is fundamentally different from the problem of ください vs. 下さい. This is completely different from older kanji vs. newer kanji either. There are similar unusual kanji usages called 当て字 (あてじ), 仮借 (かしゃく), and 名乗り (なのり).

http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%BD%93% … 6%E5%AD%97
http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E4%BB%AE%E5%80%9F

Publishers have their own policies so you can't argue as if there was only a single set of rules about these in the Japanese language. Usually publishers make changes in editions to "modernize" kanji use, not to be faithful or anything. So, for example, 送り仮名 are changed to follow popular rules used now (e.g., 行なう -> 行う). 夏目漱石's work also gets this kind of edit too. I don't know what a publisher would do when a 熟字訓 word contains need-to-be-edited kanji usage, but probably they change it anyway as long as it works the same way in modern kanji use.

Yes, the 'stylistics' part of the kudasai thread inspired this thread, but only in that general sense, because as I emphasize laughingly in that thread, I don't think that anyone meant 下さい was heavily stylistic, although if an author used て-kanji as an 'auxiliary' or whatever and an editor changed it to kana to reflect modern guidelines, I'd hope they at least wondered whether the author used the kanji for a particular reason...

The kanji/kana/grammar/typography thing seems more complicated than in other languages, so I wouldn't judge them the same, but I think the underlying principles are there in the context of the language.

Changing/modernizing things for typographic/grammatical/etc. purposes, particularly when it's obvious that's what they are and authorial intent is minimal, I can understand that, though for stickier or uncertain elements I would hope they'd make notes on what they changed and why, to give the reader the chance to think for themselves, especially for classics where these works will be oft studied--though I'd be somewhat mollified if they were reasonably confident such a change, as you said, worked the same in modern use.

I also think that you can't argue as if there is a single set of rules. I hope you don't feel I gave that impression rather than the exact opposite, else I'll need to seriously reexamine my comment style. ;p Thanks for the terminology links, I'd noted them before but forgot to use them in searches. Those are what I'm interested in.

I don't hope to find anything really concrete, which is another reason I want to keep this thread separate from kanji/kana arguments... it's not like we have a solid foundation of affective neuroscience that is used to critique aesthetics. Although one day, humanities and scitech shall be wed!

Last edited by ruiner (2010 March 18, 9:34 pm)

magamo wrote:

Edit: Oh, title changes are definitely not to be faithful. It's done before ever a manuscript gets published. For example, if you submit a manuscript for a major competition and win the first prize, your work will most likely be published by the publisher that organized it. But the title, sentences etc. can be changed when your work is published so it sells better/appeals the target audience more. That's why you see very similar titles appear each month. When a novel sells extremely well, there is an influx of similar titles.

Yeah, for fiction, I think the most irksome editorial changes, or the shallowest, stem from marketing motivations, especially mass market stuff, and especially for unknown or little known authors. The author has little power to argue, probably could've used the editing anyway if they're inexperienced, and has to balance their desire to make money/have an editor, etc. This will always be true for 'writing for money', but more and more the author gets to exercise artistic license and negotiate with the editor, or is simply writing in a style where a certain amount of creativity is expected of them (rather than pulp ;p).

Then there's writing under pseudonyms to change styles/genres...

Poetry is a different beast, though.

I think I was reading that these days it's easier for unknown authors to write experimentally and get away with it, they can bypass the system and self-publish and the like, especially for keitai novels or whatnot... maybe we'll see a surge in kanji/kana wordplay? ;p

Last edited by ruiner (2010 March 18, 9:59 pm)

yudantaiteki wrote:

Although I wonder if a native speaker like Magamo could weigh in on whether he can see any specific stylistic effect to using 接続って; obviously 接続 is one meaning of つながる, but does that kanji add some meaning that you would not get if it had been written 繋がる (or if someone were reading the story to you aloud)?  It's hard for me to see it as a non-native speaker, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's not there.

I hope maybe everyone can use this thread/forum for this sort of thing, actually. General reading discussion... perhaps of 'totally innocent' books... ;p

Without reading the story or anything about it (as presented in Breaking into Japanese Literature), I got the impression it was trying to convey an observation that was at once objective and almost mocking, in the sentence context. 接続 I've only learned as a kind of mechanical/objective term, whereas I've learned 繋ぐ/つなぐ as more organic, where people are connected, so to see both of those 'feels' that I've learned used to describe a unibrow in an enemy captain's face made me smirk a bit (but then I might have smirked because I was 'primed' to expect wordplay). The preface in the BiJL book suggests that the narrator was being ironically detached despite the dire circumstances of the dream, in describing their captors. There's also the 太い, I read that it also has a feel of shameless/brazen, so perhaps if there's a common collocation with つなぐ, it has that meaning?

Also, keep in mind, in proper reading of literature (assumes snooty voice), you want to factor in not only your subjective feel, but the author's intent, as well as the time period, etc., in a kind of smoothly integrated way, prioritized how you wish depending on your purposes. Of course some schools of criticism may focus differently. I'm a proponent of combining it all. Plus no idea how it works in Japan, I may need to read Kojin Karatani's book...

Here's the section in question, where 接続って has the furigana つながって, in case anyone's too lazy to Google it, hehe:

こんな夢を見た。
　何でもよほど古い事で、神代に近い昔と思われるが、自分が軍をして運悪く敗北たために、生擒になって、敵の大将の前に引き据えられた。
　その頃の人はみんな背が高かった。そうして、みんな長い髯を生やしていた。革の帯を締めて、それへ棒のような剣を釣るしていた。弓は藤蔓の太いのをそのまま用いたように見えた。漆も塗ってなければ磨きもかけてない。極めて素樸なものであった。
　敵の大将は、弓の真中を右の手で握って、その弓を草の上へ突いて、酒甕を伏せたようなものの上に腰をかけていた。その顔を見ると、鼻の上で、左右の眉が太く接続っている。その頃髪剃と云うものは無論なかった。
　自分は虜だから、腰をかける訳に行かない。草の上に胡坐をかいていた。足には大きな藁沓を穿いていた。この時代の藁沓は深いものであった。立つと膝頭まで来た。その端の所は藁を少し編残して、房のように下げて、歩くとばらばら動くようにして、飾りとしていた。

Last edited by ruiner (2010 March 22, 8:21 pm)

magamo wrote:

@nest0r
Aren't those changes like the difference between British novels and their US versions? Sometimes publishers change not only spellings but also words, sentences, expressions, etc. to localize novels. Commercial novels, poems and the like are a form of entertainment. So I think it's totally ok if they're modernized/localized/heavily edited to make them more interesting/enjoyable/whatever to the target audience.

They also change covers. I hate US covers, because they're representational, but I'm fond of UK covers, as they tend to be abstract.

I've never heard of a commercial poem. I guess you can consider canonized poems commercial... I can't imagine any editor rewriting a poem or changing the spellings, but I guess it's been done? Translations, however...

I think it's silly to localize novels except for when there's some hard to understand stuff, but it's up to the publisher & author how they want to do it. They might tend to go lowest common denominator, but that's the nature of 'pop'... I differentiate my criticisms between artsy/indie stuff and, for example, Hollywood stuff (or mass market vs. 'literature'). I get annoyed when, say, people review Hollywood blockbusters according to film festival standards and the like, by the way, but that's just a random peeve I'm mentioning. "The acting and plot for Transformers was terrible!" -- This is actually a common statement. I mean, are you kidding me?

As for idolizing authors, I think idolized authors get more leeway in some respects but are forced to conform to the genre/style they became popular in, unless they use aliases to experiment. I think this is less common these days, though. At any rate, not wanting a middleman to manipulate literature for money is more of an art/capitalism thing, I think there's more gradations to it than pretentiousness. (I'm not big on author-worship, myself, as my aversion to identity on this forum might reveal.)

Last edited by ruiner (2010 March 18, 11:05 pm)

@magamo - Haha, the problem for me is that once I see a cover where there's some awful rendition of what the characters supposedly look like (in the mind of the illustrator), I can't get it out of my head while reading. It's even sadder when the authors themselves don't like the art either and are stuck with it because it may or may not sell more, but their publishing company for various reasons both smart and moronic, thinks it will.

It's not that I use abstract covers to help me judge the books, it's that I don't expect people to use blank covers (my preference, as I don't care about covers), but that at least I can encourage them to be non-representational. The manga style of drawing characters, that's just iconic enough that it doesn't bother me, though I'd still prefer abstract/nothing at all.

As for the comments about haiku or whatever, yes, that's what I meant about 'canonized', someone who is often reprinted and referred to, etc. The reason I specified older/more formalized stuff as well is because I think that when people are writing poetry these days, without a particular form, and experimenting, it would be hard to tell what's intentional or not without a lot of communication with the author, and since 'style' is particularly relevant for poetry, I imagine much less would be changed. Like I said when I started another thread about contemportary Japanese poetry, however, I have no idea what that industry/work is like...

So we agree then, that editors should have standards besides turning a profit? (Edit: keep in mind I'm speaking of editors as agents of publishers, so in that sense I'm also speaking of publishers [thus my distinction of genres/goals/areas of the industry], though there are people who are simply bad editors) I happen to think that both the quality of the work, profit, and everything else is helped when there is communication with the author and respect for the intended audience to balance things out. Practically speaking, this can't always be true, but we often get to have our cake and eat it, too.

Last edited by nest0r (2010 March 19, 12:39 am)

Yes, ideally art = profit. Houses = made of candy. ^_^

I feel better knowing that my hypothetical enemy of dictatorial, phonocentric editors hacking away at all the kanji in a reprinted work with no reason other than imposing their own aesthetic vision (probably) isn't real. It remains to be dissected how stylistics and practical concerns overlap with the mixed script orthography.

Though I must still contend with the hypothetical masses, brainwashed by y_t and his sensei Unger (who are secretly logograph-allergic aliens who want to make the world safe for their colonizing brethren), that hate kanji and encourage soulless editors/publishers to greedily, clandestinely hack away at all non-ローマ字 in manuscripts in order to make the easiest money.

Nonetheless, I hope people will still post examples and perhaps their own close-readings of kanji/kana stylistics in Japanese literature, or possible books of literary criticism on the topic specifically or in part...

Also, I'm not only speaking of wordplay, but the vaguer area of choosing to use kanji over kana, how much pressure overall usage creates, whatever. Perhaps some authors are big on creating visual rhythms using kanji and balance that with aural cadence, for instance.

Last edited by ruiner (2010 March 19, 3:48 am)

pm215 wrote:

ruiner wrote:

I've never heard of a commercial poem.

Try looking in a mother's day card :-)

Haha, I didn't think of that. That's not poetry! More like slogans/bromides. ;p I was thinking along the lines of books of poems by an author, or anthologies. Apparently greeting card poets sell away all their rights with no royalties, so sad, but good for fast cash.

I am curious now about the revision and novel/poem copyright process, in the legal sense, in Japan. I wonder if, for example, they *could* change 接続って w/ つながって furigana to つながって by itself or 繋がって, and if so, what conditions would have to be met... then again, why would they, once they define it as part of Soseki's tonsai/kuchiai wordplay? (I just read about these romanized terms via Google Books on his Bungaku-ron thingy). Or on the flip side, why haven't they tried changing it? What do they tell themselves, that it's stylistic and they don't know what it means, but they're keeping it? Or they have their own theories, or perhaps there's some discussion of it elsewhere...

Last edited by ruiner (2010 March 19, 6:08 am)

blackmacros wrote:

pm215 wrote:

ruiner wrote:

I've never heard of a commercial poem.

Try looking in a mother's day card :-)

Also, didn't Shakespeare (and a lot/most of poets from that sort of time period) basically have patrons who paid them to write flattering poems about them? I'd say that is pretty commercial, when you think about it.

...or am I talking out of my ass here?

Artists have long been paid for their work, worked on individual commission, sucked up to or had relations with patrons while trying to accomplish or retain their vision, etc. ;p I wouldn't call the products of that work, the usual negotiation of art and commerce, commercial poetry, but I was attempting to make a joke similar to "'military intelligence' is an oxymoron... " That just shows how I pretentiously idolize Poetry, though. I require Poetry as a cultural artefact to be aesthetic, etc., with commercial function subordinate to that, before I would call it Poetry. I have a whole different set of theories for this topic of art and commerce and design, though, that's very flexible and egalitarian.

What do you think of kanji/kana stylistics? Know of examples? What's your reading of the Soseki above? We've established, for now I guess, according to my rhetorical questions and threats of personally condescending to/wanting to strangle editors, that Japanese legalities in publishing and editorial trends don't result in literature or poetry manuscripts and reprinted works to have kanji/kana stylistic changes imposed on them purely stylistically without negotiation, consent, annotation, etc.

Last edited by ruiner (2010 March 19, 2:17 pm)

IceCream wrote:

magamo wrote:

Oh, I heard writers/artists used to use perfumes or something for very old Japanese literature and calligraphy works, though I can't remember where I heard that (So don't quote me on this.).

they should definately definately start doing that again. what a great idea!!!!!

Yeah, but if they did, I kind of think the first modern examples of scented books would be porn novels or hardcore moe light novels. I wonder how a bookstore would smell.

On a similar note, I read a complaint about some female contestants submitting perfumed manuscripts to novel contests. I don't know what it's called in English, but an anonymous referee who checks and evaluates manuscripts before editors and official judges read them was ranting about all sorts of ridiculous manuscripts (This kind of pre-evaluation is called 下読み (したよみ) in Japanese publication jargon, by the way.). And in one blog post he was like, "Stop sending your smelly piece of shit, you sluts!!"