my blood FROZE when I first read that translation. oh dear, I can imagine that feeling. NOBODY SAID THIS WAS GOING TO HAPPEN ;)
I've been wanting for years to write a proper lengthy post laying out why I believe in keeping them, but: anxiety I'll definitely keep an eye out if you ever feel like doing so.
I suppose one way to think of it is kind of as a dialect of English >Ooh! Hmm. I'll give that some thought. ^_^ It occurred to me after the fact that this sounds like me telling you what to think about your job, which obviously you don't need me doing; apologies! It's one thing I tell myself...
I always think "but English documents from that time are written in their own modern vernacular, and read as dated to us because we know how the language has changed". Matching the general writing style etc. from the time between languages feels a bit like...artificially making it sound old-fashioned when it would've sounded perfectly modern to its original readers? And part of me would rather have it sound as fresh as it would have originally.* This is a really great comment, including the parts I didn't quote, and I have very mixed feelings about it--we could have a whole thread, and possibly a whole book or two, on this point alone. In this particular case the letters are super grounded in a particular place and time and sociopolitical milieu, and in some ways I feel like clearly modern touches would detract from the effect of Yuriko's (the writer's) left-wing-inflected travelogue of 1929 London. (For instance.) On the other hand I'm not moved to scrutinize them word-for-word to make SURE there's nothing there that isn't precisely period, as long as the general sense is right. I think this is also period- and style-dependent in a way; I'm a little bit obsessed with English-language diaries etc. of roughly this period (1930s-1940s), and while there are stylistic quirks and phrasings that are obviously not 21st-century, there mostly isn't such an "old-fashioned" divide that it's distracting. Something from an older period, or absolutely laden with slang of a given moment (new or old), etc., would want a different treatment again. As you say, anyway, I'm just thinking out loud at you here, and basically I don't think there's any one right answer for any of this, as long as the final result reads well. Please come talk to me about this kind of thing any time, I love it!
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
Re: Thinking out loud at you
Date: 2020-11-18 04:03 am (UTC)oh dear, I can imagine that feeling. NOBODY SAID THIS WAS GOING TO HAPPEN ;)
I've been wanting for years to write a proper lengthy post laying out why I believe in keeping them, but: anxiety
I'll definitely keep an eye out if you ever feel like doing so.
I suppose one way to think of it is kind of as a dialect of English
>Ooh! Hmm. I'll give that some thought. ^_^
It occurred to me after the fact that this sounds like me telling you what to think about your job, which obviously you don't need me doing; apologies! It's one thing I tell myself...
I always think "but English documents from that time are written in their own modern vernacular, and read as dated to us because we know how the language has changed". Matching the general writing style etc. from the time between languages feels a bit like...artificially making it sound old-fashioned when it would've sounded perfectly modern to its original readers? And part of me would rather have it sound as fresh as it would have originally.*
This is a really great comment, including the parts I didn't quote, and I have very mixed feelings about it--we could have a whole thread, and possibly a whole book or two, on this point alone. In this particular case the letters are super grounded in a particular place and time and sociopolitical milieu, and in some ways I feel like clearly modern touches would detract from the effect of Yuriko's (the writer's) left-wing-inflected travelogue of 1929 London. (For instance.) On the other hand I'm not moved to scrutinize them word-for-word to make SURE there's nothing there that isn't precisely period, as long as the general sense is right. I think this is also period- and style-dependent in a way; I'm a little bit obsessed with English-language diaries etc. of roughly this period (1930s-1940s), and while there are stylistic quirks and phrasings that are obviously not 21st-century, there mostly isn't such an "old-fashioned" divide that it's distracting. Something from an older period, or absolutely laden with slang of a given moment (new or old), etc., would want a different treatment again.
As you say, anyway, I'm just thinking out loud at you here, and basically I don't think there's any one right answer for any of this, as long as the final result reads well. Please come talk to me about this kind of thing any time, I love it!