Fansub Review Addendum: [Commie] Nekomonogatari (Episode 01)

74 thoughts on “Fansub Review Addendum: [Commie] Nekomonogatari (Episode 01)”

1. Many thanks to Dark_Sage for adjusting your original grade of this release. Commie should stick to editing simulcasts or use vale as the translator (Hyouka).

   Reply

   • Nope.

     vale translated the signs, by the way.

     Reply

2. Amen.

   Reply

3. Nothing is gained by commenting on what you say in great detail.

   One thing, though.

   You don’t seem to truly understand how (some of) the people in -monogatari talk. This is clearly evidenced by your suggestion that 42,195km be simplified to “full marathon”. Don’t you think that if it was meant to be simple, it wouldn’t have been 42,195 in Japanese?

   Reply

   • I’m operating from the perspective that Crunchyroll’s Nise translations were the best English translations the series has seen. Theirs weren’t awkward to the point of blind literalism worship, so why should your group’s be?

     Reply

     • Their translation was great, but it was also easier to digest than a stylistically accurate translation. This boils down to taste, and it can be argued that stylistically accurate translations in the case of -monogatari are almost unreadable in the time given.

       Mayoi speaks like a university professor from 1900 with a love for unusual phrases. Did you get that impression when you were watching?

       Even the characters that speak comparatively normally, like Koyomi, use vocabulary and structures no actual Japanese adolescent uses.

       -monogatari is not normal Japanese.

       Reply

       • I think we’re in accord that -monogatari has weird language and that it’s likely impossible to translate perfectly. Would you say there was a translation you enjoyed more than CR’s Nise though? It’s not like there’s a release that stylistically matches the original Japanese 100%, since I certainly didn’t get that 1900s feel from any subtitle releases for the -monogatari series, and I’ve watched them all.

         Reply

         • That only referred to Mayoi; it depends on the character, but by and large old-fashioned language is characteristic of most, and the adaption only made it more extreme if anything. The typesets often use archaic pre-war characters and pre-Meiji kana spellings; the edition of the book which “Hanekawa would have liked”, the Kojiki, was one employing the original antique 8th century writing system which today can only be read by studied scholars. This is -monogatari just as much as your pantsu and Shaft’s postmodern architecture. All this is -monogatari and more.

           To return to the topic at hand. Of course I enjoyed their subtitles. However, you have not answered my question. When the Japanese says 42,195 for a reason, do you really consider it imperative that this be simplified?

           Reply

           • For the translation style that I feel works best for an English release, yes.

             Reply

             • So simplification is an inherent part of translation?

               Reply

               • Preventing awkwardness is.

                 I’m not saying the line would be an issue in every circumstance, but I have yet to see an English release where that particular phrase-match would fit in well. You’d need a TL would could make awkward chic and I don’t think there is any group out there willing to put the effort into it that would be required to match that specific aspect of -monogatari.

                 Reply

                 • So lines are allowed to be awkward in Japanese, but not in English?

                   Reply

                   • There’s awkward in the sense of poor writing and awkward in the sense of adding value (generally humor, though not necessarily the sort you’d laugh at).

                     Think of it as the difference between Napoleon Dynamite (where the humor comes from the awkwardness and was written intentionally to add value to the scenes) and __(random novel here that it’s cool to hate on, like 50 Shades)__ (where the awkwardness comes from the poor writing). There is nothing intelligent, deliberate, or enjoyable about your group’s Neko release, and that’s an issue that you can only partly explain away as a blind dedication to literalism.

                   • I would strongly prefer not to be pigeonholed here, or else I will have to return to commenting only on releases that I have no connection whatsoever to, not even in group affiliation.

                     Please explain to me why it is funny and clever writing to use 42,195 in Japanese and not in English.

                   • I don’t know Japanese. I don’t even know if it’s clever or not to have 42.195 there. I assumed it was a quirk you wanted to see reflected, but I can’t tell for certain. If there’s no point to it, then there’s no point in reflecting it in English, and if there is a point to it, I need to know exactly what you want conveyed to suggest an appropriate translation (read: not transcription).

                   • Apparently my circumlocutory explanation did not convey the point; so be it. He says 42,195 for the sake of making the sentence and his expressions more complicated.

                     There is no other reason.

                   • Then like False said, spelling it out would be a good choice if you decided this was a quirk you needed reflected in the release.

                   • If you were to spell it out the question would be how to write it? The ‘proper’ way.
                     “Forty-two and one hundred ninety-five thousandths”
                     or how most people would say it (generally..)
                     “Forty-two point one-nine-five”

                 • It’s not Olympic torchbearers who run 42.195 km.

                   Reply

                   • That’s the joke in the scene. Araragi’s talking to one of his sisters and she says she was running that distance like a torchbearer and then he flips out and is all “they don’t run marathons!”

                   • If it’s for the name of character development, it could always be spelled out rather than written in numbers. That would be a quirk of subtitling that would announce it was a character quirk. I remember a.f.k doing something similar for Yuki in Haruhi and you were left in no doubt what kind of character she was meant to be.

                   • Admittedly, if she’s already given the specific distance, the simplification to “marathons” in English would be acceptable from the viewpoint that it’s spelling out a joke that wouldn’t be immediately obvious in English (I only know it as 26.something miles, not the kilometres).

                   • I know – I was offering the above as alternative way of translating/editing the line.

                   • Oh, gotcha.

4. Waiting warmly for a UTW-Mazui review as well

   Reply

5. I don’t like the stretched comments, so.

   >>>>
   Then like False said, spelling it out would be a good choice if you decided this was a quirk you needed reflected in the release.
   <<<<

   So now the problem is in using letters versus digits? That's not what we started off with.

   And besides, do you think it is possible to read "forty-two-point-one-nine-five kilometers" in the alloted time?

   Reply

   • That’s not it at all. It’s awkward when taken straight as the line is written. I suggested it should be changed to something that’s not awkward. You then said it was a character trait that may need to be reflected, so I offered a way to reflect it (stolen right from False <3).

     If you think it's too long, you could have: "They don't run forty-two-point-one-nine-five kilometers!"

     If that's still too long, then the quirk can be reflected in various different ways.

     "Olympic torchbearers don't run":
     * "42-point-195 kilometers."
     * "42.195 kilometers.”
     for example.

     Reply

   • Declaring these greatly superior to what the subtitles say right now is entirely arbitrary.

     Reply

   • The original line is not written to reflect a quirk. My examples are.

     Reply

   • I think “42-point-195 kilometers” is not a quirky notation, it’s a retarded notation. You seem to feel similarly about “42.195 kilometers”.

     So where does that leave us?

     Reply

   • My problem is not with that line’s notation. It’s that it doesn’t read as an intentional quirk. My suggestion makes the quirk appear intentional by drawing attention to it.

     Reply

   • A normal, educated reader not weaned on Doki and Hadena would immediately assume as much without the gaudy subtitle effects.

     Reply

   • Hope I’m replying to the right comment to continue this sequence…

     But it needs to have a “gaudy” effect as you put it, because subtitle readers are so used to reading numbers on a screen that they probably don’t take in the information as being a quirk of saying the actual distance over something simple like “marathon”. Writing it out adds a variation to the subtitle effect, enhancing the sub itself, even though it says the same thing.

     In effect, it’s the difference between using a comma and a period. They do two different things to how a sub is read even if the words on the screen (the translation, if you will) are exactly the same.

     Reply

   • Edit: False said it better above me.

     Dashes, italics, and bold are gaudy and I’m an uneducated reader weaned on Doki and Hadena? My, what misplaced venom.

     I suppose it’s possible that I understand nothing about subtitles, that’s true. Possible, but equally as likely as Russel’s Teapot existing.

     If I’m unable to determine a quirk from a line, then I either missed it the first time or it was unclear. Having watched that specific scene again, it’s still not obvious that was a character quirk, and that’s a failing of the script. Even beyond this one line, actually, you’d have to do a lot of convincing to get me to think the script had character of any kind.

     Reply

     • *Russell’s Teapot. <3 sage. =P

       Reply

       • Fuck Russell. He should have spelled his name better.

         Reply

         • Is there… some other way of spelling Russell?

           Reply

           • http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russel_Hobbs

             Reply

             • I’m not sure if the inability of a minority of people to spell their own name legitimises whatever misspellings arise (especially for fictional characters). And how many people have the surname “Russel”?

               Reply

               • He’s not fictional! He’s real to me!

                 Reply

         • If you claimed that there actually was another way of spelling Russell floating out in space between Earth and Mars, the burden of proof would be upon you. =P

           Reply

         • For what it’s worth, I believe his teapot must exist – otherwise, where do all the aliens get their tea? Not sure what this does for your understanding of subtitling, because you said yourself that they are both inextricably linked…

           Reply

   • —-
     In effect, it’s the difference between using a comma and a period. They do two different things to how a sub is read even if the words on the screen (the translation, if you will) are exactly the same.
     —-

     I cannot agree. The placement of commas and periods is governed by rules, while bolding or italicizing occurs in either of two cases:

     1.) The subbers don’t know how to communicate that the character is emphasizing a certain word strictly through phrasing. In this case the subbers are retarded.

     2.) The watcher is too dense to realize that the presented phrasing emphasizes a certain word or part of the sentence. In this case the watcher is retarded.

     —-
     Dashes, italics, and bold are gaudy
     —-

     Em-dashes are a requirement for sentences that are interrupted, and can’t be replaced with anything. Italics and bolding is gaudy. I don’t use it, nor will I ever. A sentence like “You really are a sweet guy.” does not need any of those ‘enhancements’ around “are”, because there is no sane way of parsing it without that exact same emphasis.

     It’s entirely beyond me how you can read that kilometers line and interpret it incorrectly.

     We have come to a standstill; I refuse to spend my evening debating subtitle formatting. I assumed this would be about, like, English.

     So long.

     Reply

     • I never thought I’d see someone argue against emphasizing words. How the fuck do you even come to that conclusion? You really think

       It’s not like I want to kill him.
       It’s not like I want to kill him.
       It’s not like I want to kill him.
       It’s not like I want to kill him.

       are all the same? I can’t believe you’re as stupid as you claim to be.

       Reply

   • It’s about *written* English and yes, it is an art in itself. Why do you think we even have grammar rules and citation rules and so on? In speech, do we not know a question by its inflection? However, when writing a question, how does one present this inflection? I’ll give you a clue – I’ve used it in this post three times already.

     Written language is all about dropping clues for the reader to understand the writer’s intentions. Sure, a certain line may read right in your head, but it doesn’t follow that it reads right in the viewer’s heads. Sometimes, these visual clues are necessary – like the em-dash to indicate being cut off – to understand the entirety of the text presented.

     Reply

   • I’ll go against my principles just this once.

     @ DS
     I’m not the one who wants him dead.
     I don’t really want to kill him, though.
     Killing is a bit extreme.
     He’s not the one I want to kill.

     Amusingly, your examples can be interpreted in subtly different ways (first sentence: Anyone killing him is fine, or someone else wants to kill him?). Great job proving your point that emphasis improves communication.

     @ FD
     I’m not saying punctuation needs to be abolished. A question is a question and receives a question mark. These are rules. The sentences you chose to write as questions have incorrect punctuation without a question mark. This is not debatable, and is unrelated to voluntary subtitle formatting.

     But now is truly enough.

     Reply

     • Neatly avoiding that em-dashes are voluntary subtitle formatting…

       Reply

6. >You know, for some *crazy* reason I’m inclined to believe UTW-Mazui’s constrictorsnake and meddlecat more than your translations, Commie.

   I don’t know about the snake, but if you watch the whole show through you’ll see why cat curse / curse cat is used.

   And no, “breast warning” because it’s a parody of what’s typically referred to as an earthquake warning.

   When you write reviews, I assume you always have many things that you don’t screenshot which still factor into the final score. If that’s the case, why were these not included originally?

   Here’s what you said right at the top of the comments for the Commie review.
   >Luckily for you, I have an open review system. Choose the line you disagree with, attack my reasoning, and then we can have a discussion and (hopefully) come to a conclusion about it.

   Is your intent to punish the group for doing just that?

   Reply

   • They were originally factored in, yes, and usually I can keep a handle on what exactly I’m cutting out. Unfortunately, I actually came up with about twice as many screenshots for the addendum as I thought I was leaving out, which means my original assessment was wrong (-monogataris are a bitch). The ending I wrote for the addendum before adding in the screens was along the lines of

     “All these screens were those I originally cut out from the review due to length restrictions. They all factored in to Commie’s D+ score.”

     Unfortunately, what I found on my second pass indicated I was quite mistaken about the content I missed. I had some options then — 1. I could not post this review and keep my thoughts to myself. 2. I could post this addendum and leave out some of what I found to make the conclusions in the review and the addendum match. 3. I could post this addendum and leave in the final conclusion, untouched and inaccurate. 4. I could amend the conclusion/review based on what I found in my second pass.

     I chose option 4 because it was the only honest one.

     I didn’t go into this intending to lower the score — just to knock some humility into y’all — but that’s what happened. What, exactly, would you have me do instead? I’m already giving UTW-Mazui a second pass to even out the final comparison (documenting what I find with screenshots this time so I wouldn’t have another issue like this one).

     Reply

     • I can’t see this doing anything but discourage people from raising issues with your open review format. People aren’t going to want to point out issues if it means you’re going to go back, look through the entire script again for errors, and essentially re-review them with a lower score.

       Also, and I realise this will be somewhat hypocritical coming from me, just because something makes more sense to you doesn’t necessarily mean it’s an accurate translation. You know that I personally do value lines that are clarified and make sense above all else, but aiming for direct accuracy even if it’s not spelled out for the viewer is a valid style and one I can’t really argue against.

       Reply

       • The addendum highlights my own flaws as a reviewer — I couldn’t get it right on my first pass. But what are you looking for me to do? I’m already factoring in a second-pass for the script for your main competition. And this was a one-off post type that I don’t particularly see coming back unless I have a really valid reason for it.

         Reply

         • I don’t think it sets a bad precedent, if that’s what Xythar’s arguing. I can see the point he’s making, but you have to factor in that most anime shows won’t have this level of difficulty and… obliqueness (think that’s the word I’m going for).

           As I’ve argued above, I’m not really sure it’s a case of clarification even. A translation is potentially less accurate if it doesn’t *convey* the spirit of the lines even if it’s word-for-word perfect.

           And if that is all it took to make a good translation, what the hell do you need editors for?

           Reply

       • I figured out a good way to handle this. First-pass is canon. Second-pass is readerservice. Bam! Everyone wins. Issue solved, yeah? I’ll update the posts.

         Reply

         • Man, and I just wrote that giant list too.

           But okay, that sounds fine to me.

           Reply

7. Anyway, here comes a giant list because I really have nothing better to do right now.

   >Oddities, eh? What an odd translation. Is that what Google told you to use?

   What’s your problem with it? “A strange or peculiar person, thing, or trait.”

   >I have been informed by quite a few people that this is gibberish from a translation standpoint. From an English standpoint, I agree as well.

   Yes, this sign was mis-TL’d (the subject is Senjougahara, not Koyomi). It’ll be fixed. Fortunately, it’s not relevant to the direct plot and isn’t onscreen for long.

   >You know you’re in for an excellent release when the group can’t even translate the guy’s name right. I mean, it’s not like he’s famous or anything. It’s not like NisiOisiN is the accepted version because the Japanese name is a palindrome.

   One could also argue that “oddity” is the accepted translation for 怪異 (see http://bakemonogatari.wikia.com/wiki/Oddity for instance) but I guess that’s only a problem here and not there?

   >You know, for some *crazy* reason I’m inclined to believe UTW-Mazui’s constrictorsnake and meddlecat more than your translations, Commie.

   As I said before, the “snake curse” I’m not sure about, but the point of the curse cat is that the 障り猫 is a pun on the words for “harm” (sawaru, in this context) and “touch” (sawaru). We went with curse/caress, and there are lines later on that wouldn’t make sense without it.

   >Wings, really? I don’t give a fuck what they say in the Japanese version; what do they mean? What would this translate into, you know, for English-speaking audiences?

   Not every line in the Japanese version was written with the intent of making sense either. UTW-Mazui had “The girl with abnormal wings.” so clearly they interpreted the line the same way. Maybe that’s simply what it means?

   >Well this is weird. Let’s see how a group translates when they don’t need to use translators scraped from the VN scene’s shoes.

   I’m told this line reflects more Araragi’s distaste of Golden Week in general, so saying “so far” isn’t quite right.

   >“Surprising? That’s a veritable bomb-shell!”

   Probably legit. The audio makes this sound like a pun but I’m not really sure.

   >Oh really? He thinks that only when he’s reading that book he bought? In UTW-Mazui’s, it’s just “a” book, so I guess he somehow became more single-minded in your release, Commie.

   Legit, I think.

   >What I find funny is that they copied the one version with typos from a site made in the 90s.

   Yep, someone should have caught that, though I was impressed it was there at all.

   >Pretty terrible list-writing skills, Commie.

   Legit.

   >It should have been “a ladder” in both instances.

   Yep.

   >It’s magazine, you dipshits.

   Most likely.

   >I get the feeling there’s a joke completely lost in translation here.

   They both end in “chi”, like how they both end in “ch” in English. The rhyme is a bit more obvious in Japanese, but I don’t think there’s anything more to it.

   >You mean “breast alert”?

   No, since it’s a parody of what is typically referred to as an earthquake warning.

   >“It was both a joke and a test of sorts.”

   As far as I know, both are acceptable.

   >If you just wanted to talk about that spiral shit in the beginning of each movie, take away “inflationary” from Araragi’s response.

   I’m on the fence about this. I’d probably do it, but I don’t think it ruins the joke not to, especially if “inflationary” is included in his response in the Japanese.

   >Yes, this is a conversation a normal human being could follow. Great job, Commie.

   I like UTW-Mazui’s line for this one a little more, yeah.

   >Italics stuff

   Arguable, but I suppose.

   >That’s just abuse!

   Legit.

   >“Olympic torchbearers don’t run full marathons!”

   Not if he says 42.195, which I believe is the case. If they meant him to say marathon they’d have put marathon.

   >That’s how you react?

   I don’t think the emphasis is necessary for this one.

   >Honestly, I’d request a full TLC on it if I were the editor, but working with what I’ve got, I’d make the final line “the pain beneath that bandage!”

   [Futsuu] nagurareta kizu -> wound from getting hit -> bruise

   kizu is wound, not pain. Not to mention that it makes no sense to lick a hole through pain anyway. Yeah, you can add an extra layer of interpretation to it if you want, and I’ve done so myself many times, but simply translating what he says and leaving it as an exercise for the viewer isn’t wrong.

   >You don’t apply on; you apply to.

   Yep.

   >only weigh down on me.

   This actually was in the original TL script, but it was changed in editing. So, legit.

   In the end, it’s a mixture of stuff that’s correct and incorrect, but most of the legitimate stuff is pretty minor (and will likely be fixed later). For what it’s worth, they didn’t really affect my own enjoyment of the script (I didn’t work on the show myself, I’m just watching it). I have a hard time reconciling this with the final grade, but then I don’t really know how your system works.

   Reply

   • Oh Jesus, let me respond to that when I get off work.

     Reply

   • Let me just jump in here and point out the ragingly obvious if admittedly minor fact RE:
     >Wings, really? English rant…etc
     >>UTW-Mazui had “The girl with abnormal wings.” We weren’t wrong…etc

     The wings line is a play off Hanekawa’s name (Tsubasa?) and her inhumanly perfect benevolent nature — akin to an angel. I don’t get how this was hard to decipher. I’m sure a proper ‘English’ line about an abnormally angelic girl could be fashioned that would please the Sage, and hopefully retain the wings reference… But it’s too late for me to think of one.

     Reply

     • “The girl who could sprout wings any moment”? Though, that still doesn’t really get the angelic bit across. Hm, it’s a difficult line, certainly.

       Reply

       • “The girl who wouldn’t look out-of-place with wings.”

         Might be a bit long for the audio, mind.

         Reply

8. Personally, I think “Anomaly” and “Abnormality” are better alternatives to “Oddity”.

   Reply

   • Any particular reason, or just Rule of Cool?

     Reply

     • “Anomaly” strikes me as the mostly likely (by quite some margin) to show up in speech. “Abnormal” is (in my opinion) a better word to use when describing something supernatural than “odd”, which is why I would choose “abnormality” over “oddity”.

       Reply

       • Agreed, “anomaly” strikes me as the perfect word to use in this situation. “Oddity” is fine, but “anomaly” just fits a little better, imo.

         Reply

       • And you can pun it on animal since that’s what all the curses are related to.

         Reply

   • 8thsin translated that word as “oddity/oddities”.

     Reply

     • I think TL’ing monogatari is about walking a tightrope between keeping intact the writer’s syntax & semantics from the original Japanese lines while also playing around with the English language to create new puns reflecting the spirit of the author. Impossible oddities (lulz) like Mayoi’s manner of speech or archaic kanji aside…

       Anomaly is much better even before factoring in the animal pun. As much as I’m an 8thsinfag…

       Reply

9. “I keep forgetting what RHE has his cronies doing now. Game reviews, right? Yeah, game reviews.”

   that was uncalled for… even if its true.

   Reply

   • What do you mean? According to Thesaurus.com, “crony” has nothing but a positive context. http://thesaurus.com/browse/crony

     I was merely trying to reflect the deep friendship you all share.

     Reply

     • As a purveyor of English idioms, I feel like you really must be aware that, thesaurus aside, cronies has gained a negative connotation in modern (American) usage, whereas it’s hardly ever used of when describing associates of good repute or ‘mates’.
       Example: “The Wall St. bankers and their government cronies rigged the whole financial system”.

       Reply

       • *-of. and yes I recognize sarcasm.

         Reply

     • I don’t think anyone has ever used “crony” in that manner ever. Unless you’re like a 1960’s Oxford professor who spends half his life wearing a silly hat and ceremonial robes and has a penchance for using obscure, outdated language.

       Reply

       • I wasn’t being serious with that link…

         Reply

         • I was more railing against the website rather that site (which is usually quite good) rather than taking your comment for anything other than a fine example of trolling.

           Reply

           • Oh man, I should really read what I write before pressing the Add Comment button. “the website rather” shouldn’t be in there (I just st-st-stuttered a little).

             Reply