Connection ErrorBad RequestThis page went staleSession ExpiredSign in requiredForbiddenNot FoundToo Many RequestsServer ErrorBad GatewayService UnavailableGateway TimeoutHTTP Version Not Supported
Session Expired
Your session has expired. Please log in to continue.
Sign in required
You need an account to do that. Sign in or create one — it only takes a minute.
This page went stale
Your security token was rejected, usually because the page sat open too long or you signed in elsewhere. Nothing was saved. Reload the page and try again.
Request Failed
We encountered an issue while processing your request.
Please check your internet connection and try again.
If a work explicitly emphasizes the Japanese cultural space, the use of *chan* and *kun* is logical.
You might be able to launch GBF and think that it features an original fictional world, and therefore it doesn't belong to that cultural space, but that's not entirely true. The characters' behavior, their ways of interacting with each other, and other elements are largely based on Japanese culture, and localizing these moments is like replacing *onigiri* with a donut because the translators see the audience or reader as an idiot who needs to be held by the hand and spoon-fed, as otherwise they won't understand what's being discussed.
More likely yes than no (considering the specifics of the food, various kotatsu, and many other things), but this isn't true for the entire game. For example, I mentioned the British school for a reason; in GBF, there's Mysteria, which is a very clear cosplay of Hogwarts and Hogwarts-like concepts. So, in the character dialogues, I would, for example, clarify with the author how much stronger localization would be appropriate. However, it's possible that the author will respond in the spirit of "No, this school is still Asian, just with a few British touches," and then, yes, you would still be right, but from the very beginning, it's not obvious. Therefore, it's important to maintain communication with the authors and not just do things as you please.
Ment, I recommend you do the same as I did in the anime thread – familiarize yourself with a large number of works. Manaria isn't much different from any other magical academy, and the fact that you have such a strong association with Hogwarts just means that you need to watch/read/play more.
Hmm. Well, then it would be better to provide arguments from specific works. I can immediately cite "Little Witch Academia," which is conceptually very similar, and for which, as far as I remember, the synopsis explicitly stated that Akko arrived in England from Japan. That is, such a thing, at the very least, happens, where it directly refers to a non-Japanese culture in relation to magical academies. And it should be noted that, despite the large number of magical academies in anime (which I am aware of, although in most cases I don't know the synopsis), this still does not serve as proof that Hogwarts is not one of the most powerful inspirations for this phenomenon. If such a thing (and specifically with a European flavor, with all these sweaters, plaid skirts, etc.) existed in anime before the Harry Potter books, then I would agree. Otherwise, it sounds rather weak.
Without delving into my extensive list of watched content, the first thing that comes to mind is Rokudenashi Majutsu Koushi to Akashic Records. But whether a school is "ultimately magical" or not doesn't really matter, in the sense that thematically, it could be about "superpowers" instead of magic, but the pattern remains the same; only the overall theme changes.
And it doesn't matter who might have set certain trends. Let's say pointed hats from that British writer became popular in culture – so what?
If I understand correctly, Tolkien popularized the modern image of orcs, but how many people think of him when they encounter this race in any work? I, for example, didn't think of him until this conversation, even though there's more than enough orc content out there today . Do you immediately think of Chinese culture when you see a compass or paper? Why not, it originated there. These are all borrowed technological and cultural elements. A Japanese school, for example, doesn't become European just because they wear clothing that isn't traditional for that country. Wait, even the Japanese sailor uniform was created based on a European design. So what does that mean...? Is it Japanese or European? Obviously, if we're talking about Japan or content created by Japanese people, it's Japanese.
If one character calls another "senpai" in a setting that thematically resembles a European one, it still doesn't mean that writing the name in the translation is appropriate, because it violates the character's personality and the level of relationship between them as established by the author. Just as in Japan, people don't casually throw around phrases like "I love you" (aishiteru); instead, they use less serious options like "suki" and "daisuki," which can refer to both friendship and romantic relationships. And if you still translate it as "I love you," the original meaning is lost, but the localizers don't care; their main goal is to write in a way that is common in English-speaking society. Localization is a degenerative practice, literally turning things into orcs. Then people consume these low-quality translations, often in dubs, and never understand the nuances of what they see and hear, continuing to perceive onigiri as a donut.
That's all well and good, but you can't learn all languages, and you still want to consume content.
and they will never understand any of the nuances of what they see.
Well, what can you do? Everyone has their own preferences. Someone eating foie gras will never understand the full range of flavors that a true gourmet can appreciate, but that doesn't mean they won't get some enjoyment out of it.
Where do we go? Where do we end up when we save the world?
Someone who eats poorly prepared foie gras will never understand the chef's lack of talent, which a true gourmet can discern, yes, but that still doesn't excuse the chef.
Even without delving into my vast list of watched content, the first thing that comes to mind is Rokudenashi Majutsu Koushi to Akashic Records. But whether the school is ultimately magical or not is irrelevant, in the sense that thematically it could be something like "superpowers" instead of magic, but the pattern remains the same; only the overall theme changes.
I don't accept this example for two reasons, or rather, one: 1) I immediately see that the characters here are not dressed as is customary in decent English schools for wealthy or aristocratic children, meaning I immediately have a serious (and, I'm sure, justified) doubt that this particular school actually has anything to do with what I was talking about. 2) "Alzano" is a word that clearly does not associate with British culture, unlike "Manaria," which is generally compatible with it. This basically says the same thing. And yes, if we're talking about magical schools, specifically English-style schools, then of course it's important that it's actually a magical school...
And it doesn't matter who might have set certain trends. Well, let's say pointed hats from this British writer became popular in pop culture, so what? If I understand correctly, Tolkien popularized the image of orcs as they are today, but how many people think of him when they encounter this race in any work? I, for example, didn't remember him until this conversation, although there is more than enough content with orcs these days. If you see a compass or paper somewhere, do you immediately think of Chinese culture? Why not, it originated there. These are all borrowed technological and cultural elements. A Japanese school, for example, will not become European just because they wear clothes that are not traditional for that country. Oh, wait, even the Japanese sailor uniform was created based on a European form. So what does that mean...? Is it Japanese or European? Obviously, if we're talking about Japan or content created by Japanese people, then it's Japanese.
I almost agree with this, with reservations. The original source can be important if its strong influence on the subject being discussed still exists. That is, you are right about the examples of paper and the compass, but a hypothetical Gothic cathedral will still remind you of Western Catholic culture, even if it is built somewhere in the Philippines. I can give an example even closer to your worldview – a European wearing a kimono is still wearing an item of Japanese culture and is most likely doing so not just for fun, but because they need it for cosplay/masquerade/performance, or as a sign of solidarity with Japanese traditions (as in the film "The Last Samurai"). That is, content sometimes matters and is preserved. In summary, your reasoning applies only to those items that have been culturally borrowed firmly and for a long time, which, in my opinion, still does not apply to English sweaters with badges and plaid skirts...
If one character calls another character "senpai" in a setting that thematically resembles European culture, it still doesn't mean that it's okay to write the name in the translation, because this violates the character that the author has given to the characters and the level of relationship between them. Just as in Japan, no one throws around phrases like "I love you" (aishiteru) left and right; instead, less serious options like "suki" and "daisuki" are used, which can refer to both friendship and romantic relationships, and if you still translate it as "I love you," the original meaning is lost, but the localizers don't care; they just want to write it the way it's customary to speak in the English-speaking community. Localization is a degenerative practice of LiTeRaLi orcs. Then people consume such low-quality translations, and even in dubs, and never understand the nuances of what they see and hear, continuing to perceive onigiri as a donut.
“Senpai” is a very nuanced word, and yes, seeing it in the original, I would almost certainly transfer it into the translation. But again, my point is that it's better for the author and translator to agree, because in this specific example, using even the same "senpai" may turn out to be a minor detail, the presence of which was more influenced by the author's linguistic traditions than they intentionally decided so.
It's strange, the statistics in the proving grounds are broken this time.
The dragons and serpent-men were amusing. There's no Dobrynya Nikitich among them.
The sheep and rose have amazing artwork, but I think it's time for them to add seasonal characters, at least to the support units. With such terrible rates, trying to roll for anything is a fantasy.
Added 3 minutes later
Oh, and Fericka has a great artwork too.
Some kind of PETRA, completely unnecessary and resurrected from Grandblue, two whole Summer Kalas, the hundredth copy of Summer Europe – that is, nothing particularly good. But among the pleasant things, besides the sheep, there was Summer Anturia; it’s just a pity that Rose never dropped.
kcfgogbfalgfl
Ple-Sen
. Do you immediately think of Chinese culture when you see a compass or paper? Why not, it originated there. These are all borrowed technological and cultural elements. A Japanese school, for example, doesn't become European just because they wear clothing that isn't traditional for that country. Wait, even the Japanese sailor uniform was created based on a European design. So what does that mean...? Is it Japanese or European? Obviously, if we're talking about Japan or content created by Japanese people, it's Japanese.
If one character calls another "senpai" in a setting that thematically resembles a European one, it still doesn't mean that writing the name in the translation is appropriate, because it violates the character's personality and the level of relationship between them as established by the author. Just as in Japan, people don't casually throw around phrases like "I love you" (aishiteru); instead, they use less serious options like "suki" and "daisuki," which can refer to both friendship and romantic relationships. And if you still translate it as "I love you," the original meaning is lost, but the localizers don't care; their main goal is to write in a way that is common in English-speaking society. Localization is a degenerative practice, literally turning things into orcs. Then people consume these low-quality translations, often in dubs, and never understand the nuances of what they see and hear, continuing to perceive onigiri as a donut.
