Words like “colour/color” or “programme/program.” Should they be changed, or should it be decided that We are smart enough to know wht the word means?
In what context is this “translation” taking place? A British book being published in the U.S. as a separate edition, the changes are usually made. What other scenario did you have in mind?
What does “translating” from British to American mean? What kind of works are so translated?
If “lorry” and “lift” are changed to “truck” and “elevator,” then it would certainly seem strange and pointless to retain spellings like “colour.”
I would hope we are smart enough to know what a lift is, no matter what colour it is.
I don’t think works should be “translated” from British English to American English at all.
We sought out British editions of the Harry Potter books because we didn’t want to put up with the “Sorceror’s Stone” nonsense and the like. I get Penguin Books all the time, and they’re certainly not altered for an American audience. One of the joys of my British-translated Asterix books is figuring out what the jokes (originally intended for a British audience) are about.
Learning that other folks spell words differently (sometimes very differently) and use different slang and grammatical constructions is part of the fun.
Were there other changes besides the substitution of “sorcerer” for “philosopher”?
I consider it part of becoming fluent in English.
There was something about ‘toilets’ and ‘bathroom’ - because in the US, if you’re in the toilets, you’re actually in the porcelain and/or pipes (admittedly, that sad ghost was often, but…).
Mostly they kept British words (biscuit, jumper) unless it would lead Americans to interpret a different meaning.
Yes.
As usual, Canada is stuck in the middle on this. We use American terminology in a lot of cases – truck, elevator, parking lot, motorcycle, scotch tape, etc. (instead of lorry, lift, car park, motorbike, cellotape, etc.), but use British spellings – colour, labour, cheque, etc. (instead of color, labor, check).
Fun, fun, fun…
Spellings, no. Words where there is a significant semantic difference, yes. (For instance, “suspenders” in American vs. British English). However if the book takes place in the United States and the characters are American, I would find it jarring if British spellings were used, even if the author was British.
Thanks a heap amanset for pointing out those differences. They fascinate me, both for the differences and for the choices. As a native speaker of California English I hadn’t known for example that (at least in CoS) the UK “tank top” is the US “sweater vest”. I Googled “tank top” and quickly found a UK image – oh, yeah – that I could use to encourage more Californians to wear sweater vests in summertime.
But (in H-BP) changing “Humph” to “Hmph”?! All credit due to who[m]ever was able to pad their timetabled hours by making such clarifications. And there are more (also from H-BP alone) that are, well, questionable – “as though it were encased” to “as though it was encased”, “woman called Narcissa” to “woman named Narcissa”, “motorbike” to “motorcycle”, “so short that they did not” to “so short they did not”, “looking out of the window” to “looking out the window”, etc. But not to spoil further your own enjoyment.
I say to give the kids footnotes straight off. The sooner that they learn about the language and cultural differences in the English[-]speaking world, the sooner that they can appreciate classic art like the Carry On… films. (“I could use a good scrubber.”)
I think it’s something which people should be able to deal with. In fact, I would applaud those who appreciate and enjoy regional differences - in both spelling, vernacular, action, and custom. It’s a feature of our world, not a bug, and should be embraced in my opinion.
Those who complain about how some folks talk different or spell things different or have slightly different customs or traditions are bores. Enjoy it! Especially in something so trivial as a bit of bedtime reading about a boy wizard. I think that in this day-and-age of the global village, “them folks talk difrunt to us” should be a celebration, not an obstacle.
This is true for books 2-7, but there are quite a lot of changes in book 1.
As for translating between different versions of English…eh, there’s no right answers, I guess. I’ve mentioned before that I’m into fandom (ie, reading and writing fanfiction). My fandom is American, but there are quite a lot of British people (plus smaller numbers of Canadians, Australians and New Zealanders) active in the fandom and this is a biiiiig issue that people argue over all the time. I think most people agree that if you’re not American, you need to get one to check your diction, just to get the characterizations correct. Some people like to use American English in the dialog and their own native version of English in the narrative, which is, imho, incredibly distracting and weird. Spelling is more controversial. Most of the Commonwealth sorts flat out refuse to change their spelling to American spellings, and that’s sort of where the issue stands.
I say no. The spelling is part of the culture. I oppose things like changing lorry to truck as well. I like getting into the characters’ and authors’ headspace.
Well, Philosopher -> Sorcerer was just moronic, but in general I’m in favour of translating to the locally appropriate spellings.
That should read:
Then again, I’d prefer to read an original British edition than one that’s been dumbed down by “translation.” I wish I could read other languages so I could read a lot more in the original.
This reminds me that when The Hardy Boys series was first published in England in the 50s, many Americanisms were changed to their British equivalents.
I’ve posted it before but I’ll post it again - here is a linkto Lindsey Davis’ (the author of the Falco books set in ancient Rome) rant on the subject of “translating” books for the American market.
To quote her final word:
There is no “should”. If the total market for two separate editions is greater than a single one, it will be done, simply to increase profit. I don’t think the spellings really matter, but if you are going through the effort to Americanize words where the semantic meaning would be confusing (biscuit/cookie etc) then you might as well Americanize the spellings while you’re at it, for the US edition.
That’s a cool idea, for adults too. I wouldn’t mind reading the UK edition anyway, I’m sure I could figure out most things, but having footnotes would make it more interesting and fun.
Well, this has been enlightening, and a little upsetting. I had not realized that such translations were so common, and I’m now annoyed that I’ve probably read a number of such amended works.
Is this mostly a new (last few decades) thing? I recall reading the Narnia books as a youngster and encountering the British usage of “torch” for the first time, but having no trouble understanding it.
Another way to look at this is translating any type of English
For instance when I was in Georgia I visited the home of Joel Chandler Harris. He wrote the Uncle Remus stories.
Interestingly enough they had for sale at the site, the original books as written and the books translated into modern English. The original were written in what used to be referred to as a “negro dialect.”
This opens up a question, should these books be translated. The books are very hard to read. Actually if you read them out loud they are very easy to read, it’s just when you read them silently. But anyway, you get my point.