Why does this happen, /a/? How could the real translation

>>150487867
translation is rewriting a concept into another language, not a scientific process.

>>150487867
What's the raw say

Japanese Oh = English Yes

Nips only borrow words and phrases from the Queen's English and use it incorrectly to fit their purposes.

>>150487929
Dammit, so the translators remove the honorifics for 'localisation', but can't pull their fingers out to change a sound for it's meaningful English equivalent?

Maybe I'd be better off reading this online instead.

File: 60a4be2dcd7608578190204d98af1a5a_600.jpg (12KB, 600x265px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 600x265px

>>150487906
I looked it up and it says nothing like that at all, how dare they change it

It should be "is that so? (generally rhetorical)"

t. nihongese expert

>>150488093
I'd translate it as "Oh, okay." then. They're both wrong!

>>150488093
>SOUKA
>TL note: SOUKA means "Like so, is it?"

I agree with >>150488093 on "Is that so?"
Unfortunately the English lacks the Japanese's brevity.

>>150487867
Oftentimes the real translations are from japanese people who don't have great english. When translating something it usually comes out more natural sounding if you're translating into your native language rather than from it.

Also, a lot of things can't be translated directly because the same nuances they have don't exist in other languages.

However I will say, there are some really shitty translations out there that aren't even close to what the characters really says and it bugs me because it's like they went out of their way to change the source material to what they think it "should" be.

>>150488229
"Oh?" would have worked

>>150488093
The problem is, in english people don't naturally say "is that so?", therefore to any english reader if you translate everything directly like this it sounds really fucking weird.

>>150488146
>not how I'd translate it
>wrong

Translation is so much interpretation and personal choice. It's not as simple as that. Disagreeing over how you'd phrase a thing in your language doesn't make the other version wrong.

>>150488172
>>150488093
When translating Japanese you have to be aware of the context which is why machine translations for Japanese are so shitty. 'Is that so?' would be a pretty poor and unnatural translation and both 'oh' and 'ok' are better.

>>150488287
sou ka doesn't always have questioning connotations like "oh?" does. Depending on the inflection, i.e. "sou ka." vs "sou nan desu ka?!"

>>150488093
I'm in my second year of JP and I'd probably translate it like this anon said (with the rhetorical part in a TN)

Still, pretty sad that official translations kinda failed with something as basic and commonly spoken as そうか in a TL.

>>150488417
depends on the inflection.

sou ka, vs sou ka?
oh. vs oh?

it doesn't seem like a questioning inflection is implied by his expression, he looks like he's just accepting it.

>>150488512
The whole point of the "generally rhetorical" part is to explain that he's not questioning but accepting that that is how it is.

>>150488320
I say that all the time.

>>150488417
If what you've written needs to be explained in a TN, and if the explanation is as simple as "this is rhetorical" you have failed badly as a translator and failed even worse as writer of English dialogue.

Yes you might be satisfied you've made it as accurate as possible, but that version would be terrible read. And if it's not a good reading experience, why have you done it at all?

I'm here for a story, not a Japanese lesson.

>>150488604
"is that so?" sounds kind of aggressive in english to me lol. Like you're implying they're wrong.

What about "Really?"?

>>150488658
>lol

そうか

>>150488765
we 2005 now roflmao :3

>>150488093
I'd translate it as "Kay"

>>150488658
yeah exactly,
i also say is,
and yeah its an aggressive -ish way to respond to something that does not amuse me in the slightest