掲示板 Forums - some unimportant thoughts

i really like how much care in the good lessons has been put in, but if you ever get bored. Maybe make more literal translation optional. If the japanese text is dont type messages during classes, why translate it with sending ?? maybe we could choose been literal and another translation.

its absolutely minor giving how much care has been given to the lesson, but i find it unnecessarily complicating things. And while it does not need fixing, i encountered it in so many textbooks, people dont seem to realize its confusing, so i just wanted to mention it

edit: ofc most lessons already have a very good literal translation, but sometimes...

It was during grammar lesson, but i have not thought how they would say it in other countries. i use the grammar too to learn grammar and vocabulary.

Anyhow the work done on this site is marvelous and i sometimes overexagerate tiny points.

i started learning ith textbooks were they translated hajimemashite with hello.

i dont want to subtract from the nice conversion and hope im not unpolite. but 初（はじ）めまして, you are using the one for beginning.

yes but i think if literal translation exist, in general, it would help understanding the logic better and it would reduce mistakes.

From my understanding (plus a few native discussions on the subject), the "correct" modern form is 初めまして. When Renshuu says "Rarely written as: 初めまして" it means this is a rare modern kanji spelling, rather than the more common full-hiragana version.

The older spelling is 始めまして, which some people still use, hence "Also written as" (as opposed to 初めまして). Just keep in mind that some natives may actually flag it as "wrong".

PS: 始まる doesn't really mean "doing something for the first time", it only means "to begin"; "to start"; etc., basically "something is to begin/start" (with 始める being the transitive version). The "for the first time" meaning is usually associated with the 初 kanji instead.

初め て (はじめて) = for the first time

始め に (はじめに) = at the beginning / first / to begin with

You can use either 初 or 始 in a lot of cases, but the nuance, and sometimes even the meaning, changes depending on the kanji. Just something to keep in mind :)

Edit: Oh, and 初める is そめる not はじめる. You didn't make that mistake, but I like pointing it out :D

PPS: To add something to the actual topic: More literal translations can be helpful, but not always. An optional — carefully crafted and very clearly labelled — more literal translation could be useful in a lot of cases, but I suspect the juice is simply not worth the squeeze for Micheal. He seems to always be very busy and rarely ever "bored" :)

Edit: Reading the topic up to now, I feel like we (referring to OP) have a slightly different idea of what "literal" means. To me it's about keeping the structure of the Japanese original relatively unchanged, while also clearly maintaining its meaning and nuance. You're still aiming for natural English. Of course the idea is to convey the meaning/nuance, not to teach you English. Slightly "unnatural" language is thus not an issue, provided it's not too awkward and very clearly conveys the meaning.

Note that this doesn't mean 1:1 literal translations of individual words. Those simply don't work a lot of the time.

If you'd like to learn individual words, you can tap/click on them and look them up in the dictionary. They often have a lot of different meanings/uses, so you simply can't learn them just by looking at a few sentences.

"what is so bad about a literal translation?" As I said, literal translations aren't always bad. I don't have an issue with good, clear, and helpful (more) literal translations. It's just difficult to always have them available.

1) 彼は暇なときに本を読みます I would translate as "He reads books in his spare time" or "He reads books in his free time". He may or may not be "bored", so I'd personally avoid it. I think Renshuu does a pretty good job with 暇な時, e.g. 暇な時は本を読んでいる (and the other examples you can see from the dictionary entry).

2) 魚を焼く typically means "to grill/roast fish", basically to cook something with direct/dry heat. Could be under a broiler or a pan (フライパン焼き) with very little oil.

What you're describing here aren't "literal" translations, but rather "good" vs "bad" translations. At least to me. I think "bored" is (almost) a mistranslation, not an issue of how "literal" the translation is being.

Two equally valid translations for the first example would be "He reads books in his free time / spare time" and "He reads books when he has free time", in which case "in his free time / spare time" would be more literal, and arguably preserve に in a way that helps with understanding the grammar.

For 魚を焼く, I wouldn't use "cooking", I think that's too general, and not very helpful given the nuance of 焼く. Once again, I don't view this as an issue of literal vs non-literal, but as good/helpful vs bad/unhelpful.

I think you may have just found some "bad" translations :D

PS: Of course you can't generalise and say that "literal" translations are always better. They are in those specific cases, but not always.

Phrases like よろしくお願いします and お疲れ様です can be translated in a variety of different ways depending on context, translating them literally can actually give an English speaker the wrong idea about what the Japanese speaker is actually trying to convey. Of course this isn't limited to set phrases, it also happens with certain words.

Anyway, I don't like the term "literal", to me there are translations that correctly convey the meaning and nuance of the original Japanese, and those that fail to do so. Doesn't necessarily have to do with how literal they are.

So apart from the terminology, I think we probably agree on what a good translation looks like :)