Miyamoto Yuriko

[karenk]

How would you describe this guy's expression/face?

午後二時ごろになると、特高係が留置場へやって来てわたしを出し、二階の一室へつれ込んだ。墨汁だの帳簿だのの、のっかっていたテーブルの向う側に、黒い背広を着、顔の道具だてがみんな真中に向ってすり詰ったような表情の警視庁の特高が腰かけている。

I imagine that she meant that his eyes, nose and mouth seemed to be concentrated towards the center os his face, what would make his face look larger... Any ideas?

 

[Toritoribe]

Yes for "his eyes, nose and mouth seemed to be concentrated towards the center os his face", but I don't think it also means "what would make his face look larger."

 

[karenk]

Yes for "his eyes, nose and mouth seemed to be concentrated towards the center os his face", but I don't think it also means "what would make his face look larger."

Yes, that would be how I imagine it..

 

[karenk]

そこのところに「階段の昇降は静粛にすべし。司法室」と書いた貼紙が、角のめくれたところに塵をかぶってはりつけられている

 

[karenk]

Hi, what would the meaning of ひとも我も be? "The others and me as well"? Thank you!

女らしさのゆえにこそ、婦人たる性を愛し尊ぶからこそ、今日婦人は立っている。そのことを、ひとも我も、しんから自覚し、たたかいにおいてさえも婦人の天真な美しさとつよさとを発揮してゆきたいと思う。

 

[Toritoribe]

そこのところに「階段の昇降は静粛にすべし。司法室」と書いた貼紙が、角のめくれたところに塵をかぶってはりつけられている

貼紙の角のめくれたところ makes sense?

what would the meaning of ひとも我も be? "The others and me as well"?

Yes.

 

[karenk]

貼紙の角のめくれたところ makes sense?


Yes

Thank you and sorry for the former post, I hadn't noticed that I posted it, but yes, I had already figured out that it meant "the creased/wrinkled corners of the paper"

 

[karenk]

Tori, is she saying that she feels that her spirit seems to find refuge and expand from the tip of one of the leaves over there till the extremity of another leaf a little farther? I've found that 一つ葉 could also be a plant so I'm want to be sure.

私は此上ない愛情と打ちまかせた心とで木を見て居るうちに、押えられない感激が染々と心の奥から湧いて、彼の葉の末から彼方に一つ離れて居る一つ葉の端にまで、自分の心が拡がり籠って居る様になって来る。

 

[Toritoribe]

Your interpretation is correct. 一つ葉 is a leaf of the same tree.

 

[karenk]

Hi, what would a 巡ぐり戸棚 inside a prison be? I guess it would be a kind of shelf/cupboard in which the inmates could deposit their bedspread and that it went from cell to cell in the morning. I couldn't find anything about it.

巡ぐり戸棚に布団をしまい、洗顔にとりかかる。

 

[Toritoribe]

I think 巡ぐり is an adverb じゅんぐり（に）, meaning "in order/rotation", not an adjective, there. The kanji 順 is usually used for this meaning, and 巡 is more likely a misuse, though.

In fact, this essay is the only one result of 巡ぐり戸棚 in google searching, and she used just 戸棚 previously when describing a scene where they are taking futon from the shelf.

廊下についている戸棚から各監房へ布団を運び入れるところをみていると

 

[karenk]

I think 巡ぐり is an adverb じゅんぐり（に）, meaning "in order/rotation", not an adjective, there. The kanji 順 is usually used for this meaning, and 巡 is more likely a misuse, though.

In fact, this essay is the only one result of 巡ぐり戸棚 in google searching, and she used just 戸棚 previously when describing a scene where they are taking futon from the shelf.

廊下についている戸棚から各監房へ布団を運び入れるところをみていると

Hm, so I think that it means that she put her bedspread in there when it was her turn to/before going to wash her face.

 

[Toritoribe]

That's not wrong, but I think 巡ぐり戸棚に布団をしまい、洗顔にとりかかる。 would be a description about the inmates, not only about her, i.e., they did that in tern.

 

[karenk]

That's not wrong, but I think 巡ぐり戸棚に布団をしまい、洗顔にとりかかる。 would be a description about the inmates, not only about her, i.e., they did that in tern.

Ok, what about the distribution of the futon, I suppose that it happened the same way, right? Each going to get them in turn before sleep time.

 

[Toritoribe]

Right. An inmate did it by himself, not a guard did.

目のギロリと大きい男が、そういって小腰をかがめ、看守の返事を待たずさっさと布団を出している。

 

[karenk]

I will have to go through this text again, she employs the infinitive in many instances, I suppose that she tries to make the text more impersonal, a "matter of fact" narrative.

 

[Toritoribe]

Well, unlike a spoken word 行くもんで！ 話して来ないもん, present forms are not always a habit in narrative parts. It's often narrative/historical present.

Historical present - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[karenk]

Well, unlike a spoken word 行くもんで！ 話して来ないもん, present forms are not always a habit in narrative parts. It's often narrative/historical present.

Historical present - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Yes, i've noticed it. It is not so easy to follow all the historical present passages to a T when I translate without it soundig weird in my language. She goes from past to historical present many times in the same paragraph. In Japanese, it sounds more natural (or my Japanese is lacking). Most of the times, it sounds more natural do just use the gerund with a verb in the past to give the ideia that it is something that is happening/going on and bring it closer to the reader. I don't know very well how to explain...

 

[karenk]

Hi, what do you think about the way the historical present was translated in The Breast, another of Miyamoto's texts?
The Breast | Kyoto Journal
The original is here: ‹{–{•S‡Žq "û–[
The translator doesn't seem to have employed the historical present in English. Do you think that it changes the text too much? What do you think? Would you try to keep the present tense?

 

[Toritoribe]

Well, I think there is no problem to use past forms for historical present in English translation if it's natural in English.

 

[karenk]

Well, I think there is no problem to use past forms for historical present in English translation if it's natural in English.

I feel divided about it because my preference would also be to use the past forms in Portuguese because it really sounds more natural, but at the same time, I would like to be closer to the original text... It is easier to use the past tenses though. But in the case of Miyamoto, I feel that it gives a different nuance to her texts...

 

[Toritoribe]

Well, I've read just the first chapter, and indeed she seems to use historical present often for objective description of scenes, comparing to subjective viewpoints or actions of Hiroko, but it would be the problem of "interpreter's preference", I think.

 

[karenk]

But wouldn't it be closer to the original if the beginning was translated in the present? Sorry to keep asking questions about it, but i want to know if my grasp of the language is too off, it could just be my grasp of the English language that isn't that good though.

何か物音がする……何か音がしている……目ざめかけた意識をそこへ力の限り縋（すが）りかけて、ひろ子はくたびれた深い眠りの底から段々苦しく浮きあがって来た

What about: "(There is) a noise... something is making a noise... "

Instead of: A noise . . . something was making a noise. . . . Concentrating all the strength she could muster in her semiconscious state on that thought, Hiroko began to awaken with difficulty from the depths of a deep, dark sleep.

 

[bentenmusume]

Sorry for jumping into the conversation midway through, but as someone who does translation for a living, this is a rather interesting topic for me. (Apologies in advance if what I'm about to say is a bit "meta".)

But wouldn't it be closer to the original if the beginning was translated in the present? Sorry to keep asking questions about it, but i want to know if my grasp of the language is too off, it could just be my grasp of the English language that isn't that good though.

Well...not necessarily.

Most professional translators will agree that the ideal translation is one that evokes the same feelings/imagery in the target language as the original work did in the source language, not necessarily one that strictly adheres closest to the literal wording or structure of the original. (As a translator, perhaps you already agree with this.)

So what does that mean in this case? In my experience, Japanese tends to play a bit more free and loose with tense than English does, and this includes this sort of use of the "historical present." It's not impossible to narrate past events in the present in English, and you see it sometimes, but generally it will be for an extended passage (like a story within a story) or a stylistic choice carried out for the entire work. Jumping from past to present tense for a sentence or two is something you see a lot more in Japanese than in English. (Sorry, these are the only two languages I'm qualified to comment on, given my nonexistent ability in all others.)

This means that if one were to strictly preserve tense here in an English translation, there's a chance that it would come out as far more disjointed and jarring than the author originally intended (and by extension, than native Japanese speakers would feel when reading the original work). As the translator, you have to make a judgment call for yourself whether translating a given sentence or sentences in the present would serve to better allow your readers in to hear the author's original voice, or whether it would actually hinder the reader's experience by introducing something that may be perfectly natural in Japanese, but come off as disjointed and unusual in Portuguese.

Unfortunately, translation isn't an exact science, so there's not really one "right" answer. Then again, that's also what can make translation an interesting and rewarding craft. (At least, I think it is. )

 

[karenk]

Sorry for jumping into the conversation midway through, but as someone who does translation for a living, this is a rather interesting topic for me. (Apologies in advance if what I'm about to say is a bit "meta".)



Well...not necessarily.

Most professional translators will agree that the ideal translation is one that evokes the same feelings/imagery in the target language as the original work did in the source language, not necessarily one that strictly adheres closest to the literal wording or structure of the original. (As a translator, perhaps you already agree with this.)

So what does that mean in this case? In my experience, Japanese tends to play a bit more free and loose with tense than English does, and this includes this sort of use of the "historical present." It's not impossible to narrate past events in the present in English, and you see it sometimes, but generally it will be for an extended passage (like a story within a story) or a stylistic choice carried out for the entire work. Jumping from past to present tense for a sentence or two is something you see a lot more in Japanese than in English. (Sorry, these are the only two languages I'm qualified to comment on, given my nonexistent ability in all others.)

This means that if one were to strictly preserve tense here in an English translation, there's a chance that it would come out as far more disjointed and jarring than the author originally intended (and by extension, than native Japanese speakers would feel when reading the original work). As the translator, you have to make a judgment call for yourself whether translating a given sentence or sentences in the present would serve to better allowing your readers in to hear the author's original voice, or whether they would actually hinder the reader's experience by introducing something that may feel natural in Japanese, but come off as disjointed and unusual in Portuguese.

Unfortunately, translation isn't an exact science, so there's not really one "right" answer. Then again, that's also what can make translation an interesting and rewarding craft. (At least, I think it is. )

Perfectly said!