A BLORTHMUGGEN IS A BLORTHMUGGEN IS A BLORTHMUGGEN,
BUT IN ENGLISH IT'S CALLED RAZORWHIP.
by Hans Holm
This originated years ago as a way of letting off steam caused by a few
columns at fanfiction.net, but this is as good a time as any to inflict it
on
others. It has been updated and revised, since the demographics of FFML
and fanfiction.net is different, but since I don�t think anybody here has
read
this (some of it has been posted earlier elsewhere) it doesn�t really
matter.
The title is new, of course.
This is, of course, simply my personal opinions on several things everybody
already knows (research and use of foreign words), but I rant faster than
I write fiction, so here goes. What originally set it off was a column on
The
High Tongue (when thou speaketh thusly), aimed at writers of original works,
but after much soul-searching I have decided to spare you most of that part.
And if you by chance should actually read any fiction I�ve written, you�ll
notice
I don�t exactly follow my suggestions myself.
ON RESEARCH
(Or Hey! It�s only a story!)
Let me start with a quote:
�It would be silly to insist that nobody who has not been a detective should
write detective stories, but it is certainly not unreasonable to ask any one
who
is going to write a book of any sort to make some effort at least to learn
something about his subject.�
Dashiell Hammett said that. He had been a detective, by the way.
He is also, among other things, possibly the only person who has actually
been
sued for copyright infringement over a character he created himself.
Anyway, back to the subject of the quote and this essay/rant.
Research.
Do I have to do research?
No, but it may save you some embarrassment. And it�s educational.
This is not about researching the story you�re basing your fanfic on (some
other
time, maybe), but on researching the other things in your story.
I�m sure you�ve all come across something in a story (or article or column)
that is
just plain wrong. Not logically, morally or grammatically, but _factually_.
It may be
just an irrelevant trifle (People don�t have that hair colour naturally.),
something
that�s so irritating it spoils an otherwise good story (Say what you want
about
the Ancient Greeks, but �homophobic� isn�t a word usually associated with
the
Athenians.) or something that completely destroys any
respect/authority/whatever
the writer may have had (I think I�ll leave that one to you.). Of course,
sometimes
in turns out that the story�s right and you�re wrong, and what spoils one
readers
story may not be noticed by another.
With that out of the way, let�s talk about _some_ types of mistakes that may
be avoided by research.
First, I�ll be as bold as assuming that everyone here is literate and has
spent at
least a couple of years in school or a school-like environment, learning
things. I�ll
also foolishly assume that more or less the same things _in general_ are
taught
at all schools (i.e. history, science, maths, etc.). Which brings us to the
first type:
The kind where you wonder how any reasonably intelligent and educated person
with what appears to be at least a slight interest in the subject could get
it wrong.
Basic history, geography and anatomy � the kind of things you should be able
to
find in the most basic books on the subject or any decent encyclopaedia.
This is
on the same level as correct spelling.
Examples:
Uh�Without pointing any fingers, one of the best examples is in lemons � If
you
don�t know what goes where or what�s what (or what�s not what) you probably
shouldn�t write lemons. If your readers keep thinking �That�s got to hurt!�
and it
was not meant to hurt in the story, you�re doing something wrong.
Other popular examples (not necessarily writing-related) are finding your
own
country (or if it�s a small country its general location) on a world map and
knowing
that people do things differently in other countries (it should be noted
that what
they do differently and in which way is in another category).
The second is the kind of thing that is, technically speaking, wrong, but:
a) generally accepted/common misconceptions (i.e. �everybody� thinks it�s
correct
(or doesn�t care));
b) essentially harmless (i.e. it doesn�t actually hurt the story); or
c) it feels petty and pedantic to point it out (i.e. it doesn�t hurt
anybody/-thing
else either).
It doesn�t really need to be corrected as most people will get the idea, it
doesn�t
hurt the story and it�s unlikely to change the mind of anybody who knows
better.
The first example that springs to mind is Frankenstein � He�s the scientist,
not
the monster (The name of the monster falls under the subject of researching
the characters you use.), but nobody who knows that F. is the scientist will
start
thinking it�s the monster. And again a basic book on the subject should be
enough.
On the other hand, the book may share the misconception, and finding the
book
may be tricky�
And to further confuse the matter, some versions of the monster, which are
no
less valid as fanfic-subjects, _are_ called Frankenstein or just Frank.
For more recent FFML examples, consider which schools exist in real life
Nerima,
but never appear in Ranma�. Not wrong or a misconception, but on the same
level of effect on the story.
Skipping the middle ground, we come into the areas where research starts
becoming important (or paying off, depending on how you look at it). This is
the kind of thing that you can�t really expect the average person to know or
care about (but your readers aren�t average persons, obviously, they are
well-educated and have excellent taste, at least in reading matters). It�s
also
the kind of thing were �non-experts� (people who have picked this stuff up
somewhere, but not seriously studied the subject) starts
challenging/correcting
you, so having some idea what you�re talking about helps. Especially if said
�non-expert� is wrong.
Examples:
There has never been any King G�ran of Sweden, but there has been an
Eric the Lisping and Lame (1222-1229 and 1234-1250). There was no
significant
Han population in Qinghai province until quite recently � even if they
appear
to actually be the majority now. (I get the impression that there were
practically
no Han there until the fifties.)
OK, I got those two from a quick googling, but I had done the groundwork
earlier.
Oh, and this is also were research may completely mess up the story you had
planned, which is frustrating even when it also gives you new and better
ideas.
Anyway, this blurs together with �expert knowledge� � the kind of thing
you�d
really only expect of someone who is really into a subject. But since
experts
read too (and, one assumes, they�d be likely to read stories related to
their area
of expertise), it is a good idea to try to get it right here too, for the
same
reasons as in the previous paragraph. Not to mention that experts
(particularly
technical), obviously, are going to know what is definitely wrong even when
it sounds sensible to the layman, and are likely to react more negatively to
it.
Example:
What kind of rifle-design (reloading, firing mechanism, etc.) would be most
practical for someone with mitten-like flippers instead of normal hands? If
restricted to pre-WW1 technology? What sounds good and sensible to a
non-expert may sound needlessly complicated to someone who knows
about these things. Being a fool, I never wrote down the answer I got and
messageboards being what they are, it is no longer easily available � I
think
it was lever action, magazine and a sort of squeeze-trigger.
Another thing to remember is that not every �expert� is an expert, and
that one man�s respected authority is another�s deluded fool. That is, in
my opinion, a very good reason to do your research.
Is research always necessary?
No, that depends on _what_ and _how_ you�re writing. To paraphrase a
comment I read in a role playing magazine some fifteen years ago:
�Do you (expletive) think we (expletive) care if pikemen in the phalanx
formation were used in the (expletive) later medieval period? This happens
to be Fantasy.�
If you write generic medieval fantasy the actual differences between the
13th and 14th centuries don�t really matter, but if you�re basing your
fantasy
on a more or less specific place or period you should research it. If only
to
know what your characters are wearing.
If the characters spend the whole story in Nerima it doesn�t matter how far
Juuban is, and if they never do anything to the river beyond passing by and
walking across bridges over it, it doesn�t matter if there is a river.
Also, the established rules of an already established setting take
precedence
over reality and logic, unless you can convincingly explain why not. If a
well-trained cast member can leap small buildings in a single jump there�s
no
need to figure out how he does it or how high he could leap in real life.
Or you can fake it. Techno-babble (and its relatives in other areas) has its
place if you sound convincing. Giving the impression of knowing what you
talk about always help, especially if audience is interested but know even
less
on that particular subject and you don�t mess up to badly. The experts and
know-it-alls don�t always care enough to complain, especially if you�re
entertaining and avoid their personal pet peeves (like, for example, trolls
and berserkers).
Or you can try a disclaimer � �I really don�t know this subject� � and hope
someone who does volunteers to help to correct what�s wrong or explain
how it works.
And sometimes the details don�t matter as long as they don�t contradict
each other or, when talking fan fiction, contradict what is already known,
like how Ucchan�s is furnished.
It doesn�t matter if the cat is black or white as long as it remains the
same
colour every time it appears. It doesn�t matter which floor Sam Spade�s
office is on as long as it stays there until he moves to another.
Of course, everything you research for a story cannot and should not
actually
appear on-page � the technical details of the rifle for the flipper-handed
is a
good example. You don�t _have_ to tell the readers everything, but it helps
if you can explain the oddities if asked without resorting to flames or �I
felt
like it�. Or to put it another way: �NO INFODUMPS!�
A good story compensates inaccuracies better than factual accuracy
compensates for a bad one.
I�ll spare you the lecture on where to look for information and where not
to.
Just the obvious one: Don�t use other people�s fanfics. Please.
ON LANGUAGE AND THE USE OF FOREIGN WORDS
(Or �Hey, she speaks Japanese (translated into English)!)
�Foreign� words aren�t necessarily foreign � consider �blorthmuggen� or
adding a Shakespearian word here and there for flavour. Is it really any
more
appropriate/correct to have a medieval or pseudo-medieval knight speak
(pseudo-)Shakespearian than to have an Elizabethan swashbuckler speaking
late 20th century slang?
On the other hand, languages, whether older versions, foreign or invented,
are not just words but grammar too (and idioms, references and so on), and
historical people are only �modern humans in funny clothes� in the
biological
sense. Essentially, you are translating without the benefit of an original
text
to work from.
Let�s begin with �blorthmuggen�.
Assuming that the people in the story are speaking translated-into-English,
they might actually be saying blorthmuggen (�Blorthm�, a sharp-edged
fork-like
tool to trim the facial tentacles, filling a vaguely similar function to a
shaving
razor for humans, and �uggen�, a whip, specifically one that splits in two
half-way.), but it translates into English as �Razorwhip� (and from English
to
Swedish as something along the lines of �Gisselgr�s� (scourgegrass),
because
�Rakbladsgr�s� doesn�t sound as good).
Translates-into-English-as-Razorwhip isn't just a name that helps picture
the
plant, but one that whoever was in charge of deciding what to call it in
non-scientific terms might decide on if left to his own devices. (Cf.
cat's-tail)
Blorthmuggen, no matter how accurate, would technically be only slightly
less gratuitous than a Tolkien elf (I forget which ones speak Quenya)
talking
about a field of porisalque, a little Japanese girl picking hana for
Okaasan, or
an Iraqi astronaut exclaiming �By the beard of the Prophet! It�s full of
suha!�.
It is not uncommon for foreign words to sneak into a text, especially in
anime/manga fan fiction and anime-flavoured stories. There are, as far as I
can
tell, two common reasons for this, and both should be avoided:
1. To emphasise/remind the reader that a character is not a native
English-speaker
or not a native speaker of whatever translated-into-English language
everybody else speaks. Because non-English-speakers have trouble remembering
phrases like �Good morning!� and �Mister�.
2. To emphasise/remind the reader that this takes place in a
non-English-speaking
country or that the author knows a smattering of Japanese (or whatever).
Popularly known as Gratuitous Japanese.
For the non-native speaker, try to think of when it makes sense to stumble
or revert to your native language, whether you know a foreign language
at the same level as the character or not. Exclamations (Mein Gott! Sacre
bleu!
Stronzo! etc.), trying to explain difficult things, being under emotional
stress, etc.
For the native translated-into-English speaker�
There is a reason it�s called _Gratuitous_ Japanese. If there is a
functional word
in English which means the same thing and would have been used by an
English-speaker, you use _that_. After all the characters are speaking
translated-into-English, not English with occasional foreign words to
demonstrate
that they�re not actually speaking English. Not �translating� the tricky
bits,
whether phrases, puns, cultural references or individual words, is not an
option.
Note that there are several uncertain or situational cases, like furo (if
the reader
knows what �furo� is, she�ll know what you�re talking about if the story is
set in
Japan and you talk about �bath�), sensei (if you�d use it in English, use
it; if you�d
refer to the person as teacher, coach or whatever in English, don�t use it),
katana
(just as you�d use backsword, seax, schiavone or any other specifically
named
type of sword), miko (just like you'd use sexton or altarboy) and so on.
Honorifics are mostly a matter of taste/�translator�s choice� � all aren�t
exactly
translatable, so it�s up to the �translator� to decide what to use, but
English
have stumbled through without a simple suffix to easily show who has
seniority
for a long time and that doesn�t change just because the story takes place
in
Japan.
Under NO circumstances write something first in Japanese (or whatever) and
then in English, unless someone is actually saying it that way. Even if you
just
finished your first year of Japanese classes. It�s not big or clever, and
those
who are able to appreciate it are most likely better at Japanese than you
are.
On the other hand, with the right explanation/circumstances you might get
away with dropping substituteable foreign words into the text. The most
obvious is with the misguided fool who thinks he�s/it�s cool but there are
more, uhm, creative explanations. One character who has been lurking
around in the pulp-influenced parts of my mind (I doubt I�ll get around to
write him down, let alone use him) is:
A northern European (he�s presumably a Swede, but possibly a Finn, Balt or a
German-descended Russian or Balt) pulp era air pirate with a primarily
German
crew. Even if he�s, technically speaking, fluent in English, chances are
he�ll
use the German terms when talking aviation technology beyond the basics.
Of course, this would likely fall under �trying to explain difficult things�
above.
Which is one reason I�m not sure I�ll ever use him, but that�s a different
story
(and a problem that can be solved with RESEARCH!).
�Culturally specific monsters� (kitsune, tanuki, oni etc.) should not be
translated
unless they�re are nearly identical, using the term amounts to just showing
off (Chinese ghosts may not be nearly identical to English ghosts, but
unless
there�s a story-founded need to keep them separate there�s not much point
in insisting), or if a character of that culture is trying to explain what
it is to
one who is not (and the readers). A tomte/hustomte/g�rdstomte could be
referred to as a brownie, as they share a lot of traits (there are some
differences, but their relevance depends on the story), but what about, say,
selkies?
On the whole, �culturally specific� terms which carry certain connotations
even if they can be approximately translated (samurai, emir, houngan,
marabout, ju-ju, jarl) can usually be left as they are. (Besides, many of
them
are officially recognised as part of the English language.)
Then there is the situation where characters who normally speak
translated-into-English
actually try to speak English. The easiest and most obvious thing is to
simply
note that they are now talking English (or whatever), but what if the
character
is not actually any good at the language?
Well, if you can�t do the/a stereotypical accent (again, research) and maybe
throw in a few �untranslated� words as above, you can try to creatively
mangle
the language.
Some of you may remember a British sitcom called �Allo �Allo, which was set
in France during World War II and included a British agent posing as a
Frenchman
and picked for his fluency in French. Unfortunately, his teachers and the
locals
had different views on proper pronunciation. For once, homophones and
not-quite-homophones are your friends.
(It doesn�t really work in serious works, though.)
The real show-offs have the English-speakers speak the language
translated-into-English untranslated until an interpreter shows up.
One thing more: accents are fun, if done right and not used as a character�s
sole defining trait. (And part of the fun is discussing which accent
translates
into which, and why. Are Osakans Southerners or New Yorkers? Is there any
particular reason Dwarves speaking Common shouldn�t have Jamaican accents?
Is Jar-Jar more acceptable if he has a German accent?)
Of course, as Mr. Yonge just demonstrated, you may have to consider at least
toning it down a bit to make it easier to read.
_________________________________________________________________
L�ttare att hitta dr�mresan med MSN Resor http://www.msn.se/resor/
.---Anime/Manga Fanfiction Mailing List----.
| Administrators - ffml-admins@anifics.com |
| Unsubscribing - ffml-request@anifics.com |
| Put 'unsubscribe' in the subject |
`---- http://ffml.anifics.com/faq.txt -----'