Am I right in presuming you dislike Huey and Dewey calling Fethry their cousin in DuckTales '17?
Well, not as much as I would in the comics or for Gladstone. Fethry is, I think, generally reckoned to be the youngest of Donald's cousins; and 17-HDL are, for their parts, rather older than the comic versions; so they don't feel like they belong to different generations quite as obviously as comics-HDL and comic-Gladstone.
And Scrooge MacDuck was right, the name "Fethry" was pronounced in different ways by different characters. In fact it was hard to put my finger on exactly how it was most commonly pronounced. But I was glad it was always "Cousin Fethry", not "Uncle Fethry" even to the boys; a first cousin once removed is either "a child of one's first cousin" or "one's parent's first cousin". Both Gladstone and Fethry meet the second criteria with respect to HD&L, so both can be accurately called their "cousins" (this seems more accurate than "uncle", in fact).
Glad to know I got it right, but as to "uncle" vs. "cousin", I'm sorry but you're just going to have to accept that "uncle" obviously means something slightly different in the Duckverse than it does in the real world. HDL referring to Gladstone Gander as "Cousin" Gladstone would just feel weird to me, and I think most people would agree. And it's the only way to make sense of the dozen characters whom Donald, Goofy or Mickey have called their "uncles"… or else their grandparents had really big families.
Post by Scrooge MacDuck on Oct 26, 2018 10:11:38 GMT
Does anyone have the title of that Egmont Mickey Mouse story where he and Goofy end up on an island with a carnival fair that entertains various historical figures (cavemen, Conquistadors, an Amelia-Earheart-knockoff), kept there by a goddess? I'm positive that it was printed both in France and in the U.S.A.
Those two series were redundant anyway. They were just printing the same standard type of Mickey and Donald stories that the other publications were.
That's true of Donald & Mickey (which only existed to pally the lack of the actual Donald Duck and Mickey Mouse titles), but not Showcase, at least in theory. Its point was to showcase more unusual characters, which it did for the Phantom Blot and Arizona Goof. It could have gone on, we could have had Showcases for people like Moby Duck, or Pipwolf, or Dickie, or who knows who else. Coulda been brilliant.
I will be honest...I’ve never read these stories in Italian, so I don’t know how true to the original story the translations are or aren’t. Sometimes changes are not the decision of the translatiors, but Disney itself. I do know that all of the writers at IDW that I’ve had the pleasure to talk with all love this stuff and respect the original authors. I’m tired of this endless arguing. It’s one of the reasons that I seldom draw any Disney fan art anymore...this fandom is tiresome. There are days that I just want to shove all of these books in the back of my closet and move on. But I genuinely like the characters, artists, writers and translators and their work, and I’m tired of all of this ruining my appreciation of it. Go ahead and tear this post to pieces. I don’t care anymore.
Oh, this a million times. Most of us are just people with honest, nuanced, reasoned opinions on localization, which we have exposed long ago and are not too interested in shouting at people over and over again. People who are goldarn exasperated that we have to do this over and over.
And then there's a couple of inexplicable people (like jumbojr in this instance) who keep staking the fire.
And we (unlike you) lack the detachment to just let people be wrong, and we have to try and make them understand every time why what they're saying makes no sense.
The person eventually calms down and/or everyone's exasperation becomes such that we leave the thread to die quietly.
Later, when we least expects it, some other user starts up the discussion again.
Rinse and repeat.
(The sad thing is that in this particular case such a discussion was kind of warranted, since there has been a noteworthy change in the ground data in the form of the Fresh And New translations dropping in. But now it's just getting drowned out in a repeat of the same old schlog of an argument that puts everyone on edge for no good reason.)
Bad example. That's not what the previous "dialoguers" were doing. A lot of times they were changing the dialogues to mean something entirely different.
I think you may have misread what I wrote above. I'm not claiming that the Core Four people did "Around the World in 80 Days" — in this example, they'd done "The Amazing Adventures of Phileas Fogg".
What I'm saying is that there's a way to do a honest, good, legible "straight translation". The Core Four people didn't usually do it (I never claimed they did). But neither do the Fresh And New people, because their "directness" is only literal: the Italian versions were also supposed to read like actual things people might say, a fundamental element of what makes the stories work that is all-too-often destroyed by the Fresh And New versions' stiffness.
Oh, also: TheKKM's above comment shows this was not at all made in malice, but Joe Torcivia has emailed me and once again objects to being singled out like this in a way that could be detrimental to his career by painting a false picture of readers' appreciation of his work. (So jumbojr doesn't like it and TheKKM is lukewarm — but many of us love it.)
That's ok. And obviously not all of us appreciate unnecessary changes to the original dialogues.
Again, Jumbo, the problem here is that some of the changes in the Core Four localizations were probably "unnecessary". Some people like them, some people don't. But you're the only one here, I think, who doesn't admit that the Fresh And New translations lack many necessary changes in just basic wording.
Let me give you a practical example of what's going with Ms Brady. No one has ever argued that Around the World in 80 Days is not a fair translation of the title of Jules Verne's Le Tour du Monde en 80 Jours. If the English publishers had called it, say, The Amazing Adventures of Phileas Fogg because they thought it'd sell better, you'd have a point, but Around the World in 80 Days is fine. However, a literal word-for-word translation would have been The Tour of the World in the Span of 80 Days, which is just obviously terrible. You may not want The Amazing Adventures of Phileas Fogg (e.g. Core Four localization), but I cannot conceive why you would think that The Tour of the World in the Span of 80 Days is acceptable.
Nope (usually). In fact, Don Rosa has been known to be quite distressed by it, especially as there were a few changes that very heavily altered the meaning of scenes in his stories.
As someone who reads IDW's comics for entertainment and not the preservation of "Art", I preferred the old scripters.
That's a good translation. Blame the original writer, or ask them to pick better stories.
See my example above of how the dialogue might have been written to mean the same thing, but actually flow as something a native English speaker might actually say. Which the Brady version simply doesn't. Without even going into whether the line makes sense in Italian (which it actually doesn't, really, for the reasons Deb points out), it's simply false to call the Brady version a good translation.
In this case, the story itself does share a lot of the blame, as traditionally, Scrooge doesn’t believe in luck, and attributes his fortune to hard work. While the translation is stiff and humorless, the story is also pretty contrived and shoehorns Scrooge’s personality to fit it.
True, and the story is itself none too great, but see my version above for a take on the line that captures what might have been the original spirit a little better.
What Scrooge is saying here isn't that he attributes his fortune to being lucky, as you might derive from the Brady wordsalad, but instead that he does believe in bad luck and tries to avoid it. Which is consistent with Scrooge: with people like "Big" Jinx (and, later, Gladstone and Magica) in his life, Scrooge can but acknowledge the existence of luck (good and bad) in his universe. And it would simply be daft to delibrate walk into a jinx-giving situation when such things clearly exist. Yet he won't actively seek out good luck either, but just preserve himself from the bad kind.
Post by Scrooge MacDuck on Oct 22, 2018 14:59:21 GMT
What bothers me with the Fresh And New translation is that they're so bad. I have always been on the fence on the matter of localization, and I'd be quite prepared to accept more direct translations from IDW — but "more direct" shouldn't equal "stilted and unnatural".
For example, for the panel you quoted, the Core Four way of handling this would have been to make up a new witty statement from Scrooge. And that's fine. But it would also have been fine, if you wanted a straighter translation, to go with something that has the same meaning as what quoted above, except in a way that sounds like something a human being might actually say. Such as:
It's not particularly clever or interesting, but it doesn't jump out at you and take you out of the story like the Brady version did.
The plots of upcoming episodes (acording to Disney wiki) :
- The Ballad of Duke Baloney! - After his disappearance, Glomgold resurfaces as anything but his ever-scheming self, while Webby and Louie try to uncover the truth behind who is Duke Baloney.
(DRAT! Looks like they realy change the spelling in the characters name)
So it is the Duke of Baloni, and they do make something of his 2nd-richest-ness! I think that's worth the alternate spelling.