Different choice of words between traditional and simplified versions.

[HSC]

I have often seen manuals and other texts with both simplified and traditional character versions and it is never that the two texts are the same, one simply being a simplified character version of the other. For example, Harry Potter 6 is now available in both versions and the first chapter in each version begins as follows:

時近午夜，首相獨自坐在辦公室裡，閱讀一份冗長的備忘錄，但眼前的字句輕輕滑過他的腦海，完全沒留下半點痕跡。

已经快接近午夜了，首相一个人坐在他的办公室里看着一份长长的备忘录，可他一点儿也没读进去。

The traditional version starts with 時近 whereas the simplified form's equivalent is （快）接近. The traditional version uses 獨自 for 一个人.

Can someone comment on the difference in word usage? Is it because the traditional version is geared towards Taiwanese readers or some other audience and these alternative words are closer to a regionalect? Or is it simply a matter of two different translators？

The simplified version is, of course, geared towards mainland China and I recognize more words and constructs as standard Putonghua, such as 看着一份长长的 as opposed to 阅读一份冗长的. But I'm not clear as to what the influence is when using traditional form since the languages of traditional character users, i.e. overseas Chinese, Hong Kong people and Taiwanese, can vary drastically.

[zhwj]

You've got several things going on here, as you correctly assume.

First, in your Harry Potter example, the two texts are actually different translations, produced independently by different sets of translators. That they are in different character sets is merely incidental; you can find the same variety among translations that use only simplified characters.

Second, "manuals and other texts" probably are going for clarity over anything else, so they'd use the vocabulary and character set of whichever region they were marketing to, essentially producing two separate translations (I've yet to see distinctions made within character sets, say for Hong Kong vs. Taiwan, but I wouldn't rule it out). Cell phones are another nice example.

Essentially, the translators are using whatever form of the language they are most familiar with, and then dressing up the style as they see fit. To me, the traditional example you provide reads more literary-like, while the simplified is done in a breezier style.

[HSC]

So if someone speaks, say, Mandarin and know simplified characters well and is familiar with traditional characters, he would indeed be able to read the traditional version without thinking that it sounded weird? (by "weird" I don't mean literary)... or would he just consider it literary?

I think these two translations should have been a joint effort. The English version is also very literary in describing that "the prime minister was reading a long memo that was slipping through his brain without leaving the slightest trace behind."

On a separate note, does "没读进去" mean to read but not absorb? Is this a fixed phrase?

Thanks in advance for your response.

[Quest]

So if someone speaks, say, Mandarin and know simplified characters well and is familiar with traditional characters, he would indeed be able to read the traditional version without thinking that it sounded weird? (by "weird" I don't mean literary)... or would he just consider it literary?

The simplified version uses simpler language and reads like it's from a children's book (probably intended). I think if your "someone" was an adult, he would enjoy reading the traditional version better. The only times when one version would sound weird to users of the other character set would be when slangs, dialects or localized technical terms were used. Other than that, both are perfectly Chinese and should be understood by an educated Chinese without much problem. The differences are just different translations and styles, they are both written in the same language.

On a separate note, does "没读进去" mean to read but not absorb? Is this a fixed phrase?

It means litterally "not read into [the brain]". You can also say 没读进脑. I would say it's a constructed phrase not a fixed one since it's not a 成语 and you can break down the phrase using modern grammar.

[Mugi]

I think these two translations should have been a joint effort.

Political reasons aside, probably unwise. Mainland China, Taiwan, Hong Kong, etc, all have different literary traditions. In general, readers in Taiwan have different expectations of written text from mainland Chinese, and indeed will evaluate the appropriateness of a given text differently.

It even happens in English. I know that at least some of the Harry Potter books have been significantly re-edited for the American market - not just the spelling, but individual words and even sentence constructs...

[atitarev]

Interesting topic. Our Taiwanese lady-friend (originally) from Taiwan told us that she didn't like expressions from China, she understood them well. She thought they were primitive. Maybe the mainlanders think the same about other Chinese writers (outside China) but they are probably affected in mainland by restrictions, controls and censorships and also who gets to write and publish. I started reading some short stories - the way they are phrased remind me of the Communist time in Russia but in a very exaggerated way.

[in_lab]

HSC, do you know if the characters' Chinese names are consistent?

[xiaocai]

but they are probably affected in mainland by restrictions, controls and censorships and also who gets to write and publish. I started reading some short stories - the way they are phrased remind me of the Communist time in Russia but in a very exaggerated way.

I don't think so. It is more about the content but has little ralationship to the way of writing, at least here you can see the obvious difference from Harry Potter which has nothing to do with the restrictions, controls and censorships.

I feel the readers from mainland like me are less "picky" than your Taiwanese lady-friend, cause for me using simple words is not always "primitive". And considering the biggest market of this book in China is primary school students, it could be an adavantage.

[skylee]

Both versions are ok with me, but I think I would prefer the version in traditional characters. It is just better written IMHO.

[HSC]

in_lab,

No, I don't know if the names are consistent as I really only read the English version. It was just out of curiosity that I looked at the two Chinese versions. I am still not able to read in Chinese fast enough so I end up getting frustrated and reverting to the English version

For those of you who are better at this, here are the two links that will give you each of the versions:

哈利·波特 混血王子的背叛 （繁體中文版）

哈利·波特 混血王子的背叛 （简体中文版）

[bathrobe]

I've had a look at the Simplified Chinese link. Judging from the chapter titles, it is not the official translation of the book, it's an amateur translation.

[jukebox]

Interestingly, more Classical Chinese（文言文） lessons in textbooks are taught in Taiwan than in China mainland, so people in Taiwan maybe somewhat tend to use more classical way of speaking and writing.

IMHO, I like the simplified Chinese translation of Harry Potter better, considering that the book is mainly for kids, though the sentences of CHT version is pretty beautiful.

But both sides of the straight is now regulating the amount of classical Chinese lessons in textbooks.

Taiwan High School

Grade 1 ratio from 55 % to 40%

Grade 2 65% - > 45%

Grade 3 75% -> 50%

China high schools, on the contrary, is boosting Classical Chinese texts from average 28% to 40%.

[chefintheprc]

Wow…I’m glad I cook….

[xichg]

Peronally I think the two versions are just having two different styles, formal and informal, or written language and spoken language. It doesn't have too much with them being in traditional Hanzi or Simplified Hanzi. Since the target audience is yong kids, I think the simplified hanzi version is much better. Although I have no difficulty understanding the traditonal version, it seems to me too formal, rigid and too decorative. I think that's a little hobby of some people, showing off their master of classic Chinese and making the writting unnecessarily difficult to impress others. It does reminds me of some Taiwan or Hong Kong translations of the titles of Hollywood movies. Big name, very impressive, very awe-inspiring, but has nothing to do witht the original title or the content of the movies.

[Ferno]

(I've yet to see distinctions made within character sets, say for Hong Kong vs. Taiwan, but I wouldn't rule it out).

I thought HK-specific Chinese is rather different? Surely if you're going to change the word choice between Mandarin speaking China and Mandarin speaking Taiwan, why wouldn't there be changes when you are exporting this to a Cantonese-speaking population who have different character word choice due to their spoken language?

[HSC]

Ferno,

From what I understand, it seems that Cantonese speakers tend not to write the same way they speak. Writing Chinese using extended Cantonese-specific characters and the such has traditionally been reserved for informal writings though that might be changing in Hong Kong now as it seems the government is really pushing for standardizing these additional characters and they are even part of the Unicode standard now (as far as I know).

For example, a Cantonese friend of mine told me that if she saw a phrase like "英皇道在哪里", she would automatically translate it into "英皇道係邊度啊 (jing1 wong4 dou6 hai2 bin6 dou6 aa?)" if she had to read it aloud in Cantonese.

I don't think that any newspaper, for example, would publish in the latter form, as that would be considered too informal or colloquial. Anybody know more about this?

[skylee]

I agree with HSC.

[Ferno]

yes I remember we had a long, and interesting, thread about this stuff earlier but I was unable to discern a single conclusion from it. This "translate on the fly" stuff is new to me though, especially if you're actually adding words - seems kind of tough, especially since people will give you the idea that it's all "one chinese"...

[HSC]

As far as I know, only Cantonese seems to take it to that length. Taiwanese has unique words too, but I don't think that there is any de facto informal written Taiwanese to go with it.

Seems like it's inevitable that if a speaker of a Chinese "regionalect" wants to learn to read/write Chinese, he/she must learn Mandarin Chinese to some extent.

As for the translation on the fly - Mandarin text to Cantonese speech - I guess if you are fluent in both, it's not too hard; seems to just happen naturally as voicing the exact characters with Cantonese pronunciation sounds weird.

It's almost like giving the hanzi alternate pronunciations, so everytime you see 在那里，you automatically say "hai bin dou (a)". 男孩 is automaticaly "pronounced" naam4 zai2 (男仔) instead of naam4 haai4，etc. Again, I'm pretty sure that if you're fluent in both, it's not a big deal.

However, if you have to learn both...