Talk:Translations of The Lord of the Rings
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
A fact from Translations of The Lord of the Rings appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on 29 February 2008. |
 |
Contents |
[edit] Wikilinks
One user regards my linking of grammatical terms as "hilarous" overlinking. I submit that, in an article about translation, wikilinks to related terms translation, literal translation, proper noun, loanword, inflection, nonstandard dialect, and cognate are well within the terms of MOS:LINK and WP:CONTEXT. jnestorius(talk) 17:51, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
- it's not a big deal, but not in my book: you don't link to general vocabulary. This leads to ugly text where about every other word is wikilinked, so that the terms that are actually are relevant are lost in the noise. I also object to wikifying 3 July on general principle. I am sorry to be blunt, but that's a disastrous policy. You link 3 July when it is of some importance that some event took place on a 3rd of July, you don't wikilink dates that are just mentioned in passing for completeness as is the case here. Autoformatting isn't a reason to mess up wikification, there can easily be solutions to autoformat dates without wikifying them. Autoformatting dates only when wikified is a Bad Idea. If you want to implement that, some sort of smart template should be used. dab (𒁳) 23:11, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
-
- As regards wikifying dates, MOS:DATE#Autoformatting and linking states "Full dates, and days and months, are normally autoformatted by inserting double square-brackets, as for linking." This is so users can see "3 July" or "July 3" according to their preference. MOS:DATE#Do not put square brackets around dates when lists some limited exceptions. If you don't like that, you might take it up at Wikipedia:Date debate rather than simply defying it.
- As regards "general vocabulary", I don't think words like "cognate" or "inflection" are general vocabulary (unlike, say, "spider" or "she"). I imagine plenty of Tolkien fans arriving at this article will not know what those words mean. Ugliness is in the eye of the beholder, of course, and reasonable people can differ; but removing a link simply because there are already a threshold of wikilinks in a given sentence/paragraph/article would be placing style over substance. In this article's current form, nearly all wikilinks are to proper names (though not to "proper names" :) I think this is an arbitrary prejudice: literal translation seems more relevant to the topic than Gyldendals Bibliotek. One reason I favour more links rather than fewer is that, whatever about stylistic considerations, deciding which links are sufficiently "relevant" can provoke unnecessary substantive debates. jnestorius(talk) 19:28, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
-
[edit] movie impact
One q that comes to my mind is; after the latest blockbuster movies were released, there ought to have emerged various versions of the movies with dubbing/subtitles in other languages than the ones that the book triology is published in (Hindi, Arabic are two cases that immediately comes to my mind). Do we know anything on translations of names into such languages? Is there any authoritative source, so that one hasn't to enter into original research? --Soman (talk) 12:21, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
It appears that there is a Chinese translation now. But I cannot quite figure out when it first appeared (1998?), or whether it is complete. Mere transliterations of names into the Arabic script aren't exactly "translations". The best compilation of translations I could find online is here (search for "На какие языки"). Quite a few translations have appeared since the movies came out, Basque, Indonesian, Latvian, Ukrainian, Albanian, and it may be that some of these responded to a market created by the movies. dab (𒁳) 16:07, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
it is in any case interesting to note that the 2000s is the decade during which the most translations appeared. More even than during the 1970s. dab (𒁳) 17:33, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Chinese translation?
The Chinese article appears to mention it,
- 在臺灣，聯經出版公司於2001年出版、由朱學恆翻譯的三部曲繁體中文版受到廣泛認可，賣出數十萬冊的佳績。
- 在大陸，譯林出版社於2002年出版簡體中文版的《魔戒》三部曲，由三人各翻譯一部，因连贯性等问题受到一些愛好者的批評。
but I don't exactly read Chinese... It seems to involve some guy called Lucifer Chu, which leads me to an article at taipeitimes.com. So, the appearance of the Chinese translation is indeed tied up with that of Jackson's movies. Interesting. dab (𒁳) 16:13, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
- I'm not sure I understand the Chinese title. "魔戒之王" appears to mean something like "lord of evil magic". But the title is also given simply as "魔戒". The Chinese translation of "The Lord of the Rings" appears to be "指环王". dab (𒁳) 16:28, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Redirect
Why does "Guide to the names in The Lord of the Rings" redirect here? 76.252.28.142 (talk) 16:50, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Comic Book Guy from The Simpsons
Is it worthy to note that Comic Book Guy from The Simpsons as part of his masters degree in Mythology translated all three Lord of the Rings Books into Klingon for his Thesis?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gordybingham (talk • contribs) 12:21, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
- Er, maybe in Comic Book Guy's article, but I can't see how it's notable here. Phoenixrod (talk) 01:47, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
