Thread by @DogBarkingBees

I want to expand on this, because it's getting some attention and I feel the need to clarify:

A bad translation isn't "a decision that I disagreed with" -- it's a translation that is objectively wrong, to no service of the target language, and negatively reflects the source.

https://twitter.com/DogBarkingBees/status/1386221503591682049

All of us, especially those of us that have been professional translators and editors, have seen lines that we pick apart in our heads. That's the nature of being someone who works with words.

But a bad translation goes deeper, and is poisonous to the material itself.

Liberties are taken all the time with subtitles. Some are good, some are bad.
And far many more than you realize are actually a better translation than what you think an "accurate" one is.

(but that's for another thread)

But at the end of the day, they're all done in service of the end result. The target language.
Whether that's for stylistic purposes or whatever the may be, they are what they are.
Whether you like them or not is an opinion you're entitled to.

A bad translation is hard to read. Doesn't convey the intent of the source material. Ignores style guides provided by the license holder. Very poor spelling/grammar for the target language. Objectively and subjectively not accurate to the source script.

And there's so much more going on here than just "honshin" and "olnofelk" and "trasnform"

And anybody that licenses Faiz or Agito after this is going to have to clean it up.