I know I'm opening a huge can of worms, but here goes.

As translators, what is the right way to handle "offensive" content? Who determines what gets "left in", and what gets "censored"?

A long thread about translation theory, ethics in localization, and capitalism.

[NOTE: Let me be clear: I don't condone racism, sexual assault, pedophilia, or anything like that. The arguments in this thread do NOT defend or argue for the normalization of said acts.

I'm here to discuss the topic from from an academic point of view (sociology, TL theory).]

First, let's start off with some basics about language, culture, and context.

Then, we'll talk about ethics in translation and moral responsibility.

Finally, we'll look into the real-world (capitalist) influences that determine what gets "left in" and what gets "censored".

1. CONTEXT IS KING.

By this point, we all know that translation isn't 1-to-1. Translating anything, whether it's an instruction manual or a full-length movie, goes WAY beyond the words on the page.

It all comes down to one thing: context.

We're all familiar with how context can change the meaning of a word, sentence, or action. It's a staple of comedy all over the world. Misunderstandings, characters acting inappropriately, fish-out-of-water humor, and of course, this classic.

Put simply, context is additional information that affects the meaning of a word, event, or action.

Take the word "tie". Depending on how it's used in a sentence, it could mean:
- A common item of clothing
- The act of joining two things together
- An equal score

Homonyms are an example of intratextual context, or information INSIDE the text that affect meaning. Let's talk about extratextual context -- information that comes from OUTSIDE the text that affect meaning.

Here are a few sentences that can be interpreted differently based on the extratextual context:

"Okay, Karen."
"We're no strangers to love."
"Check out that bear."

Extratextual context affects more than just jokes, though. Historical events and current cultural attitudes also affect the interpretation of phrases that might seem innocuous without said context:

"I have a dream."
"I can't breathe."
"Work sets you free."

We're all aware that every culture has their own ideas about what is 'acceptable'. See: greeting a friend with a kiss in France.

This is true of smaller cultures, too: you can clap after a solo at a jazz concert, but shouldn't clap until the end of a symphony.

Cultures can change on a dime, too. The pandemic has rapidly changed our outlook on things like "inviting the family over for grandma's 100th birthday".

Look back 300 years, and you'll see even bigger changes: Interracial marriage? Women owning property? Scandalous back then.

Now that I've explained the obvious, let's get back to translation.

Because language is so inseparably bound to culture and history, a translator needs to be hyperaware of its influence on the words they translate, not only in the source language, but in the target, too.

Often times, this manifests as tiny bumps and twists that require a bit more thought.

If you're translating a Japanese game, you might want to find a new name for a monster called ホーンドッグ ("HORNDOG").

(Unless it's MEANT to be a sexual innuendo, in which case, HELL YEAH!)

While that change is REACTIVE to the Japanese text, translators also make PROACTIVE changes, too. This means adjusting the wording or visuals in the target language to better express the same meaning to a new audience.

Take, for example, the names of some Pokemon adapted for English: "Zenigame" ('pond turtle') vs. "Squirtle" ('squirt' + 'turtle').

Pixar and Disney leverage proactive localization in their films, too. Take a look here:

This process of reactively or proactively changing content to better express meaning to the target audience is a key part of the translation process. In the industry, we call it "cultural adaptation", or "localization".

There is no translation without localization.

(SIDE NOTE: Notice that "localization" is a neutral term. It applies to Pokemon names, Pixar films, and yes, even the removal of 'offensive content'. Localization is not inherently good or bad. It is the name of a process, nothing more.)

I'm not here to argue what is or isn't offensive in a certain culture. That's not for any one person to decide. Rather, it's decided by the majority of members of a certain group or culture.

It's on the translator and publishers to recognize content that is offensive to their target culture and a wider audience.

(Of course, slip-ups occur--we can't be perfect! That's when we need to retroactively go back and adjust or remove offensive content.)

What happens, then, when a translator encounters this kind of content in the text they're translating? Where do our responsibilities lie?

What ethics guide our final decision?

2. ETHICS IN TRANSLATION

The notion of ethics in translation has been discussed for eons, and applies to everything from "when is it morally right to break NDA on a project?" to "can a translator be trusted to work on something they disagree with on a moral level?"

For now, let's focus on our first question: how should a translator handle something considered 'offensive' in their target culture?

To answer this, we need to talk about responsibility, or rather, WHO the translator needs to consider when making an ethical decision.

First, THEMSELVES. Is this something you can translate in a non-biased way? Will translating this impact your physical health (taking on a rush project late at night) or mental health (carefully wording the details of a rape testimony)?

Will you cause harm to YOURSELF?

THE AUTHOR. What role does this visual or event play in the author's narrative? Why did the author include it? Did the author MEAN for it to be offensive? Would the author be offended by the changes you want to make to their art?

Will you cause harm to the AUTHOR?

THE AUDIENCE: What effect would retaining this visual or event have on the intended audience? What portion of the intended audience would be offended or harmed by this content? Alternatively, would removing this content cause more harm than good?

(This pertains more to content localized for children than anything. See: blood and guns removed from 4Kids releases of One Piece, or the Batman TV series vs. The Dark Knight.)

Finally, THE CLIENT: Would altering this content break the agreed-upon terms of contract with your client? If your client was made aware of this change, would they condone it, or condemn it?

Would altering this content in a certain way harm the CLIENT?

AUDIENCE and CLIENT are integral to translation in more ways than you might think!

For example, if I was translating Song of the South for Japanese children, I'd take a MUCH different approach than I would for Tokyo U scholars of American Culture studying race in media.

Again, I'm not here to argue what's right and what's wrong, simply state the facts.

In America in 2021, publishing material that is considered by a wide majority of your potential audience to be 'offensive' is economically damaging to individuals, companies, and corporations.

The extent of the economic damage varies depending on the content, the publisher, and the offended audience, which is why it's difficult to predict the extent of said damage.

So when publishers are made aware of potentially damaging content for which they will be responsible, they tend to make the final decision on whether that content is removed, altered, or retained in the published version.

These publishers are also aware that removing or altering content will likely produce some amount of backlash. If the potential damage due to 'censorship' is less than the potential damage due to 'offensive content', it will likely be 'censored'.

There's no malice behind the decision, no anger or disdain for the author or content. It's capitalism, through and through.

4. CONCLUSION & ADDITIONAL THOUGHTS

"Katrina, you haven't even answered the question. What IS the right way to handle offensive content?"

I know you're going to hate me, but there's no one-size-fits-all answer. Language and culture are extremely complicated.

So much affects these decisions.

How do you determine if the material is offensive?

How do you decide to change the offensive material?

How would the author react to your decision? Your audience? Your client?

How could your decision impact you, your client, or your audience?

As always, it's the people, culture, and history surrounding the content in question that determine not only its meaning, but what we, as translators, must do to ethically handle it.

In the end, it all comes down to context.

ASIDE: MEDIA FORMAT AND ADAPTATION

Certain forms of media are easier to adapt and change than others.

BOOK: lmao it's just words, move around shit, change it, gg no re.

LIVE-ACTION MOVIE (SUB): fuck they say the words out loud AND my audience knows that's a racial slur, fml

ASIDE: SO MUCH IS OUT OF OUR HANDS

Publishers and authors get the last say on a lot of things in a translation, such as:

- whether or not content is removed or added
- the spellings of names ("Syo" vs. "Sho")
- titles and terminology ("Attack on Titan")

ASIDE: ETHICS AND THE HEIRONYMIC OATH

While there's no widely agreed-upon Hippocratic Oath for translators (though a Heironymic Oath has been proposed multiple times), there are plenty of associations and companies that have compiled their own Codes of Ethics. 1/2

For starters, the American Translators Association has their own Code of Ethics, readable here: 2/2

https://atanet.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/code_of_ethics_commentary.pdf

FINALLY: any youtubers/video editors are more than welcome to cannibalize this twessay if you let me help out, i am but a humble translator, i have no time for video editing