Talk:Hoichi the Earless

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is part of the Japanese mythology WikiProject, which aims to improve and expand Wikipedia's coverage of Japanese mythology. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.[FAQ]
???	This article has not yet received an importance rating within Japanese mythology.

[edit] Requested move

Article was initially created with an awkward and obscure translation of the Japanese name, and then a redirect page was created with the more common and appropriate name shortly afterwards. I have never seen the name "Earless Hoichi" used outside this Wikipedia article, but Kwaidan: Stories and Studies of Strange Things (the main source for the myth), Kwaidan (film) and The Dream of a Summer Day all use "Hoichi the Earless" (although the second only in subtitle, of course). elvenscout742 01:11, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

---

• Support. elvenscout742 01:11, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose. waka 09:43, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
• Support - based on discussion below, and that H the E is 10x more common on .edu sites. Rd232 ^talk 23:20, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

This article has been renamed as the result of a move request. Dragons flight 05:34, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion

Hearn's original text does translate "Mimi-nashi Hoichi" as "Hoichi the Earless," but only at the very end of the story. The main title of his work is THE STORY OF MIMI-NASHI-HÔÏCHI. However, I think that Hearn's translation is a little dated, and "Earless Hoichi" is a better rendering of the name in modern English. The form <aspect adjective> <title> is still commonly used in Japanese, but it's usually translated as "<aspect adjective> <title>" rather than "<title> the <aspect adjective>" because the latter usage is uncommon in modern English. For example, we could translate 欲張りおじいさん (yokubari ojiisan) as "Old Man The Greedy," but "greedy old man" would be much more natural. Though there is some precedent for translating "Mimi-nashi Hoichi" as "Hoichi the Earless," I've also seen it written as Earless Hoichi (here, here, and here, for example), so I don't think that the translation is particularly clumsy. Given that the article under either name will require redirects (both translations must point at the content one way or another), I think that the existing page and its associated redirects are more than sufficient. --waka 09:43, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Well, the fact is that even if Hearn's translation is still the most prominent English source on the story. Indeed, the first of the three Internet sources you quote includes his translation with "Hoichi-the-Earless" and only says "Earless Hoichi" in the introduction. The third is a Japanese-language site and therefore the English translation is just a translation, not a proper rendition in good English (it calls Hearn "Yakumo Koizumi", which is not correct by any standard). "<PERSONAL NAME> the <TITLE>" works just fine in modern English (Alexander the Great and Theodoric the Great, for example). Besides, current translation trends do not matter, as the character has an English language name as given him by a fine writer over a century ago. The character's name is "Hoichi the Earless".A Google search will reveal that most Internet sources that use "Earless Hoichi" are either English translations of Japanese sites (probably by native Japanese unfamiliar with Hearn's reputable English version) or informal discussions of either Kobayashi's film or Hearn's book, both of which officially support the "Hoichi the Earless" stance.

Okay, this looks like it could lead to problems, as neither of us will give up our claims and few other Wikipedians will understand or join in. Can you think of any way to resolve this, being one of the only two people I informed of this movement? (The other, User:Jefu, apparently only editted this article because of an interest Wikipedia's naming conventions on Japanese Emperors.) elvenscout742 21:11, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

While I totally see your point, I think that renaming the page will do little to increase the quality of the content. As I mentioned before, both translations are applicable and thus redirects will be required either way. As of right now, searching Wikipedia for either translation will bring you to the correct page, which I believe is the most important aspect of the name. I think we've made our points, but I would like to point out that we have already changed Hearn's original words because they are dated; we've discarded the dated romanization scheme he used by referring to this work as "Hoichi the Earless" rather than "Hôïchi-the-Earless." My point is that the name of this story is 耳なし芳一, and that any translation into English is just that: a translation. I don't think we should tie the content to any specific translation, which is why I don't feel that renaming the page is particularly useful. --waka 21:21, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

If it doesn't make much difference either way (and I don't think it does) there's no reason not to respect the Wikipedia convention of using the most established English usage. Rd232 ^talk 23:20, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

That's fine with me as long as the existing Hoichi the Earless redirects are replaced by similar Earless Hoichi redirects. My main concern is that people unfamiliar with the dated translation used by Hearn and others will have trouble finding the page if they know the Japanese name. As long as both names point at the content, I don't really care what it says at the top of the page. And I think there is probably a legit point about the precedence of the Hearn translation; I'm probably warped because I read this story in Japanese long before I found it in English.--waka 07:03, 30 November 2005 (UTC)