Lost in Translation: An Introduction ft. Squid Game

In this week’s What Is, we open a new series dedicated to various considerations of the translation process. Whether from English to Korean or Korean to English, we hope to share how film, drama, and literature translation informs how we understand contemporary social and political issues! 

Intro to Translation: A Crash Course

What exactly is translation? One may answer: the act of “translating” is converting the original message and intention of one language, the source language (SL) to the target language (TL). The process, however, is not that simple. Differences between genres, cultures, periods, and languages can make a translator’s job indescribably challenging. In this post, we hope to introduce translation theory and kick off our conversation on how translation informs or complicates our understanding of contemporary South Korean and American societies and cultures. 

How could anything be lost? 

Simply put, languages are different. English belongs to an “Indo-European language family,” and scholars widely associate Korean as an “isolated language” (Kiaer, 2018). One of the most prevalent differences between English and Korean is their respective syntactic structures. English follows an SVO (subject-verb-object) sentence structure, as in: 

‍

Michael bought a book.

subject       verb         object

‍

Whereas Korean follows an SOV (subject-object-verb) sentence structure, as in: 

‍

마이클이 책을 샀어요.

 Michael  a book bought.

  subject    verb    object

‍

Although the included sample sentences are simple, many translators take on longer sentences with multiple clauses. Translators’ jobs grow even more tedious when we consider tense, plurality, and gender, which are “specified” in English, but “remain unspecified” in Korean (Kiaer, 2018). (More on tense, plurality, and gender in later articles, stay tuned!) Nuances are bound to be lost amid the back and forth game between two unique languages. The challenge then is recognizing the ST’s original meaning and intention among lost information. 

Considering Fidelity vs. Transparency

Another hefty decision translators must make (mostly in literary translation) is the choice between fidelity and transparency. Fidelity refers to “the limits given to a translator[to] depict the underlying message or meaning of the ST” without distortion, exaggeration, or under-translation (Postan, 2020). Examples include transliteration and “direct” translation. On the other hand, transparency refers to the “degree to which a translation caters to native speakers and the target audience,” considering sociolinguistic, cultural, political, and social contexts (Postan, 2020). This best describes adaptations and “idiomatic” translations. 

‍

Consider the following English idiom:

‍

Easy as pie 

‍

If a translator employs fidelity, their direct Korean translation would be: 파이처럼 쉽다. Although English-speakers learning Korean could perhaps understand this, Korean-speakers would not recognize it as the Korean equivalent. 

‍

On the other hand, if a translator chooses transparency, their idiomatic translation would be: 누워서 떡 먹기. This phrase is the Korean equivalent of “easy as pie.” Thus, Korean speakers would understand what “easy as pie” means after reading the English idiom's equivalent. 

‍

We can apply this to both Korean to English and English to Korean translation. Imagine translating “누워서 떡 먹기” into English with fidelity. We would get “lying down while eating a rice cake.” Readers with prior knowledge of the idiom’s Korean cultural reference would understand this. After all, it is a word-for-word translation. What’s there not to understand? Well, readers without prior knowledge of Korean culture and the idiom’s meaning would be left out of the loop. 

Considering Cultural Perspective

Thus, translators must also consider and derive from each language’s unique cultural nuances. TL readers should understand the translation so as not to hinder their experience. For example, a Korean-speaking reader will understand bibimbap (비빔밥), but an English-speaking reader may not. Should translators then transliterate the word to maintain the SL’s “foreignness” (result: bibimbap) or directly translate the menu item (result: mixed rice)? Or should they rely on the readers’ cultural awareness or curiosity? Such debates have become prevalent with globalization and the Korean cultural wave (한류, Hallyu). As media consumers begin to, quite literally, consume Korean food, translators work hard to maintain the SL’s cultural nuance and “foreignness” while also keeping in mind their TL readers’ acquired knowledge. 

Let’s Check out Some Examples

Korean Address Terms

Hallyu exposed many other countries to Korean popular culture and language. Among the Korean language’s many unique characteristics is its honorific system, reflecting South Korea’s social hierarchy and interpersonal respect. Speakers change their speech style depending on their age, social status, gender, and degree of intimacy with those they are speaking to. Address terms (호칭어) are terms used by Korean speakers to address their counterparts. These are, however, different from what English speakers are used to.

Address Terms in Squid Game 

Squid Game is a Netflix-original Korean survival drama directed by Hwang Dong-hyuk. Within less than 28 days, the drama pulled in 111 million viewers worldwide and became Netflix’s biggest debut hit (France-Pesse, 2021). Yet, controversies sparked over possible translation errors. Character Mi-nyeo calls every male character “oppa” (오빠), a term used by women to address older brothers/male friends. Yet, this gets translated as “babe,” a gender-neutral term used for flirting or between lovers. For another example, Character Abdul Ali calls Cho Sang-woo, and other characters, “sajangnim” (사장님), which gets translated to just “boss,” although it signifies Ali’s utmost respect for every character. Cho Sang-woo then tells Abdul to “stop calling him sajangnim” and just use “hyung,” (형), a term used by men to address older brothers and older male friends. However, “hyung” here is translated to “just call me Sang-woo.” Many non-Korean speaking viewers may miss this. Here, we see the inevitable loss of cultural references via translation. 

‍

Conclusion 

Where do we go from here?

The question remains– what challenges does translation pose to us, as various media consumers living in the contemporary era? Squid Game is one of many cases that prove that performing and relying on translation demands a certain level of bilingual cognizance. In other words, as viewers, we may have just as much homework as translators do. This applies to popular culture and how we access other countries’ political and social issues, whether it be from translated news articles, news broadcasts, papers, etc. What are we to do with, say, mistranslation or the lack of crucial details that are lost in the translation process? As contemporary media consumers, how can we best inform ourselves of complications among translated news or translated cultural references? The list of questions will only go on. How can we begin to reconcile these complications? Foreign language education and bilingual non-profit organizations, just like Passionfruit, are resources to help you navigate the seemingly overwhelming world of translation. 

Moving forward

While there is much to consider and debate, one thing is for sure: there can never be a “perfect” translation. The translation process depends on individual choices informed by social, cultural, and political awareness. Even here at Passionfruit, we work hard to represent our source texts, but some words and nuances are inevitably lost. What matters most is our consistent and prolonged effort to stay as aware and faithful to our surrounding cultures as possible. We hope you stay tuned for the rest of our translation series! 

‍