contributing editor into J
Mika Jarmusz
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contributing_editor
"... does not actually edit articles, and the title is largely honorary. "
contributing editorとは、
○ 単に寄稿する人。
× 寄稿を編集する役割はない。
× 編集を補助する人でも、補助的な編集を加える人でもない。
コントリビューティングエディターとは何ですか、という質問のページに、
"直訳すると「寄稿編集者」という意味ですね。 "
という回答があります。
(http://minna.13hw.com/forum/viewthread/3828/)
ここでも「直訳すると」と前置きとしてあるように、
寄稿＋編集者 という取り合わせは、
不思議な翻訳調です。
Those two words 寄稿 and 編集 put together just seem incompatible and ghostly to my ear.
寄稿 can only be done from the outside, whereas 編集 is always done on the inside. It's NOT about the contributor being off-site, a third-party, or working via email. You just can't be a person of both inside and outside wearing a single "contributing editor" hat. It seems to me that in English, a contributing writer can be upgraded to a contributing editor without causing this serious conflict. When translating into Japanese, I'd have to designate "contributing editor" as the outside person. So, the translation would be something like 特別寄稿者、ゲスト寄稿者.
Mika Jarmusz 清水美香
English to Japanese Translator
http://inJapanese.us
Alan Siegrist
> Another translator asked me some time ago how contributing editor should
> be translated into Japanese. I'm not trying to change how it's being
> translated already by others, but I'd like to share my observation as to
> why 寄稿編集者 or 補助編集員 doesn't work for me as its translation.
I understand your difficulty. I worked for an English-language magazine in Tokyo. I started out as simply a translator, but eventually acquired the title "Associate Editor" in addition to translator. Even though they called me Associate Editor, I did not have many editorial duties other than doing some proofreading at press time. I was able to proof the galleys faster than some of the other real editors, so this was a useful skill when we were faced with short press deadlines.
So even though I did almost no editing, they called me an editor. I also did occasionally do some minor reporting and interviewing work for the magazine, but again this really is not what I would consider "editing" work.
I thought it was strange, but it sounded nice to have the title Associate Editor so I did not object. In the publishing world, they seem to like throwing around the title "editor" as a mark of prestige. I never had a Japanese-language 名刺 so I don't know exactly what the Japanese equivalent would be. The magazine was in English, so of course I appeared with the title Associate Editor on the masthead.
I think this is the same as in "contributing editor" which is largely an honorary role.
Unfortunately, this does not really help you in deciding what the proper Japanese equivalent would be. I wonder, though, if you could work around the problem by using a title such as 寄稿者・名誉編集者.
Regards,
Alan Siegrist
Orinda, CA, USA
Fred Uleman
FWIW,
-- -- -- -- -- --
Fred Uleman
Alan Siegrist
> If asked to translate "contributing editor" into Japanese, my first
> impulse would be 論説委員 (ronsetsu iin).
Isn't the 論説委員 the person or persons that write the editorials for a
publication? I am pretty sure that editorials are usually presented as the
official position or opinions of that publication on the matter at hand, so
it seems unlikely that they would be "contributed" by a contributing editor,
who seems to be presented as someone outside the organization despite being
a regular contributor.
The editorials are an "in-house" thing, as far as I know.
Fred Uleman
That said, I note that Wikipedia says:
"A contributing editor is a magazine job title that varies in responsibilities. Most often, a contributing editor is a freelancer who has proven ability and readership draw. The contributing editor regularly "contributes" articles to the publication, but does not actually edit articles, and the ("editor" part of the) title is largely honorary. At smaller magazines the title may imply a staff member with regular writing responsibility and some editorial duties." (four words in parens added by me)
Adding 客員 or something to emphasis the person's freelance status would be a possibility. But is it necessary? Or is the contributing editor someone who is in-house but also able to moonlight outside? (Someone who has semi-star status and hence has a longer leash than other in-house writers?) And how firm is the dividing line between editorials and advocacy articles of the sort James Fallows, for example, used to contribute?
Too many questions, I know. But they may be pointing in the same direction: Rather than translate the words in the title, we need to know what this or that individual actually does and then try to describe that in a title of equivalence.
Again, FWIW,
Tom Donahue
> Adding 客員 or something to emphasis the person's freelance status
> would be a possibility.
That's a good idea.
Going on Mika's idea of "outside", I tried 外部編集員, which does
get a few hits, but not much evidence that these people are
called "contributing editors" in English.
www.dhbr.net/magazine/out.html
客員 sounds good and gets at least one real hit.
今年度版報告書の客員編集員を務めた著名な開発経済学者ジェフリー・サックス氏
www.unic.or.jp/new/pr03-066.htm
Guest Contributing Editor Jeffrey Sachs
hdr.undp.org/en/media/hdr03_complete.pdf
--
Tom Donahue
Shinya Suzuki
> コントリビューティングエディターとは何ですか、という質問のページに、
> "直訳すると「寄稿編集者」という意味ですね。 "
> という回答があります。
> (http://minna.13hw.com/forum/viewthread/3828/)
> ここでも「直訳すると」と前置きとしてあるように、
> 寄稿＋編集者 という取り合わせは、
> 不思議な翻訳調です。
contributing editors のcontributingの意味ですが、以下の二つが考えられま
す。
A: (Those who) contribute to the editorial process
B: (Those who) contribute articles (regularly) to a magazine/journal
私見では、単にBをするだけではeditorとは呼べないと思いますが、現実的にはB
のようなcontributing editorsの実例もあると思います（job title inflation!）。
Aが本来の意味だと思いますが、Aの他にBもするような人をあえて、
contributing editorと呼ぶ場合もあると思います。
以下に、いろいろな例を引用します（下になるにつれて、AからBの要素が大きく
なる？）。
(1)
Contributing editors are expected to review articles before their
submission to MacTech. Editors should confirm that articles are
technically accurate, that they present the ideas of the article
in an engaging and informative manner, and that the articles meet
MacTech submission guidelines.
http://www.mactech.com/news/?p=1001990
(2)
Contributing editors are scholars from around the United States and
elsewhere in a number of disciplines, who will provide peer review,
thematic suggestions, and occasionally guest-editing of particular
issues as requested by the editorial board.
http://biblioteca.rrp.upr.edu/LatCritCD/Publications/Clave/CLAVEOrigAnnouncement.pdf
(3)
Contributing Editors play a key role in the newsletter by providing
essential content, including information on conferences and symposia,
fellowships, books by the International Conference community members,
opportunities to publish, and additional items of interest.
http://ijt.cgpublisher.com/diary?month=2008-05
(4)
A contributing editor gets regular writing assignments from us,
participates in web-based staff meetings, and gets their name on our
magazine masthead as a contributing editor in each issue, whether or not
they actually contributed anything to that specific issue.
http://model-railroad-hobbyist.com/contribute
> Those two words 寄稿 and 編集 put together just seem incompatible and ghostly to
> my ear.
>
> 寄稿 can only be done from the outside, whereas 編集 is always done on the
> inside. It's NOT about the contributor being off-site, a third-party, or
> working via email. You just can't be a person of both inside and outside
> wearing a single "contributing editor" hat. It seems to me that in English,
> a contributing writer can be upgraded to a contributing editor without
> causing this serious conflict. When translating into Japanese, I'd have to
> designate "contributing editor" as the outside person. So, the translation
> would be something like 特別寄稿者、ゲスト寄稿者.
contributing editorはあくまでeditorなので、「○○編集者（員）」を使わざ
るを得ないと思います。従って、「△△寄稿者」は、editorial processに全く
関与しないことが明らかな場合を除いて、使えないと思います。
一般的には、Tom Donahueさんの「客員編集員（者）」あたりが有力候補になる
と思いますが、「寄稿をよくする編集者」なら、「寄稿編集者」でも直訳的です
が誤訳とは言えないと思います。
Shinya Suzuki
Mika Jarmusz
writerよりも格が上だというニュアンスが聞こえてくるのに対し、
日本語の「編集者」にはそのニュアンスが、あまりないことです。
（もちろん日本にも有能な編集者は多々おられるとは思いますが。）
http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%B7%A8%E9%9B%86%E8%80%85
によれば、日本語の「編集者」は
1. 著作的な編集を行う人。編纂者・編者（編著者）に同じ。
2. 出版業界用語で、編集実務を担当する職業人（本項で詳述）。
<snip>
いわば匿名性のなかで仕事をすすめていくのが、編集者の仕事の特質のひとつである。
－－－－－－－－－－－－－－
>「寄稿編集者」でも直訳的ですが<snip>
そう。説明しにくくてもやはり直訳的ですね。
contributing editorの場合、
上記１．のような中心的存在ではもちろんありませんから、
それにあやかった敬称として使うわけにもいかず、
「寄稿編集者」という称号からは余り特別な印象は伝わりません。
それどころか、海の物とも山の物ともつかない付け焼き刃な印象があります。
ただし編集員、編集委員というと、響きが良くなります。
員・委員の文字が「特殊な役職」であることを示唆するからでしょうか。
客員編集員、客員編集委員なら
distinguishedのニュアンスも伝わります。
どうしても「editor＝編集」という言葉を使わなければならないのなら、
私もこちらにするかもしれません。
ただ贅沢を言えば、「客員」という限りは
実際に訪問するwarm bodyが
必要な気がするのですが？
とにかく、「者」の一文字が問題だったでしょうか？
それにしても、内部の編集作業にまで手出しをしない
単なる寄稿者であることが明白なcontributing editorであれば、
結局は「特別寄稿」ということですよね？
実際に編集作業に手を貸す（鈴木さんのAの）
contributing editorは「編集協力」でいいのではないでしょうか。
Mika Jarmusz
I wonder, though, if you could work around the problem by using a title such as 寄稿者・名誉編集者.
Fred Uleman
Equally, is this "contributing" that s/he contributes articles -- which is the way I understand it -- or contributes generally to the publication?
My understanding is that the person has no editing responsibilities but contributes articles on a reasonably regular basis. Perhaps somebody who freelances widely but this publication is his/her "home base." More prestigious than "staff writer" because of the freedom to publish elsewhere, but uses this publication for identification purposes.
(Note the need to avoid suggesting that articles by this person are special occasions or cameo appearances in the publication. They are not. They are something you can expect every so often.)
--
Fred Uleman
LOgasawara
was precisely what I was asking Mika for help with. Interestingly, the
same word is being used for 1 person who has some editing abilities
(in addition to articles) and another who regularly contributes
articles with no editing. I suppose the English itself just is aiming
at this "home base" kind of association.
I think I went with something like this (I'll go back and look and
email later)
寄稿・編集者
Leanne Ogasawara
goodle
http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Contributing+editor
にあるようにいろいろと翻訳できそうですが、まだ投稿されていない翻訳例としては、『編集顧問』、『顧問編集員』というのがあります。
参考になれば
Shinya Suzuki
> とにかく、「者」の一文字が問題だったでしょうか？
「編集○」の、○に何が適当かは、主に出版物・分野の違いによると思います
（英語では例外を除いて全てeditorに対応）。
Google検索によると以下のようになりますね（数字はヒット件数）。
A: 編集委員：大多数の学会誌はeditorを編集委員と呼んでいますね。
"学会誌編集委員": 56,700
"学会誌編集員": 52
"学会誌編集者": 29
B: 編集員：新聞の場合も編集委員が大部分ですが、員や者もそれなりに使われ
ていますね。
"新聞編集委員": 50,100
"新聞編集員": 4,800
"新聞編集者": 8,630
C: 編集者：（一般）雑誌や書籍では編集者が多くなりますね。
"雑誌編集委員": 9,430
"雑誌編集員": 865
"雑誌編集者": 174,000
"本の編集委員": 51
"本の編集員": 11
"本の編集者": 22,500
> それにしても、内部の編集作業にまで手出しをしない
> 単なる寄稿者であることが明白なcontributing editorであれば、
> 結局は「特別寄稿」ということですよね？
やはり「特別寄稿」は special contribution、それをする人は special
contributorでしょうか。
> 実際に編集作業に手を貸す（鈴木さんのAの）
> contributing editorは「編集協力」でいいのではないでしょうか。
「編集協力（員）」に近いのは、editorial assistance (assistant) だと思い
ます。
Shinya Suzuki
Mika Jarmusz
> "home base" kind of association
彼女の場合は編集「する役割がある」ということで
別途「編集協力」を提案しておいたのですが、
「内」の感覚なら「者」で納得できます。(^_^)v
「員」なら内と外のどちらも可なので、ニュートラルに使えると思いましたが、
わかっているのなら半端なニュートラルよりも
「内側」に構えた方が親しみやすいですね。
客員と寄稿の取り合わせは
「外から来てくれる人物」「外から稿を寄せる」で
いささか重複の感があるかも。
>やはり「特別寄稿」は special contribution、それをする人は special
contributorでしょうか。
>(Note the need to avoid suggesting that articles by this person are special occasions or cameo appearances in the publication. They are not. They are something you can expect every so often.)
editorial assistance (assistant) というと単なる下っ端に聞こえます。
「編集協力」には、外部の独立した人物を挙げることもできるように思いますが。
「者」と「員」などの使用頻度をカテゴリー別に見るのも面白いですね。
どうもみなさま、ご苦労様でした。
Mika Jarmusz
Can a 編集者 be 寄稿ing？
寄稿とは、どこそこ「へ」、またはどこそこ「に」、外部から行うものでは？
編集作業も行うcontributing editorを「編集者」とするなら、
その人物の書くものは寄稿ではなく執筆では？
編集者が、自分の雑誌に寄稿することはできるのですか？
「できる」とすると、なんだかインチキくさくなりませんか？
これは日本語のsocial deixisでしょうか？
William Taylor
As is contributing editor, which makes it (名誉 nani nani) a perfect
match.
Looking for any smidgen of meaning in these kind of honorary titles
(in either language) could be damaging to your mental health
-- -- -- -- -- --
Contributing Editor兼Big Hog Daddy
四字熟語の推進委員会
http://jp.youtube.com/watch?v=Yu_moia-oVI
Mika Jarmusz
It's one thing to keep looking for any smidgen of meanings where the difference is insignificant in the real world. I'd call it a waste of time.
It's another to notice when a certain expression comes out ridiculous in the target language. What shows up on the web for 名誉編集者 is either translation (more likely from "honorary editor") or some sort of a 冗談. Are you, as a Japanese translator, seriously recommending that "contributing editor" is a good match for 名誉編集者?
What I was getting at was that 名誉 is too high of an honorary title. Sorry if my tongue-in-cheek wasn't obvious.
William Taylor
>Japanese translator, seriously recommending that "contributing editor" is a
>good match for 名誉編集者?
I make no serious recomendations with the handle name included in my
post above.
何か誤解を招いたらすみません
Regards
William Taylor
> William,
>
> It's one thing to keep looking for any smidgen of meanings where the
> difference is insignificant in the real world. I'd call it a waste of
> time.
>
> It's another to notice when a certain expression comes out ridiculous in the
> target language. What shows up on the web for 名誉編集者 is either translation
> (more likely from "honorary editor") or some sort of a 冗談. Are you, as a
> Japanese translator, seriously recommending that "contributing editor" is a
> good match for 名誉編集者?
>
> What I was getting at was that 名誉 is too high of an honorary title. Sorry
> if my tongue-in-cheek wasn't obvious.
>
> Mika Jarmusz 清水美香
> English to Japanese Translator
> http://inJapanese.us
>
Mika Jarmusz
やっぱり くさくさ しますよね～。
接尾語として「しゃ」と読むときと、以下の辞書引用のように「もの」と読むときで
どれほど意味が変わるのかはわかりませんが、
私が感じた編集員と編集者との違いを
一応裏付けする方向を示しているようです。
参考としてお目にかけますが、確たる自信はありません。
者（もの）
一般に「ひと」に比べて立場や地位の低い人をいうのに用いられるといわれ、平安時代の和文からはそのような傾向がうかがわれるが、厳密ではない。ことに漢文訓読資料にはあてはまらない例が多い。
もの [2] 【者】
〔「もの（物）」と同源〕
人。古来，単独で用いられることはごくまれで，多く連体修飾語を伴って用いられる。「家の―を迎えにやる」「若い―」「おまえのような―は勘当だ」「だれか試してみる―はいないか」「―は極(イミジ)き臆病の―よ/今昔 28」
〔「人」に比べて卑下したり軽視したりするような場合に用いられることが多い〕
もの【者】
《形式名詞》「人」の意を表す。〔卑下・軽視の気持ちをもって言うとき、また、あらたまって言うときに使う〕