namigata (~) uses

[Mark Spahn]

Simon Varnam wrote:

> "翻訳料： 1円～/日本語１文字あたり"
> Bwahahahahaha !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You must have missed the ～ there, indicating you will be paid *no
less than* one yen per character. Why, you could be paid 1.5 yen, or
even a whopping 2 yen! Time to shop around for that summer home!
Nora [Stevens Heath]
- - - - - - - - - -

About this character "～", which is called "namigata"
(or, by some people, "nyoro"),
http://www.iwata-shoin.co.jp/backnews/ura/ura743.htm says
【「～」の使い方】
　「～」。この記号の読み方、知ってますか。『句読点、記号・符号活用辞典』（小学館、2007)によると、「波形(なみがた)」と読むそうだ。わたしは「にょろ」と読んでいた。
　で、その「～」だが、基本的には、○○から○○まで、という意味で使われるが、最近は、論文などのサブタイトルに使われる場合が目に付く(サブタイトルは、「―」で前後をくくるのが普通だったのだが）。
　これをやられると、文献目録を作る時に困る。原典に正確に、ということだと「～」と表記せざるを得ないが、目録の統一性を計ろうとすると、「～」「―」が混在することになって、気になる。
　ちなみに、先の『句読点…』によると、「～」の用例として、ちゃんと、「⑦副題を示すときに使われる」と書いてある。う～ん、既に「誤用」じゃなくなっているのか…。おっと、「う～ん」の「～」は、「⑩「ー」の代わりに長音符号として使われる」例。

So "～" is used mostly in the context "A～B",
meaning "from A to B", and in this usage the "～"
is read as "kara".
But my impression is that "～" is also used
immediately before numbers, in expressions like
"～３０人", to mean "approximately".
(1) Is "～" actually used this way, or is that just
a misimpression I picked up somewhere?
(2) In this usage, how is the "～" pronounced?
As 「やく」, the same as 「約」?
-- Mark Spahn (West Seneca, NY)

[Alan Siegrist]

My impression is that the "approximately" usage is more common for the similar but not identical tilde character ~ which is used in English to mean "approximately." See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tilde#Common_use

But perhaps there is sometimes some linguistic overlap from ~ to ～.

On an aside, I notice somewhat frustratingly that the vertical position of the ~ tilde character seems to vary from font to font. When writing in English, I do sometimes use ~ for "approximately" but in this case, I like to see it vertically positioned at the midline like the hyphen -. But in several otherwise attractive fonts, it is positioned higher (like its position atop the n in ñ), so I sometimes need to change font just to get the character at its proper height.

Regards,

Alan Siegrist
Carmel, CA, USA

[Benjamin Barrett]

On Jul 31, 2013, at 1:05 PM, Alan Siegrist <AlanFS...@Comcast.net> wrote:

Mark Spahn writes:

About this character "～", which is called "namigata"
(or, by some people, "nyoro"),
http://www.iwata-shoin.co.jp/backnews/ura/ura743.htm  says

So "～" is used mostly in the context "A～B",
meaning "from A to B", and in this usage the "～"
is read as "kara".
But my impression is that "～" is also used immediately before numbers, in
expressions like
"～３０人", to mean "approximately".
(1) Is "～" actually used this way, or is that just a misimpression I picked up
somewhere?
(2) In this usage, how is the "～" pronounced?
As 「やく」, the same as 「約」?

My impression is that the "approximately" usage is more common for the similar but not identical tilde character ~ which is used in English to mean "approximately." See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tilde#Common_use

But perhaps there is sometimes some linguistic overlap from ~ to ～.

On an aside, I notice somewhat frustratingly that the vertical position of the ~ tilde character seems to vary from font to font. When writing in English, I do sometimes use ~ for "approximately" but in this case, I like to see it vertically positioned at the midline like the hyphen -. But in several otherwise attractive fonts, it is positioned higher (like its position atop the n in ñ), so I sometimes need to change font just to get the character at its proper height.

When I see it, I usually interpret an expression like ～30 to mean "up to 30," though clear context is not always available. I don't think I ever use the tilde in translation as it doesn't seem very professional for use in most fields, but when so squeezed for space that not even "approx." will work, it seems like a reasonable workaround.

Benjamin Barrett

Seattle, WA

Learn Ainu! https://sites.google.com/site/aynuitak1/videos

[Benjamin Barrett]

BTW, it appears 波ダッシュ may be a more common way to refer to this symbol. http://kotobank.jp/word/%E6%B3%A2%E5%BD%A2?dic=daijisen also gives 波ダーシ and スワングダッシュ. BB

[Mark Spahn]

> My impression is that the "approximately" usage is more common for the
> similar but not identical tilde character ~ which is used in English to
> mean "approximately." See:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tilde#Common_use

> ...

> Alan Siegrist
> Carmel, CA, USA

Aha, that's where I must have picked up this usage: from English.
That Wikipedia article calls the Japanese 〜 a "wave dash"
(with Unicode U+301C) and is "Used in Japanese punctuation",
with a link to
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_punctuation#Wave_dash ,
where it is called a "nami dasshu".
On the sample text shown there (click to enlarge), the wave dash
in vertical writing looks like a stylized S.

[Alan Siegrist]

Benjamin Barrett writes:

When I see it, I usually interpret an expression like ～30 to mean "up to 30," though clear context is not always available.

 

Yes, when I see ～３０ in Japanese, I too usually assume it means “up to 30” since the “approximately” meaning of ~ is mostly limited to English.

 

I don't think I ever use the tilde in translation as it doesn't seem very professional for use in most fields, but when so squeezed for space that not even "approx." will work, it seems like a reasonable workaround.

 

You would be surprised. I see ~ used for “approximately” in English in many technical and especially scientific fields. Naturally, it is probably most common where the author is squeezed for space, as you note. But I have never had any clients that objected when I used ~ in technical documents in English. I assume that it is understood just fine. No one has objected to it being “not professional” or such.

 

Best,

[Dr. M. S. Niranjan]

(2013/08/01 4:31), Mark Spahn wrote:
> But my impression is that "～" is also used
> immediately before numbers, in expressions like
> "～３０人", to mean "approximately".

But impressions are mostly wrong (cf. marriages based on impression
ending in divorce).
"～３０人", does not mean "approximately" but means "up to XXX", which
was probably taken by ordinary folk from the Japanese technical people
writing emails or reports to non-technical (and stupid?) management. I
suppose!

Dr. M. S. Niranjan

[Benjamin Barrett]

That's a good point. In my experience, clients don't usually care about such subtleties, so I'm probably wasting keystrokes with this and so many other things that I spell out, LOL.

[Nora Stevens Heath]

Alan Siegrist wrote:

> You would be surprised. I see ~ used for “approximately” in English in
> many technical and especially scientific fields. Naturally, it is
> probably most common where the author is squeezed for space, as you
> note. But I have never had any clients that objected when I used ~ in
> technical documents in English. I assume that it is understood just
> fine. No one has objected to it being “not professional” or such.

It's a reasonable stand-in for the "almost equal to" sign, consisting of
two ~ stacked vertically like an equal sign. Apparently I can't
reproduce it here--a problem others must have encountered, leading to
the acceptance of the readily available ~ in its stead.

Nora

--
Nora Stevens Heath <no...@fumizuki.com>
J-E translations: http://www.fumizuki.com/

[Stephen Suloway]

Benjamin Barrett wrote:

> I don't think I ever use the tilde in translation as it doesn't seem very professional for use in most fields, but when so squeezed for space that not even "approx." will work, it seems like a reasonable workaround.

Wouldn't "c. 30" be a space-efficient workaround for "approximately/about 30"?

Regards,
Stephen Suloway

[Benjamin Barrett]

On Jul 31, 2013, at 4:12 PM, Nora Stevens Heath <fumi...@gmail.com> wrote:

Alan Siegrist wrote:

You would be surprised. I see ~ used for “approximately” in English in
many technical and especially scientific fields. Naturally, it is
probably most common where the author is squeezed for space, as you
note. But I have never had any clients that objected when I used ~ in
technical documents in English. I assume that it is understood just
fine. No one has objected to it being “not professional” or such.

It's a reasonable stand-in for the "almost equal to" sign, consisting of
two ~ stacked vertically like an equal sign.  Apparently I can't
reproduce it here--a problem others must have encountered, leading to
the acceptance of the readily available ~ in its stead.

On Windows, Carlinga helps to type symbols like that. I just put a link to it on Adam Rice's Honyaku Home (http://www.honyakuhome.org/area/computing/) today.

[Benjamin Barrett]

That's usually for dates, though the OED and Wiktionary certainly allow for that usage as well. I think I'd prefer the tilde though as "c." is not as understandable.

[Nora Stevens Heath]

Benjamin Barrett wrote:

> On Windows, Carlinga helps to type symbols like that. I just put a link
> to it on Adam Rice's Honyaku Home (http://www.honyakuhome.org/area/computing/)
> today.

I should clarify that while I found the symbol in the Character Map
easily enough, it didn't show up when I set Becky! to use either the
ISO-2022-JP or UTF-8 charsets. :shrug: But thanks for the Carlinga
tip; the tool looks like it could come in handy.

[imagina...@gmail.com]

Are you talking about English or Japanese? In English the "twiddles" sign
means "approximately"; in Japanese it is (more or less invariably) used for
ranges, so that before a value it means "up to". Ranges in English are
indicated by a (straight) dash (probably an en-dash; I can't find 'dash for
range' in the index to Chicago, but of course Chicago uses an en-dash to show
ranges of page numbers etc.

Do you have a citation that would suggest that the Chicago manual of style
and I are wrong, and all these Japanese writers have been mysteriously
setting English usage all along?

Brian Chandler

[Adam H]

The single wavy line can be used to indicate ranges in (British) English as well, but a straight line is more common. The sign that is used to indicate "approximately" is a double wavy line, similar to a drunk equality sign (correction: "~" apparently can also be used to generally indicate a poor approximation, but I've never used it that way in my ≈30+ years of writing).

I'm not trying to start any flame wars or anything, but the Chicago manual of style, while being world renowned and highly respected, is just a collection of preferred and recommended writing practices. In an ideal world, people would follow the same writing style. Unfortunately it's not an ideal world, and other styles do exist. The Chicago Manual of Style is not wrong, but it may not necessarily be right either. For what it's worth, I often refer to it as well, but I try not to let it dictate every pen or key stroke I make.

Adam

[Chris Poole]

Sorry I deleted the thread before reading. But it's called a "tild" yeah? Have we covered that?

 

Chris

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Honyaku E<>J translation list" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to honyaku+u...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

[Adam H]

Yes, I think that was covered in the portion which you must have deleted before reading. "Tilde" (with an "e") is the name for the single wavy line. It is not the name for the general approximate symbol.

[Fred Uleman]

Does the English name depend upon where it is? E.g., over an equals sign vs over an "n" in a Spanish word

- -- --- ---- ----- ---- --- -- -
Fred Uleman

[Adam H]

Good point. Now that I come to think about it I only think I've used the name when referring to it's use over a letter.

Wikipedia (try to suppress your shudders everyone) makes reference to a "Tilde operator" and a "swung dash".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tilde

--

[Benjamin Barrett]

Hah! And clicking on "swung dash" yields "wave dash" and the "fullwidth tilde" both used for East Asian typography. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swung_dash#Swung_dash

FWIW, I use Wikipedia and Wiktionary all the time. Just like Glova, Weblio and any other site, you have to be careful when using information, but it's an incredible resource.

Benjamin Barrett

Seattle, WA

Learn Ainu! https://sites.google.com/site/aynuitak1/videos

[Adam H]

I agree. Any site that contains information from a variety of sources and arranges it in to a relatively easy to read format shouldn't be dismissed off hand, especially if you are starting with no information at all. The important thing is to corroborate any and all information you find where possible (there are some people that openly sneer and look down on such sources though).

[Mika J.]

On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 8:18 AM, <imagina...@gmail.com> wrote:

>>  "～３０人", does not mean "approximately" but means "up to XXX"

<snip>

Are you talking about English or Japanese?

Japanese, of course.  I must admit that I FREQUENTLY have the SAME nagging question as you do, Brian, as we observe various translation discussions unfold.  But there's no question this time, because Dr. Niranjan quoted  "～３０人" which is 100% Japanese, and because I do agree with his interpretation of this particular Japanese writing convention.

To answer the original query posted by Mark:
(1) Is "～" actually used this way <snip>?

No.　日本語には、従来的にはそういう意味合いは「なかった」と思います。
英語で言うところの「約」の意味合いと混同されちゃったりすると、なんか深刻な問題が発生しそうですけど...。
フォントでもって使い分けしてもらうことにでもしましょうか。
このスレッドの冒頭（前身スレ？）で誤解を正してくださったNoraさんに感謝です。
http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%AD%89%E5%8F%B7
A ≒ B （AはBにほぼ等しい）

(2) In this usage, how is the "～" pronounced?
As 「やく」, the same as 「約」?

いえいえ。個人的には「から」という読みでもって「～」が打てるようにと単語登録しております。

Mika Jarmusz 清水美香
        English to Japanese Translator
        http://inJapanese.us

[Herman]

On 8/4/2013 18:22, Mika J. wrote:
>
> To answer the original query posted by Mark:
> (1) Is "～" actually used this way <snip>?
>
> No.　日本語には、従来的にはそういう意味合いは「なかった」と思います。
> 英語で言うところの「約」の意味合いと混同されちゃったりすると、なんか深刻
> な問題が発生しそうですけど...。

That horse has left the barn. Based on (an extrapolation of) my
experience, if you search the Japanese patent database, you will find
thousands of documents with such usage, most of which will be E->J
translations. You will also find that in the majority of cases it is
clear from context if "about" or "up to" is the intended meaning, but
sometimes there will be ambiguity.

Herman Kahn

[Mark Spahn]

Hi Mika,
It looks like I started this contretemps by misremembering the language in
which I saw "～" preceding a number and meaning "approximately". I must
have seen it in English. But Herman reports that the "～ as
'approximately'" infection has spread to Japanese patent writers, so
possibly I saw it in a Japanese patent. Maybe it's time for somebody to get
a patent, or at least a 実用新案,考案, or 意匠 on
a novel use of the punctuation mark "～"
(known as "namigata", "swung dash", etc.),
wherein its "from ... to ..." or "up to ..."
range meaning is extended,in contexts in which
the "～" immediately precedes a number, to
the meaning of "approximately, about".

[Tom Donahue]

Mark Spahn wrote:

> But my impression is that "～" is also used
> immediately before numbers, in expressions like
> "～３０人", to mean "approximately".
> (1) Is "～" actually used this way, or is that just
> a misimpression I picked up somewhere?
> (2) In this usage, how is the "～" pronounced?

On pronunciation questions, the first thing I do is
select the character and hit the 変換 key to see what
MS IME suggests.

For "～", it suggested:
から
きごう
より
にょろ

For all of those except きごう, I confirmed that you
can enter the kana and get "～".
The quickest was にょろ.

Of course that doesn't say anything about how it would
be proounced in conversation. But at least there is no
support from MS IME for the theory that the character
means "approximately".

--
Tom Donahue

[David J. Littleboy]

From: Herman

>>>>>>>>>>>
On 8/4/2013 18:22, Mika J. wrote:
>
> To answer the original query posted by Mark:
> (1) Is "～" actually used this way <snip>?
>
> No. 日本語には、従来的にはそういう意味合いは「なかった」と思います。
> 英語で言うところの「約」の意味合いと混同されちゃったりすると、なんか深刻
> な問題が発生しそうですけど...。

That horse has left the barn. Based on (an extrapolation of) my
experience, if you search the Japanese patent database, you will find
thousands of documents with such usage, most of which will be E->J
translations.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

What percentage of those are mistranslations, and to what extent do native
Japanese speakers recognize tilde as meaning approximately? (Note that the
native speakers chirping in here have been quite firm that it means up to,
not approximately.)

Hmm. Come to think of it, those questions are backwards: if few native
Japanese speakers recognize tilde as meaning approximately, then you are
looking at a lot of mistranslations. As in "ノルウェイの森", how many native
Japanese speakers realize that the song is about 木材? (My point being that it
strikes me as being the sort of thing a native speaker wouldn't think to
doubt.)

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan

[Shinya Suzuki]

Nora Stevens Heath wrote:

> I should clarify that while I found the symbol in the Character Map
> easily enough, it didn't show up when I set Becky! to use either the
> ISO-2022-JP or UTF-8 charsets.

I think you need a Unicode font (such as Arial Unicode MS) to use
some or most of those characters. The following characters/symbols
are visible on my Becky! set to use UTF-8 and Meiryo font.

≃: (U+2243) asymptotically equal to
≅: (U+2245) approximately equal to
≈: (U+2248) almost equal to
≒: (U+2252) approximately equal to or the image of

̃: (U+0303) combining tilde
̴: (U+0334) combining tilde overlay
∼: (U+223C) tilde operator
˜: (U+02DC) small tilde
~: (U+007E) tilde*
～: (U+FF5E) fullwidth tilde*
〜: (U+301C) wave dash

‐: (U+2010) hyphen
–: (U+2013) en dash
-: (U+002D) hyphen-minus*
—: (U+2014) em dash
－: (U+FF0D) fullwidth hyphen-minus
ー: (U+30FC) katakana-hiragana prolonged sound mark*
―: (U+2015) horizontal bar

On my JIS keyboard only those characters with an asterisk can be
typed just by hitting the relevant key (- or ~) with or without
the Shift key (and the JPN IME on or off). I need a Unicode table
to enter the other characters.

While searching for the difference between fullwidth tilde and wave
dash, I came across JTA翻訳日本語表記ガイド** which has this to say:

８．１０．波ダッシュ
波ダッシュおよび（全角）チルダについての表記ガイドを述べます。
全角チルダ「～」(Unicode: U+FF5E)・チルダ「~」(Unicode: U+007E)は使用しないでく
ださい。
波ダッシュ・波ダーシ（「Wave Dash.svg」など）は原則として用いず、半角(JIS X 0201)
にあるハイフンマイナス「-」で代用します。この理由は、波ダッシュ「〜」(Unicode: U+301C)
が、コンピュータOS およびフォントによっては上下逆の波形「Wave Dash2.svg」で表示
されることがあるからです。
波ダッシュを固有名称などでやむを得ず使用する際には、原則として「〜」(Unicode:
U+301C)を必要最小限に用いてください。
この場合、波ダッシュ「〜」(Unicode: U+301C)の入力は、Windows 環境では、通常のキ
ーボード入力（すなわち「全角チルダ」となってしまう入力）は避けて下さい。

** http://www.jta-net.or.jp/pdf/jta_hyoki_guide.pdf

Shinya Suzuki

[Shinya Suzuki]

David J. Littleboy wrote:

> As in "ノルウェイの森", how many native Japanese speakers realize
that the song is about 木材?

Trivial trivia:

ノルウェーの森 is the (mis)translated title of The Beatles' song
"Norwegian Wood" (1965). ノルウェイの森 is the title of Haruki
Murakami's novel (1987).

The Honyaku Archive tells me that I mentioned the same thing back in
2009:

"村上春樹 adopted (as the title of his novel), intentionally or
otherwise, ノルウェイの森 rather than ノルウェーの森."

http://honyaku-archive.org/posts/239376/?q=Norwegian%20Wood

I prefer Murakami's version despite the fact that ノルウェー（王国）
is the official Japanese name of the country used by both the
Norwegian government and the Japanese government.

Shinya Suzuki

[Mark Spahn]

> ...

> Hmm. Come to think of it, those questions are backwards:
> if few native Japanese speakers recognize tilde as
> meaning approximately, then you are looking at
> a lot of mistranslations. As in "ノルウェイの森",
> how many native Japanese speakers realize that
> the song is about 木材?
> (My point being that it strikes me as being the sort of
> thing a native speaker wouldn't think to doubt.)
> David J. Littleboy
> Tokyo, Japan

Wait. You're saying that "ノルウェイの森" is
a mistranslation of the Beatles' song title
"Norwegian Wood"?
Is this true? How do we know?
A dictionary lists both meanings for
wood = (1) a thick growth of trees; forest or grove
(2) the hard, fibrous substance beneath the bark
in the stems and branches of trees and shrubs; xylem.

When listening to pop music, I take the lyrics
as just place-holding syllables of no significance.
With some exceptions, an analysis of song lyrics
as poetry does not pay off. An especially good
genre of fun music but content-free words is
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bubblegum_pop , e.g.,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-uo9tMoew6o .

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norwegian_Wood
reveals that the song-writers (Lennon & McCartney)
do indeed mean 木材 rather than 森,
but how is the English-to-Japanese translator
of the lyrics supposed to know that?
Here are the lyrics:
I once had a girl, or should I say, she once had me...
She showed me her room, isn't it good, norwegian wood?

She asked me to stay and she told me to sit anywhere,
So I looked around and I noticed there wasn't a chair.

I sat on a rug, biding my time, drinking her wine
We talked until two and then she said, "It's time for bed"

She told me she worked in the morning and started to laugh.
I told her I didn't and crawled off to sleep in the bath

And when I awoke, I was alone, this bird had flown
So I lit a fire, isn't it good, norwegian wood.

From merely the lyrics, it is not at all
clear that "Norwegian wood" refers to
the wooden paneling on the walls of a
dwelling. It could just as easily be taken
to mean that this story takes place in
a cabin in a 森 in ノルウェイ, or that
the wood is firewood being burned in
the cabin's fireplace.

Maybe this interpretation is a false,
fanciful ex-post-facto joke by the lyricists,
somewhat like the interpretation that
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FawjYJ2rjwQ
is about puffs of marijuana smoke.

Point: Let's have some sympathy for the
poor English-to-Japanese lyric translator,
who is expected to know things that the
lyricists did not reveal till years later.

[Charlie Milroy]

Mark Said "Let's have some sympathy for the

poor English-to-Japanese lyric translator,
who is expected to know things that the
lyricists did not reveal till years later."

You don't need to be a mind reader to know the most likely translation. Just
from doing a little bit of background research/having some basic baground
knowledge it is clear that "ノルウェイの森" is incorrect. Isn't getting that
kind of detail kind of the point of translation? Although I do have some
sympathy as I am sure we have all made mistakes where we have chosen a
possible but unlikely term.

Charlie Milroy