You basically ignore how communication psychology works.Originally Posted by silentenigma
Successful communication is only then existant when the communication partner understands the intention and follows exactly what was intended.
Square wrote her as Earisu with the intention of the name being Aerith. It is is Aerith. The manual says it. The game says it. The files of several official pictures for the pc version says it. Therefore what follows what Square wanted is the most authentic translation. I will point it out one more time.
"Hi, can you tell me what time it is?"
"Yes."
"..."
____
"Yes." <- LEGITIMATE but WRONG ANSWER (So how is it right? In the context of legitimacy)
It does not follow the intention of my question, therefore is a disturbance of communication.
Square had the intention of her being Aerith all the time. And that's it. You cannot even say "he chose ri because of this and that", because Aerith is an allusion of Earth, not directly meant to be Earth. And no, "ri" is not by the same logic the best attempt to reproduce an "r" because in most cases for that they take "ru". By your logic, when Sephiroth is right, they would have to automatically and without a doubt write him as "Sefirotto" because Americans do not use the authentic Hebrew pronounciation either, but no, he was written as "Sefirosu" because the intention made him the English pronounced Sephiroth. And I have pointed it out more than once - Japanese authors also do not just think with a mindset that uses Japanese only. Tetsuya Nomura had to name his Organization XIII with the Western names in mind for his little name game to work.
It is really interesting how someone wants to argue that when someone decides to give a name to someone that person's intention is worth nothing when it is the essence of things.
How right is Aeris?
Level of being Correct:
Correct in the Context of Legitimate Translation
As correct as: Aelis, Airith, Aelith, et cetera
When can it be intentionally correct?
When the owners change their intention and say "it is correct (as well)", as the context of intention changes.
How right is Aerith?
Level of being Correct:
Correct in the Context of Legitimate Translation and Intention of the Namegivers
What people do not want to accept, is that Aerith always existed and was not a retcon as no true state was rewritten but just a mistake corrected. I can only mention it again: When I started FFVII in the 90s my brother, who never did that much with FF as I did, already said "call her Aerith, that's how she is called, Aeris was a mistranslation", so this whole mistranslation thing was already that popular on the internet back then and it was important to be pointed out. And that's obvious. If I want to say something and someone does not understand what I said I also say "sorry, that was meant differently".
And once more to clarify things:
Correct: Tidus (Tida who was meant and written as Tidus all the time), Cloud (Kuraudo who was meant and written as Cloud all the time), Sephiroth (Sefirosu who was meant and written as Sephiroth all the time), et cetera ...
Purposely changed: Tina -> Terra, Butz -> Bartz, Balflear -> Balthier, Eclair -> Claire, Cidney -> Cindy, Attacker -> Command, Blaster -> Ravager, Enhancer -> Synergist, Jammer -> Saboteur, Healer -> Medic, Defender -> Sentinel, et cetera ...
Mistranslated: Aerith, Reina, Misunderstanding Rebirth as Reverse, et cetera ...
If legitimacy was everything necessary and the context of intention was meaningless then communication would be totally misleading.
Reply With Quote