Harry Potter Scholastic

[Gazella]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I would make a distinction, however, between changing the title, and editing the book to change cultural references. I just don't see the need for the latter at all.

I agree and a lot may agree with that too. In the case of the Harry Potter books, I can see a lot of Americans objecting to the original language of British English used in the books- there are a lot of Americans ( not only Americans but also non Americans who are influenced by American media) who wouldn't be familiar with many of the British vocabulary used, yes it's always nice to learn new words and learn the differences between British/American English vocab but there are many who expect these books to be simple and not laborious, especially since they're aimed at children, and so in my opinion, "Americanizing" the HP books is a good move by Scholastic so now readers have a choice, if they want to read the books in English US (Scholastic) or English GB (Bloomsbury).

[Jessica Lares]

Something to note is that they started bringing in some of the UK spellings I think in either Order of the Phoenix or Half-Blood Prince in the US Scholastic editions.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by Jessica Lares

Something to note is that they started bringing in some of the UK spellings I think in either Order of the Phoenix or Half-Blood Prince in the US Scholastic editions.

There's something I've been wanting to ask you:
Would a tyranasaur's field of vision really allow it to read something held between it's stubby little arms? 'cuz I'm not sure if your avatar is paleontologically accurate.

[curtw]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I would always prefer to read the original version of a book, if possible, and these are British books, set in Britain. It really grates to read an "Americanised" version and see American expressions that would never be used in Britain. Britain does not have "parking lots", we have "car parks"; our post does not arrive through a "mail slot", but through a "letter box", and many, many other glaring differences.

True, but most of these meanings can be inferred. And somebody might even be curious enough to look up some of the more puzzling cultural differences (bonnet and boot as parts of a car). But a lot of 'Murkins don't know that when a British book mentions trainers, it's talking about shoes, not garments. Or that 'biscuit' means 'cookie.' I think I recall seeing both of these in the HP books.

[HomeInMyShoes]

^Don't forget jumper.

I hate re-wording books. I've said it before, anyone that can't deal with the concept of Philosopher's Stone or look it up is stupid. We need to teach people to learn.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by HomeInMyShoes

^Don't forget jumper.

I hate re-wording books. I've said it before, anyone that can't deal with the concept of Philosopher's Stone or look it up is stupid. We need to teach people to learn.

It's not a matter of "can't." It's matter of "stop-being-so-freakin'-judgemental-and-when-you're-elected-king-of-the-universe-then-you-can-tell-everyone-else what-they-should-read."

It's important to remember that just because a marketing person thinks of a reason for something, the thing could be good even if the reason is wrong.
Change the word.
Because Americans can't understand it?
No.
Because Americans will find it more compelling and relatable.

[FizzyWater]

Originally Posted by curtw

True, but most of these meanings can be inferred. And somebody might even be curious enough to look up some of the more puzzling cultural differences (bonnet and boot as parts of a car). But a lot of 'Murkins don't know that when a British book mentions trainers, it's talking about shoes, not garments. Or that 'biscuit' means 'cookie.' I think I recall seeing both of these in the HP books.

Sadly, while I agree that I'd have preferred the British versions, even if it meant I had to infer the meaning on terms like "jumper" that mean something different to me, there are some who would have problems with it.

I've seen numerous instances on Amazon reviews, for example, where people complain about "spelling errors and typos" in books with British spellings. It amazes me that there are folks out there who *don't* know that British spelling is subtly different, but...there it is.

ETA: I have to wonder if the marketing choice was to do this because of the parents more than the kids.

[4691mls]

Originally Posted by curtw

True, but most of these meanings can be inferred. And somebody might even be curious enough to look up some of the more puzzling cultural differences (bonnet and boot as parts of a car). But a lot of 'Murkins don't know that when a British book mentions trainers, it's talking about shoes, not garments. Or that 'biscuit' means 'cookie.' I think I recall seeing both of these in the HP books.

What kind of garment would that be? Personally, as an American when I see "trainer" my first thought is a person who trains athletes. (I do know that in British books "trainers" means athletic shoes)

I have been reading British books since I was a kid and I don't remember having a problem with it. My parents were able to explain common terms like sweater/jumper, truck/lorry, elevator/lift, apartment/flat, and I'm sure I picked up a lot more just from context.

[ApK]

The first time I read Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy as a kid, I thought the reference to Man being killed in a zebra crossing was a hilariously absurd image.
It wasn't until I read an Americanized edition a couple years later that I learned a zebra crossing was a crosswalk. I was disappointed that it was so mundane.

[EndlessWaves]

Originally Posted by curtw

True, but most of these meanings can be inferred. And somebody might even be curious enough to look up some of the more puzzling cultural differences (bonnet and boot as parts of a car).

Especially when we're talking about electronic books, where generally just touching an unfamiliar or confusing word is enough to tell you what it means.

Originally Posted by ApK

It wasn't until I read an Americanized edition a couple years later that I learned a zebra crossing was a crosswalk. I was disappointed that it was so mundane.

It's supposed to be mundane, it's poking fun at how philosophers and theologians often seem so divorced from everyday reality.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by EndlessWaves

It's supposed to be mundane, it's poking fun at how philosophers and theologians often seem so divorced from everyday reality.

I know. And if it used appropriate language for its audience, I have gotten that from the first reading as well, as the author intended. I didn't "not know" what a zebra crossing was and fail to look it up. In mind I was certain I knew. Just like a pedestrian crossing or deer crossing, it was obviously a place where zebras cross. Hilarious.
Interesting parallel here about folks objecting to regional changes seeming so divorced from the realities of storytelling an connecting with an audience.

[pdurrant]

Originally Posted by ApK

I know. And if it used appropriate language for its audience, I have gotten that from the first reading as well, as the author intended. I didn't "not know" what a zebra crossing was and fail to look it up. In mind I was certain I knew. Just like a pedestrian crossing or deer crossing, it was obviously a place where zebras cross. Hilarious.

Then perhaps it was a good think it was kept, as at least you found it funny. Since, as far as I know, US crosswalks are not marked with broad black and white stripes across the road, it wouldn't have made much sense if it had just substituted crosswalk for zebra crossing, and it wouldn't have been funny.

[4691mls]

If I didn't know what a British zebra crossing was, I would probably picture a scene out of a TV nature documentary
US crosswalks, at least in places I've been, are usually white stripes on the black/gray pavement; they don't remind me of a zebra at all....
Actually I just used Google images for "crosswalk" and for "zebra crossing" and the pictures it pulled up for each looked similar.

Two British/American differences which often trip me up, even though I know what the British meaning is:

1. Pavement - as an American I see "pavement" and think of a road; when I read that someone is walking on the pavement I expect them to get hit by a car, until I remind myself that it's the British equivalent of a US "sidewalk"

2. Call - I'm surprised when someone goes to make a call and they start observing the other person's surroundings; in American usage a call is typically a telephone call, not a personal visit

[ApK]

Originally Posted by pdurrant

Then perhaps it was a good think it was kept, as at least you found it funny.

And it gave me fodder for this thread, too, but I don't think either was what Douglas Adams intended!
EndlessWaves is exactly right. That bit was far more subtle humor, which I came to appreciate later, about Man smugly thinking himself great for logically proving the non-existence of God, and then getting killed by a car while crossing the street.
Being trampled to death by zebras sends a whole different message, comedically speaking.

We can easily tangent into lessons learned from mondegreens here, but I'll spare you the story about how my sister heard the first line of "Same Old Lang Syne" as "Met my own mother in a grocery store" rather than "Met my old lover..." and all her life thought the song told a very different story than Dan Fogelberg intended.....

Originally Posted by 4691mls

2. Call - I'm surprised when someone goes to make a call and they start observing the other person's surroundings; in American usage a call is typically a telephone call, not a personal visit

Funny, that never threw me. I always seemed to be aware of doctors making house calls, and people handing out calling cards when they visit people (both probably more from TV and movies than life).

[curtw]

Originally Posted by 4691mls

What kind of garment would that be? Personally, as an American when I see "trainer" my first thought is a person who trains athletes. (I do know that in British books "trainers" means athletic shoes)

Here in Texas, it's a track suit.