It's a taiwanese Movie - but why is it a cantonese Title - Should be mandarin - isn't it..?
Well Heinz, the HKMDB uses Mainland official Potunghua for all their transliterated representations no matter what dialect the entry is originally exhibited and I've been boasting an ambidextrous international approach with my Chinese related entries at IMDB but you guys don't have to follow suit with either of these. If you deem this DB to be Cantonese oriented as your primary default dialect to represent all titles & staff, then there's nothing wrong with leaving a Taiwan or Mainland title with a Cantonese bias. Hell, the schizophrenic translators at Celestial/IVL still haven't sorted this very issue out with their shaky track record at subtitle translating for their re-masters. Back to titling I cite an official example, Li Han Hsiang's 1958 Mandarin opera without a traditional English title: 'Diau Charn' was transliterated with old-school Southeast Asian (Indonesian/Malaysian/Singaporean) acculturated English romanization practices because the studio was still commuting from Singapore yet to open up shop fully in HK but if this title was coined by someone fully established in HK with Mandarin knowledge proficient in English, it might have been represented as 'Dou Chan' or 'Dieu Chung' in Cantonese, etc. but the cultural lens of the studio was still domiciled in Singapore i.e. not yet assimilated to British-HK linguistic practices at that time so it all has to do with context. In this example, it doesn't adhere to EITHER Mandarin or Cantonese Chinese romanization systems as we recognize them to be now & I will never apply my own biases into changing it to adhere to any prevailing cultural linguistic mantra or any other personal dialectic preference in this case because that's the way THEY presented it officially. As one of you have stated to me here appropriately, usage dictates the incumbency of this title's representation so perhaps likewise you should all go with the flow.
It's a simple matter of policy (& that's for mgmt to decide) but if you had to choose one or the other, I'm sure your decision would have to consider what scale of mobilizing would be involved with your data being re-translated i.e. a massive re-editing campaign just to adhere with a consistency rule? Your valuable time might be a better spent for more constructive pursuits. I think scrutiny should be applied for editing past represented (still accurate & error free) names & data should remain as-is especially if the way it is represented was done so 'officially' by the authored studio of a title (however erroneous we may think of it now) but it's delicate food-for-thought & management's call. This culturally laced Information Technology problem is best suited for those maturing well-rounded data-architects who can not only play straight chess, but 3 dimensional chess & can foresee a bit of the future while taking the pulse of the prevailing culture to represent the majority of your web based user audience from here on out, never mind us old-schoolers who'll be outta here in a decade, or two,...or three, or four.
Posted: Sat Jul 14, 2007 10:31 am
where are these lobby cards?