Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Q&A

Naming non-English folklore creatures

+0
−0

I'm working on a novel that involves folklore/mythological creatures from mainly the Norse and Scandinavian myths, but in the world of the novel, there exists beings from all cultures. I wish to write it in English, leading to some problems with what to call the creatures.

Some creatures are easier than other. Valkyria, for example, could just be translated to Valkyrie and everything would still be great.

But beings such as the Bäckahäst would cause some trouble here. The common translation into English here is Kelpie, but to me, Bäckahäst and Kelpie are two different beings, one from Norse folklore and one from Scottish. So to translate Bäckahäst into Kelpie would be adding more confusion.

But keeping "Bäckahäst" as the name also causes some questions for me. Namely, how to add grammar stuff to it. The Swedish way to put Bäckahäst into plural would be to add "-ar" at the end of the word (Bäckahästar), but the English way is to add "-s".

Using the English version seems to me like the logical way, but it makes the inner me—reading the word the Swedish way—cringe.

Are there any tips on how to do this "right"? Or is the most important to be consistent throughout it all? Or should I just use Kelpie and skip the problem? Maybe go with my own word for each being?

Pro and cons for the different ways would be appreciated too. Have been trying to decide on this for way too long, and pretty much keep jumping between them all.

History
Why does this post require moderator attention?
You might want to add some details to your flag.
Why should this post be closed?

This post was sourced from https://writers.stackexchange.com/q/26436. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.

0 comment threads

1 answer

+0
−0

I really like the -ar plural, and I think you should keep it regardless. You don't always have to obey the rules of English if your original word isn't. English is rife with loan words from other languages, so there's plenty of precedent. Look at cherub and cherubim (the correct plural, I believe from Hebrew).

As far as the translation, do what works for your story. If your Bäckahäst is more of a selkie than a kelpie, then that's how you should treat and translate it. You can even have a character mistranslate Bäckahäst as "kelpie" and be corrected, so the reader knows you're doing it on purpose.

No matter which way you go, be consistent. If you use -ar for one Scandinavian plural, use it for all of them.

History
Why does this post require moderator attention?
You might want to add some details to your flag.

0 comment threads

Sign up to answer this question »