Proceedings - Translation Concepts

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Lena Hamaidia (Sheffield) EU-High-Level Scientific Conference Series MuTra 2006 – Audiovisual Translation Scenarios: Conference Proceedings Read my Lips: Gaps in meaning between spoken and subtitled dialog. Contents 1 Introduction 2 Theoretical Background 3 Marked Structures 4 Rigidity of the Structure of English 5 Halliday's Approach to Theme-Rheme Analysis 6 Firbas' Approach to Theme-Rheme Analysis 7 Subtitling Marked Structures 8 Read my Lips Analysis 9 Conclusion 10 References Abstract The purpose of this study is to examine whether the communicative meaning of the sentence structures used in spoken dialog is altered by the subtitling process. The paper will focus on the way in which emotional and emphatic sentences of spoken dialog are translated into English subtitles. As the structure of the sentences is determined by the communicative intention of the speaker they are defined as pragmatically or communicatively ordered sentences. 1 Introduction Purpose of this study Because the sequence of the elements in a pragmatically ordered sentence differs from that in a standard or “unmarked” sentence a pragmatically ordered sentence is known as “marked”. Following Schmid’s observation that marked structures contain “elusive meaning components” (Schmid 1999: 4) which may be lost in the translation process this study will consider whether the translator’s sensitivity to the nuances of meaning conveyed by the use of marked structures in the spoken dialog can be increased by a closer study of the communicative function of the syntactic structure and whether this in turn can be used to inform the translation of the spoken dialog into written subtitles. This study will begin to explore the hypothesis, which forms part of my ongoing research, that marked structures are particularly important in subtitled dialog as they can be used both as a form of shorthand for communicative meaning and also as a strategy for conveying some of the features of spoken language. It will aim to show that as spoken language has to be condensed in a subtitle the use of a marked structure can provide one method by which meaning can be expressed both succinctly and forcefully and it can also carry some of the emphasis of intonation in spoken dialog. In order to place this topic within a theoretical framework the discussion will begin with a theoretical investigation of the connection between sentence structure and meaning in © Copyright 2006-2007 by MuTra 34
MuTra 2006 – Audiovisual Translation Scenarios: Conference Proceedings Lena Hamaidia language and in translation. The nature of the interaction between spoken and written language in the subtitle will also be briefly considered. The paper will conclude with a case study of the French film Read my Lips where the structures used in selected sentences of spoken French dialog and their translation into English subtitles will be analyzed in detail and the communicative impact of both the spoken and the written forms of the dialog will be compared. The theories of Halliday and Firbas will inform the interpretation of the sentences examined in this analysis, which will examine the translation of spoken dialog into subtitles in the light of Schmid’s claim that: “If the source text deviates from the unmarked canonical word order, sentences carry an additional meaning potential that has to be explored and carried over into the target language.” (Schmid 1999: 1). It is a feature of both spoken and written communication that the verbal messages, which we convey are organized into structured segments or sentences. Whilst there are by definition differences between the types of sentences formulated in spoken and written communication there is in both cases a requirement to convey information in structured segments so that they can be processed by the recipient of the message. It is therefore instructive to begin by considering the link between sentence structure and meaning from a general perspective. Syntax, sentence structure and meaning in translation. Scholars, including Givón (1993), Finegan (1994) Schmid (1999) and more recently many others, have noted how syntactic structure generates meaning in sentences. We will here limit ourselves to a discussion of these three authors. Finegan states that: “In all languages one principal function of syntax is to encode pragmatic information. What differs from language to language is the way in which pragmatic structure maps onto syntax.” (Finegan 1994: 199). This has implications for the transfer of meaning when translating between languages with different syntactical rules for the structure of sentences. 2 Theoretical Background Givón’s analysis of the connection between grammar and language in English Grammar A Function-Based Introduction (1993) is particularly relevant to the communicative focus of this research, as it identifies the link between grammatical structure and communication in language in a general sense. Givón (1993: 2) describes the rules of syntax as the means by which “coherent communication”, in the form of grammatically correct sentences, is produced. Givón uses the analogy of a biological organism or an instrument to convey his view of the integral connection between the grammatical form and the function of language. For example, he stresses the interdependence of grammatical structure and language by comparing it with the interdependence of the structure and function of a biological organism (ibid.). Givón’s recognition that syntax and meaning are inextricably related within one language leads to the logical question that if form and meaning are connected within a language, how then is meaning affected when translating between languages with different structures? Finegan (1994) categorizes three types of meaning in sentences: “referential” (what is actually described); “social” (the social content of what is described) and “affective” (the emotional connotation of what is said) (Finegan 1994: 127). This paper will be principally concerned with the translation of affective meaning as defined above by Finegan. Like Givón, Finegan describes syntax as “encoding” meaning in sentences (Finegan 1994: 218) and he recognises that word order can affect meaning in sentences in all languages (Finegan 1994: 127). 35
Page 1 and 2: Marie Curie EU High Level Scientifi
Page 3: TABLE OF CONTENTS Part I: Multiling
Page 6 and 7: MuTra 2006 - Audiovisual Translatio
Page 18 and 19: Eduard Bartoll (Barcelona) Contents
Page 42 and 43: 3 Marked Structures MuTra 2006 - Au
Page 46 and 47: Scene 2: I know Sign Language MuTra
Page 70 and 71: Stavroula Sokoli (Athens) EU-High-L
Page 78 and 79: EU-High-Level Scientific Conference
Page 88 and 89:
MuTra 2006 - Audiovisual Translatio
Page 90 and 91:
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
I would like to raise five issues:
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103:
Page 104 and 105:
Page 106 and 107:
Page 108 and 109:
Page 110 and 111:
Page 112 and 113:
Page 114 and 115:
Page 116 and 117:
Page 118 and 119:
Page 120 and 121:
Page 122 and 123:
Page 124 and 125:
Page 126 and 127:
Francisco Utray Delgado (Madrid) U-
Page 128 and 129:
Page 130 and 131:
Page 132 and 133:
Page 134 and 135:
Page 136 and 137:
Page 138 and 139:
Page 140 and 141:
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148 and 149:
Page 150 and 151:
Page 152 and 153:
EU-High-Level Scientific Conference
Page 154 and 155:
Page 156 and 157:
Page 158 and 159:
Page 160 and 161:
Page 162 and 163:
Sabine Braun (Surrey) Contents EU-H
Page 164 and 165:
Page 166 and 167:
Page 168 and 169:
Page 170 and 171:
Page 172 and 173:
Page 174 and 175:
Page 176 and 177:
Page 178 and 179:
Page 180 and 181:
6 The accent of the voice MuTra 200
Page 182 and 183:
Page 184 and 185:
show all

Proceedings - Translation Concepts

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?