Proceedings - Translation Concepts

More documents

Recommendations

Info

5.6 Media-specific constraints MuTra 2005 – Challenges of Multidimensional Translation: Conference Proceedings Jan Pedersen The media-specific constraints of subtitling should be well known by now, and they will be outlined here only insofar as they interfere with the rendering of ECRs. For more details on these matters, the reader is referred to the works of Luyken (1991), Ivarsson & Carroll (1998), or Gottlieb (1997, 2000). Most fundamentally, there is the semiotic switch from the spoken to the written word, which means that the text gets somewhat formalized in the transfer from SL to TL. In many countries, however, subtitles are seen as a “hybrid” form, containing oral features in the written form. Nevertheless, this constraint often leads to Explicitation being used on ECRs in subtitles. Apart from the semiotic switch, there are “the famous and infamous time and space restrictions of subtitling” (Gottlieb 2004: 219), which often restrict the subtitlers’ options. Generally speaking, these options are limited by constraints such as the widely applied 12 cps rule, which means that there should be a display time of one second per 12 characters in the subtitles (equalling 36 characters for a full one-liner that would be displayed for three seconds). This means that in rapid conversation, the dialogue will be condensed. A previous study by the present author shows that the mean quantitative condensation rate is about a third in Scandinavia (Pedersen 2003a). The condensation tends to affect verbal material that is less central than ECRs however, but it means that Omission is sometimes the only viable strategy for rendering (or rather not rendering) ECRs in subtitling of rapid dialogue. On the other hand, the media-specific constraints can be low (in slow dialogue), and the subtitler may have ample time and space to use space-consuming strategies like Addition or Paraphrase. 5.7 Paratextual considerations The parameters outlined this far have in common that they can be analysed from the texts alone or from the interplay between the texts and the world. This final parameter is not in the text, but rather about the text. The parameter is centered on the translation situation (cf. e.g. Chesterman 1998: 207) and the individual considerations combine to form overall translation goals or overarching translation strategies pertaining to the text as a whole. The facts that constitute the paratextual considerations would ideally be included in Nord’s “translation briefs”(1997: 59). Unfortunately, translation briefs are extremely rare in real life subtitling, and even rarer for an analyst of subtitling to get hold of. This means that the answers to the paratextual questions often have to be sought elsewhere: from subtitlers, guidelines, subtitling companies, broadcasters, the Internet and even TV-guides. Nevertheless, it is crucial to take the paratextual factors into consideration, because in very many cases, pivotal explanations of subtitling behavior lie here. The paratextual considerations can be broken down into a few clusters of questions, and the following are but a few examples of the most central questions in each cluster; the list is not meant to be exclusive: 5.7.1 Skopos-related Questions (cf. Vermeer: 1989/2000) i) What are the national norms of subtitling? ii) iii) iv) What are the company’s guidelines and other in-house rules for subtitling? Have the clients left any instructions about what sort of strategies they want? What norms does the subtitler prescribe to? 126
MuTra 2005 – Challenges of Multidimensional Translation: Conference Proceedings Jan Pedersen a) Foreignizing? b) Domesticating? c) etc. v) What genre is the film? vi) a) Is it a documentary? Then information is the most important aspect, and minimum change strategies could be used. b) Is it a comedy? Then humor is the most important aspect, and interventional strategies may have to be used to secure punch lines. etc. 5.7.2 TT Audience-related Questions i) What is the age group? Do they remember e.g. ‘The Battle of the Bulge’ (if that is the ECR at stake)? ii) Do they have specialist knowledge? Does the program appeal only to e.g. snowboarding buffs? Then they could be assumed to be familiar with many of the ECRs pertaining to that field, hence Retention. iii) etc. 5.7.3 Broadcasting-relates Questions i) When will the film be aired? a) On prime time? That signals high prestige and many viewers, and there is evidence of more effort going into prime time subtitling, with the result of more felicitous solutions. ii) Who is the broadcaster? a) Is it a public service channel? They have certain obligations towards their viewers regarding reading speed etc. iii) etc. 5.7.4 Questions related to Pragmatic matters i) What may the deadlines have been? Interventional strategies take time, and the subtitler may not have had that. ii) What financial remuneration may there have been? Since subtitlers get paid by their quantitative output, and interventional strategies take time, and as some subtitling firms do not pay very well, there is ample evidence of some subtitlers’ not always being able to set aside the time it takes to use interventional strategies. iii) etc. 6 Conclusions The model presented in this paper covers the seven strategies available to subtitlers for rendering ST ECRs in subtitles: Official Equivalent, Retention, Specification, Direct Translation, Generalization, Substitution and Omission. We have also seen the seven different parameters that influence the subtitlers’ decision-making: Transculturality, Extratextuality, Centrality of Reference, Intersemiotic Redundancy, Co-text, Media-specific Constraints and Paratextual Considerations. Using this model, an analyst should be able to describe how 127
Page 1 and 2:
Marie Curie EU High Level Scientifi
Page 3:
TABLE OF CONTENTS Part I: Positioni
Page 6 and 7:
MuTra 2005 - Challenges of Multidim
Page 8 and 9:
2.1 Conceptual Foundations MuTra 20
Page 10 and 11:
Page 12 and 13:
Page 14 and 15:
Page 16 and 17:
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20 and 21:
EU-High-Level Scientific Conference
Page 22 and 23:
2 DVD is here to stay MuTra 2005 -
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
Page 44 and 45:
3.1.1 Intersemiotic translation MuT
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
Page 50 and 51:
Page 52 and 53:
Page 54 and 55:
Page 56 and 57:
Page 58 and 59:
Page 60 and 61:
Page 62 and 63:
Page 64 and 65:
Page 66 and 67:
Yvonne Griesel (Berlin) EU-High-Lev
Page 68 and 69:
Page 70 and 71:
Page 72 and 73:
Page 74 and 75:
Page 76 and 77:
Page 78 and 79:
Page 80 and 81: Minako O’Hagan (Dublin) EU-High-L
Page 82 and 83: MuTra 2005 - Challenges of Multidim
Page 92 and 93: EU-High-Level Scientific Conference
Page 104 and 105: MuTra2005 - Challenges of Multidime
Page 122 and 123: 4.5 Generalization MuTra 2005 - Cha
Page 128 and 129: Source Culture MuTra 2005 - Challen
Page 140 and 141: 4 Business aspects MuTra 2005 - Cha
Page 168 and 169: Language MuTra 2005 - Challenges of
Page 178 and 179: Mira Kadric (Vienna) EU-High-Level
Page 180 and 181:
Page 182 and 183:
Page 184 and 185:
Page 186 and 187:
Page 188 and 189:
Page 190 and 191:
Page 192 and 193:
Page 194 and 195:
Page 196 and 197:
Page 198 and 199:
Page 200 and 201:
Page 202 and 203:
Page 204 and 205:
Page 206 and 207:
Page 208 and 209:
Page 210 and 211:
Page 212 and 213:
Page 214 and 215:
Susanne Wagner (Halle) EU-High-Leve
Page 216 and 217:
Page 218 and 219:
Page 220 and 221:
Page 222 and 223:
Page 224 and 225:
EU-High-Level Scientific Conference
Page 226 and 227:
Page 228 and 229:
Page 230 and 231:
Page 232 and 233:
Page 234 and 235:
Page 236 and 237:
Page 238 and 239:
show all

Proceedings - Translation Concepts

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?