audiovisual translation theory - what is a theory?

8/10/2019 Audiovisual translation theory - What is a theory?

1/13

Unit 1: Theory/Theories

Keywords: theory, structure, literal, domestication, fidelity, translation history, adaptation.

Texts: Two anthologies will help you find your way into historical perspectives of translation:

Venuti, Lawrence, Ed. The Translation Studies Reader(Routledge, 2004) is a good overview of essays

on the art of translation structured into periods with good substantial introductions to each period. Ifyoud like to gain a substantial insight into a range of translation practice, you are adviced to look at the

essays by St Jerome, DAblancourt, Scheleiermacher, Borges, Nabokov, Nida and Venuti himself. These

are all relevant for the issues discussed in Unit 1. Other interesting contributions by Toury, Steiner,

Berman, Spivak and Nornes will be mentioned in further units.

Weissbort, Daniel and Astradur Eysteinsson, Eds.,Translation. Theory and Practice: A Historical

Reader(Oxford University Press, 2006) is another excellent anthology. It includes more texts

and it is even more wide-ranging. The contributions, well organized in sections, are often briefer

and easier to read and are preceded by contextual introductions.

What is a theory?

In the simplest terms, a theory is a formulation on how something

works: it explains phenomena. Scientific phenomena. Social

phenomena. Cultural phenomena.

This formulation can be based on informed speculation, needs to be

made in relation to other proposals, specifically to contrasted

knowledge or to philosophical explanations. A theory is not just ahunch based on intuition, but requires engaging with contrasted (i.e.

solid, tested) knowledge about the world. It also requires precise, structured explanation, sometimes

even specialized terminology. Often a theory is subject to a scientific test, but many theories can only

be contrasted with philosophical ideas.

This is something you should keep in mind for the purposes of this module:

hunches and intuition are great. Theory and explanations are something else.

Skills for intuition can be cultivated and they are in other modules. In this module

you will be asked to cultivate your ability to give written accounts of a moretheoretical kind.

Whereas a doctrine sets out an agenda (its form is b is r and so we should do x in order to achieve what

we intend), theories are far more complicated. Their form is if what X says about topic M is right, then

I propose that B, a phenomenon related to M, has qualities a, b, c, and can be explained by r.


2/13

Forum Exercise 1

Replace the variables in the previous sentence with specific notions to give an

instance of theoretical formulation. Please notice this is a rhetoric exercise:

your theory does not have to be true and indeed it can be absurd!

In any case a theory will be based on ideas, on abstraction and generalization

about the world.

A theory is always about understanding and very specifically about describing systematically a

phenomenon. Examples of phenomena are: the human mind, economics, power, radiation, gravity.

Example 1

Freudian psychoanalysis is a theory on how the human mind works: as a theory

it posits that our acts and conscious ideas are governed by lower sub-conscious

structures, and that there are certain relationships between subconscious

desires/drives and actual behavior or neuroses. Freud described the human

mind very precisely as a mechanism. What Freud proposed is only partially

subject to scientific proof: we can infer from what we see how the mind works,

but we cannot see, quantify or show the structures Freud described.

A theory can have practical repercussions and often aims to intervene in order to solve real issues in

the real world. Contrasted scientific theories help us predict the effects of something we do to human

bodies or to nature. Theories help see the world as a machine. However, its important to remember

that not all of them can be contrasted in the same way: global warming is most likely true but

it remains a theory in competition with other opposing ones which would claim different

effects from the accumulation of CO2. Psychological theories are closer to this. By understanding the

human mind, Freudian psychoanalysis claims, we can cure mind-related illnesses and straighten out

(or cure) damaged personalities.

In saying a theory is a proposal the implication is that it is not truth. But, crucially, this does not

mean theories are simple speculations or can easily be dismissed.

A translation theory is a proposal that accounts for the difficulties of intercultural

exchanges, particularly as they concern the way texts are adapted for the needs of

a target language.


3/13

Example 2

Not every psychologist will agree with Freuds basic structures, but many

consider it to be a good way to describe mental processes and a process of

curing patients with mental diseases is based on application of Freudian

theory.

But a theory can co-exist with others.

Example 3

Even Freud changed his formulation of the human mind. And not only that:

this formulation co-existed with others. Other authors after Freud re-shaped

the structures he proposed (for instance French psychoanalyst Jacques

Lacan).

People with neurosis are not always cured by psychoanalysis. That does not mean the theory itself is

useless. Remember, theory is first and foremost about understanding and only secondarily about doing.

Otherwise it would be a creed or a doctrine. It can always be modified. It can be made more complex.

More variables can be introduced. In some cases experiments may lead to re-formulations.

Forum Exercise 2

Think about a theory on a subject. Discuss what it is based on, what

its roots are. Are those roots scientific or philosophical? Is it widely

accepted or just one proposal on the subject?

Structures, ideas, abstraction

One common stumbling block for practitioners of translation dealing with

theory is the fact that theories are based on abstract ideas and describe

structures which are essentially abstract. Translation is regarded largely

as a practice and it is experienced as such by translators. They are more

concerned with actual processes (doing) than with the ideas underlying

those processes (understanding).


4/13

Most of your work in the course will focus on those processes and

practical issues. In this module, however, you should be prepared to

embrace abstraction rather than avoid it.

Dealing with abstract ideas is important. First because it saves you dealing with each problem

individually: abstraction makes problems more general. Therefore abstract ideas can make your work

more fluid, consistent and better informed. Secondly because it can guide you into the specific solutions

you are aiming for.

Some people have an implicit intuitive knowledge of such abstract ideas. In other words, they dont

need to use explicit formulations in order to make use of them. Still, making the implicit explicit can

help them in cases where intuition fails. And then again in some cases a wrong approach can too easily

be confused with a right intuition or mere imitation. Intuition (or hunches) can be legitimate and they

certainly have their right place in translation practice, but in this module students are asked to think

alternatively in terms of abstract ideas put into words.

This module is very much about making the implicit explicit, discussing how and why

certain solutions might be best rather than proposing final solutions. You are asked

to be able to explain your decisions rather than reaching the right decision.

Example 4

Justimagine an alien, newly landed and eager to know our culture, who

naturally enough decides to attend a football match. It could learn about

football by watching numerous matches. Eventually, the rules might

become clear, although this would take time. But if a shared language is

worked out, it could begin by getting some ideas on structures of the

football match and general rules. The process of engagement with the

game will be faster, the learning curve steeper. Provided it has the right

number of legs, our alien would be well on its way to become the next

Messi!

Structures are often understood to be formal, that is, they refer only to why things appear as they are.But there is another set of structures that have to do with conventions and ideas. In this module we

shall focus on the latter.

A theory of translation deals with conventions and ideas on language, which then tries to

adapt to practical purposes of how to transfer meaning or whole texts into a different

language. Theories of translation are complex. This module is intended as an introduction

to theoretical views on language, translation and audiovisual narratives that can open new

avenues of understanding and prepare the way for potential postgraduate work.


5/13

Example 5

A sonnet is a verse form with very tight formal structure. In Spanish it consists of fourteen lines, two

quartets (a quartet is a consistent set of four lines) and two tercets (three lines). In English it consists

of three quartets and two couplets. But in most cultures a sonnet also entailed the use of a certain

approach to love, even a certain rhetorical content. Ideas can also be structural.

A programis a structure that sets out specific, clear sections and objectives for a particular event. Every

time the event is repeated, these sections and objectives will have to appear. Too often a program is

equated to a theory. Although a theory can produce a program, remember that the concept of theory is

wider, more general, more abstract.

A theory emphasizes ideas, rather than creeds or schools of practice.

A theory will not always tell you how to do things (for instance how to translate); a theory is not a set

of instructions. Translators need to bridge the gap between ideas and practice.

In this module a view of how language works will be proposed, but it

is up to students to match that proposal to their own practical needs.

In section 2 of this unit well see different examples of how ideas have historically influenced the

practice of translators.

Forum Exercise 3

Can you describe formal structures underlying your favourite song? How are TV news programmes

structured? Can you distinguish between programmaticstructures in a news programme?

Ideologies and theories

As pointed out, there rarely is only one theory on any phenomena. There is not one

theory on the human mind. There is not one unified theory of the way societies work.

There is no single theory on economics or on how to beat recession. And in each of

these areas, multiple theories will be in conflict.

Translation is no exception

Choosing one over theory another will often be arbitrary (i.e. choice can

be unmotivated). Sometimes it will be subjective (choice has a motive on

personal reasons). In some cases it will be ideological (some people

decide that theories predicting chaos from global warning are wrong

because they are for free enterprise, or because they are conservative anddont want ecologists to be running society or some such reason).

Arbitrary, subjective or ideological are different concepts and have

to be studied differently.


6/13

Forum Exercise 4

Give briefly an example of an arbitrary decision, a subjective one and finally an ideological one.

One needs to be careful as often such ideologies try to pass themselves off as truths. Some

philosophers have argued that, indeed, the success of an ideological doctrine consists precisely in

convincing people that it is right, good and truthful.

Also, we have seen how theories are not objective truths. In fact theories are influenced by ideologies

(sets of ideas, ready-made and well articulated), and consequently the choice of one theory over another

has to do with the preference for one or another set of ideas. In other words, the reason for adopting a

theory on the human mind, on global warming or on language and translation is open to question. Even,

we might add, if a particular theory is accepted by a majority of people (see 2.1 for the standard theory

on how translation works).

In section two we shall see how ideas on cultural exchange influenced the practice of translation, to the

point that certain ideologies of translation were imposed over others. Economic ideas also help definetranslation and the status of the translator.

Other ideas are less obvious in political terms. We all have an implicit idea of how language works. Or

how the mind works. Once again, in this module the implicit will be made explicit, so that it can be

contrasted with other ideas.

Why Translation Theory?

Translation is a complex process. In principle, it is simply about

putting utterances from one language into another. In the particularcase of audiovisual translators utterances are audiovisual texts

(For the purposes of the module, the focus will be on narrative texts,

although references will be made to journalistic texts, documentaries

or essays). This formulation seems to be enough for many students,

and even for professionals of translation.

This leads to a view of translation as mechanical transference of contents which can be as clear and as

simple only if the following conditions are met:

a) It presupposes words have stable meanings.

b) It presupposes that all meanings exist in all languages (provided we consider individual languages

as different ways to fragment reality) in practical terms in one-to-one correspondences.

If this is true, it is only a question of finding the right equivalent to every utterance, which one can do

through research and by having access to such resources as dictionaries and encyclopaedias. The

process may not always be smooth, but occasional wrinkles can be addressed as problems.

If we accept this formulation as the truth, translators do not need a theory.

But as we discussed earlier the truth is hardly ever covered by one theory in the humanities: language

is far from simple and even this view presupposes too many things to be considered as a


7/13

straightforward truth. The central problem is that even views of translation that reject the need of a

theory (and assume a merely practical side to translation) will entail theoretical proposals. They are

always based on ideas on language.

One of the objectives of this module is to investigate the ideas on language which underlie views on

translation.

Here are some questions that can only be accounted for if we adopt a theoretical view of translation

and language beyond the standard one:

-To what extent are translators creative writers?

For some writers, translators should repress any creative impulses and aim to disappear behind the

texts original author. For others this is simply impossible: language being what it is, translators are

either creative or limited.

-What values of the original text are to be preserved?

For some writers, translators should concentrate on the explicit meaning of the text. Everything else is

subordinated to that meaning. Others think that the text works on more levels than just objective

meaning: form, implication, symbolism, cultural context.

-Which levels of meaning should translation address?

Is the rustle oflanguage to be taking into account in translation? Does rhythm produce meaning in

any significant way? Does the text mean the same for everybody? Should translators take this into

account?

-Is transparent translation achievable?

Some proponents advocate transparent translation, to the extent that machine translation is a

growing area on translation studies. For others, machine translation is a tempting but preposterous

idea.

-Are politics relevant to translation?

Does one translate in the world or from a vantage point of utter objectivity? Do translators intervene

in issues of race, gender, ethics or oppression?

-Where does a translation end and a version or an adaptation begin?

Some will argue that translation is translation and a version is a different thing. One deals with an

objective text and produces a final version which is also objective. For others, translation is a far more

porous concept and one cannot completely dismiss the processes that are often associated to adapting

texts into different media.

-How is translation similar to other forms of cultural transference?


8/13

Does translation end with the finished product? To what extent it is a wider phenomenon similar to

other ways of intercultural exchange?

In Unit 2 we shall propose that far from being a simple process, translation is a very problematic one

(which can be conventionally standardized). In Unit 3 we shall discuss how ideas on language are wide

ranging and affect how the translation process can be approached.

What are the advantages of a theoretical view?

Awarenessof how language and translation work is important to identify the issues and to be able to

explain what translators do.

A second advantage is consistency: in resolving issues from a coherent perspective, we avoid solutions

that may seem right but are just motivated by chance. A theoretical approach will force translators be

more systematic in the solutions.

Thirdly, knowledge of theoretical issues can provide translators with new approachesand ideas todeal with problematic texts.

Theories in History (examples from different approaches to translation)

Translators without historical conscience easily become victims of their own assumptions and

those privileged by the cultural discourses of their time Antoi ne Berman (1995:61) Pour une

critique des traductions: John Donne. Paris: Gallimard.

Introduction. Why history is relevant for translators

Many of the insights in the first section of the course will be contextualized in

historical terms. By looking at the way translators approached problems and

issues of language transference in the past, we can, at least, acknowledge that

there is more than one solution, that there are no recipes that will always work,

that translators need to exercise their own knowledge.

The following section builds up on the idea proposed in the previous one. By showing how different

theories of translation have been prominent in history, the notion of a single theory becomes more

relative. Throughout history, change in ideas has produced changing approaches to translation which

were favoured by different political and cultural situations. At the very least, one might conclude each

period will require a different model of translation. Of course the question of which model is ours is still

very much open.

Historically translation scholars have privileged one of these perspectives in looking at translation. The

three perspectives complement each other:

a) To specify the function and objectives of translation

In other words: is translation supposed to reproduce the original, to adapt it, replace it, comment on it,

and serve the same function.?


9/13

b) Description and analysis of the translation process

In other words, how to translate, what do we do if we find s omething which, in principle, is

untranslatable, etc.

c) Critical commentary of the relationship between objectives and processes

Translation analysis: these translators made these decisions with this purpose and the relation

between the decisions and their intention is problematic for this and this reason

Literal and dynamic approaches to translation

In terms of the results of the translation process, one finds two basic approaches

(as described by Eugene Nida in reference to Bible translation):

a) First a number of authors through history have believed in literal

translation. Nida calls this approach formal or word for word. The translator

believes a text is basically the sum of its elements, and therefore one should keep

as close to the original elements as possible, even if the result is not natural in

the target language. When St Paul translated sections of the Bible, being faithful

to the words was important, as every word was sacred.

b) The second approach is known as dynamic (also known as sense for sense), which favours

function of the original text or the intention of the original author, both conveyed in a natural way into

the target language. Example: Cicero believed that what was important was to convey the rhetorical

impulse of the original. Numerous authors in the history of translation have opted for dynamic

approaches. St Jeromes translation of the Bible is a great example of this. Functionalism is one

manifestation of dynamic approaches which emphasizes the idea of performativity in language (as we

shall study in unit 2).

As well see in the next unit, the dynamic approach can be understood as literal in that it is larger units

with clear, objective, meanings that are translated rather than simple words, in order to make syntax of

the translated text smoother (domestication, see below). However, one can push this alternative into

something different, more radical and less literal.

What if instead of units of sense one starts thinking about functions? And wha t if instead of

concentrating on the linguistic chain one looks at language as a multi-level structure? In his later work,

Eugene Nida asked himself these questions and started to stress what he called the functionalapproach. In units 2 and 3 youll be encouraged to think in terms of the function of texts and units as

determining translation choices.

Domestication and foreignization in translation history

Of course even if we accept either sense for sense translation as the legitimate

approach there are still choices for the translator regarding whether the resulting

text must hide its origins and read as a standard text in the target language or it has

to own up to being translated, resulting in a certain strangeness. Lawrence Venuti,

in his challenging and groundbreaking 1995 essay The Translators

Invisibility, mapped the history of translation as a territory between two poles in

terms of how translated texts conform to the target language.


10/13

The main insight on which he built his theory comes from a text by XIX century German linguist

Friederich Schleiermacher on the importance to translation (On the different methods of translating,

1813). Schleiermacher is very sensitive to the political aspects of translation: when one is transferring

a set of ideas from one language into another, there are effects in the target language. This is why, Venuti

would add, some dictatorial governments are so wary of translation and so intent in controlling what

and how gets translated. This is also, for instance, why the Franco years were so obsessed with

controlling dubbing of films. Ideas that move between cultures can challenge received ideas in the target

culture. But Schleiermacher adds, besides ideas, linguistic form is important. In preserving some

stylistic aspects of the source language, we are introducing variety and enriching the target language.

We could re-phrase Scheleiermachers ideas here by saying that bastardization invigorateslanguage.

Venuti calls domesticating translation to the important historical trend to adapt or domesticate

the foreign text into the target language so that it is perceived as if written in that language originally.

This contributes to make the translator invisible. The text attempts to pass as an original, even if this

implies ironing out anything in style or ideas that might be problematic for target readers. In extreme

cases names are changed and even some of the habits are brought closer to the experience of the reader.

For Venuti, this trend has negative implications for language, for style and for the status of translators.

Among other things it fixes linguistic structures and prevents innovation. In his work, Venuti defends

the opposite trend, which he derives from the Schleiermacher text, which he calls foreignizing and

entails allowing the less orthodox aspects of the source language to remain in the translated text.

Whether one agrees or not with Venuti, whether one considers his approach practical or not (and

certainly many translators dont agree with him) it helps us to look at translation as a creative,

imaginative process, rather than as a mechanical one.

Translating the classics: approaches

One of the best ways to illustrate how ideas on translation determine different approaches is to learn

from historical attitudes towards translation.

Translating the classics entails taking into account two elements which are not present in translating

texts produced by contemporary writers.

1. There is a time gap, and therefore a shift in the way the original was perceived, with many elements

which will have changed or even lost their relevance or meaning. The translator is addressing a

contemporary audience.2. The text itself has been the object of interpretations through time and it has come to mean something

more than what it did originally. Translators have to deal with the way the text has been read.

Translating the Bible

It is not irrelevant that a substantial amount of study in historical translation studies

has been devoted to Bible translation. This is because the Bible has been, for centuries,

the basic book in Western culture (Bible comes from the Greek meaning The

Books). The Bible was originally written in Hebrew and Aramaic, languages veryremoved from Latin or Romance languages thus positing many difficulties to the

translator. But at the same time such difficulties could not be dealt with resorting to


11/13

the translators subjective choices: there was too muchat stake and the process of translation had to

be presented as authoritative and as conveying the exact meaning of the scriptures.

Other issues complicated what we have come to know as the Bible: first a selection

among sacred scriptures of the Judeo-Christian tradition had to be made. Again such

selection was presented as divinely inspired. But far from being objective divine

inspiration was different for Jewish scholars and the later Christian tradition. For a full

discussion on different attitudes towards Bible translation you can check out pp. 28-33

of Daniel Weissbort and Astradur Eysteinssons (eds) excellent anthologyTranslation.

Theory and Practice: A Historical Reader. There is a good account of the influential exchange between St

Paul and St Jerome on the implications of their different attitudes towards Bible translation. The volume

gathers numerous texts on translation collected from all periods.

Bible translation influenced views of translation in general. Beyond merely

philological reasons, theological and political ones had an impact on Bible

translation. During the Middle Ages Christian Bible scholars went into heated

debates about what had to be included and how the original had to be translated.Such debates were of central cultural importance and could end up in different

factions within the Church. Ideas on what God was, on the Nature of Christ, on Morality, on what had to

be read literally, were not uniform and holding the wrong set of ideas at the wrong time could mean

heresy.

One way to end such debates was standardization: first the authoritative text had to be agreed, secondly

a standard translated version (into Latin) had to be promoted as the real, accepted one. Saint Jerome

produced the first Latin version of the Bible in AD 382.

Although translations in other languages were not unknown, the fact remains that it took the invention

of the printing press to make Bible and Bible translations into romance and other languages widely

available.

The Luther Bible in German (1534) and the King James Version in English (1611) are two milestones

not just in translation, but also in the creation of standard German and English.

In translating the classics there are several areas which will be relevant:

1.

Choosing the text: how do you fix the actual texts that make up the canonicalBible? What can one do with conflicting statements?

2. The time gap: translating for contemporary audiences. Would the Bible still make

sense to contemporary audiences if it was translated with the same ideas that made

sense in the Renaissance? Should translators continually approach the Bible to

their actual audiences?

3. The issue of faithfulness to an authoritative original: clearly the translated Bible

needs to be faithful to the original words of God that inspired the source text, but

how many versions can be equally faithful?

4.

The voice of the translator: to what extent is the translator supposed to be inspired by Divinity inorder to interpret ambiguous statements or words?


12/13

Translating Shakespeare

As one of the key writers in Western culture, translating Shakespeare raises issues which, in the end,

are not dissimilar to the translation of the Bible. But given Shakespeare is literature rather than the

divine words, the difficulties can be resolved by resorting to creativity.

a) It is often hard to fix he actual source text of Shakespeares plays. Rather than handwritten

manuscripts or playscripts supervised by the playwright we have different sources, some of them more

reliable than others. One original version of Hamlet is just over 1000 whereas the fixed, canonical

version used by most companies is over 4000 lines. The problem is that the latter has been collated

from different sources, and decisions have been made.

b) Ideas on art and entertainment were different in the XVII century. Yes,

Hamlet can be regarded as both, yet the balance is bound to be difficult to keep

for translators. Does the target text keep the same balance between substance

and fun? Are they in conflict?

c) Faithfulness to the original intentions is of course a problem, given we dont know a lot aboutShakespeare and it is almost impossible to know what his intentions were.

d) And of course there is an issue with the kind of function that Shakespearean performance may have

nowadays. Hamlet was written for a particular kind of theatre practice. Today, it is translated for film,

for television and for many approaches to performance: there are political Hamlets, there are Hamlets

for the subsidized theatre, for school theatres, for amateur companies, for modern companies each

will require and benefit from different approaches to translation.

e) Finally, in all of these areas (fixing the text, deciding on audiences, deciding on the approach and on

faithfulness) the translator will have to make decisions which cannot be but subjective.

This module

To finish this introduction, here is a little roadmap that will help you look at the

reasons behind the topics discussed in each unit.

This module will encourage you to look at source texts (basically narrative film

texts) paying close attention to the linguistic, narrative and cultural structures

underlying them.

Linguistics and TranslationUnits 2, 3 and 4 constitute an introduction to the translation process based on developing views on

language that are sensitive to cultural structures. Language is both produced by culture and produces

the culture of a society. The units are intended to provide you with references and approaches to look

at language and translation in a different way. Particular emphasis will be made on the concept of

function: elements in language not only mean they also do something and translators shoul d be

aware of function (or performativeness) as well as of literal meaning. Unit 4 focuses on an aspect of

language which is sometimes ignored in translation: style. Style is highly conventional but it also

conveys textual meaning. In audiovisual narratives, both TV and film, style can be the key to

characterization.


13/13

Film Narrative and Translation

Film narrative goes beyond a series of scenes representing events put together. As

in the case of translation, the literal meaning of the scenes is only a part of what

the film means and how it conveys meaning. The whole is more than the sum of the

parts as it is held together by conventions which have their own meaning and work in specific ways. In

Unit 5 we shall study what dialogue can do in film, and in units 6 and 7 well focus on close film analysis,

applying the ideas and concepts learnt to the Warner Brothers classic Casablanca (Michael Curtiz,1942). In these three units you shall develop awareness of film language and its structures, which will

help you explain your decisions as translator in terms of functions.

Cultural Studies and Translation

The last section (units 8 and 9) will focus how culture works and how, beyond language, translation can

has culture transfer as its object. Although culture is introduced in units 2 and 3, the last units will

extend those ideas around two areas: humour and cultural references. The comic effect is a good bridge

between cultural translation and film narrative in terms of functionality, as most audiences experience

comedy in terms of laughter. By working around the comic effect we shall explore the difficulties of this

effect to be transferred from one culture into another. Unit 9 will explore more issues of intercultural

translation, with a special focus on the translation of cultural references. The film Clueless (Amy

Heckerling, 1995) will be used to illustrate the difficulties created by cultural references.

The final assignment

Unit 10 puts every concept studied in the course in the context of your

final assignment. This exercise will require you to show that you are

sensitive to the details on how film communicates meanings andidentifying issues and potential problems to the translators. You need to

watch two films before the last unit: Gosford Park (Robert Altman, 2002)

and The Big Lebowski(Coen brothers, 1998)

audiovisual translation theory - what is a theory?

Documents