UNIVERSITY OF EASTERN FINLAND

PHILOSOPHICAL FACULTY

SCHOOL OF HUMANITIES

English language and translation

Nina Karoliina Hirvonen

Nomen est Omen

Reception of translated and non-translated descriptive names in My Little Pony Tales

MA Thesis May 2016

ITÄ-SUOMEN YLIOPISTO – UNIVERSITY OF EASTERN FINLAND

Tiedekunta – Faculty Philosophical Faculty

Osasto – School School of Humanities

Tekijät – Author Nina Karoliina Hirvonen

Työn nimi – Title Nomen est Omen - Reception of translated and non-translated descriptive names in My Little Pony Tales

Pääaine – Main subject Työn laji – Level Päivämäärä – Date Sivumäärä – Number of pages

English Language and Translation

Pro gradu -tutkielma x 17.5.2016

84 pages + Appendix Sivuainetutkielma

Kandidaatin tutkielma Aineopintojen tutkielma

Tiivistelmä – Abstract This study focuses on the literary function of descriptive personal names in the animated series My Little Pony Tales. Although the primary function of personal names is to identify characters from one another, descriptive names can also serve multiple complex purposes as a dynamic part the narrative. This study aims to explore how characterization is affected when descriptive names are retained in the source language and whether this retention can result in diminished character memorability and recognition. Yvonne Bertills (2003: 48) argues that characters are the most important piece of narrative, as without characters there would be no story. Personal names function as determinants that set important characters apart from the non-important, and are often brought to attention of the audience early on (2003: 47). Descriptive names have narrative functions; they impart knowledge of the character’s attributes such as appearance, origin or personality, amuse and entertain the reader, evoke emotion, or fulfil an aesthetic function (Van Coillie 2006: 123). Bertills argues that translation of names with semantic content is necessary to preserving the desired effect (2003: 194). What, then, happens if personal names with semantic meaning are retained and transferred unchanged to a Finnish context target text? As my materials I am using two Finnish dubs of My Little Pony Tales (Pikku Ponit), where two different translation strategies were used. One dub retains semantic names in English, the other dub has names translated into Finnish. The dubbed episodes were shown to two classes of students enrolled in Joensuu Normaalikoulu primary school, and the 24 participants, aged 7 to 9, were asked to answer a questionnaire after. The results indicate that language context affects memorability, spelling and cognitive recognition of characters not previously named. In short, characters appear to be more easily identified when the descriptive function is fulfilled and the allusion understood. However, characterization appeared to be determined by character behavior more so than language context and allusive values of personal names. Descriptive names, however, had some effect on characterization.

Avainsanat – Keywords children’s literature, personal names, characterization, personal name translation, semantics

ITÄ-SUOMEN YLIOPISTO – UNIVERSITY OF EASTERN FINLAND

Tiedekunta – Faculty Filosofinen tiedekunta

Osasto – School Humanistinen osasto

Tekijät – Author Nina Karoliina Hirvonen

Työn nimi – Title Nomen est Omen - Reception of translated and non-translated personal names in My Little Pony Tales

Pääaine – Main subject Työn laji – Level Päivämäärä – Date Sivumäärä – Number of pages

Englannin kieli ja kääntäminen

Pro gradu -tutkielma x 17.5.2016

84 sivua + liitteet Sivuainetutkielma

Kandidaatin tutkielma Aineopintojen tutkielma

Tiivistelmä – Abstract Tutkielmani tarkoituksena on tarkastella kuvaavien erisnimien funktioita animaatiosarjassa My Little Pony Tales (Pikku Ponit). Erisnimien ensisijainen tehtävä on erottaa henkilöhahmot toisistaan sekä taustastaan, mutta kuvaavilla erisnimillä on myös muita monitahoisia tarinankerronallisia funktioita. Tässä tutkielmassa tutkin kuinka kuvaavat nimet vaikuttavat hahmon karakterisaatioon silloin, kun kuvaava nimi on säilytetty alkukielisenä ja vaikuttaako alkukielinen erisnimi hahmon muistettavuuteen tai tunnistettavuuteen. Tutkielma pohjautuu pitkälti Yvonne Bertillsin Beyond Identification -väitöskirjassaan esittämiin väittämiin hahmon roolista kenties tärkeimpänä osana tarinankerrontaa, jonka takia hahmo henkilöidään erisnimellä yleensä varhaisessa vaiheessa (2003: 48). Kuvaavilla erisnimillä on henkilöinnin lisäksi myös muita funktioita; niiden tehtävä on kertoa lukijalle jotain kantajastaan kuten viittaukset ulkonäköön tai luonteeseen, huvittaa lukijaa, herättää tunteita, tai ne täyttävät esteettisen funktion (Van Coillie 2006: 123). Tästä syystä kuvaavien erisnimien kääntäminen on Bertillsin mukaan tarpeellista, jotta erisnimen tarkoitettu funktio välittyy lukijalle (2003: 193). Mitä sitten tapahtuu, mikäli kuvaavaa erisnimeä ei käännetä kohdekielelle vaan se säilytetään alkukielisenä? Käytin tutkimusmateriaalinani My Little Pony Tales -sarjan kahta dubbausta, joissa ensimmäisen käännösstrategana on nimen säilyttäminen ja toisen nimen kääntäminen kohdekielelle. Suoritin tutkimukseni Joensuun Normaalikoulun kahdessa luokassa. Eri luokat katsoivat eri version samasta jaksosta ja täyttivät katselun jälkeen kyselylomakkeen. Yhteensä 24 oppilasta osallistui tutkimukseen, vastaajien ikähaitari oli 7-9 vuotta. Tulokset viittaavat siihen, että kuvaavien erisnimien ymmärrettävyydellä on vaikutusta erisnimien muistettavuuteen sekä tunnistettavuuteen. Kun erisnimen kuvaava funktio täyttyi ja nimen kuvaavuus oli kielellisesti ymmärrettävissä kohdekielellä, vastaajat tunnistivat hahmoja sekä kirjoittivat nimiä oikein useammin. Hahmon karakterisaatioon nimen ymmärrettävyydellä ei kuitenkaan ollut oletetun kaltaista vaikutusta. Hahmon käyttäytymisellä ja toiminnalla on suurempi vaikutus karakterisaatioon kuin kuvaavalla nimellä. Nimen ymmärrettävyys ei kuitenkaan ollut yhdentekevää.

Avainsanat – Keywords lastenkirjallisuus, erisnimet, kuvaavat erisnimet, erisnimien kääntäminen, semantiikka

Table of Contents

1 Introduction................................................................................................................................................ 1 2 Personal names in children’s literature ...................................................................................................... 5

2.1 Conventional and descriptive names................................................................................................... 6

2.1.1. Descriptive names in My Little Pony .......................................................................................... 10

2.2 Characterization ................................................................................................................................ 11

2.3 Personal names and characterization ............................................................................................... 15

3 Translating for children with reference to translating personal names ................................................... 16

3.1 Translating personal names ............................................................................................................... 19

3.2 Translation strategies for personal names ........................................................................................ 21

1 Retention .......................................................................................................................................... 21

2 Domestication/Adaptation ............................................................................................................... 21

3 Direct translation .............................................................................................................................. 22

4 Substitution ...................................................................................................................................... 22

5 Other ................................................................................................................................................ 23

4 Audiovisual translating and dubbing ........................................................................................................ 26

4.1 Subtitling and dubbing ...................................................................................................................... 26

4.2 Recitability ......................................................................................................................................... 28

5 Material and methods .............................................................................................................................. 31

5.1 The My Little Pony franchise, the Ponyverse and My Little Pony Tales ............................................. 31

5.2 Video Clip .......................................................................................................................................... 33

5.2.1 Plot synopsis ............................................................................................................................... 34

5.3 Questionnaire .................................................................................................................................... 35

5.4 Data collection and processing .......................................................................................................... 36

6 Results and analysis .................................................................................................................................. 39

6.1 Name recognition task: Name this pony ........................................................................................... 39

6.1.1 Naming characters with translated names ..................................................................................... 39

6.1.2. Overall recognition patterns .......................................................................................................... 40

6.1.3. Recognition patterns by character ................................................................................................ 42

Tähti .................................................................................................................................................... 43

Hellä .................................................................................................................................................... 44

Teddy ................................................................................................................................................... 45

6.1.4 Naming characters with non-translated names ............................................................................. 46

6.1.5 Overall recognition patterns ........................................................................................................... 46

6.1.6 Recognition patterns by character ................................................................................................. 48

Starlight ............................................................................................................................................... 49

Sweetheart .......................................................................................................................................... 50

Teddy ................................................................................................................................................... 51

6.1.7 Comparisons of recognition patterns between translated and non-translated names .................. 52

6.2 Name Recognition Task: Match Pony and Name ............................................................................... 54

6.2.1 Translated names Karkki, Apila and Tilkku .................................................................................. 55

6.2.2 Non-translated names Bon Bon, Clover and Patch ..................................................................... 57

6.2.3 Comparisons of name matching between translated and non-translated names...................... 59

6.3 Name Creation Task: Name this Pony ............................................................................................... 61

7.3.1 Name creation in a Finnish language context ............................................................................. 62

7.3.2 Name creation in an English language context ........................................................................... 64

6.4 Characterization Task: Describe this pony ......................................................................................... 66

6.4.1 Direct characterization ............................................................................................................... 67

6.4.2 Indirect characterization ............................................................................................................ 70

6.4.3. Effects of name on characterization .......................................................................................... 71

7 Conclusion and Discussion ....................................................................................................................... 73 References:.................................................................................................................................................. 78

1

1 Introduction

This study endeavors to explore the effect of personal names on characterization and character name

memorability with an emphasis on the possible difference translation and retention might have on the

survey results. I test whether children can remember characters with greater accuracy when names are in

their native language versus when they are in a foreign language the children either do not know or have

a very limited grasp of. In the case of this study the language is English. Firstly, accuracy is primarily tested

by having the children name characters without external help (writing the names under the characters)

and combining names with characters (drawing lines between available names and characters). My

hypothesis is that children will name more characters and have fewer spelling errors when naming

characters in their native language as opposed to foreign language, and will combine characters with

greater accuracy when they understand the names as opposed to when they do not.

Secondly, and perhaps more interestingly, characterization will be tested with free association questions,

where children are asked to describe characters. These characters have semantically loaded names, and

my hypothesis is that children will derive qualities from these names when they can understand them,

and when the names are foreign they will derive qualities from other characterization attributes. I

hypothesize that children will draw clues from translated names resulting in repetition of alluded qualities

(that is to say, a character with a name alluding to niceness will result in characterizations that imply

niceness) whereas non-translated names will result in a more vague characterization that is based on

other cues, such as character appearance and character behavior.

My interest towards the effects of personal names in children’s literature (or in this case, visual media)

stems from a personal recollection from my own childhood. My pastel-colored youth was filled with My

Little Pony, and with translation policies as lax as they were and dubbing budgets so seemingly meager,

my favorite ponies were often entangled in a web of confused identities. Is this pony called Apila or

Clover, or perhaps both? Fast forward circa fifteen years, and I wrote my bachelor’s thesis on the subject

of personal name translation in the 1990s animation series My Little Pony Tales. In my thesis I categorized

and cataloged translation solutions regarding personal names, with a particular emphasis on names that

contained semantically loaded elements. With the concluding chapter of my bachelor’s thesis begins the

2

introductory chapter to this master’s thesis, as I intend to expand on the theories and themes I have

explored previously.

Though children’s literature is considered by many to roost within the periphery of the literal polysystem

(Lathey 2006, Shavit 1986), it by no means should be understood as children’s literature not adhering to

literary conventions or authors not treating their literary pieces with appropriate integrity. As such, in my

thesis I will be treating children’s literature as purposeful a text as any other, regardless of intended

audience. One might criticize the choice of material, but My Little Pony has a long legacy as a franchise

which spans decades as well as generations and is particularly fruitful in terms of its unique personal

name conventions. Characters are primarily named with descriptive names or names containing semantic

elements in the fictional world of My Little Pony, the Ponyverse.

Descriptive names are widely used in literature aimed at child audiences who can either read for

themselves, or who are read aloud to by adults (Bertills 2003, Kapari et al. 2002). If we argue that all texts

have a purpose (Vermeer 2013) and all communication has a meaning (ibid.), it can be assumed that

names which are descriptive also serve a purpose in the realm of literature. They are used to

communicate to the reader implicit or explicit information about the character (Nord 1997, Nikolajeva

2002, 2005, Bertills 2003, Oittinen 2000, Van Coillie 2006). And as such, no name is a coincidence.

Characters, one could argue, are the most meaningful part of a story and because of this it could also be

argued that character names are particularly important to the narrative. Does non-translation affect

characters if the specific intended purpose of a descriptive name is disclosing character attributes, when

the allusion cannot be effectively exploited due to language barrier? Names are naturally not the only

characterization tool, and other tools including age, sex, appearance and behavior are considered (for

example what are we to think of old man Mr. Grumpy or the pirate Captain Tiny, who dwarfs a squadron

of the royal guard with his hulking body?). Names alone, descriptive or otherwise, do not make a

character. But I argue that names are a fundamental part of the narrative that should not be overlooked.

What is a descriptive name, or a semantic element? These terms are explored in chapter 2 and 3, but I

will briefly illuminate the concept. In the context of this study I have chosen descriptive name as my

primary term, but will use semantic name intermittently, which correspond with Yvonne Bertill’s

semantically loaded name (2003: 206). A descriptive name, in short, is a proper noun and a personal

3

name that by itself carries a meaning. Names that qualify as semantic are names that refer to intangible

abstract concepts such as Sweetheart, to tangible real life objects such as Clover or Patch. Semantic

names can be divided to many (if not countless) categories to best suit the purposes of the researcher.

For the purposes of this study I have assigned some general categories, which are further explored in

chapter 3.2. Name with semantic elements is a more precise derivation of a semantic name, implying a

name that by itself is not semantic, but rather parts of it are. These parts are called lexemes and are

better explained in chapter 3.

The study was conducted as a questionnaire survey in two separate classes of students enrolled in

Joensuu Normaalikoulu primary school in Joensuu Finland, among school children aged 7 to 9. The

children were asked to watch a short episode of My Little Pony Tales and then asked to answer a brief

questionnaire on paper. The survey consists of multiple choice and free association questions. Depending

on their age, the children will see either a version where names have been translated or a version where

they have been retained. These versions are official translations by two different translation agencies. The

questionnaire is introduced in detail in chapter 5.

The thesis is structured as follows. Chapter 2 focuses on personal names in children’s literature and

expands on the terms descriptive and semantic name. Translating of personal names and my

categorizations for these translation solutions derived from previous research (Hirvonen 2012) are also

explored in greater detail. Chapter 3 explores translating for children and translating children’s literature,

aiming to expand on ideas of functional equivalence, fidelity, creativity and the position children’s

literature have from a sociocultural perspective. It briefly defines some general linguistic theories which

serve as a fundamental backbone to the vital theories on semantics by Ferdinand de Saussure (2002) and

Hans Vermeer’s functional equivalence (Vermeer and Reiss 1984). Chapter 4 discusses the practices of

audiovisual translating in detail. Although subtitling and dubbing are not at the forefront in this study, it is

important to explore some principles that may affect how a translator might translate a script (time

restrictions, extra-linguistic elements) and the multimodality of translating literary and audiovisual

content for children.

Chapter 5 introduces my material and methods. My research data was collected via a survey

questionnaire from children aged 7 to 9 in Joensuu Normaalikoulu primary school. The materials used

4

include two different dubs of a ten minute episode from the 90s children’s animated television series My

Little Pony Tales.

Results and analysis is discussed in detail in chapter 6 and concluding chapter 7 will critically consider the

validity of this thesis.

In this study I have chosen to purposefully use the gender neutral singular they (Huddleston 2002: 492) as

my preferred pronoun in place of the cumbersome she/he and her/him or the particularly tiresome

generic he. This is a conscious choice to use inclusive language in my part as the author. It is also utilized

for the purpose of blurring the lines between survey respondents to further protect their identities.

5

2 Personal names in children’s literature

"What's the use of their having names," the Gnat said, "if they won't answer to them."

"No use to them," said Alice; "but it's useful to the people that name them, I suppose. If not, why do things

have names at all?"

Gnat and Alice, Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking Glass, page 152

In this chapter I will explore the functions of personal names in literature with a particular focus on names

that appear in My Little Pony, conventional and descriptive names and their utility, as well as personal

name translation. I will also discuss personal names as a characterization tool, and how descriptive names

may affect characterization.

One could argue that characters are a quite-essential building block for any good story and the most

important piece of narrative. Their function is to provide the intended audience a point of reference, an

active participant in the storytelling and someone (something) to relate to (Bertills 2003: 48). A character

only becomes one when they are specifically and explicitly described by the author (Nikolajeva 2002).

Often a character is distinguished from the background humdrum of non-important descriptions of other

people, animals and objects by giving them a distinguishing personal name.

Furthermore, Yvonne Bertills (2003: 48) suggests that personal names also serve the function of signifying

importance or relevance of the characters. In the case of classic fairytales in particular, plot-related key

characters (or main characters, such as the protagonist or hero) are assigned personal names as a sign of

importance (such as Little Red Riding Hood) whereas minor characters are only given simple appellations

such as wolf, grandmother or huntsman despite their important roles in the narrative (there would, after

all, be little story to tell with any of these characters missing).

Personal names in literature serve multiple, complex functions. Most notably the function of a name is to

distinguish the character from their surroundings and other characters, and to allow the reader to orient

themselves within the narrative (Bertills 2003: 48). A name has been purposefully chosen for the

character to draw attention to what is significant about them (for example, female name vs male name, a

prestigious heritage name such as the German nobiliary particle ‘von’, unconventional made up name or

a descriptive name). A lack of a name is a purposeful decision by the author and equally meaningful as far

6

as the narrative and the character is concerned (ibid.). A name serves a dynamic narrative tool, and the

author can choose to impart additional knowledge about the characters personality, origin or appearance

by choosing character names that are transparently descriptive or meaningful (Ainiala et al. 2008: 338).

Furthermore, the functions of personal names according to Jan Van Coillie include: to identify the

character, to provide information about the character, to entertain or even amuse the reader (2006:

123). This is particularly true in children’s literature, where names serve aesthetic purposes through

whimsy and imaginativeness, such as alliteration, poetic rhythm or word play (consider Tweedle Dee and

Tweedle Dum). Understand the functions in the source language and source culture is important for the

translator so that they might stay faithful, as demanded by Bertills (2003: 194), to the purpose of the

author when translating, whether the function is formal, semantic or otherwise. Bertills also notes that

this is what makes translating for children particularly challenging. However, Van Coillie implies that any

purpose or intent of the author is not known to the translator and hangs in the balance of interpretation

of possible function, and any effect on the reader is not in the author’s or the translator’s power to

determine as each reader will have their own interpretation (2006: 123).

2.1 Conventional and descriptive names

Fictive names are bound by the confines of the rules that govern any particular fictive world; where

conventional names are often found in our real world lexicon and serve little purpose besides labeling to

set one person apart from another (Bertills 2003: 17), in the world of fiction names are a textual tool for

explicating innate knowledge about the character (Bertills 2003: 55–56). Conventional names in literature

often carry meaning, and are used to allude to real life bearers of the name, or to other works of fiction

or popular culture (Bertills 2003: 42). Examples of this could include biblical names, which have been

widely adopted into conventional name lexicon, but in fiction are used as an allusive tool for carrying

connotative value; consider a character named Judas, for example. Judas as a name is infused with the

notions of deceit and ultimate betrayal, Maria on the other hand with the essence of purity and piety.

Moreover, even when a conventional name does not appear to have an immediate point of reference, it

gives the reader some information of its bearer; whether the character is a female, old or young, or if

their name ‘exotic’ in the fictive context, etc. (Bertills 2003: 42).

7

In this thesis I frequently use the terms semantic and semantic element when referring to descriptive

names. Semantics, in brief, is the study of meaning. According to Ferdinand Saussure (2002: 48), meaning

can be derived from signifiers, such as words, symbols and signs, and their ideational signified, what they

stand for (and to some degree referent, their real-life signified). Denotation is the apparent meaning, and

connotation a culture-specific meaning (Diaz-Cintas 2009: 78).

By the term semantic I intend to signify that a word has particular meaning and that it refers to an

intangible idea or concept, or a tangible real life referent. Furthermore, a semantic element is used to

isolate words or elements (lexemes) within words that signify a meaningful connection to a referent. In

this study there are semantic names, that is, the name itself refers to a concept (such as the name

Starlight). Alternatively there are also names that only contain semantic elements. That is, the name itself

may not be fully meaningful but parts of it are, or that a word that has a meaning is ingrained within an

otherwise meaningless name (see also Cruse 2004: 86 on word forms and lexemes for further reading). An

example of a meaningful lexeme within a meaningless name is Cheerilee, which can be determined to

have the stem Cheer, with a meaningless suffix particle -ilee.

In My Little Pony, conventional names are sometimes used, although they are not very common. In the

Ponyverse, or the fictive world that the characters inhabit, descriptive names are more common.

Descriptive names (also semantic names and semantically loaded names (Docherty 1986: 45, Bertills

2003: 206)) mean names that have semantic elements or carry connotative meaning to describe the

name bearer. Names like these are the most common in children’s literature (consider the Big Bad Wolf),

as well as fantasy genre literature. The functions descriptive names perform are not limited to identifying

characters. Descriptive names are used to inform the audience to the nature or appearance of the

character, and can be used for comedic effect when there is direct mismatch between the character’s

descriptive name and their actual description, like would be the case with a giant named Tiny or a little

fluffy lapdog named Killer. The functions of these names are to draw attention to what is significant about

these characters, and to amuse the reader with the apparent discrepancy and oxymoron. A descriptive

name can function on multiple levels simultaneously, performing functions as a means of relaying

information, identifying the character, and amusing the reader, or any other combination.

Descriptive as defined by Merriam-Webster Dictionary:

8

de·scrip·tive

adjective

a) : giving information about how something or someone looks, sounds, etc. : using words to

describe what something or someone is like

b) : serving to describe <a descriptive account>

For the purposes of this study, descriptive name is reserved to names that adequately fulfill the task of

descriptiveness as defined in the Merriam-Webster Dictionary.

In his master’s thesis, Joni Rahja (2013) argues that unconventional, or invented names (Bertills 2003:

210) are most common in fantasy and sci-fi genres. This supports Bertills’s argument that sometimes the

fictive world demands a unique name that is outside the ordinary lexicon in order to convey a certain

milieu (2003: 41). An unconventional name is neither a descriptive name, nor a conventional name from

an existing onomasticon (Bertills 2003). Onomasticon refers to names that are accepted in their source

culture and/or language as personal names. An onomasticon is never constant, it evolves with time and

cultural exchange), though it may contain elements of one or both. Invented names often function as

identifiers, and satisfy the aesthetic functions and norms of their fictive context. Unconventional names

are coined without a direct relation to our common reality, but rather in keeping with the fictive world in

which they belong. However, it is not thoroughly impossible for these types of names to eventually

become a conventional name (for example Tolkien’s Bilbo and Legolas have been adopted into

conventional name lexicon in some countries).

I have chosen to use the term descriptive name to refer to personal names that have descriptive

elements such as allusions (or, references) to:

a) appearance,

b) profession,

c) or personality

This term has also been used by Nord (2003: 183). I propose to define this term in more clarity in relation

to this specific study. The definition I am using is my own adaptation refined from terms I have previously

9

used in my bachelor’s thesis, such as the term semantically loaded name, which was also used by Bertills

(2003: 206). It will be used as a replacement for the terms semantically loaded name, semantic name and

name with semantic elements. A semantic element means a part of the name that holds semantic

meaning; a name may not be fully semantic, but it may have semantic lexemes embedded in it (consider

Cheerilee), or as a part of a full name (Pippi Longstocking). However the aforementioned terms are not

without merit and can be used when it is necessary to draw attention to a particular aspect of a name or

its translation. In the next section I will explain what the term descriptive name means in the context of

this particular study.

A descriptive name is personal a name that contains elements that have meaning and/or allude to

something concrete (tangible or intangible) about the character, or imply something about the character,

whether explicitly or implicitly, in a way that can be understood from the semantic meaning or context

derived from the name. In simpler terms, a descriptive name serves a purpose as providing the reader

with information on the nature of the character (Van Coillie 2006: 124).

Descriptive names are an effective characterization tool in literature, as they provide the reader

transparent and direct information about the character. Names that fit the definition of a descriptive

name can be used in the real world (e.g. Hope, Amber, Jay) as identifying labels without inherent meaning

(Bertills 2003). However, in the literary context where they have a distinct purpose besides identification

they are most common in children’s literature and to some extent in fantasy genre (Rahja 2013). Many

are familiar with characters such as the Grimm’s Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, where descriptive

names allude both to physical attributes (Snow White for her ivory skin) as well as personality disposition

(Grumpy for his sour mood). Similar use of descriptive names can be found also in Pierre Curriford’s The

Smurfs, where characters are named either in relation to their

a) occupation (Doctor, Poet),

b) personality (Lazy, Grouchy)

c) color (Black)

d) implicit qualities (Papa as the patriarch, Smurfette as a female smurf).

10

Although these examples are focused on children’s literature, it should be noted that the use of

descriptive names is not strictly limited to this genre, and can be used in practically any other genre of

literature. However they are perhaps the most frequent in fantasy and sci-fi genres.

2.1.1. Descriptive names in My Little Pony

Having explored descriptive names as a relatively common literary tool for authors, I aim to briefly expand

on what descriptive names means as a term, and how descriptive names are used in the Ponyverse.

Much like in The Smurfs, descriptive names are used in the Ponyverse to refer to a character’s

profession, color, age, type (flying Pegasus-pony, magical unicorn-pony, water-dwelling mer-pony),

personality, origin or “cutie mark” (all ponies present an image on their flank in relation to whatever sets

that pony apart from the others, oftentimes referring to a calling, special talent or a primary personality

attribute).

Figure 1. Patch’s cutie mark is a patch of fabric, which directly alludes to the character’s name. Screen

capture of My Little Pony Tales, 1992.

11

Names can be explicitly descriptive, such as single word names Valiant or Sweetheart. They can be

implicitly descriptive, such as multiword names Sky Whirler or Bon Bon. Furthermore, not all personal

names in My Little Pony are descriptive, or the level of transparency in descriptiveness can be varied.

Consider the name Cheerilee, which contains a semantic element (or lexeme, Cruse 2004: 86) cheer with

a suffix particle -lee, but as a whole is neither descriptive nor conventional, or the twin names Ting-a-Ling

and Jing-a-Ling which allude to the onomatopoetic sound of musical jingling, but are not fully transparent

in descriptiveness nor meaningful as standalone words.

It should also be noted that sometimes a reference may also be lost despite a perfectly understandable

descriptive name. As a case in point a My Little Pony character, Chevalier, whose name was retained in

both English original and Finnish dub. English speaking children might make the connection to chivalry

and knighthood, as the character’s French name strongly resonates with its English cousin chivalry, and as

such may be recognized by English speaking audience. Chevalier is assigned a French identity (he has a

French name and speaks in a thick French accent). However Finnish children, with Finnish language being

relatively distant to French, might not pick up on the otherwise fairly obvious allusion to the personality

attributes of chivalry. Furthermore, ballet instructor Madame Percheron’s French accent might not seem

out of place because French ballet teacher seems like an appropriate trope; however the name has a

clever allusion that may not be apparent to an average child viewer; Percheron is a breed of French

horse. Retention of these names, however, could be supported by Christiane Stolt’s (1978) idea of names

as a means of retaining a certain cultural milieu (see chapter 3.2 on translation strategies), in this case the

exoticism of French identity that clearly defines these characters. Madame Percheron is translated in the

Finnish context Nordic Agapio dub as Neiti Ranskanen, to make this allusion more available to the Finnish

audience while still retaining a sense of foreign identity.

2.2 Characterization

12

Characterization is the act of describing or characterizing a person or a thing, and the act of an author

creating a representation of a fictitious character to function as a literary tool within the narrative. An

author has many ways of facilitating characterization, which will be explored next.

In her master’s thesis Suvi Nordenswan (2014) explains that characterization can be divided into two

categories; direct and indirect characterization based on the observations of Maria Nikolaveja (2002,

2005).

Direct characterization encompasses the things we as readers know, more specifically the things that the

author will explicitly spell out for us, or that we can objectively see in illustrations. These include

attributes such as sex, attire, actions and reactions or thoughts that are given to the reader by the

authoritative author. Although these attributes may be incomplete or even unreliable (say, when a

character describes another or when a character describes themselves and we cannot trust the

description to be accurate), the reader will often have to accept what is offered to them by the narrator.

Unless the author has established that the narration cannot be trusted either by directly telling the reader

the narrator or character is lying or coloring the story (much like Tom Sawyer who tells tall tales in The

Adventures of Huckleberry Finn), there is little room for personal interpretation or doubt. Characterization

that relies on external factors that can be perceived (such as clothing, hair or general cleanliness) are

often used in children’s literature, however implicit attributes can be a powerful characterization tool

(Nikolajeva 2002: 268-277). In audiovisual media such as animation, the marriage of the text (such as plot

and narration, as well as dialogue) and the visual content is all the more apparent and the reader (or,

viewer) is all the more likely to use visuals to make their characterization, as they can see and interpret

what is happening and what the characters look like. Visuals and text is often also supported by other

auditory cues, such as music or sound effects.

Indirect characterization consists of more implicit attributes, such as age, preferences and indeed,

personal names. Implicit attributes can be directly addressed (Joe did not like broccoli) or implicitly

addressed (Joe looked at the broccoli in disgust), where the reader is allowed to infer the purported

meaning the author is conveying about the character. From the previous examples we can deduce that

Joe is male, he does not enjoy broccoli and maybe he does not enjoy greens in general, he reacts rudely,

perhaps he is young. However these are subjective rather than objective interpretations and their

13

correctness is entirely dependent on the author and whether or not the author will expand on the subject

(Nikolajeva 2005: 161). For all we know, it could turn out that Joe is in fact a female character. As such, it

can be argued that indirect characterizations in translated literature rely on the interpretation of the

translator and the ensuing translation (unless the translator has the privilege of contacting the author

directly or vice versa to correct misunderstandings). Furthermore, it should also be mentioned that it has

been argued that all translation is an adaptation because it always relies on translator interpretation

(Kapari 2005).

In My Little Pony, as an animated series where illustration is equally prominent as the text (dialogue and

narration), both indirect and direct characterizations are employed. The characters have both externally

determined attributes such as color, body type, mane style, and cutie marks. A cutie mark is an image

portraying special talent or affinity which can also be considered an implicit characterization tool, as it

does not explicitly state anything about the character but the viewer is able to infer qualities about the

character based on its image. The ponies are also assigned other determining characteristics, such as

professions (nurse, teacher, janitor, ballet instructor) and nationality implied by accents or a particular

tone (Madame Percheron’s and Chevalier’s French accent). The children can, and likely will use some or

all of these when asked to describe the characters. The results will be discussed in later chapters.

14

Figure 2. Bulk Biceps (My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic 2014) is named in accordance to his physique.

He is not very bright, which is a stereotypical brawn over brain bodybuilder trope. Screen capture.

Moreover, though personal names fall within the category of implicit attributes (Nikolajeva 2005), in the

case of the Ponyverse names could be seen as direct characterizations; they can allude to external,

explicit and apparent factors such as coloration or physique. As such, it could also be interpreted that

personal names function as determinants to what is relevant or unique about the character (Bertills 2003

:88, 102), like one’s ability to fly or being heavily built, thus setting them apart from other characters who

cannot or are not. Personal names also make explicit what otherwise would be implicit, such as by

alluding to character’s profession or age (Mr. Cake, Granny Smith). Nordenswan (2014), much like

Nikolajeva (2005) and Bertills (2003), argues that in literature, no personal name is left to chance and that

all personal names can act as a powerful characterization tool for authors. The next chapter will explore

this further.

Figure 3. Clover (pictured behind Sweetheart) is an exhibition of a personal name’s humorous function.

Her cutie mark is a four leaf clover which is a symbol of good luck, but she is insufferably unlucky. Screen

capture from My Little Pony Tales 1992.

15

2.3 Personal names and characterization

In the previous chapter I suggested that there are two types of characterization as defined by Nikolajeva

(2005). Personal names fall in the category of indirect characterization. However I also suggested that in

the case of My Little Pony, wherein the names also contain semantics elements or are directly and

transparently descriptive, personal names could also be seen as a direct characterization tool.

Although scholars agree that the primary tools for assigning traits to a fictional character is through direct

actions, speech, description or narration (see Nikolajeva 2002 quoted in Bertills 2003: 51), personal

names can be used as devices of giving a character substance. This is particularly true for personal names

with semantic elements that are transparent and as such, tangible to the reader. According to Docherty

(1986: 45, quoted in Bertills 2003: 48), if a character is assigned a semantically loaded name (term in

correspondence with descriptive name), the name clearly defines the name-bearer and renders the

character somewhat limited in their possible interpretations. Even when the name is not in

correspondence with the character (for example a character of enormous proportions being called Tiny),

it still draws attention to a specific character trait (Tiny’s relevant character trait is its size).

Bertills draws attention to the notion that both conventional and semantically loaded names are carriers

of connotative value, although their power and target of allusion, denotation and connotation are

different (2003: 52). If you were to look at conventional names such as George and Tatyana, you are very

likely to have already drawn conclusions of the character’s attributes (possible interpretations including

age, sex and ethnicity). If you are then given names Logan and Sweetheart, your perception of these

characters may be very different because of the differences in their names, and perhaps the

interpretation will include presumed personality attributes (such as kindness for Sweetheart) due to the

connotation of the semantic element in the name. Although in My Little Pony both conventional names

as well as descriptive names are used, I would suggest that descriptive names serve a larger role as being

directly affective to characterization. The justification for this statement lies in the naming conventions of

the Ponyverse, which was discussed in the previous chapter 2.2, and will be discussed further in chapter 3

16

3 Translating for children with reference to translating personal names

This chapter will briefly discuss some general ideas regarding translating for children, or alternatively,

translating children’s literature. Some key ideas involve the author-audience dichotomy where an adult

author and child audience is involved, as well as notions on fidelity and translator ethics and functional

equivalence. Although most of these theories revolve around works of literature, they can be applied to

audiovisual content. Children’s literature often incorporates the multimodality of text and illustration,

where imagery is intended to support the text or provide more information than what can be interpreted

from text alone.

The definition of children, children’s culture, literature and childhood in general is not clear, but rather

something that has remained fluid throughout time periods. Riitta Oittinen (2000) approaches childhood

as an indefinite, subjective experience that all adults have had and is different for each individual. Thus, it

cannot be defined in a strictly prescriptive way. She also discusses whether children’s culture is culture

intended for children (as chosen, produced and censored by adults), or if it means a culture children

create among themselves, or perhaps a collaboration where both adults and children create a culture

together (Oittinen 2000: 84).

A similar divide could be made for children’s literature: is it literature that is intended for children (as

appropriated by adult authors and readers), or literature children read. Examples of children’s literature

that was originally intended for adult audiences but was adopted by child readers includes but is not

limited to Kipling’s Tarzan, Defoe’s Robinson Crusoe and Swift’s Gulliver’s Travels. Shavit (1986 quoted in

Oittinen 2000: 64) also supports the argument that children’s literature can have a dual audience, where

the content can be enjoyed by both child and adult readers on their separate levels. Examples of such

literary ambivalence include Milne’s Winnie the Pooh, Carroll’s Alice in Wonderland and Jansson’s

Moomin books.

Children’s literature has its own uniqueness that stems from the duality of audiences. It has to be

appropriate to the audience in terms of language and syntax, as children’s reading abilities are not like

those of an adult. Similarly the language must be recitable, as children’s literature is often read aloud by

adults: this also applies to dubbing, where the lines must be recitable in order for the dub to be

successful. Adults are the secondary audience to children’s literature, as the literature has to appeal to

17

both adults who choose what books to buy and read to children (or what movies or television shows they

are allowed to watch), as well as the child audience that chooses to listen (or consume independently)

(Oittinen 2000: 69).

According to Gillian Lathey (2006), children’s literature is considered to be in the periphery of the literary

polysystem. Furthermore, Lathey argues that it is not without sacrifice, as translating for children has

been regarded to be a low skill profession, which can hurt a translator’s reputation. Lathey is not alone in

these assertions, which mirror Riitta Oittinen’s (2000) observation that the apparent lack of

acknowledgement may be the symptom of patriarchy; where the work of women (writing and translating

for children has been, at least in Finland, dominated by women since 20th century) and subsequently

children’s culture is not as highly regarded as the work of men or adult culture. Appreciation is low in the

public eye, and within the discipline translating for children is apparently regarded with, if not quite

equal, considerable apathy. According to Oittinen (2000: 68), there are few universities with departments

for children’s literature and it is a subject most often found as an elective in other disciplines such as

psychology or pedagogy.

Perhaps this peripheral position and low appreciation also bring positives in terms of the act of

translating? Translators are permitted greater creativity and freedom when it comes to employing

strategies to the text, and strategies ranging from aggressive adaptation and omission to minor

simplification of subject matter are all available when translating for children (Oittinen 2000, Bertills

2003). These strategies and freedom can also be extended to personal name translations. Jaana Kapari-

Jatta (2008) argues in favor of the translator’s freedom to choose strategies on a case by case basis,

rather than having to decide on any single strategy and commit to it with disregard to the translation

needs and problems that may arise later.

Translating children’s literature is often not a task of preserving formal equivalence, but rather to

translate an idea. In this regard, functional equivalence (formerly dynamic equivalence, Nida 1964: 129)

could be considered to be a theoretical cornerstone when translating for children. For the purposes of

this study Hans Vermeer’s skopos theory (Reiss and Vermeer 1984) felt the most appropriate basis of

functional translation theory from the perspective of children’s literature (and audiovisual material)

translation. Vermeer suggested that fidelity to the source text was not a priority, but rather that a text

should be translated in accordance to its purpose. Moreover, he argued that the purpose of the

translation could result in different translations of the same source text (Vermeer 2004: 234). This could

18

be seen as complimentary to general ideas about translating for children where a translator is considered

to have more freedom in terms of fidelity, and a moral responsibility towards their audience more so than

the original author (Shavit 1986: 26). Children’s literature can have multiple purposes as discussed by Van

Coillie (2006: 123), such as to educate, or to amuse. Anthony Pym has argued that a translator can have a

different purpose than the original author. The original text could aim to amuse, but the translator could

decide that this purpose is not as important, and translate (adapt) the text to make it more educational

(2010: 48).

Skopos theory intends to shift the focus from source text equivalence to a more dynamic, functional

equivalence. Vermeer (as well as Holtz-Mänttäri 1984 and Nord 1997) argues that the intended purpose

of the text should be the determining factor for the translation. The audience (reader, end user) becomes

the master. However, Vermeer also argued that although the purpose may be the end that justifies the

means, a translator is also bound by their commissioner; who may or may not be the end user. Consider

this in the context of animation dubbing script translation. The commissioner will be the publishing

company that has bought rights to the animation script. However the end user will not be the publishing

company (though they will use the translation and ensuing dub), the end user will be the audience;

children. However, it should also be noted that children’s literature (and its translations) is affected by the

adult author child reader dichotomy (Bertills 2003, Nikolajeva 2002), where the author (and subsequently

translator) acts as an agent with more experience and knowledge and has to pre-determine not only what

the child reader will be able to understand, but also what is appropriate for a child audience; thus writing

(and translating) for children.

It is seldom possible to discuss children’s literature without discussing the special relationship between

illustration and the text. Children’s literature is often illustrated (and in the case of animation, the

imagery is the text), and it is the translator’s duty to ensure that the resulting translation does not conflict

or detract from the illustrations (Oittinen 2000: 4). A disruption between text and illustration and the

resulting dissonance can affect the reading/viewing experience negatively (Van Coillie 2006). This is all

very relevant also in the realm of audiovisual translation and translating both script and dialogue for

children’s animated television series and movies, where disruption and a dissonance between the text

and the audiovisual content (for example an error in script writing assigning a line in dialogue to the

wrong character, so the character seen speaking has the wrong voice) can detract from the viewing

experience and break the illusion of the story. Audiovisual translation will be discussed in further detail in

chapter 4. Oittinen (2000: 6, 76) argues that all translation is adaptation, and that adapting a text for a

19

target audience is an essential part of translating for children. This is a much more liberal stance on

adaptation, for example Ritva Leppihalme (2007) argues to use caution when adapting and domesticating

children’s literature, as authoritative adults should not determine so strictly what content and language is

appropriate for children and should not risk censoring the original, but to respect the author’s intended

purposes (such as to amuse or to educate) when translating.

3.1 Translating personal names

In Kapari et al. (2002), Jaana Kapari mentions that the trend in Finland in the 1990s was to translate all

personal names in literature aimed at child and teen audiences to make them easier to read by an

audience only fluent in one language, Finnish. In her master’s thesis Terhi Leskinen (1995) notes that

there has been a shift from the 90’s trend of translating personal names from English to Finnish to a more

modern practice of leaving personal names intact (quoted in Oittinen 2000). Kapari-Jatta (2008: 71–72)

also supports this idea and argues that not all names require translation and that children are nowadays

more accustomed to foreign languages, making systematic translation of all personal names a strategy

more befitting of literature aimed at ever younger audiences (Kapari et al. 2002: 4). This shift in

translation conventions and attitude could be considered a display of potential freedom of choice, but

also a development stemming from the complexity of the definition of children’s literature.

If the personal names in My Little Pony were intended to be meaningful characterization tools (as they

appear to be in the original to the source language users), translating the names so that they serve this

function could be one skopos. In short it could be described as follows; the names should allude to

qualities physical or psychological as intended by the original. If this were an assigned skopos, would a

translation where the names failed their purpose be a correct, or at the very least, a good enough (or

adequate (Toury 1995 quoted in Venuti 2004: 216) or instrumental (Nord 1997: 47–52)) translation at all?

Ultimately, the skopos of the translation determines what the parameters of an acceptable, adequate or

good enough translation are.

Although it is not without warranted criticism (Vermeer 2004: 230–234, Pym 2010: 56–59), skopos theory

provides particularly useful tools for determining whether translated and non-translated personal names

serve their intended purpose for the intended audience in this particular study. Translation strategies for

personal names are discussed in more detail in chapter 3.2.

20

Understanding the function of a fictive personal name is key to preserving the desired effect, however

subtle the reference or function may be. Because personal names have a dynamic role in the narrative,

Yvonne Bertills (2003: 194) argues that when translating personal names, especially when they carry

semantic value and allusions, the function of the name should remain faithful to the original and the

translator should be aware of the cultural context the original name has. For example, translator Alice

Martin retained British names in her translation of Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland when the characters

belonged to the real world to indicate the mundane, but changed or translated the names of characters

originating from Wonderland to highlight the curious (Oittinen 1997: 54), which could be seen as a

translator choosing a strategy to achieve a desired effect (functional equivalence, Vermeer 2004) and is in

keeping with Nord’s observation that translators can utilize many strategies within a single text (Nord

2003: 182–183, see also Kapari 2008).

Bertills (2003: 207) suggested the following categorization for translation strategies for the translation of

personal names, and continues that a translator can, or in fact must employ multiple strategies when

translating personal names with connotative value. Bertills’s categorizations are based on the categories

provided by Hermans (1988), which she expanded upon and are as follows:

1) copying: name is transferred completely unchanged from source text to target text, so that it

appears exactly as it was in the original

2) transcription: name is transliterated and adapted on different levels, such as spelling or

phonology

3) substitution: name is changed to a point where it no longer represents the original in form

4) translation: if name has semantic content, it can be translated to match source language meaning

in target text

5) non-translation: name is omitted in target text

6) replacement: name is replaced with a proper noun

From the above we can deduce that there are a number of strategies a translator can employ when

translating personal names. Not all translation strategies are actively used in personal name translation. A

translator may choose to use just one or two strategies, such as retention or domestication and direct

translation, or a combination of any number of strategies (Hermans 1988, Nord 2003). The translator may

also choose to change their strategy or solve translation problems on a case by case basis (Kapari 2008:

71-72).

21

3.2 Translation strategies for personal names

When studying what translation strategies were used in the two translations of My Little Pony Tales, I

used a list of strategies I adapted from the works of Nord (2003: 194–195), Hermans (1988 quoted in

Bertills 2003: 207) and Čičelytė and Jaleniauskienė (2009) and used as a categorization tool for my

bachelor’s thesis (Hirvonen 2012). Other terms have been used for these strategies; my choice of terms

has been a matter of personal preference over predetermined terminology (for example Bertills and

Hermans use different terminology and categorization). For the purposes of this study my original

categorization was insufficient, while Hermans’s and Bertills’s categorization seemed too sprawling and

imprecise, I re-adapted my original list of strategies as follows:

1) retention

2) domestication/Adaptation

3) direct translation

4) substitution

5) other

I will briefly define what each translation strategy means in my categorization.

1 Retention

Also called copying by Hermans, and direct translation by Čičelytė and Jaleniauskienė. The name is

retained and transferred unchanged to the target text. Retention can be utilized when a name is easily

read and understood in the target language. It can also function as a way of introducing the reader to a

foreign culture or creating a culture specific milieu (Stolt 1978: 137), such as the Harry Potter books

(where English milieu is nurtured via retention of personal names but not always proper names, like in

Jaana Kapari-Jatta’s translations of Harry Potter and Hermione Granger, but Likusteritie and Tylyaho).

However sometimes retention does not appear to serve a specific purpose and the reasons for retention

are unclear, with My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic as a case in point. One possible reason for retention

could be that the commissioner of the translation (author, publisher, trademark holder) wishes to

maintain brand integrity; that the names be same in every country. Because of this, Rarity remains Rarity

and Fluttershy is Fluttershy in the Finnish translation of My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic despite there

being no apparent need for retention (no milieu to retain).

2 Domestication/Adaptation

22

Domestication refers to the act of translating a conventional foreign name into target language

equivalent or otherwise. This strategy is most often used in children’s literature (Stolt 1978: 135–136,

Leppihalme 2007: 371), although it could be argued that all translation is in a way adaptation. It is a

common strategy for translating conventional personal names, as well as personal names with titles.

Examples of these include historic names such as Alexander the Great (Aleksanteri Suuri), King Carl Gustaf

(kuningas Kaarle Kustaa), as well as children’s literature characters Pippi Långstrump (Peppi Pitkätossu),

Emil I Lönneberga (Vaahteramäen Eemeli) and Kirsi Kunnas’s translation of Alice to Liisa.

In My Little Pony Tales, domestication is primarily used for conventional names. For example, Mr. Tidwell

(the school janitor) is translated as herra Jokinen, Logan is translated as Jaakko and the Barringtons

translates to Marjaset. These also fit the criteria for adaptation, where the name is not an apparent

equivalent to the original, but does not fit the criteria for substitution. Other domesticating adaptations

include a plural name Peaches adapted to singular Persikka, Meadowlark from bird to a grass Niittyheinä

and Daisy to a different type of flower Kielo.

3 Direct translation

Direct translation means that the elements have been translated word-for-word, or to their target

language equivalent (Bertills 2003: 207). It is utilized primarily for descriptive names or names that

contain descriptive elements (lexemes), and thus abovementioned conventional names do not meet the

criteria for this category. A conventional name can be translated to its perceived equivalent, or assigned

an appropriate conventional name in target language and culture, which by my categorization would fall

in the realm of domestication.

In My Little Pony Tales, many descriptive names are translated word-for-word when a direct translation is

possible. Examples include Amber (Meripihka), Peach Blossom (Persikan Kukka), Sugar (Sokeri) and Spot

(Täplä).

4 Substitution

A translator can choose to forgo the original name altogether and create a new name. When substitution

is used as a strategy, the resulting name can be domestically localized or foreign, ideally in preserving the

method that has been employed throughout. Substitution can also be used when there is no direct

equivalent in the target language or when other types of (such as phonetic) equivalence is preserved.

Substitution can also be used in place of direct translation, where names that would have an equivalent

are instead translated to something other than this perceived equivalent.

23

For this translation category, names can be non-descriptive or descriptive. Conventional names, even

when substituted, could still fall within the category of domestication rather than substitution. To meet

the criteria for substitution, the name must diverge from the original meaning, or not meet a perceivable

target language equivalent. In My Little Pony Tales, the name of a farm animal, Yorkie and its translation

Jörkki, belonged in this category. The translation could not sufficiently fulfill the criteria for translation or

adaptation, but appeared to be an attempt to preserve phonetic equivalence. Similarly, the pony

character name Squire and its translation Kuoro (en. choir) fit the criteria for substitution, where the

translation does not meet its target language equivalent of asemies or aseenkantaja (although on

personal note, this appears to be a translation error and not a conscious translation strategy, as the

English words squire and choir are pronounced similarly and are easily confused if the translator does not

have the original script and is translating from audio alone, see chapter 4.1).

Replacing the personal name with a proper noun or a personal pronoun could also fall in this category,

though there were not many instances of this type of substitution. Most notably in My Little Pony Tales,

Ms. Hackney is substituted with the appellative noun teacher, and Mr. Tidwell with the appellative noun

janitor instead of being referred to by personal names in the episode.

5 Other

Other strategies, such as omission or addition, are sometimes used when the name or character is not

deemed important or relevant to the reader/audience such as when the character is not seen or the

inclusion of the character is not important to the narrative. Omission is used to conserve time and space

especially in audiovisual translating and dubbing.

It should be noted that both omission and addition could be their own non-translation category and

studied separately. This is recommended if omission and/or addition seem to be a strong trend in a

translation, or when omission occurs as a way of substituting personal name with proper nouns or

personal pronouns (though in my categorization, this is included in substitution). In the case of my

materials both omission and addition are uncommon strategies consisting entirely of additions and

omissions, and all other names fit more specific categories, leaving no ambiguity in the other-category. In

My Little Pony Tales, the name Half Note is omitted for no discernable reason. The character is seen on

screen, but the dialogue with the name is omitted. In another instance, the name Riitta is added to a line

in dialogue that did not have a name in the original.

24

As discussed earlier and as suggested by Kapari-Jatta (2008), translators can use different strategies to

achieve an adequate translation, and are not confined to only using one or two strategies when

translating personal names. For example, in the two translations of My Little Pony Tales, all of the five

strategies defined above have been used to create the onomasticon (Bertills 2003) for their respective

Ponyverses.

Table 1 demonstrates how different strategies have been used in My Little Pony Tales, the results in this

table have been collected from two dubs of the same series, one by Nordic Agapio Oy (NA) which used a

domesticating approach and the other by Golden Voice Ab (GV) which employed a retentive strategy. The

numbers 1-5 correspond with the number of strategies listed above (retention,

domestication/adaptation, direct translation, substitution and other), the letter D stands for descriptive

name and C for conventional name. Not all names are included in table 1, as it is intended only to

showcase how different strategies can be used within one text (I use the term text loosely here, meaning

a dub translation). For a full list of all names and their categorization, see Hirvonen (2012).

Table 1. Translations of some personal names in Finnish dubs of My Little Pony Tales.

Name in original Translation Dub D C 1 2 3 4 5

Clover Clover GV D x

Chevalier Chevalier GV/NA D x

Madame Percheron Madame Percheron GV D x

Madame Percheron Neiti Ranskanen NA D x

Amber Meripihka NA D x

Half Note Puolinuotti NA D x

Half Note - (omission) GV D x

Logan Jaakko NA C x

Yorkie Jörkki NA C x

Meadowlark Niittyheinä NA D x

Starlight Tähti NA D x

- Robert (addition) GV C x

Ms Hackney Opettaja GV C x

Ms Hackney Neiti Simanen NA C x

25

Squire Kuoro NA D x

In table 1, we see examples of the category 5 (other), strategies. These include an omission: where the

character Half-Note is seen on screen and her name is spoken in the original, but is omitted in the

translation, as well as addition: where the original line does not mention a character name, but the

translation has added a name of a character that is not seen on screen.

As Table 1 indicates, in the Nordic Agapio dub, several complementary translation strategies (adaptation,

direct translation and substitution) are used together to create a Finnish language context and

onomasticon. According to Bertills (2003: 194), when translating personal names in children’s literature,

the function of the name should be carried over to the resulting translation. It could be argued that if

personal names had a distinct function (such as to describe the character), the names should be

translated so that the function can be fulfilled also in the target language. However the translator has the

freedom to choose their translation strategy, and can choose to use retentive rather than adaptive

strategies. Or like Kapari-Jatta (2008) argues, choose a strategy on a case-by-case basis. The

commissioner of the translation can also have an effect on how personal names are translated.

26

4 Audiovisual translating and dubbing

In this chapter I will discuss pragmatic approaches to the theories and rules that are closely linked with

my chosen material. Firstly, I will explore the field of audiovisual translation, subtitling and dubbing. Of

these two dubbing is naturally more relevant to this particular study, but subtitling must also be

considered in this regard. Secondly, I will briefly consider the challenges recitability presents in the field of

dubbing.

4.1 Subtitling and dubbing

Worldwide, dubbing and voice-overs have been and still are used to make foreign language audiovisual

available to the audience. Dubbing is more common in some European countries, for example in Spain

and Italy content for all audiences, including adults, can be dubbed. In Finland dubbing is traditionally

used for translating children’s media (namely animations), however there are exceptions (e.g.

documentaries). A European Commission requested study indicates that reasons for subtitling, dubbing

and voice-overs are political (such as nationalistic identity), social (literacy and foreign language

knowledge), economic (level of demand) and cultural (preference or habit) (Media Consulting Group

2011: 23).

Subtitling is commonly used for foreign media aimed at literate (adult) audiences. It is more economical

to produce (Vertanen 2007: 150) and a preferred method for translation in countries with a high literacy

rate as well as high demand (Media Consulting Group 2011). However, in countries that produce a large

volume of content in native language (e.g. The United States and the United Kingdom) consumers may

feel more comfortable with a dub, as they are not accustomed to reading subtitles while watching

television, movies or games and would rather avoid it.

Next I will discuss dubbing in more detail. Tatu Tiihonen defines dubbing as a specific type of audiovisual

translation which incorporates theatrical translation, subtitling and poetry translation. Moreover, dubbing

shares principles with all these special fields of translation and is subject to similar considerations and

restrictions (2007: 171). Texts intended for dubbing require oral recitability much like theatrical scripts,

the timeframe for a speech act is limited and the quality of the mouth animation affects requirements for

27

phonetic equivalence in terms of vowel harmony as well as rhythm of syllables (ibid.). I will look into this

in more detail in the succeeding chapter.

According to Tiihonen, translators have previously had limited access to the content they were

translating, and would often translate directly from script or after only a single viewing of the source

content. The script would then be rehearsed and further post-translation script processing (such as

corrections, omissions and additions) would be fine-tuned during recording. Studio equipment as well as

animation quality have developed in recent years, requiring better quality translations to meet the

demands posed by more accurate mouth animation. Technological advances have made recording and

post-recording processing more efficient for voice actors and audiovisual designers, so fixing errors and

recording re-takes can now be done with relative ease compared to the equipment of yesteryear.

(Tiihonen 2007: 181).

Figure 4. Screen capture from My Little Pony Tales, 1992. Mouth animation makes some vowel sounds

more appropriate than others. Here the exclamation “Aah!” is more likely than “Eek!”

28

Presently advances in animation (not discrediting the hard work of skilled animators in the past) may have

increased the need for phonetic equivalence; disruptions in lip synchronizations due to mismatched

mouth animation and phonetic output (including but not limited to wrong mouth shape for a vowel,

pauses, mouth movement continues or stops out of synch with utterance) can have a negative effect on

the audience experience and illusion of text produced in native language, as well as result in diminished

perceived quality of the translation and/or dub . As such, translators must consider synchronization of

vowel sounds; especially when vowels begin or end a word or an utterance, they create a specific mouth

shape, and replacing it with a disharmonic vowel is likely to cause a disruption in lip synchronization (see

Tiihonen 2007: 179). Similarly, if a word or utterance becomes significantly longer or shorter than the

original, disruptions are likely to occur. Omission and condensation are common tools for translators

working on dubs. Time restrictions can apply even when mouth movement is not a part of the equation;

scene changes or sound effects sometimes determine how long an utterance can be when lip

synchronization is a non-issue. (Tiihonen 2007: 176.)

It may not be instantly apparent how this relates to descriptive names. However, the link is very simple.

Many descriptive words in English have a very disharmonic partner in Finnish due to the different

language families these two languages belong to (Hirvonen 2012). Furthermore, due to the differences in

the use of morphemes, such as stacking suffixes in Finnish, we can determine that Finnish generally has

words with more syllables. Alternatively, very complex multiword sentences can be expressed in a single

word in Finnish. These can become a considerable challenge when lip synchronization and time

restrictions must be considered.

4.2 Recitability

As mentioned in the preceding chapter, dubbing is subject to similar rules as theater scrips, poetry and to

some degree children’s literature (on reading aloud, see chapter 3 on translating for children). When

translating texts intended to be orally performed, it is not only time or vowel sounds that the translator

must consider. Although time and timing restrictions naturally play a large part, it is also the rhythm of

speech and allotted space for syllables that also affect how the text might be translated (Heikkinen 2007).

Children’s literature may often be read aloud and as such, texts for child audiences have to be carefully

formulated so that they might be easier to recite. Similarly, children who read for themselves would likely

29

benefit from text that was not too complex. Recitability in this context is closely linked to Oittinen’s

(1997) idea of readability, as children’s literature is often read aloud.

With recitability in mind, form may become less important than function. Vermeer’s (1984) skopos theory

may be relevant in the regard that if the text is supposed to be orally recited (it is its purpose) the text

should be translated (and arguably originally written) in a way that enables oral recitation. Moreover, for

a text intended for child audiences to read (or hear, or for voice actors to recite), it would be imperative

that the text not be complicated in rhythm or riddled with elaborate syntax, complex verbs or verbose

vocabulary (Oittinen 1997: 103). This is not to discredit the child audience, but rather to consider their

cognitive capacity and possible linguistic limitations (adult author and child reader dichotomy, see Bertills

2003 and Oittinen 2000).

Recitability is especially important for scripts intended for dubbing. Modern dubs for children will often

retain original English names. It must be noted here that the majority of animated content for children

aired in Finland’s commercial channels in 2015 is primarily either American or British, and seldom from

other countries or originating from other languages, which has not always been the case. Examples of

animations from other countries include Japanese Tao Tao Ehonkan (fin. Tao Tao), Spanish La vuelta al

mundo de Willy Fog (fin. Matka maailmanympäri 80 päivässä) and German Die Biene Maja (fin. Maija

Mehiläinen), as well as many others. This modern trend seems to bring challenges to voice actors, as not

all names are easy to pronounce or fit properly in an otherwise Finnish text, which result in multiple

pronunciations of the same name (for example Klou-ver and Clover, Ted-dy and Te-di), or line flubs.

However difficulties in pronunciation does not appear to be of much concern to publishers as the practice

seems to be increasing on commercial channels. This estimate is based on personal observation alone

from observations on series including but not limited to Totally Spies, Pokémon, Beyblade, Monster High

and Kim Possible. Furthermore, it should also be noted that the Finnish public broadcasting network YLE

continues to produce dubs to different age groups where names have been translated, such as Paw

Patrol (fin. Ryhmä hau), Peppa the Pig (fin. Pipsa Possu), and The Wild Soccer Bunch (fin. Villit futarit). An

interesting exception to the rule of dubbing is French animation series Le Ranch (fin. Mistral) broadcast

on YLE, which is subtitled from French rather than dubbed despite perceived intended audience being the

same as for The Wild Soccer Bunch.

In terms of My Little Pony, it could be noted that the characters have names that could potentially be

(and occasionally are) clearly difficult to pronounce. As a language, Finnish does not have an alveolar /r/

30

sound like that in English, and as such names such as Sweetheart and Starlight can pose challenges. Bright

Eyes is frequently mispronounced Brite Eyes (or Braitais) due to a lack of any silent letters in the Finnish

language and the pronounced alveoral trill r instead of the alveoral approximant /r/. Because of minor but

frequent hiccups in pronunciation, recitability of the entire script can be compromised.

31

5 Material and methods

In this chapter I endeavor to introduce my research material as well as discuss the origins of the My Little

Pony franchise in order to shed some light into what may otherwise seem like a very arbitrary subject of

study. Following the introduction of the background material the primary materials for analytical research

(that is, survey questionnaire provided for the children) will be discussed in detail. Following the materials

chapter is the method of data collection and processing, as well as a brief mention of how the data will be

stored.

5.1 The My Little Pony franchise, the Ponyverse and My Little Pony Tales

It is imperative to understand some key elements of the My Little Pony franchise to understand the

foundation of this study. I will discuss the history of the franchise before introducing my chosen research

materials (ie. My Little Pony Tales). The Ponyverse is a term coined by fans and encompasses the fictive

world (or indeed, universe) which the pony franchise stems from.

The My Little Pony franchise was originally developed by illustrator Bonnie Zacherle, sculptor Charles

Muenchinger and manager Steve D'Aguanno and launched by toy company Hasbro in 1983 with a line of

colorful plastic pony toys. To aid sales in the 80s, Hasbro also developed animated series, full length

feature films and animated specials featuring pony characters that could also be purchased as toys. In the

original launch, My Little Pony characters were primarily pastel colored ponies (including flying pegasi,

merpony and unicorn characters), various other fantasy critters and a few human characters. Ponies

would embark on adventures with or without their human friends. Although they could do some human-

related tasks (such as building with tools), they were primarily confined to their physique as four-legged

equines, thus holding tools in their mouths rather than their hooves.

Altogether the franchise is divided into 4 generations by toy collectors. The first generation (G1) was

intended for child audiences consisting primarily of girls. Perhaps the nobler idea behind the franchise

was to provide girls with an alternative to traditional toys such as dolls or play housewares. The animation

was also aimed primarily at young girls, supporting an idea of perseverance, importance of friendship and

working together, and the power of imagination. Later generations have seen a shift in focus to appeal to

different age groups with adjustments to character design and story thematic.

32

I have chosen the 1992 animated series My Little Pony Tales as my research material. This series belongs

in the first generation of My Little Pony, although it saw a redesign both in character design as well as

thematic content. In this launch of the Ponyverse, as many fans have come to call it, the ponies are

presented as anthropomorphized; they attend school and run businesses, there is an economy where

money is exchanged for goods. In Ponyverse ponies represent people, there are no humans in the re-

launch My Little Pony Tales, though humans had been incorporated in the earlier series and re-introduced

in the latest launch, My Little Pony: Equestria Girls (Hasbro 2014).

A very particular feature of the Ponyverse is the use of descriptive personal names (see chapter 2.1).

Ponies are often (but not always) named after colors, occupations, origin, objects or personality

attributes, or combination of these. Furthermore, names can also allude to the ‘cutie mark’, which is an

image on the ponies’ flank representing their unique talents or other attributes (e.g. musical instruments,

weather symbols, nature, etc.), as seen in figure 5. below.

Figure 5. A collection of Generation 1 Cutie Marks with associated pony names showing correlation of

name and cutie mark image.

My Little Pony Tales was produced by Graz Entertainment and Sunbow Creations for Hasbro, and ran for

one season consisting of 26 episodes with a runtime of approximately 10 minutes each (intro and outro

not included). No special episodes or films were made for this launch.

The intended audience, based on my personal observation and evaluation on the animated content,

appears to be primary to children ages 7 to 13, with many themes revolving around doing well in school,

33

being a good friend, honesty, nature conservation, prejudice and the importance of open mindedness, as

well as consumerism and fame; all culturally common themes to school children of the 1990s. The DVD

has an age rating appropriate for ages 7 and up.

The series was first released in Finland for VHS tape in 1992, translated and dubbed in Finnish by Golden

Voice AB. The VHS release omitted a few episodes, and consists of 20 episodes. The series was re-

released for television in 1997 on commercial channel Nelonen, this time translated and dubbed by

Nordic Agapio Oy. This release retained all original 26 episodes. It should also be noted that in the Nordic

Agapio dub, character names occasionally change (Clover is called both Apila and Clover), which could

cause confusion. The series was re-released on DVD in 2006, with DVDs containing four episodes each.

This DVD release was digitized from the 1992 Golden Voice AB translated VHS material, though a single

episode appears to have been re-dubbed by another company. The DVDs do not list information on the

translations, so it is presently unknown why one episode saw a substituted translation and dub and

whose handiwork it is.

5.2 Video Clip

My research is conducted in school classes, where participants are shown either the Nordic Agapio or the

Golden Voice dubbed version of the same episode. After viewing, participants are asked to fill out a

questionnaire based on the video they have just seen. The questionnaires are otherwise identical, with

the exception that the names of the characters correspond with the dub the participants have seen.

Two videos serve as the basis for the comparative questionnaire, which will be explained in greater detail

in chapter 5.3. The audience was be presented with the episode ‘I Stand by You’ (runtime approx. 10

minutes), which features several characters that are referred to by their name. The audience saw a dub of

the same episode by either Nordic Agapio Oy, or Golden Voice AB. By approximation an equal amount of

children were shown each video. The data collected from this sample will be analyzed both qualitatively

and quantitatively in chapter 6.

The video has been appropriately time stamped with name occurrences. The time stamping and name

occurrence statistics were manually extracted from each episode. The number of name occurrences will

likely be a helpful tool in determining whether repetition plays a part in character recognition and name

memorability, which will be explored in chapter 6.

34

Time stamped list of name occurrences from each episode is available in the appendix.

5.2.1 Plot synopsis

In the episode ‘I Stand by You’, Melody brings her new tape recorder to school. However when the

recorder goes missing, accusations quickly turn to the class troublemaker, Teddy. The ponies hold a mock

court in class to determine who took the missing recorder. Sweetheart is forced to make a choice

between doing the right thing and her friends. She defends Teddy in court and solves the mystery of the

lost tape recorder, which was in the lost and found bin the entire time. The episode ends with a recap of

what can be learned from this incident; standing by what you believe in even when no one supports you,

not making hasty accusations, and that everyone deserves and needs a friend.

The episode provides some helpful characterization tools throughout. Melody’s musical inclination is

hinted at by her name, enthusiasm for her new tape recorder and her cutie mark is a star and a

microphone. She acts like a proper diva and is quick to jump to conclusions, which is in keeping with her

dramatic personality. Sweetheart always gives everyone the benefit of the doubt and stays true to herself

even in times of adversity. She is friends with the main cast but also with Teddy and she stands by her

friends despite pressure from others. She is portrayed as kind and friendly, but also firm. Her cutie mark is

a heart. Teddy is portrayed as a rambunctious troublemaker, but Sweetheart’s song in the episode also

sheds light on his compassionate and gentle side. He may appear rough and rude but is not inherently

bad at heart. Teddy’s cutie mark is a comb and does not directly refer to his personality. His name is an

allusion to his secret stuffed teddy bear, and also implies that he has a softer, gentler side. Starlight,

Bright Eyes, Bon Bon, Clover and Patch only have brief lines in the episode. Starlight is assigned the role of

judge in court because she is always fair and does not take sides. Bright Eyes is diligent and detail

oriented, and is assigned the role of prosecutor; she is seen working very hard on a list of reasons why

Teddy may be guilty of theft. Starlight’s cutie mark is a star (refers to her name), Bright Eyes’s cutie mark

is a notebook (refers to her personality). Bon Bon and Clover both speak a couple of lines but not much

can be determined of their character based on their discourse. Their cutie marks correspond with their

names (candy for Bon Bon and a four-leaf clover for Clover), which may help children in character

recognition. Patch is never named during the episode, but she speaks two lines.

Other characters include Miss Hackney (teacher) and Mr. Tidwell (janitor). These characters play minor

parts, and I did not include them in the questionnaire. Another reason for the omission of these

35

characters from the questionnaire was that as adult characters, the children might not identify with them,

and also that their ideas of the characters might be impacted with their preconceived ideas of what it

means to be a teacher or a janitor.

5.3 Questionnaire

The survey questionnaire was conducted in Joensuu Normaalikoulu during the fall semester in

September, 2014. Two classes took part in the questionnaire, with respondents’ ages ranging between 7

to 9 years old.

A questionnaire was handed out to the children in the classroom. The children were asked to fill in their

personal information (age, native language) and complete four questions. The questions should be

answered only after viewing the clip, and the children were instructed not to look at the questions

beforehand. To further enforce this instruction, the children were asked to turn the paper around so that

they can focus on the video. When the video is finished, participants were asked to turn their paper

around or open the survey again to begin answering questions. The main motivation behind this

procedure is that the children would not orient themselves any certain way before viewing the video clip,

so that the answers would reflect a response after a leisurely viewing and not an isolated test situation. If

the children were aware that they would be asked to recognize and write down character names, it might

affect them in a way that they would be more mindful of the characters, which would not reflect a

leisurely real-life viewing situation.

The questionnaire features both open-ended free association questions, where the children will be asked

to describe a character using only a few words or to name their own character (not seen in the episode),

as well as multiple choice questions where the children are asked to name three (3) characters from the

show, and draw lines between characters to match with their names. The questionnaire features only a

limited amount of questions (four separate tasks) to avoid overwhelming the children and to ensure filling

out the questionnaire will not take longer than 30 minutes. Though the primary reason for such a fast

paced questionnaire may be to save the teacher’s time so that the class may resume with regular

curriculum, it is also to ensure that children do not take too long to consider their options. Snap

36

judgments about characters may prove to be more intuitive than if the children are allowed to brainstorm

on characteristics indefinitely.

Teachers were allowed to provide instructions, however they are not allowed to prompt the children in

any way. That is, they are allowed to repeat the instructions (to remind the children what to do if they do

not know the answer or if they cannot think of anything to write, in which case the teacher or parents

would instruct the child to leave the answer blank), but they cannot offer examples (such as instructing

the children to use words like nice or friendly). I am responsible of handing out, collecting and storing

finished questionnaires. In a real life situation I was also personally responsible for instructing the children

and teachers only provided additional support when children were getting carried away or talking during

the questionnaire.

An example of a blank questionnaire is available in the appendix.

5.4 Data collection and processing

The completed questionnaire slips were collected and labelled with the appropriate class identification.

Identification will be used to determine which version of the video clip the children saw, as well as what

grade they represent (NA, representing Nordic Agapio dub with translated names, and GV, representing

Golden Voice dub with non-translated names). The data was transferred to a computer via Excel to

further simplify the analytic processing, with respondent assigned arbitrary identification numbers 1

through 13 for both groups.

The children were also asked to fill out their age and tick the appropriate box for native language. Native

language options are Finnish, English and Other. Finnish and English are explicitly asked because an

English speaking child may understand the allusions in descriptive names that are lost to their non-English

speaking peers. Other is included because being a native speaker of neither Finnish nor English may also

affect the child’s ability to understand alluded qualities as well as provide them with a limited vocabulary

in Finnish.

Personal data that will be utilized contains the respondents’ age and native language. Sex is included in

the personal data, but will only be utilized if a trend can be determined to be affected by respondents’

37

sex. Thusly the responses do not contain any significant personal data and cannot be reliably traced to

any one single child. Further data such as respondents’ names are not included. This is done to protect

the children’s privacy all the while keeping track of essential research data.

For the free association portion of the questionnaire, the data is submitted and explored in Microsoft

Excel to interpret and categorize the answers. Both the quality as well as the frequency of words is looked

at. This data will also be used to make interpretations on how well they resonate with what would be the

assumed allusions of a given name, as well as appropriate characterizations based on character behavior.

Assumed allusions or characterizations will be discussed in the analysis chapter to better maintain a clear

image of the results.

Allusions will be looked at in the form of a free association task where the participants are asked to

describe characters they saw in the video with a few descriptive words. Three response lines have been

assigned so as not to overwhelm the children. I will be looking at the types of words that are used

(whether they are externally descriptive such as color, or implicitly such as temperament). I will also look

at whether descriptive name will result in repetitions in descriptions (i.e. if Sweetheart will result in

answers such as ‘sweet’ or variant of the word).

A free association task is also provided where the participants are requested to give a name to a

previously unnamed character. The purpose of this task is to discover what kind of tools the children

employ in naming the character and if they are in correspondence with My Little Pony personal name

conventions (whether the name is conventional or descriptive, and if it alludes to implicit or explicit

qualities). It is also used to measure whether language context of other names in the episode has effect

on how children choose to name their character.

Multiple choice answers will be looked at separately to determine trends and frequency (or, accuracy) in

character name recall. Data will be submitted through Excel sheets to determine frequency of blanks,

accuracy in terms of correct and incorrect answers, as well as sort through appropriate data to provide

further insight into the quantitative aspects of this survey. It can also be debated whether it is the

character itself or the name that is being recognized and recalled, however that may warrant a very

different type of research not suitable within the confines of this study.

Recognition questions ask the participants to spell out the character name. Blank answers are valid, and

will be explored in the analysis chapter to determine possible causes for lack of answer. The participants

38

are also asked to join a name and a character with an extra name included to determine whether the

children remember and/or can make the connection based on other qualities (character name and cutie

mark are corresponding in both versions of the questionnaire).

The completed questionnaires will likely not be made public to ensure participant anonymity. Partial

questionnaire results are included in no specific respondent order.

39

6 Results and analysis

In this chapter the data collected from the questionnaire responses is presented. This chapter looks at

some of the key elements that arose from the questionnaire as well as provides further qualitative

analysis into results collected from the free association tasks included. Name recall will be subject to both

quantitative and qualitative analyses, and will be the first point of discussion. The results of the analysis

will be discussed in detail at the end of this chapter and revisited briefly in the concluding chapter.

The results are divided between a quantitative portion (name recognition tasks) as well as a qualitative

portion (free association tasks). They will be discussed chronologically in this order for clarity and

coherence with the questionnaire survey construct.

It should be noted that the number of respondents was lower than originally anticipated and as such the

data cannot be used to more than making broad generalizations.

6.1 Name recognition task: Name this pony

In the first task of the questionnaire the participants were asked to name three characters who were the

primary protagonists of the episode they were shown. The characters Teddy, Sweetheart (Hellä) and

Starlight (Tähti) are named in the episode multiple times. My intention was to see whether Finnish names

would be recalled with better frequency than their English counterparts, measured by combined correct

answers, as well as incorrectly spelled answers. I will first discuss the results of each dub separately

beginning with the Nordic Agapio dub (later, NA) with Finnish translated names, second the Golden Voice

dub (later, GV), lastly making comparisons between the two.

6.1.1 Naming characters with translated names

The characters are called Teddy, Hellä and Tähti in this version. It should be noted that in this version, the

spelling of Teddy is the same as in the original, as it appears this way on the DVD cover. Altogether 10

participants were shown the NA dub, with participants’ ages ranging between 8 and 9 years old.

40

The maximum answers in this group is 30 (calculated by number of naming questions (3) times number of

respondents (10)), constituting 100% of answers. Data concerning the recognition of any single character

will be compared against 10 answers, which constitutes 100% for a single question. Each character will be

analyzed separately.

Finnish was listed as the language of the home by 7 respondents, Finnish, English and Other by 2

respondents and Finnish and Other by 1 respondent. Other languages were not explicitly specified in the

survey, but personal survey observation notes list other languages spoken at home as Russian and Syrian.

Group consisted mostly of boys, but sex did not seem to be an indicator when looking for trends in

responses, so it is not taken into consideration for this group. Native language did not appear to have

effect on responses for this task.

6.1.2. Overall recognition patterns

Responses are grouped as either positive identification or negative identification. Positive identification

answers include correctly named characters and incorrectly spelled character names (where the name

and character can be reliably matched despite misspelling, for example Tedi can be matched with Teddy).

Negative identifications include incorrect names (names belonging to other characters or misspelled

without reliable match) and blank answers. Blank answers will also be looked at as a margin of overall

recognition alongside positive and negative identifications. If a response was all blanks, it is excluded from

the responses but still considered for the overall recognition margin.

41

Figure 6. Nordic Agapio all survey responses for recognition task.

In this group the divide between positive identifications and negative identifications was a distinctive 50%

versus 50%, with the answers divided to:

a) 14 blank answers,

b) 1 incorrect

c) 0 wrong character (no character match)

d) 8 incorrect spelling (character match)

e) 7 correct answers;

This constitutes a 15/30 in correct and 15/30 in incorrect answers.

I had expected a higher recognition level due to the Finnish origin character names being relatively easy

to spell and identify as words. However it became apparent that language had an effect on overall

recognition as well as ability to provide viable survey answers, as will be evident when the survey data is

compared against the data from the English character name version.

This group yielded one full blank response. The respondent also failed to answer other survey questions,

and their survey could conceivably be excluded from the data. However I chose to keep this particular

respondent as their language of the home was neither Finnish nor English, and it was possible that this

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Correct Incorrectspelling

Wrongcharacter

Incorrect Blank Correct vsincorrect

Nordic Agapio

Responses Total

42

language barrier may have affected their performance. If the survey were to be left out it would change

the data to have a higher recognition rating for characters overall.

The character with the highest recognition rating was Teddy (9/10 respondents), however his name was

misspelled by 8 times out of 9 of all positively identifying respondents. This result will be explored in more

detail in the preceding sub-chapter. Tähti was the second most recognized character with a 4/10

recognition rating despite playing a relatively minor role compared to Hellä, who was positively identified

by only 2/10 of respondents. My interpretation of possible reasons for this will be discussed in more

detail in their respective chapters.

There was one incorrect response, in which the respondent had named Tähti with a Finnish conventional

name, Leena. Leena is not a name for any character in the series, and as such constitutes an incorrect

response.

6.1.3. Recognition patterns by character

The previous chapter explored the performance of the NA group as a whole. In this chapter the results of

each individual character are studied in greater detail to further illuminate how each character was

recognized, name was remembered and name was spelled. The names are in the following order; firstly

Tähti, secondly Hellä and finally Teddy. The response data for each character is provided in a table for

further clarity.

43

Table 2a. All responses for identification task for Tähti in NA group.

Tähti

Response Frequency Percentage

Correct 4 40%

Incorrect 0 0

Wrong spelling 0 0

Wrong character 0 0

Total: 4/10 40%

As apparent in table 2a, Tähti was positively identified by 4 respondents, corresponding 40% of all

responses and also being identified with most accuracy. The character plays only a minor part in the

episode and is specifically named five times. No other answers were assigned to Tähti, her name was not

misspelled nor was she falsely identified as another character. Six respondents left her name blank.

One possible interpretation for this is that her part is rather minor. She speaks less than ten lines and is

named on five occasions, compared to the main protagonists Hellä and Teddy who are named more often

and speak the majority of lines in the episode. However, her cutie mark corresponds with her name, as

discussed in earlier chapters. This could improve children’s ability to associate the name to the character;

it alludes directly to the character’s appearance and is readily available as a point of reference when

looking at the character, similar to names such as ‘Grumpy Smurf’ or ‘Blackbeard’.

Because ‘tähti’ is a Finnish generic word for ‘star’, it could also explain why she is recognized (her name

spelled correctly) with greater accuracy than Teddy, and more frequently than Hellä, despite having only

a minor part in the episode. However these are simply educated guesses, as due to time restraints I did

not ask the children to explain how they came to the conclusions they did with their answers (whether

extratextual cues were used) and it could be interesting to study character name recognition further by

interviews or open ended questions.

44

Table 2b. All responses for Hellä for identification task in NA group.

Hellä

Response Frequency Percentage

Correct 2 20%

Incorrect 1 10%

Wrong spelling 0 0

Wrong character 0 0

Total: 3/10 30%

Hellä is a main protagonist in this episode. She is named on six occasions, speaks in excess of ten lines and

has a brief song towards the end of the episode. She was correctly identified by 2/10 respondents, with

no misspellings, constituting only 20% of all respondents. Curiously, one respondent chose to engage in

creative liberties and renamed Hellä altogether with a conventional Finnish female name, Leena.

Altogether 7 respondents left her name blank.

Although ‘hellä’ is a generic Finnish language word for kind or gentle, the name refers most actively to the

character’s demeanor. Her cutie mark is a large heart surrounded by small hearts, which makes the

original English name Sweetheart resonate with both her personality as well as her external appearance.

This is not as much the case with the Finnish name Hellä, which could attribute to the low recognition

rate, as her name is not as readily recalled from simply perceiving the character’s appearance.

It could also be noted that perhaps the archaic word sydänkäpy could have been substituted for

Sweetheart as it has been in earlier versions of My Little Pony, and the name would have corresponded

with both demeanor and appearance. However, according to Kielitoimiston sanakirja, sydänkäpy is an

affectionate pet name for cherished or toddler, and might not have been an appropriate translation.

It is very difficult to fathom why the wrong response, Leena, manifested. Leena is not a name of any of

the characters, and it is questionable whether Hellä could be misheard as Leena multiple times

throughout the episode. It could be a simple matter of not wanting to leave answers blank and answering

something even when the respondent did not have the correct answer. It is also possible the respondent

substituted the name with Leena from forgetting the correct name but perhaps having interpreted Hellä

45

as an archaic conventional female name and making a guess at the response. The children were advised

to leave responses blank when they could not remember character names.

Table 2c. All responses for Teddy in identification task for NA group.

Teddy

Response Frequency Percentage

Correct 1 10%

Incorrect 0 0

Wrong spelling 8 80%

Wrong character 0 0

Total: 9/10 90%

The spelling of Teddy could be argued, but the official Finnish DVD sleeve spelling is considered to be the

correct spelling in this study. However, respondents were not shown how to spell the name, they only

heard it spoken during the episode. Teddy was a primary main protagonist (or perhaps, antagonist?) in

this episode. He is named by most of the characters who speak lines, altogether 25 times. In fact the very

last word spoken in the episode just before the end is ‘Teddy’. The sheer number of repetitions could

partially explain why he is positively identified by 9 out of 10 respondents. However, only one participant

was able to spell his name correctly, with the other responses containing misspellings.

Teddy is misspelled by 8 respondents, which corresponds 89% of all positive identifications. Suggested

spellings which can still be associated with the correct character without surmountable doubt include

1) Tedi (4)

2) Ted (2)

3) Dedi (1)

4) Thed (1)

The numerous misspellings could be an indication that children were unsure of how a seemingly foreign

origin name should be spelled in an otherwise Finnish language text, with 50% of incorrect spellings being

Tedi; very close phonetic resemblance to how most character pronounce the name. The name is also

exaggerated as Ted-di with a distinctive double consonant in some lines, but this spelling did not occur in

the responses.

46

One of the reasons for a high ratio of misspelled answers could hypothetically be that both the letters D

and Y are not typical in conventional Finnish names and can be result of an imported name (such as

Swedish Daniel or Norwegian Ylva), although not always (consider Yrjö). Because the English Y is usually

pronounced akin to the Finnish I, and the Finnish Y as the last letter of a name is often pronounced

differently from English, confusion on the correct letter is almost inevitable in a Finnish language context.

Ted and Thed are possibly result of this language confusion, and children may have assumed the

nominate name to be Ted, and that it conjugates to Ted +i (+llä , +lle) because it ends in a consonant. This

is likely beyond the children’s formal Finnish grammar training, but simply a matter of inherent language

knowledge. These too are understandable mistakes, though the spelling Thed is curious in the sense that

Finnish language does not have a dental fricative sound equivalent to the English ⟨th⟩ (as in this or that),

nor is this spelling native to the Finnish language. A possible reason for this spelling may also lie in the

phonetic sounds the janitor character makes when speaking to or about Teddy.

6.1.4 Naming characters with non-translated names

In the Golden Voice (later GV) group there were 14 participants, with a total of 42 answers constituting

100% of responses (number of respondents (14) times number of naming answers (3) and like in the

previous group, all answers regarding any single character is compared against the total number of

responses, in this group 14. In the GV version dub the characters retain their English names as Teddy,

Starlight and Sweetheart.

Because of a lapse in communication this group was erroneously younger than anticipated, with

participants aged 7 to 8 years old. It should be noted that participants in this age group have likely little or

no prior English language skills, which could have affected the results. However, it is also relevant to study

how children with no English language skills relate to descriptive names they might not understand.

Finnish was the primary language of the home for 11 respondents, Finnish and Other by 3 respondents.

Like in the NA group, languages were not explicitly specified.

6.1.5 Overall recognition patterns

47

As explained in 6.1.2, overall recognition patterns are determined by the combined frequencies of

positive and negative identifications. In the GV group there was a larger discrepancy between positive

and negative identifications, and the group also saw more blank answers than the NA group. The divide

between positive and negative identifications is 12% versus 88%. The answers were divided as follows:

a) 29 blank answers

b) 3 incorrect

c) 5 wrong character (no match),

d) 2 incorrect spelling (character match)

e) 3 correct answers;

Which constitutes 37/42 incorrect and 5/42 correct answers.

Figure 7. Golden Voice all survey responses for recognition task.

I had expected difficulties in the English language version, but expected to also see more misspellings. It

would appear that the respondents chose to leave characters blank rather than attempt to spell names

they may have had difficulty understanding in terms of translating appropriate phonemic content to text.

It is little more than an educated assumption, as I chose not to interview the respondents and did not

acquire a further insight as to why they chose to not respond at all.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Correct IncorrectSpelling

Wrongcharacter

Incorrect Blank Correct vsincorrect

Responses Total

48

Another curious observation was the number of character confusions, where a character was assigned

the wrong name. Wrongly named character was recorded a total of 5 times, resulting in 12% of all

responses and 35% of all respondents. The names suggested were Bon Bon (3), Clover (1) and Starlight

(1). A possible explanation for this could be that the respondents tapped into another task that provided

character names (Bon Bon, Patch, Clover and Ace), and chose to use names that they could both read on

the survey paper and had heard in the episode as Bon Bon and Clover are named characters who appear

briefly on screen and speak a few lines. Starlight was assigned to Sweetheart. Incorrectly named

characters will be revisited when analyzing character responses separately.

This group yielded a total of 29 blank answers, with 7 surveys as complete blanks (no response on any of

the three naming questions for the first task). The high number of blanks (69% of all responses) could be

related to the English language names, which were frequently pronounced differently by different voice

actors. With respondents unsure or not knowing how to spell these names and choosing, as instructed, to

not respond when they did not know or remember the character name. Out of the 7 full blank surveys, 6

came from respondents aged 7 years old and 1 from 8 year old respondent. It cannot be established with

enough certainty that age would have played a part in this result, however it could be argued that 7 year

old respondents (having started 1st grade the fall before the survey took place) may have been less

experienced with a test setting and hence felt less confident to attempt answering when they were not

certain of the correct spelling.

The character with the highest recognition in this group was Teddy (5/14 respondents) which constitutes

35% of all respondents. Sweetheart was positively identified by only 7% of respondents. Starlight was not

identified correctly by any respondents; however, Starlight was correctly spelled but misidentified by one

respondent, who wrongly assigned the name to Sweetheart. Possible reasons for this could be a simple

error when writing down the response, or a genuine misidentification.

6.1.6 Recognition patterns by character

Like in chapter 6.1.3, the responses for each character are first explored separately to better illustrate the

data of how each character name was recognized by the respondents. The characters are in the following

order; firstly Starlight, secondly Sweetheart and finally Teddy.

49

Table 3a. All responses for Starlight in identification task for GV group.

Starlight

Response Frequency Percentage

Correct 0 0

Incorrect 1 7%

Wrong spelling 0 0

Wrong character 3 21%

Total: 4/14 28%

None of the respondents were able to identify Starlight correctly; however she was named incorrectly in

four surveys. Altogether she was assigned the wrong character name 3 times, with name suggestions

being Bon Bon (2) and Clover (1). She was also given a completely invented name on 1 survey.

Starlight was assigned a conventional Finnish female name Ronja, despite the name not fitting with the

naming conventions in the episode (names are in English). As previously observed, reasons for this are

obscured to me at this time and could be a case of not wanting to leave a blank answer in the event that

the respondent did not know the correct answer despite having been told to do so.

One potential explanation as to why Starlight was not positively identified nor misspelled by any of the

respondents could be that her name contains phonemes that may be difficult to translate into lexical

elements. Finnish language lacks the English alveoral r, and pronunciations of Starlight ranged from silent

r [Sta:lait] to exaggerated trill r [StaR-lait] sound by different characters. This could have surmounted to

confusion as to how the name should be spelled. I had anticipated misspellings but it could be that the

foreign phonemes were intimidating to such degree that respondents preferred to leave the answer

completely blank instead of trying to translate what they could not confidently understand into a written

name.

Furthermore, it appears the allusion to Starlight’s cutie mark, a star, was lost to the respondents and

unlike in the Finnish context episode (Tähti corresponding with the image of a star and the allusion being

understood) they were unable to use this extratextual element in this recognition task. This could be

50

because the respondents do not yet know or understand English enough to make a meaningful

connection between the name Starlight and the image of a star.

As previously argued in chapter 6.1.5, my assumption as to why Starlight was assigned the wrong

character names Bon Bon and Clover could do with children using the questionnaire paper as a guide for

answering this task. Bon Bon and Clover are also named in the episode, which could attribute to children

recognizing the name and spelling, as it was provided for another task further in the survey (see appendix

for reference).

Also worth noticing is the fact that Starlight was spelled correctly on one survey; however her name had

been assigned to Sweetheart instead of the correct character. On one hand this could have been a simple

error when writing the answer down, as the answer could have been accidentally written on the wrong

response line. On the other hand, it could be a case of genuinely mistaken identity. It is difficult to discern

what may be the case, as I cannot identify the respondent or ask them why they have respondent in the

fashion that they did. So it could be argued that Starlight may have been positively identified by one

respondent, with the name correctly spelled.

Table 3b. All responses for Sweetheart in identification task for GV group.

Sweetheart

Response Frequency Percentage

Correct 0 0

Incorrect 0 0

Wrong spelling 0 0

Wrong character 2 14%

Total: 2/14 14%

Sweetheart was not positively identified by any respondent, and incorrectly identified as Starlight and

Clover once. Overall, 12 out of 14 respondents chose to leave her name as a blank, resulting in 93%

incorrect or negative identifications. As discussed in the preceding chapter, being wrongly identified as

Starlight could have been a simple error of placement, rather than a genuine misidentification.

Possible reasons for a high level of blanks (85% of all respondents) could be that, much like Starlight,

Sweetheart has phonetic elements that may be difficult for Finnish speaking respondent to transfer into

51

Finnish syllables. Furthermore, in the same vein it can also be argued that much like in the case of

Starlight, Sweetheart’s name saw diverse variation in pronunciation, which might have further hindered

comprehension as to how the name should be spelled.

Because respondents may not have felt comfortable with identifying the phonemes in Sweetheart, they

may have opted to leave the name blank instead of trying to answer to the best of their ability and

understanding. This could have been avoided with more precise instructions to write the name as they

hear it, with disregard to how the name may actually be spelled. This could be the reason for such a high

frequency of blanks.

Table 3c. All responses for Teddy in identification task for GV group.

Teddy

Response Frequency Percentage

Correct 3 21%

Incorrect 1 7%

Wrong spelling 2 14%

Wrong character 0 0

Total: 6/14 42%

As with the NA group, Teddy was positively identified most often. Altogether 36% of all respondents

identified Teddy correctly. Teddy’s name was also spelled correctly more often than in the NA group (10%

correct spelling in NA versus 21% correct spelling in GV), and with only two misspellings (14%). As

mentioned in 6.1.3., this could be result of sheer repetition, as Teddy’s name is repeated in excess of 15

times during the episode, thus making it more likely to be remembered than the other names.

Alternative spelling offered in this group of surveys is Ted (2), which manifests in two surveys. Although

the voice acting does not seem to actively promote mishearing Teddy as Ted, it could be a similar

conjugation misunderstanding as I proposed in 6.1.3 with the NA dub. However the characters pronounce

Teddy in many different ways, and seem inconsistent in conjugating the name, for example Sweetheart is

heard referring to Teddy in genitive as both Ted [+i] [+n] as well as Teddy [+n], the teacher also speaks to

Teddy as both Tedi as well as very articulated Ted-dy.

52

One possible explanation for higher accuracy in correct spelling of Teddy could be that characters actively

pronounce the name exactly as it is written as Teddy, exposing all the letters phonetically which was not

the case in the NA dub where characters routinely pronounce the name as Tedi or Teddi. Alternatively,

the children may have also been affected by the English language context, and have recognized the name

as an English origin name. In this case the spelling of Teddy with a double consonant and Y seem

appropriate, whereas in the case of trying to fit the name within a Finnish context, names with a dropped

D and a I substitute for Y were more common.

One respondent named Teddy as Teeri, which I marked as incorrect. Although the name bears some

resemblance to the original, I interpreted the deviation in both spelling and meaning (en. black grouse)

significant enough to warrant it as an incorrect answer.

6.1.7 Comparisons of recognition patterns between translated and non-translated names

Although the results have been analyzed separately, I also intended to explore the aggregate of data

comparatively. In chapter 1 I hypothesized that Finnish language names would see a greater rate of

recognition (as measured by positive identifications) and greater accuracy in spelling (as measured by

correct answers) than their English counterparts. The initial results as proposed in chapters 6.1.1 and

6.1.5 would indicate that this hypothesis may be accurate, with NA group having greater positive

recognition rate than the GV group. However, it should be noted that the body of data for this

questionnaire was very low with only 24 participants in total and should be considered an inconclusive

but potential indication of a possible trend, rather than an assertion of validity of the hypothesis.

53

Figure 8. All NA group responses by percentage, names translated in Finnish.

Figure 9. All GV group responses by percentage, names retained in English.

As apparent in the comparison of figure 8 and figure 9, the hypothesis is supported by the Finnish name

dub NA having a higher rate of recognition (50%) as opposed to the lower recognition rating of the

English name dub GV (12%). Both Starlight and Sweetheart saw greater recognition accuracy when their

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Correct Incorrect spelling Wrong character Incorrect Blank

Nordic Agapio

% of answers Total

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Correct Incorrect spelling Wrong character Incorrect Blank

Golden Voice

% of answers Total

54

names were in Finnish, as no respondents were able to identify the characters in the GV dub, versus 6

positive identifications (30% out of all possible identifications) by the NA dub group.

Because of a high rate of choosing to leave answers blank rather than attempt to spell names that were

difficult (GV 69% blanks), it is not particularly fruitful to examine whether spelling accuracy is better when

names are in Finnish as opposed to English. However, as I also hypothesized in chapter 1, it looks

apparent that respondents named more characters (fewer blanks) when names were in Finnish.

Respondents also attempted to name characters more often in Finnish despite being unsure of the

correct spelling, whereas in the English version respondents chose to leave answers blank when they

were uncertain.

Teddy became the most interesting element of this task, as his character with a conventional name rather

than a descriptive name was more easily identified by both groups. He was positively identified more

often by the NA group (90% versus 36%), but spelled correctly with greater accuracy by the GV group

(21% versus 10%). Possible reasons for this were discussed in chapters 6.1.2 and 6.1.5, including different

language context having an effect on perceived spelling, as well as pronunciation differences affecting

perceived spelling.

As discussed in chapter 4, pronunciation may have had an effect on these results. It is not uncommon in

the dubbing industry that voice actors never see each other or practice together, but rather each actor

submits their lines separately. This could be the reason why different characters have different

pronunciation for Teddy, and other characters. Although changing inflection and tone during dubbing can

be used to characterize characters differently, it does not fully explain why the same voice actor would

choose to alter their pronunciation of a character name throughout the dub. Furthermore, it could simply

be a matter of inferior quality control from the production team.

6.2 Name Recognition Task: Match Pony and Name

In this task respondents were asked to choose a name from a predetermined list of names and attach it

to an appropriate pony character. There were four names to choose from (Ace, Patch, Bon Bon and

Clover for GV, Ässä, Tilkku, Karkki and Apila for NA) and three characters (Bon Bon (Karkki), Clover (Apila)

and Patch (Tilkku)). One of these characters (Patch/Tilkku) is not addressed by name in the episode, but is

55

seen on screen and speaks four lines. Ace is a name of a character in the series, but does not appear and

the name is not spoken in the episode. This name serves as the only throwaway answer that is always

wrong for any of the characters. Both Bon Bon and Clover are named once during the episode in both

versions. Characters were picked based on relative unfamiliarity, as all characters appear on screen

(making them recognizable) but play insignificant parts. To further complicate matters, in NA dubbed

version the character Bon Bon is misnamed with the English name instead of the Finnish equivalent,

Karkki. This episode was picked with the dubbing flub in mind to see if children were still able to positively

match the character and the Finnish name despite the name being wrong in the actual dub.

The aim of this task was to see if children were able to use language cues to accurately match names to

characters they were not very familiar with. All the characters have cutie marks (explained in chapter 5.1)

that correspond with their name in both languages, so I intended to discover if being able to identify

these language cues (understanding the allusion) with the external appearance (matching allusion with

extratextual cue) of the ponies would result in more accurate positive identification of the characters.

As in chapter 6.1 I will first look at both versions NA and GV separately, and secondly look at the results

comparatively to determine recognition accuracy in each individual group before comparing the results

against each other.

6.2.1 Translated names Karkki, Apila and Tilkku

Like in the previous task, the total number of responses is 27, which corresponds with 100% of all

responses and excludes a survey with a full blank (3 blanks) response. Answers will be first compared

against the total number of responses, and then individually by character, where the total number of

responses corresponding 100% is 9 per character.

56

Figure 10. All name matching responses in translated NA group.

Altogether 23/27 responses were positive identifications, corresponding to 85% correct answer ratio,

whereas there were 3 incorrect answers and 1 blank (4/27) translating to 15% incorrect answers. There

was one completely blank answer from a fully blank survey for this task, which has been excluded from

the body of data for a more accurate result of actual responses. The reason for a full blank is unclear, but

could be language related as the survey is from a respondent with a home language different from

Finnish or English.

Karkki was named correctly most often (9/9, discrediting blank survey). This was in fact curious in the

sense that in the episode there is a dubbing flub, and she is erroneously addressed as “Bon Bon” and not

Karkki (this happens only once, only in this episode). It was a conscious decision on my part to see if

children were able to name her correctly despite the fact that she is named incorrectly in the video.

Karkki is a generic Finnish noun and corresponds with the character’s cutie mark, making her recognizable

through her appearance alluding to her name.

The second most often correctly named character was Apila with 8/9 respondents identifying her

correctly. Like with Karkki, Apila’s cutie mark corresponds with her name which assumedly made it easier

to match corresponding name and character. One survey identified her incorrectly as Tilkku. It is difficult

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Karkki Apila Tilkku Total

Blank

Incorrect

Correct

57

to guess why Tilkku was assigned to Apila, but preliminarily it appears to be a case of genuine mistaken

identity as the same respondent also misnames another character.

Finally, Tilkku was recognized by 6/9 respondents, making her the least often identified character. She is

not named in the episode. However, her cutie mark corresponds with her name (although whether the

piece of fabric was recognized as a ‘tilkku’, Finnish for a patch of fabric, can be contested) which could be

utilized as an aid to associate her with the correct name. Altogether 1 respondent left a blank, and further

2 respondents named her Ässä. My interpretation is that this is the result of making guesses, as neither

the name Tilkku nor Ässä are vocalized during the episode. Whether character was vocally named during

the episode seemed to have an effect on how well the character was recognized. It must be asserted that

a 67% recognition rate for a previously unnamed character is not a bad result and would indicate that

children were able to use both language based and external cues by matching previously unheard names

with the character cutie marks and that extratextual elements had a significant part in making these

connections.

6.2.2 Non-translated names Bon Bon, Clover and Patch

The complete number of answers is 33 with 14 respondents, 11 being the total number of answers for an

individual character. There were 3 completely blank surveys, which have been excluded from the results

and result in 11 viable respondents.

58

Figure 11. All name matching responses in non-translated GV group.

As previously hypothesized, the English names version had a compelling result of 18% (6) positive

identifications versus 82% (27) wrong answers, combined wrong name or blank, but excluding full blanks.

The amount of full blanks was also higher at 21% (9/42) compared to that of NA at 10% (3/30). This is in

line with the assumption that characters with English names would be correctly identified less often than

their Finnish counterparts. For the purposes of this quantitative analysis, full blanks are excluded from

responses.

Clover had the highest recognition rate at 3/11 respondents identifying her correctly (27%), with a total

of 8/11 incorrect name identifications. Other names suggested for Clover include Ace (4) and Patch (4).

Interestingly, neither of these names are spoken during the episode and do not have any elements that

would make them particularly attractive alternatives. It would be interesting to conduct interviews with

respondents to explore the reasoning behind these choices, as at this time it can only be suggested that

these choices have been random.

Bon Bon was the second most identified with 2/11 respondents (18%) and 9/11 incorrect names (82%).

The fact that negative responses surmount to 82% of all responses is surprising in the regard that Bon

Bon is phonetically the same in Finnish and in English, so I had assumed her to be more easily recognized.

Wrong names suggested for Bon Bon include Patch (5), Ace (2) and Clover (2). The suggestion of Clover

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Bon Bon Clover Patch Total

Blank

Incorrect

Correct

59

could be considered an understandable mistake, as Bon Bon and Clover are addressed in the same

sentence without a clear distinction which character is which. It is somewhat surprising that Patch occurs

so often (45% of all respondents). Ace served as a throwaway name, as it was the only thoroughly

incorrect name; thus choosing Ace as the name for the character could be considered a true

misidentification or a pure guess. It does not have a distinct reference to any of the characters in any

form (external cues) and is never spoken in the episode.

Patch was identified correctly by 2/11 respondents, and like Bon Bon, was assigned the wrong name most

often (9/11 of respondents). Out of the wrong identifications she was named Clover most often (5/9). She

was named Bon Bon and Ace equally frequently, 2 times each. This is interesting, as Patch is not named

during the episode, leaving Patch and Ace the most likely options for a name. However 55% of wrong

name responses suggested her to be Clover. This could be due to the proximity of the name (Clover is

written right under Patch’s image) to the character on the paper. One respondent who positively

identified Patch also identified Clover, but no other characters were correctly named.

Altogether it would appear that the English language names resulted in more guesswork from the

respondents, as it became evident that there seemed to be little logic behind the wrong responses (and

often little correlation between correct responses), indicating that both positive and negative

identifications could be the result of randomized elimination process.

6.2.3 Comparisons of name matching between translated and non-translated names

Comparatively, the two groups performed as suggested in my hypothesis in chapter 1. Moreover, the

Finnish translated names NA group had a recognition rate that was perhaps a little higher than I originally

anticipated, discrediting the full blank survey, the group performed at a high overall recognition of 85%

positive identifications of all responses. Altogether the results for NA are as follows; 23/27 correct

answers, 1 blank and 3 incorrect answers. In percentages this translates to 85% positive and 15% negative

answers.

60

Figure 12. Comparison of positive and negative identifications by percentage between translated (Nordic

Agapio) and non-translated (Golden Voice) names.

Furthermore, the English names retained GV group indicated difficulties in name and character matching,

as the total frequencies are as follows; 7/33 correct answers, 9 blanks were excluded, and 26/33 incorrect

answers. Thus, in percentages we can see a reversal of the NA results. The group provided 18% positive

and 82% negative answers. In this group there were 3 respondents who chose to leave the task

completely blank, so altogether 11 respondents performed the task. The three respondents who chose to

leave all answers blank provide evidence of uncertainty of correct answers resulting in aversion to answer

at all, but are not included in the final body of data.

Although the body of data was not sufficient to draw any conclusive assertions, I argue with confidence

that the observed reversal in performance indicates that extra-textual cues can be applied to textual

problems when, and only when the problem can be solved using language. This applies to descriptive

names in particular, as the referential material cannot be sufficiently understood if the vocabulary is

foreign and the meaning obscured by insufficient language knowledge. The tasks applied the same

principle in both languages; characters were either vocally named during the episode, or names were

directly referring to the appearance of the character (corresponding cutie marks). In the Finnish language

NA group, respondents seemed better equipped in solving the problem of unnamed characters by

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Nordic Agapio Golden Voice

Negative

Positive

61

matching descriptive name to the character’s appearance. There seemed to be greater confidence in

answering (fewer blanks). When the descriptive name was not understood, it could not be utilized to aide

in solving the problem, resulting in more guesswork and a lower performance overall as seen in the

English language group GV.

For further research it could be fruitful to conduct a similar experiment using a think-aloud method

and/or respondent interviews to shed light on the elimination process and to assess whether correct

responses are the product of luck or logic, and what is the reasoning behind seemingly illogical incorrect

answers.

6.3 Name Creation Task: Name this Pony

The purpose of this task was to determine what types of names the respondents would assign to the

characters independently. It aimed to emphasize whether children picked up on the external cues of the

characters and if they were inclined to name the characters using descriptive names. My original

hypothesis was that the children who were shown the NA Finnish language version of the episode would

be more inclined to use descriptive names or names consisting of nouns. Furthermore it proceeded to

categorize the kinds of names that emerged.

I originally divided the results to two categories and further on to two subcategories; Descriptive and

conventional names, female or male. It emerged during analysis that these categories were insufficient,

and a third category for non-descriptive names (chapter 2.1) was added to the matrix. It should be noted

that non-descriptive and descriptive names might not be placed in either subcategory as they are not

explicitly gendered.

62

Figure 13. Ace, My Little Pony Tales.

I used the character Ace for this task. In the series, Ace is a male pony with a soccer ball cutie mark, his

name refers to him being a stereotypical archetype high school jock; accomplished in sports (the ace) and

popular among his peers, but with an arrogant attitude. The Finnish counterpart Ässä also refers to him

being the best at something (Kielitoimiston sanakirja), in this case presumably soccer as alluded to by his

cutie mark. Because ponies generally do not exhibit sexual dimorphism, it is not explicitly apparent this

character is a male pony.

I will first look at responses from NA and GV dubs individually to determine what types of names each

group assigned to the character in their respective language context (Finnish versus English names). I will

then look at these groups comparatively to see how these trends align in respect to each other, as well as

my hypothesis.

7.3.1 Name creation in a Finnish language context

Altogether 9 respondents took part in this part of the survey. Children were not prompted in any way

during this task besides the initial instruction of naming the character with a name they think befits the

character. This wording was used to avoid steering the respondents astray with more subjective

instructions such as “a name you like” or “a good name” which could have resulted in associations with

conventional names that the respondents find pleasing.

In this group names fell in two categories; conventional names, and descriptive names. I will first look at

the conventional names, which were further divided into subcategories based on gender. Spelling errors

63

are not taken into consideration in this task and names are categorized based on the interpretation of the

name regardless of spelling.

Figure 14. Personal names by category in NA group, names translated in Finnish.

Conventional Finnish names constituted a majority with 7/9 respondents choosing to name the pony

character with either a conventional female name (4) or a conventional male name (3) as presented in

table x below. Two respondents used descriptive names consisting of nouns and compounded nouns.

Altogether 5 respondents identified the character as a female and 3 as a male, whereas one respondent

chose a name that does not explicitly allude to any gender.

Table 4a. All names by category in NA group.

Conventional male name

Pekka, Pekka, Perttu

Conventional female name

Hanna, Jenni, Maijja, Miina

Non-gendered descriptive name

Jalkapallo

Gendered descriptive name

Jalkapallotyttö

The two names that fall within the parameters of descriptive name (allude to the character) consist of

nouns jalkapallo (‘soccer ball’) and jalkapallo + tyttö (‘girl’), which directly refer to the character’s soccer

Non-gendered descriptive , 1

Conventional - Male, 3

Conventional - Female, 4

Gendered Descriptive, 1

64

ball cutie mark. One respondent affixed the gender noun for girl as a suffix for soccer ball, further

denoting the character to be a female rather than male. Jalkapallo by itself is not directly gendered.

It can be argued that the respondent who chose the name Jalkapallotyttö used external cues as a basis

for name creation, having determined the character to be a female possibly based on his long flowy mane

and gender neutral color pattern. The character is not marked with gender specific traits externally, and

could easily be either gender. Only possible giveaway would be the color blue in his exercise equipment,

but since a female character is also seen wearing blue sweatbands earlier in the survey (see appendix Å) it

is not a certain male denominator.

It is interesting how the respondent chose a noun compound as a name for the character, as names with

compound nouns are not used in this episode. I had expected descriptive names to be more common

than 2/9 respondents, and it might have been the case had the children been exposed to more characters

with descriptive names.

7.3.2 Name creation in an English language context

Figure 15. Personal names by category in GV group, names retained in English.

Conventional - Male, 5

Conventional - Female, 3

Non-gendered Descriptive, 2

Non-Descriptive, 2

65

The GV group consisted of 11 respondents who participated. Like with the NA group, they were advised

to name the character in a fitting way but not prompted in any other way. This group had more variety in

their naming conventions with non-descriptive names (Cem and Beba, latter to be discussed further) as

well as descriptive names. In this group descriptive names and non-descriptive names could not be

divided further into male and female subcategories.

Table 4b. All names by category in GV group.

Conventional male name

Arttu, Bart, Luukas, Tauski

Conventional female name

Emma, Leena, Stela*

Descriptive name

Vaalea suklaa, Rouski*

Non-descriptive name

Beba*, Cem

Because of ambiguity in spelling, names Stela, Rouski and Beba could be arguably be categorized

differently. In my interpretation Stela is equivalent of the conventional female name Stella, but could also

be categorized as a made up non-descriptive name. Rouski was categorized as a descriptive name due to

an onomatopoetic allusion to the sound or act of crunching (fin. verb rouskua, verb rouskaista,

onomatopoetic rouskis similar to English bling bling or Japanese kira kira which both stem from verbs),

but could also be re-categorized as a non-descriptive name. Similarly the name Beba could be a cheeky

descriptive name derived from colloquial slang for the derriere more commonly spelled peba (eg. Finnish

tabloid Seiska, however spelled beba on internet discussion forum Demi.fi). However because of this

ambiguity in spelling I have decided to place this name in the non-descriptive category.

One instance of uncontested descriptive name was recorded, consisting of two nouns, vaalea (‘light’) and

suklaa (‘chocolate’). This name seems to have originated from external cues, namely the character’s light

beige and brown coloration reminiscent of light milk chocolate. The name cannot be assigned to either

gender. It is in keeping with Ponyverse naming conventions as discussed in chapter 5.1.

Possible reasons for more variation among this group could be the English language context with the non-

translated names the group watched before taking part in the survey. As descriptive names are not

perceived as names which carry meaning, the use of descriptive names might not occur as a potential

naming convention. Furthermore, as names sound foreign it might have inspired the non-descriptive

66

made up names and use of less common letters such as C and B as well as the English conventional male

name Bart (possibly intertextually referring to the animated series The Simpsons).

6.4 Characterization Task: Describe this pony

In this task the respondents are asked to describe in few words (there are only three lines to write on)

two characters who are the main protagonists in the episode; Sweetheart and Melody. These two

characters were picked because of their descriptive names referring to their temperament and interests

(Sweetheart is kind and unassuming, Melody is passionate about music). The purpose of this task was to

determine whether children use these implicit traits to describe the characters derived from the

character name, if the name will appear as a repetition (ie. Sweet for Sweetheart) and what other

qualities are used to describe the characters (appearance, behavior).

I hypothesized that children shown the dub version with Finnish names are more likely to infer something

about these characters based on their names, even if these attributes are implicit. You can determine

Melody enjoys music by her musical note cutie mark and her apparent passion for her new radio, though

this possessiveness could be interpreted as materialistic love. Similarly Sweetheart is called “honest” and

“fair” by other characters, which makes her natural niceness towards others more explicit.

The answers are in the form of free association and participants were given a picture of the two

characters and instructed to write what this character is like. The instructions were the bare minimum to

avoid adult contamination in the results, as the purpose was to see what types of words would be used

for characterization and if character names had an effect on these characterizations. The responses are

divided into implicit and explicit characterizations. Implicit word categories include words referring

indirect characterizations, such as behavior or personality attributes. Explicit word categories include

words referring to color, appearance and gender as appropriated by direct characterization (cf.

Nordenswan 2014 in chapter 2.2). More word categories could be specified, but this division was

sufficient for this task with my research data.

I also looked at characterization words that could be linked to the characters’ names. For Sweetheart,

words that implied sweetness, kindness and caring are included in this category. For Melody, words that

implied music or musicality.

67

6.4.1 Direct characterization

As defined above, direct characterization is the result of attributes that can be perceived by the audience

and/or are made explicit by the author, and in this study includes words referring to character’s gender,

external descriptors referring to appearance, or words referring to active behavior (Nikolajeva 2002: 169).

This group could also include words referring to occupation, but there were no responses for this

category.

For clarity, I will group the results from both NA and GV questionnaires to reveal emergent trends.

Comparatively interesting results are discussed separately to explore differences between the two

groups.

The most numerous of all responses in this category were words that referred to active behavior and

words referring to appearance, most notably color. For the active behavior category words, it should be

noted some results could be considered passive personality attributes instead of active behavior.

However, because of the nature of the episode these words have been marked as active behavior, as the

attributes might not be explicitly related to the character’s passive personality based on a single viewing

of a single episode. Different categorizations could be made, especially if more episodes were shown to

the respondents.

In the Finnish language group NA external descriptors were prominent direct characterization words as

3/9 (33%) respondents used external descriptors and external descriptor words made up 12/30 (40%) of

words used. Three quarters of external descriptors were words pertaining to colors white, pink, blue and

purple which are the primary colors of the two characters. Other external descriptors include: hieno

(‘fine, fancy, nice’), nelijalkainen (‘quadrupled’) and pitkät hiukset (‘long hair’). The English language

context group GV did not use external descriptors to describe the characters. A possible reason for this

could be the respondents’ age difference, with younger respondents being more accustomed to the

utilization of external descriptors in their school work, children’s playbooks (eg. They might be asked to

count all the red cars, find all the yellow balloons, look at the black cat etc.), as well as children’s

literature. Older respondents may already be familiar with making more in-depth assessment when asked

to describe something, especially a personified character.

68

Table 5a. External descriptors used by 9 GV respondents, number in brackets constitutes number of

repetitions for the same answer.

External descriptors in GV Category

pinkki (2), valkoinen, violetti, sininen häntä,

punaiset silmät, punainen (2), sininen

Color

Pitkät hiukset, nelijalkainen, hieno Appearance

Behavior is also a direct characterization tool, as it is explicitly presented to the audience to interpret. The

distinction here between passive personality attributes (i.e. being nice) and active behavior (i.e. behaving

nicely) were sometimes hard to make, and alternative interpretations of the results are also possible. In

this case the division to active and passive was primarily driven by the contents of the episode. Although

some words were adjectives, but implied an active process, they were placed in direct characterization

category as a behavior descriptor through my interpretation of the implied meaning of the word. I concur

that this is not the only possible interpretation and result.

Behavior descriptors are derived from the episode shown to the respondents, and focus on the

characters’ actions rather than innate personality attributes (though actions can and do reflect

personality). Appropriate characterizations would include words associating Sweetheart with helping and

defending others, and Melody with being quick to jump to conclusions and blame others, as explained in

the plot synopsis in chapter 5.2.1. There were deviations from these characterizations. Melody was

described as auttavainen ‘helpful’ despite the episode showing no indication that it befits her personality.

Table 5b. Behavior descriptors in both groups.

GV Sweetheart GV Melody NA Hellä NA Melodi

Auttavainen (2), ei jätä

toista, auttaa (2),

lohduttaa, ei jätä toista

yksin

auttavainen, ei satuta

ketään*, oppivainen,

syyttäväinen, ei halua

menettää tavaroitaan

Pelaa paljon

tietokoneella*, syö

paljon karkkia*,

puolustava, tykkää

Tedistä

Ärsyttää*, juo

limpparia*, hätiköijä,

vähän vihainen

69

One respondent also took a more creative approach to describing both Sweetheart and Melody, assigning

both characters with active behaviors that were not displayed in the episode. Sweetheart was described

as syö paljon karkkia ‘eating a lot of candy’ and pelaa paljon tietokoneella ‘playing on the computer a lot’,

and Melody ärsyttää ‘annoys’ and juo limpparia ‘drinks soda’. As there was nothing in the episode to

warrant these characterizations, I am confident in discarding these results as an exercise of creativity on

the respondent’s part and not something they were able to perceive or deduce about the characters.

Although on the surface some words look like they should be personality attributes rather than active

behaviors, my interpretation is different. The words auttavainen ‘helpful’, hätiköijä ‘one who rushes’ and

vähän vihainen ‘a little angry’ all as case in point of words that could be interpreted either as active or

passive personality attributes. Although these words are adjectives and could be used to describe

personalities, my interpretation is that these words stem from actions seen in the episode. It is most

pronounced on the negatively implied hätiköijä ‘one who rushes’ and vähän vihainen ‘a little angry’,

whereas helpfulness could be an innate personality attribute that simply manifests in the character

actively helping others (auttavainen ’helpful’). However, in my opinion this characterization emerges

because the audience is explicitly shown Sweetheart helping others during the episode. Helpfulness

requires actualization through action to be recognized as something the character is. Similarly, being a

little angry was an attribute determined by actions; Melody is not characterized as a character who is a

little angry, but as a character who acts a little angry.

Sweetheart is identified by both groups as a character who helps (auttaa), comforts (lohduttaa) and

defends (puolustaa) others. GV group emphasized how she stands by her friends and does not exclude

anyone, and is a caring and nurturing character. Words pertaining to being kind, helpful and reliable are

emergent trends both in GV and NA, though more strongly present in the responses of GV (7 responses vs

2 responses).

Melody’s characterization based on her actions paints her as a rash character who becomes angry (vähän

vihainen), blames others (syyttäväinen) and jumps to conclusions (hätiköijä). As discussed at the beginning

of this chapter, these are all valid characterizations. However responses also highlight that she learns

(oppivainen) (not to make judgments without proof) and does not hurt anyone (ei satuta ketään),

softening an otherwise negative perception of her actions. I interpreted the description does not want to

lose her possessions (ei halua menettää tavaroitaan) as a valid, neutral characterization.

70

Interestingly, language context did not seem to have the assumed effect on characterization. The English

language context group GV performed at a higher level of direct characterization, using a more character

appropriate vocabulary and in-depth analyses of the characters’ actions than the Finnish language group

NA. Another curious observation is that the GV group respondents were also younger, aged 7 to 8 years

old. This difference could be explained by personal differences of the groups and group dynamics, but

could also indicate that language context has less of an effect on direct characterization: behavior and

appearance are extratextual elements rather than being exclusively textual. The audience is able to see

the characters and their actions, leaving less to be deduced and interpreted through textual

interpretation. Also, when foreign names and their allusions are not understood, it can leave more room

for personal interpretation rather than limiting possible interpretations.

6.4.2 Indirect characterization

Indirect characterizations include words that are more implicit and depended on audience interpretation.

These characterizations are not explicitly provided by the author, with the exception of personal names.

Descriptor words referring to passive personality attributes (rather than active behavior as discussed

above) belong in this category. Some words in this category could also be interpreted as active doing, and

a reclassification is possible. It could also be argued that passive personality attributes are determined

through active behavior, but I concluded that it would overcomplicate an otherwise streamlined division

process and will not delve into the subject. Although personal names traditionally fall in this category, I

have determined that descriptive personal names like those in the Ponyverse are direct characterization

tools as they explicitly determine something about the character (see chapters 2.2 and 2.3).

Table 5c. Indirect personality words in both GV and NA groups.

GV Sweetheart GV Melody NA Hellä NA Melodi

Kiltti, iloinen,

rauhallinen (2),

ystävällinen (3), lempeä,

kiltti

Rauhallinen, kiltti,

röyhkeä, iloinen,

musikaalinen*,

äkkipikainen

Ystävällinen (3), lempeä,

kiva, hellä*, kiltti

Epäileväinen, hätäinen,

vihainen,

epäystävällinen, tyttö*

71

Appropriate indirect characterizations here would be that Sweetheart is kind and sweet (and other

synonyms), and that Melody is judgmental and self-important. Although Melody’s musical cutie mark

(microphone, stars and musical notes) is explicit (perceivable), its meaning is implicit and as such,

Melody’s musicality would be the result of indirect characterization. Most descriptor words here followed

appropriate characterization regardless of language context. Surprisingly even, the English language

context seemed to yield more appropriate results than the Finnish counterpart. However, in the Finnish

context group NA Hellä’s name resurfaces as a repetition ‘hellä’ (‘tender, nurturing). This occurrence

supports the original hypothesis that the name could affect characterization in the way that the name

itself is perceived as a character attribute.

Melody is described as musikaalinen (‘musical’) in the GV group, implying the allusion between her name

and cutie mark was utilized by the respondent despite the English language context. The name Melody

sounds very similar both in Finnish and in English, so it cannot be reliably argued that language context

had effect in the result, but there seems to be some indication that it might.

One might question why the word vihainen (angry) is determined as an indirect when the word vähän

vihainen (‘a little angry’) is not, similarly äkkipikainen (‘short-tempered’) could be classified as a behavior

but I chose otherwise. My justification for this division is that the aforementioned refers to the mental

disposition of the character rather than the active behavior of becoming a little angry. Melody is depicted

rather aggressive and irritable throughout the episode, possibly indicating that the character is of an

aggravated disposition, thus short-tempered, in the long term. Other interpretations are of course

possible, but in this case the response appeared to refer to the character’s personality, rather than an

isolated occurrence of annoyance and irritability.

The word tyttö (‘girl’) is included in this category as a point of interest. Although gender is not made

explicit (nobody refers to the character as a girl or makes it apparent the character is a girl, sex cannot be

definitely deduced from external attributes) and as such should belong in the implicit characterization

category (Nikolajeva 2002).

6.4.3. Effects of name on characterization

Although it looks apparent active behavior is a greater driver in characterization, textuality is not without

merit. Indirect characterizations appear to be affected by descriptive names, although due to the limited

72

amount of data it cannot be definitely asserted. However I am confident in hypothesizing that in a larger

body of data a trend may become more apparent, because some indication of emergent trends is already

perceivable from this small sample.

Sweetheart was described with words synonymous with sweet, such as ‘kiltti’, ‘kiva’, ‘lempeä’,

‘ystävällinen’ and ‘hellä’. However language only seemed to have a minor effect in the words used, with

‘hellä’ appearing as a descriptor only in the NA version where the character is named Hellä. Other

synonymous words appeared with equal frequency in both groups, the GV group perhaps placing a

stronger emphasis on calmness and kindness and NA on friendliness and niceness. Altogether the

language context and name appeared to have little effect, which I must stress is still more than no effect.

Melody’s musicality surfaced in the GV results. This does not definitely bar language context from having

an effect, because Melody and Melodi are phonetically identical in both dubs and the connection was, at

least theoretically, equally accessible. It is possible that respondents were not able to make the

connection between the suggestively descriptive name Melodi and the Finnish word ‘melodia’ and thus

did not benefit effectively from the possible allusion in either language. However, it might be indicative

that the allusion can be utilized to some extent. If the questionnaire were to be conducted on a larger

scale I estimate that more respondents would make the connection.

Another point to consider is the vagueness of the descriptive names used in this study. When names have

a more transparent descriptive quality, the name is more likely to affect what the audience deems

memorable about the character. In this study, it would appear that personal name and whether or not its

allusion can be utilized were not as meaningful as I originally hypothesized. AS such, whether a name is

translated or not translated seems to make little or no difference and it appears that character behavior

is the most significant characterization tool employed by the respondents.

73

7 Conclusion and Discussion

The primary aim of this study was to determine whether descriptive personal names can be better

recognized when the names are in audiences’ native language versus when they are not, and to explore if

and how descriptive personal names affect characterization when the descriptive function can be fulfilled

and the allusion understood versus when the allusive properties are obscured by a language barrier. I

hypothesized that a Finnish context would make a name easier to remember and to reproduce, which I

measured by asking respondents to identify characters by spelling their names and matching names to

characters that had not previously been named. To measure the effect of a Finnish descriptive name

versus an English descriptive name, I asked the respondents to describe characters they had seen in a few

words.

The study was conducted in a Finnish primary school with children aged 7 to 9 years old, with a total of 24

respondents. The majority of respondents spoke Finnish as their native language and all respondents

listed Finnish as the language of the home (with ‘other’ as the native language, native languages were not

explicitly asked but research notes include Russian and Syrian). The study was conducted by showing the

respondents an episode of My Little Pony Tales, and asking them to fill out a questionnaire afterwards.

Although the sample size acquired through questionnaires was significantly smaller than originally

intended, some trends were able to emerge even from the collected small sample. I had hypothesized in

the beginning of chapter 1 that Finnish named characters would be recognized (as measured by positive

identifications) and spelled correctly with greater frequency (as measured by total of correct answers)

than their English counterparts. The results gathered from name recognition tasks (naming characters

and matching previously unnamed characters with their descriptive names) indicated that characters

were identified more often in the Finnish translated names group (50% and 85% of responses identified

character correctly) versus the English names retained group group (12% and 18% of responses identified

character). Although the sample size is small this could be indicative of language context having effect on

these results. I am confident in suggesting that the experiment could be repeated with a larger sample

without the result changing fundamentally (though I also trust that both NA and GV groups would

accomplish higher recognition rates as a whole), as the statistical difference became apparent even in a

small sample. And pragmatically, the difference between the two groups seems indicative that the

hypothesis may indeed be legitimate. In terms of results, it also implies that Finnish names may be more

74

relatable in the context of descriptive names, and children are more likely to identify and to repeat them

with greater accuracy. This could be commercially significant, as many children’s animated series also sell

merchandise, which could be more easily identified both by child fans, and their parents. This could be a

topic of an interdisciplinary study in linguistics, consumer markets and brand identity.

The results give indication of language context having some effect in the nature of responses. Names

were written correctly more frequently due to phonological familiarity eliminating guesswork from

spelling. Finnish language context also appeared to improve the quality of associative answers, providing

more implicit characterization descriptors (than explicit characterizations within the same group).

Moreover, personal names appeared to have an effect in characterization although it was not as

significant as originally hypothesized. In Finnish language context, the name Hellä repeats as a personality

attribute, ‘hellä’ (‘gentle’) in the translated names NA group. Melody’s musicality is brought up by one

respondent in the English language context group GV; it should be noted that the name Melody is

phonetically almost identical to the Finnish equivalent, Melodi. These could be seen as descriptor words

derived from character names, although for Melody, the argument could also be a sum of attributes both

textual and extratextual had an effect on the characterization of her musicality. In this regard, it could be

argued that the names performed their functions as described in chapter 2.1 in this small sample.

Language also seemed to affect how respondents perceived the fictive names in their fictive

environment, as respondents who had been exposed to Finnish language context with semantic names

that could be understood responded with more transparently descriptive names when asked to name

their own character. The NA group also named their character with Finnish conventional name more

often than the GV group. The effects of English language could also be witnessed in the naming

conventions of the GV group, where respondents used unconventional names with foreign letters in

greater frequency. This is indicative that the audience perceived the names differently depending

whether the allusive function of descriptive names was satisfied, and whether the names appeared in a

language context that was familiar to the respondents.

However, it became apparent that regardless of language context, in the case of this particular animation,

character behavior is the strongest influencer on characterization. Characters were most often described

with words that related to their actions as they were seen and perceived by the audience, with words

referring to Melody’s anger over her lost stereo and Sweetheart helping and defending others. Out of

implicit characterizations, sweetness, kindness and friendliness were the most frequent theme for words

75

used to describe either character in both NA and GV groups. The striking similarities in the responses of

both groups could be indicative that language context has little effect on how the respondents determine

character attributes, which would strongly suggest that textual elements such as descriptive names (and

their allusions) were not as important in this particular study as originally hypothesized.

This could implicate that illustrations and direct characterizations are the driving force for how young

audiences perceive the characters. It would be interesting to do a similar study with illustrated literature,

where character actions are explicitly spelled out, but not shown in action like in animation, leaving more

for the reader to decipher and interpret based on their own experiences. Alternatively, a study on how

character action influences characterization in literature void of illustration could also be a fruitful source

of study on characterization.

The questionnaire survey saw considerable challenges, as due to a miscommunication with the

participating classes the translations were shown to the wrong age groups. This resulted in the younger

class (ages 7 to 8) seeing the translation which had the English names retained (and which I dubbed the

‘more difficult’ version), and the older class (ages 8 to 9) saw the episode with the names translated in

Finnish (or, the ‘easier version’). I had planned for the Finnish name translation to be shown to younger

students who are already at a disadvantage with less English education than their older peers, and for the

older students to see the English name version because of assumed experience level with English would

have (presumably) made for a more level ground for research. However as this did not happen, the

results could potentially be vastly different if the study were to be conducted again with an adjustment to

target audiences. For future reference, I would make sure to communicate with the teachers in person to

ensure that the correct age groups are shown the correct version and confirm in advance which age

group is taking part in the questionnaire.

Another challenge was acquiring respondents, as my initial assumption of class sizes appeared to be

vastly overestimated. Most teachers opted out, with two teachers responding out of twelve; nine

teachers that I contacted directly and three more teachers who received my request for permission to

conduct a study via the school head teacher. I had not anticipated this challenge and if I were to conduct

my study again, I would seek to contact many more teachers in many more schools to ensure a large

enough participant count. This problem was perhaps foreseeable, as school curriculums can be quite

strict and it can be a challenge to fit in extracurricular activities such as videos and questionnaires.

76

The responses received through the questionnaire were too vague and left too much open and up to

personal interpretation to be considered an exact science. There was variation in the responses in terms

of quality, which is to be expected in a questionnaire survey. The questionnaire could have been followed

up with interviews or further questions to probe into the reasons respondents answered the way that

they did. This could have provided valuable information on the strategies respondents used to gauge

character personalities; whether their interpretation was based on direct characterizations such as

behavior or appearance, or if they utilized indirect characterizations such as interpretations of the

character’s personality or disposition and furthermore, if these responses used textual elements such as

the character name. It could also have explored why respondents chose to leave blank answers, whether

it was due to uncertainty of how to spell names, or genuinely not remembering. Qualitative questions

asking for the reasons for the response in the form of brief recorded interviews or additional questions

included in the questionnaire or as a separate questionnaire altogether could be used to probe further

into the effects of extratextual and textual elements that affect characterization and memorability of

characters with descriptive names.

Another point to improve on is the instruction of respondents. My questionnaires yielded too many blank

answers, which is indicative that respondents were not confident answering questions when they

experienced uncertainty of the correct answer. This unfortunately disturbs the research goal of testing

spelling accuracy of foreign language names compared to native language names, as well as whether

characters are recognized or not. It is possible that the level of recognition was higher, but respondents

chose to leave a blank instead of communicating a positive identification when they were unsure of

spelling. For future research it would be more conductive to encourage respondents to respond to the

best of their abilities, not to worry about possible spelling errors or wrong answers, and to attempt to

answer all questions and not leave blanks. A large volume of blanks resulted in a lower response rate and

thus diminished the already depleted body of data that could have been acquired.

Although it is difficult, if not impossible, to assert the hypothesis as true, I would like to conclude it is not

without merit and warrants further study into the effects of descriptive names on character relatability,

memorability and characterization. Possible methods of further study include interviewing respondents

to explore the reasoning behind their answers, whether respondents used textual or extratextual cues,

what affected their characterization (whether it was character behavior, appearance, or if personal name

had any effect) and whether language context affects memorability. Research on personal names and

their effects on the narrative in translated texts (texts here include multimedia content such as

77

animation, movies and games) have recently been the target of vigorous study in the field of literature

and translation studies, which is a welcome shift in focus from mere formal onomastics to a more

functional, end-user oriented approach to translation studies.

78

References:

Literature:

Ainiala, T., Saarelma, M. and Sjöblom, P. 2008. Nimistötutkimuksen perusteet. Helsinki: Suomalaisen

Kirjallisuuden Seura.

Austin, J. L. 1975. How to do Things with Words, Second Edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Bertills, Y. 2003. Beyond Identification. Proper Names in Children’s Literature. Turku: Åbo Akademi

University Press.

Carroll, L., Haughton, H., & Carroll, L. (2009). Through the looking-glass and What Alice found there. New

York: Penguin Classics.

Cruse, A. 2004. Meaning in Language. An Introduction to Semantics and Pragmatics. Second Edition.

Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Diaz-Cintas, J. (ed.) 2009. New Trends in Audiovisual Translating. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.

Docherty, T. 1986. Reading (Absent) Character. Towards a Theory of Characterization in Fiction. Oxford:

Clarendon.

Heikkinen, H. 2007. Puuha-Petestä Pokémoniin – Lastenohjelmien dubbaus Suomessa. In Oittinen, R. and

Tuominen, T. (eds), Olennaisen äärellä. Johdatus audiovisuaaliseen kääntämiseen. Tampere: Tampere

University Press. 235–241.

Hermans, T. 1988. On Translating Proper Names with reference to De Witte and Max Havelaar. In Wintle,

M. and Vincent, P. (eds), Modern Dutch Studies : Essays in Honour of Peter King. London and Atlantic

Highlands, NJ: Atlone. 11–24.

79

Hirvonen, N. 2012. Translation of personal names in the children's television series My little Pony Tales. A

comparative study of the translations conventions of semantically loaded names in three versions of My

little Pony Tales. Unpublished BA thesis. Joensuu: The University of Eastern Finland, Department of

Foreign Languages and Translation Studies.

Holz-Mänttäri, J. 1984. Translatorisches Handeln. Helsinki: Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia.

Huddleston, Rodney D. and Pullum and Geoffrey K. 2002. The Cambridge Grammar of the English

Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Kapari, J., Katellus, K. and Sivillis, K. 2002. Erisnimet kirjoissa. Kääntäjä, 7/2002. 1,4.

Kapari, J. 2005. Kohtaamisia tuntemattoman kanssa. In Rikman, K. (ed.), Suom. Huom. Vantaa: WSOY. 29 –

40.

Kapari-Jatta, J. 2008. Pollomuhku ja posityyhtynen. Helsinki: Tammi.

Käpynen, K. 2011. Fiktiiviset nimet Mauri Kunnaksen teoksessa Viikingit tulevat! ja niiden englannin- ja

ruotsinkieliset käännökset. MA thesis, University of Tampere, Translation studies (English).

Lathey, G. 2006. Translation of Children’s Literature: A Reader. Topics in Translation: 31. Clevedon:

Cromwell Press.

Leppihalme, R. 2007. Kääntäjän strategiat. : In Riikonen, H.K., Kovala U., Kujamäki P. and Paloposti O.

(eds), Suomennoskirjallisuuden historia 2. Helsinki: SKS. 365–373.

Leskinen, T. 1995. Pekka Poikasesta Peter Paniksi ja Liisasta Aliceksi: erisnimien käsittelyä englannista

suomennetuissa lastenkirjoissa. MA thesis, University of Tampere, Translation studies (English).

Nida, E. 1964. Principles of Correspondence. In Venuti L. 2000. Translations Studies Reader. London:

Routledge.

Nikolajeva, M. 2002. The Rhetoric of Characters in Children's Literature. Lanham, Maryland and London:

Scarecrow Press.

Nikolajeva, M. 2005. Aesthetic approaches to children's literature : an introduction. Lanham, Maryland:

Scarecrow Press.

80

Nord, C. 1997. Translation as a Purposeful Activity. Functionalist Approaches Explained. Manchester: St

Jerome.

Nord, C. 2003. Proper Names in Translations for Children. Alice in Wonderland as a Case in Point. Meta

48, 182 –196. Web. LLBA Database. Retrieved April 29, 2015.

http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.uef.fi:2048/docview/85592814?accountid=136582

Nordenswan, S. 2014. Kääntäjä ja karakterisaatio teoksen The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn kahdessa

suomennoksessa. MA thesis, University of Tampere, Translation studies (English). Web. Retrieved April 14,

2015. https://tampub.uta.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/95737/GRADU-1403081663.pdf?sequence=1

Oittinen, R. 1997. Liisa, Liisa ja Alice. Tampere: Tampere University Press.

Oittinen, R. 2000. Translating for Children. New York: Garland Publishing.

Pym, A. 2010. Exploring Translation Theories. New York: Routledge.

Rahja, J. 2013. Translation of Personal Names in Robin Hobb's Fantasy Trilogies The Farseer Trilogy and

The Tawny Man. MA thesis, University of Eastern Finland, Translation studies (English).

Reiss, K. and H.J. Vermeer 1984. Grundlegung einer allgemeinen Translationstheorie. Tübingen: Niemeyer.

Saussure, F. 2002. Writings in General Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Shavit, Z. 1986. Translation of Children’s Literature. In Lathey, G. 2006. Translation of Children’s

Literature: A Reader. Topics in Translation: 31. Clevedon: Cromwell Press.

Stolt, B. 1978. How Emil becomes Michel in Children’s Books in Translation. The Swedish Institute of

Children’s Literature. 130–146.

Tiihonen, T. 2007. Puhumme suomea! – Mutta miten animaatiodubbaus oikein syntyy?. In Oittinen, R.

and Tuominen, T. (ed.), Olennaisen äärellä – Johdatus audiovisuaaliseen kääntämiseen. Tampere:

Tampere University Press. 171–186.

Toury, G. 1995. Descriptive Translation Studies – and Beyond. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John

Benjamins.

81

Van Coillie, J. 2006. Character Names in Translation. A Functional Approach. In Van Coillie, J. and

Verschueren, W. (eds), Childrens Literature in Translation. Challenges and Strategies. Manchester: St.

Jerome. 124–131.

Vermeer, H., Reiss,K. 1984. Towards a General Theory of Translational Action. Skopos Theory Explained.

Manchester: St Jerome.

Vermeer, H.J. 1996. A skopos theory of translation. Some arguments for and against. Heidelberg:

TEXTconTEXT.

Vermeer, H. and Reiss. K. 2013. Towards a General Theory of Translational Action: Skopos Theory

Explained. Translated by Nord,C. Machester: St. Jerome.

Vertanen, E. 2007. Ruututeksti tiedon ja tunteiden tulkkina. In Oittinen, R. and Tuominen, T. (ed.),

Olennaisen äärellä – Johdatus audiovisuaaliseen kääntämiseen. Tampere: Tampere University Press. 149–

170.

82

Online sources:

Brenes, P. In my own Terms. Terminology for Beginners and Beyond. Web.

http://inmyownterms.com/mysmartterms/mysmarterms-5-the-semantic-triangle-words-dont-mean-

people-mean/ . [Accessed June 22, 2015]

CIA. 2014. Fact Book, Finland. Web. https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-

factbook/geos/fi.html . [Accessed January 29, 2015]

Čičelytė, V, Jaleniauskienė, E. 2009. The Strategies for Translating Proper Names in Children’s Literature.

Web. http://www.kalbos.lt/zurnalai/15_numeris/06.pdf .[Accessed March 4 2012]

"Descriptive." Merriam-Webster.com. Merriam-Webster, n.d. Web. http://www.merriam-

webster.com/dictionary/descriptive . [Accessed November 7, 2014]

Kielitoimiston sanakirja. Web. http://www.kielitoimistonsanakirja.fi. [Accessed May 3, 2016]

MOT Englanti 2.0. Web. http://mot.kielikone.fi.ezproxy.uef.fi:2048/mot/uef/netmot. [Accessed April 4,

2016]

Ogden C. K., Richards I. A. 1923. Meaning of Meaning. Magdalene College, University of Cambridge. Web.

http://s-f-walker.org.uk/pubsebooks/pdfs/ogden-richards-meaning-all.pdf . [Accessed August 20, 2015]

Tilastokeskus. 2013. Etnisyystiedon merkitys kasvaa maahanmuuton lisääntyessä. Web.

http://www.stat.fi/artikkelit/2013/art_2013-09-23_003.html?s=5. [Accessed January 29, 2015]

Media Consulting Group. 2011. Study on the use of subtitling. The potential of subtitling to encourage

foreign language learning and improve the mastery of foreign languages. Web.

http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/llp/studies/documents/study_on_the_use_of_subtitling/rapport_final-en.pdf .

[Accessed May 6, 2016 ]

My Little Pony Tales. Wikipedia.Web. http://www.wikipedia.com. [Accessed April 5, 2015]

My Little Wiki. Web. http://www.mylittlewiki.org. [Accessed April 5 2015]

83

Lahti, K, Sarakontu, L, Ruhanto, H, Arpiainen, H, Turunen, L, Sulaine. Myrskyttären ponisivut –

Suomennoksia. Web. http://www.elisanet.fi/myrskytar/kaannoksia.htm . [Accessed December 5, 2012]

84

Image sources:

Figure 1. My Little Pony Tales. 1992. Hasbro.Web. http://afponygroup.blogspot.com/2013/10/stables-of-

damned-7-madness-of-patch.html . [Accessed May 6, 2016]

Figure 2. My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic. 2014. Hasbro. Web. http://mlp.wikia.com/wiki/Bulk_Biceps.

[Accessed May 6, 2016]

Figure 3. My Little Pony Tales. 1992. Hasbro. Web. http://mylittlewiki.org/wiki/Gribet . [Accessed May 6,

2016]

Figure 4. My Little Pony Tales. 1992. Hasbro. Web.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v497/RaptorRed/B-rony/Pinkie_in_2nd_Cartoon.png . [Accessed

May 6, 2016]

Figure 5. My Little Pony. Web.

http://img02.deviantart.net/60b1/i/2014/042/3/4/g1_cutie_marks_by_starbat-d6eqzdd.png . [Accessed

May 6, 2016]

Figure 13. My Little Pony Tales. 1992. Hasbro. http://mlptales.wikia.com/wiki/Ace . [Accessed May 6,

2016]

85

Appendix 1.

Time stamped lines where character name is spoken, episode ‘Seison rinnallasi’ Nordic Agapio Oy.

Time Character Line

00:00:26 Melodi: Olet tyhmä, Teddy!

00:00:34 Melodi: Anna se takaisin, Teddy!

00:00:51 Hellä: Mutta Teddyhän ihan vain yritti auttaa sinua, Melodi.

00:01:02 Hellä: Ehkäpä jos sanoisit Melodille, että olet ihan oikeasti pahoillasi.

00:01:08 Teddy: ... en pyydä anteeksi keltään, varsinkaan tuolta kaikkitietävältä Melodilta.

00:01:15 Herra Jokinen: Hei Hellä, tekikö tuo pikku Teddy sinulle taas kiusaa?

00:02:09 Tilkku: Mikä hätänä, Melodi?

00:02:24 Melodi: Anna se takaisin, Teddy!

00:02:34 Tähti: Voisimmeko tutkia Teddyn syyllisyys ...

00:02:42 Neiti Simanen: Tähti, sinä kun olet niin tasapuolinen ...

00:02:55 Neiti Simanen: Räpsyn täytyy todistaa, että Teddy on todella syyllinen.

00:03:10 Hellä: Minä voisin ihan todella auttaa Teddyä.

00:03:18 Neiti Simanen: ... todisteiden perusteella, onko Teddy syyllinen.

00:03:20 Neiti Simanen: Jos toteatte Teddyn syylliseksi ...

00:03:34 Herra Jokinen: ... mitäs kummaa, Hellä?

00:03:45 Hellä: No Teddy, kerro ...

00:04:19 Räpsy: Teen listaa kaikista niistä syistä miksi Teddy on syyllinen.

00:04:30 Melodi: Hei Räpsy, Hei Tähti.

00:04:31 Hellä: Melodi, kiva kun tulit! Minulla olikin asiaa sinulle Teddystä.

00:04:37 Melodi: Kuulitko jotain, Tähti?

00:04:38 Tähti: Se on Hellä.

00:04:47 Hellä: Olen myös Teddyn ystävä.

00:04:49 Melodi: Et voi olla Teddyn ja meidän ystävä.

00:04:53 Melodi: Eikä niin, Tähti?

00:05:03 Tilkku: No Hellä, miten on? Teddy vai me?

00:05:17 Hellä: Haluan auttaa Teddyä ...

00:05:23 Hellä: Mennään, Teddy.

00:05:34 Tähti: ... oletko valmis esittämään syytteen Teddyä vastaan?

00:05:41 Räpsy: ... todistajinani haluaisin esitellä Apilan ja Bon Bonin.*

00:05:51 Tähti: Näittekö Teddyn ottavan sen?

00:05:55 Apila: Emme oikeastaan nähneet Teddyn sitä vievän.

00:07:33 Tähti: Ehkäpä sinun pitäisi kutsua Teddy todistamaan.

00:07:54 Hellä: ... jonka Melodi näki takertuneena, ei ollutkaan Melodin?

00:07:58 Teddy: Hellitä jo, se oli Melodin.

00:08:19 Teddy: Olen pulassa. Auta minua Hellä.

00:08:21 Hellä: Miten voisin, Teddy?

00:08:33 Hellä: Tähti, öh, tarkoitan tuomari.

00:08:55 Herra Jokinen: Mitäs kummaa, Hellä?

00:09:35 Neiti Simanen: Entä sinä, Teddy?

00:09:48 Teddy: Hellä, auta!

00:09:51 Hellä: Odota, minä autan sinua, Teddy.

86

Appendix 2. Time stamped lines where character name is spoken, episode ‘Seison rinnallasi’ Goden Voice AB.

Time Character Line

00:00:28 Melody: Tuo ei ole yhtään hauskaa, Teddy!

00:00:51 Sweetheart: Teddy halusi vain olla kiltti ja auttaa sinua, Melody.

00:01:04 Sweetheart: ... että sinun pitäisi pyytää Melodylta anteeksi.

00:01:14 Talonmies: Hei Sweetheart, Teddykö täällä taas teki pahojaan?

00:02:09 Patch: Mikä hätänä, Melody?

00:02:25 Melody: Anna nauhuri heti takaisin, Teddy!

00:02:45 Opettaja: Starlight, koska sinä olet niin viisaskavioinen ...

00:02:55 Opettaja: Henkilö, jonka tehtävä on todistaa onko Teddy syyllinen vai ei.

00:02:58 Opettaja: ... joka auttaa Teddyä puolustautumaan.

00:03:12 Opettaja: Hyvä, Sweetheart!

00:03:20 Opettaja: Ja ratkaistava onko Teddy syyllinen vai ei.

00:04:20 Bright Eyes: ... listaa asioita, jotka puoltavat Teddyn syyllisyyttä.

00:04:31 Melody: Hei Starlight.

00:04:32 Sweetheart: Melody, hyvä että tulit! Haluan puhua kanssasi Teddystä.

00:04:37 Melody: Kuulitko sinä jotakin, Starlight?

00:04:39 Starlight: Sehän on Sweetheart.

00:04:47 Sweetheart: Mutta olen myös Teddyn ystävä.

00:04:54 Melody: Vai mitä, Starlight?

00:05:02 Patch: No Sweetheart, kumman valitset? Teddyn vai meidät?

00:05:17 Sweetheart: Minä autan Teddyä.

00:05:24 Sweetheart: Tule, Teddy.

00:05:37 Starlight: … oletko valmis aloittamaan oikeudenkäynnin Teddyä vastaan?

00:05:42 Bright Eyes: … todistajikseni kutsun Cloverin ja Bon Bonin.

00:05:50 Starlight: Näittekö Teddyn ottavan sen?

00:06:17 Sweetheart: Ette tiedä Teddystä kaikkea.

00:07:33 Starlight: Sinun pitäisi kutsua Teddy todistamaan, että hän on syytön.

00:07:56 Starlight: Oliko se Melodyn nauhurista?

00:08:01 Teddy: … silloin kun yritin auttaa Melodya.

00:08:09 Sweetheart: Mitä sinä Melodyn nauhurilla tekisit?

00:08:20 Teddy: Nyt minä mokasin, Sweetheart!

00:08:25 Sweetheart: Miten ihmeessä, Teddy?

00:08:33 Sweetheart: Starlight, tarkoitan herra tuomari ...

00:08:47 Talonmies: Mitäs sinulla on sydämelläsi, Sweetheart?

00:09:36 Opettaja: Entäpä sinä Teddy, mitä sinä opit?

00:09:48 Teddy: Sweetheart, tule auttamaan!

00:09:51 Sweetheart: Ei hätää, Teddy! Minä tulen, Teddy!

87

Appendix 3.

Blank questionnaire.