translating humor for subtitling

7/24/2019 Translating Humor for Subtitling

1/15

Translating Humor for Subtitling

by Katia Spanakaki

umor is an essential part of everyday communication and an important component ofinnumerable literary works and films and of art in general. It is rooted in a specific cultural and

linguistic context, but it is also an indispensable part of intercultural communication and mass

entertainment. When trying to translate humor, culturally opaque elements and language-

specific devices are expected to make the translator's work difficult, while some elements areultimately not transferred at all.

umor, in its many manifestations, appears to be one of themost defining aspects of humanity. !epeated attempts have been

made to define the essence of humor from sociological andpsychological, as well as from linguistic perspectives. "lthough

humor has been approached from several angles, it has rarely

been systematically studied as a specific translation problem.umor has various levels of applicability that are partly

universal, cultural and linguistic, or individual. It is the level of

applicability, which often makes it a tangible problem for atranslator. owever, for the purpose of maintaining

intelligibility, the problem needs to be resolved in one way or another.

"dditionally, humor, as an everyday phenomenon, is increasingly a part of the context of

intercultural communication. It is also a vehicle for mass entertainment, as television nowadaysoffers a wide variety of entertaining programs, both feature films and #$ series, which are

mostly of "nglo-"merican origin, with humor as the primary or secondary element. #ranslators

often face the task of having to translate seemingly untranslatable humor, while not reducingthe meaning effect, which invariably tests their capability for finding creative solutions.

Definitions and theories of humor

%o matter how ordinary or commonplace humor seems to be in everyday life, it is found to bemuch more problematic and indefinable as a theoretical concept. #his has not, however,prevented scholars of various disciplines such as psychology, sociology, pedagogy and

linguistics, from exploring the issue of humor, which has, more often than not, resulted in

&epistemological hairsplitting& "ttardo, ())*+(. #he problems involved when it comes ondefining humor, are that some scholars have doubted that an all-embracing definition of humor

could be formulated see "ttardo, ())*+. "dditionally, we could say that one of the

difficulties in defining humor derives from the fact that the terminology used to describe it is

umor, in its many

manifestations,

appears to be one

of the most

defining aspects of

humanity.


2/15

not explicit. " number of scholars such as chmidt-idding ()/, see "ttardo ())*+/-0, have

attempted to clarify the issue by proposing semantic maps of humor, but certainly various other,

significantly different definitions could be formulated.

It goes without saying that the definition of humor ultimately depends on the purpose for whichit is used. "s "ttardo points out ())*+*, in the field of literary criticism for instance, there is a

need for a fine-grained categori1ation, whereas linguists have often accepted broader

definitions, arguing that whatever evokes laughter or is felt to be funny is humor, e.g. thathumor can be deduced from its effect. %evertheless, laughter as such is not necessarily a

condition for humor, and with this in mind, "ttardo ())*+( considers 2erbrat-3recchioni's

()4( pragmatic definition of humor as a text whoseperlocutionary, e.g. intended, effect islaughter, to be a more fruitful approach. 5ore specifically, humor is whatever is intended to be

funny, even if it might not always be perceived or interpreted as such. #his definition seems to

be quite problematic, since measuring intention is not easy. owever, it is useful because it

accounts for humor as a fundamentally social phenomenon as well as one whose manifestations

can vary greatly in different cultures.

3ne could agree that there are three general categories of humor67okes+ a universal

humor67okes, b culture-specific humor67okes, and c language-specific humor67okes. Indeed,

!aphaelson-West ()4)+(8 has also divided 7okes into three main categories+

linguistic 7okes e.g. puns

cultural 7okes e.g. the ethnic 7okes, and

universal 7okes the unexpected

he states that by going from top to bottom, following the above order, &the 7okes are

progressively easier to translate& ibid.. he demonstrates each by examples and drawsconclusions respectively. "s regards the translation of linguistic 7okes, she uses the expression

&punny as hell,& by replacing the idiom &funny as hell& to show that the word 'punny' rhymes

with the word 'funny,' and further states+ &In order to translate the 7oke it would be necessary tohave an idiomatic expression about humor which contained a word which rhymed with a word

which means something about puns or language. #his word which means something linguistic

would have to be semotactically similar to the word it rhymes with, and its presence would

have to add a little meaning to the sentence& ibid.. 5oving on to the next category, thecultural 7okes are seen to be &more widely translatable& ibid.. 9onsidering the following

example where we have nations x, y, 1, for instance, and both nations x and y have relationswith nation 1, it is possible for nation x to make 7okes about nation 1, which would betranslated into the language of nation y, but translating a 7oke of nation x into the language of

nation 1 might be impossible for the reason that, &even if the listener is good-natured and can

laugh at himself, he might not understand the stereotype& ibid., original emphasis. #o make itmore explicit, !aphaelson-West ()4)+(: points out that+ here are many 7okes which may

mean the same thing semantically, but in terms of pragmatics and culture, there is something

sorely missing which makes the 7oke untranslatable.& ;et, universal 7okes are perhaps bicultural


3/15

7okes, since not being aware of every culture, there is no way for understanding all 7okes in the

world.

The equivalence of humorous effect


4/15

homophony identical sounds but different spellings

homography different sounds but identical spelling and

paronymy there are slight differences in both spelling and sound.


5/15

"lthough, techniques : and *, as well as techniques / and 0 are found overlapping with each

other at some point, they can be combined in a variety of ways.


6/15

3n the other hand, translating allusive texts is complicated for two reasons+ the fact that irony &mal-codes,& that is, &it misrepresents the real content of themessage so that the contradiction must be assumed as normal, whereas a sarcastic statement is

ostensibly sincere and provokes no feeling of contradiction at all& %ash, ()4=+(=:-(= quoted

in 5ateo, ())=+ (0:.

owever, as a point of reference for the findings in this pro7ect, not all of these approaches arehelpful since the study focuses attention on the specific medium of subtitling. "lthough these

approaches do not take into account the constraints of subtitling, they are worth investigating in

terms of studying irony in translation.

5ateo ())=, drawing on 5uecke's ()/) classification of irony types, proposed a list ofpossible strategies, after studying a corpus of three English comedies translated into panish.


7/15

"lthough the strategies do raise some problems, when it comes on engaging them in the

specific medium of subtitling e.g. (8. '# irony is explained in footnote in the ##' is not

possible in any case, since in subtitling, a footnote or a translator's note is out of the question,we will discuss this issue in detail on the next chapter, after the subtitling constraints and

limitations are established. owever, these strategies clearly presented in Table #.below, haveas follows+

# irony becomes ## irony with literal translation

# irony becomes ## irony with 'equivalent effect' translation

# irony becomes ## irony by means of different effects from those used in # including

the replacement of paralinguistic elements by other ironic cues

# irony is enhanced in ## with some word 6 expression

# ironic innuendo becomes more restricted and explicit in ##

# irony becomes ## sarcasm i.e. more overt criticism

#he hidden meaning of # irony comes to the surface in ## no irony in ##

# ironic ambiguity has only one of the two meanings translated in ## there is no double-

entendre or ambiguity in ## therefore

# irony is replaced by a 'synonym' in ## with no two possible interpretations

# irony is explained in footnote in ##

# irony has literal translation with no irony in ##

Ironic # is completely deleted in ##

%o irony in # becomes irony in ##

Table #.The Translation of %rony

5ateo, ())=+(0=-(00> see also Celsmaekers and $an Gesien, :88:+:=(


8/15

Humor in subtitling


9/15

!umania, Israel, see also

?ries,())=+:/, which are most commonly defined as subtitling countries. I will not enter into

the particulars of what motivates the choice of a particular subtitling technique in the first placesee 2ilborn ()4) and 3'9onnell ())4, but it is at least partly due to the fact that subtitling is

about fifteen times less expensive than dubbing @uyken et al. ())(+(8=> see also ?ries())=+:4-8.

$onstraints and limitations of subtitling

"$ translation's visibility is probably one reason as to why "$ translation also lends itself to

easy and occasionally sharp criticism among the viewers. "ccording to hochat and tam+

&subtitles offer the pretext for a linguistic game of 'spot the error' & ()4=+*/, especially forthose viewers who have a command of both the source language and the target language. #o

highlight the above-mentioned 'sharp criticism,' I should mention the fact that there are, indeed,

whole Websites, as well as Internet forums and 9hatrooms devoted to subtitling gaffes, as forinstance the following+ http%&&digitallyobsessed.com http%&&dvd(subtitles.com etc.

quoted in ottlieb, ()):+(/*, ottlieb ()):+(/*-(/=

brings up interesting evidence from more recent studies d';dewalle et al. ()4=, according to

which some viewers have been able to read subtitles considerably faster.

"s ?elabastita ()4)+:88, also discusses the problem of film subtitling, he suggests that one of

the chief aspects to be considered is the amount of reduction it presupposes. #his is due to the

fact that the number of visual verbal signs on the screen is restricted, on one hand, by the spaceavailable and, on the other hand, by the time available. #he constraints of space and time result

in the problem of selection, as the translator has to analy1e the source text material carefully to

decide what should be transferred to the target text and what can or must be left out. 2ovai


10/15

())*+:=8 has applied relevance theory to subtitling, arguing that &decisions about deletions

are context-dependent.& %evertheless, while 1ig1agging in the crossfire of all these demands, a

subtitler aims at producing a sub7ectively maximal result.

5oreover, subtitling as a mode of linguistic transfer has a number of synchroni1ationconstraints.


11/15

for the original dialog. ubtitled films thus require a greater effort to harmoni1e a variety of

cognitive activities and grasp the underlying idea.


12/15

9oupland, ?. ())( /eneration 0 ( Tales for an ccelerated $ulture reat Gritain+ "bacus.

9uddon, J.". ())( The Penguin Dictionary of iterary Terms and iterary Theory, @ondon+

Cenguin Gooks.

?elabatista, ?. ()4) ranslation and 5ass 9ommunication+


13/15

5ifflin 9ompany.

Ivarsson, J. ()):, Subtitling for the 5edia% ,andbook of an rt, tockholm+ #ransEdit.

Ivarsson, J. L 9arroll, 5. ())4 Subtitling, imrishamn+ #ransEdit.

ivir, v. ()40 &Crocedures and trategies for the #ranslation of 9ulture.& In #oury, . ed.,

Translation across $ultures%ew ?elhi+ Gahri Cublications @td., pp. =-*/.

Jakobson, !. ()// &3n @inguistic "spects of #ranslation.& In Grower, !euben ". ed.,


14/15

!odopi Cerspectives in 5odern @iterature, "msterdam and "tlanda+ !odopi, pp. (:)-(=*.

5ateo, 5. ())= he #ranslation of Irony.& In5eta $olume *8, %umber (, pp. (0(-(04.

5uecke, ?.9. ()/) The $ompass of !rony,@ondon+ 5ethuen.

5uecke, ?.9. ()4:!rony and the !ronic :nded., @ondon+ 5ethuen.

%ash, W. ()4= The anguage of ,umor% Style and Techni*ue in $omic Discourse @ondon

and %ew ;ork+ @ongman.

%ewmark, C. ()44 Textbook of Translation @ondon+ Crentice all.

3'9onnell, E. ())4 &9hoices and 9onstraints in


15/15

Kabalbeascoa, C. ())* &

translating humor for subtitling

Documents