Audiovisual Translation (AVT)

3.2 Audiovisual Translation (AVT)

Some scholars point out that AVT is often underestimated (Delabastita 1989: 194, 1990: 97) or considered as a necessarily low quality activity (Zabalbeascoa 1996: 235). Despite being labelled as a subfield of TS, AVT has gathered a wealth of research. However, due to its constant development, AVT has suffered from some terminological confusion. For example, Luyken et al. (1991) suggest the term ‘language transfer’ to refer to the different types of translation strategies applied to audiovisual texts, which can include subtitling, voice-overs, commentary or dubbing. Other scholars such as Heiss (1996) and Ulrych (2000) focus on the type of text to be translated. They use ‘multimedia translation’ as an umbrella term to describe the translation of all those texts created through a multi-semiotic channel, be they films, TV programmes or plays for the theatre.

In his introduction to the special issue of The Translator on screen translation, Yves Gambier (2003) offers an extensive discussion of the state of the art in what he refers to as ‘screen translation’ or ‘audiovisual translation’ (AVT). In reviewing the various te rms used in the audiovisual field, Gambier points out that the term ‘language transfer’ does not seem to take into account the extra-linguistic elements it involves (e.g. pictures, sounds, etc.). In addition, he remarks that ‘multimedia translation’ often includes not only theatre but also computer games, web pages, etc. without distinguishing between the media and codes used. Consequently, he prefers the terms ‘screen translation’ or AVT because this helps to narrow down the analysis to those TV and radio programmes and films that are broadcast on a screen (cinema screen, TV set or computer screen) (ibid.171-172). Considering that nowadays the term AVT seems to be the most commonly applied, I tend to agree with Gambier and I will use this term, along with screen translation, throughout my thesis.

Among the many types of AVT (e.g. interlingual subtitling, dubbing, voice-over, interpreting; cf. Gambier ibid.172-177 for a complete list), the most popular ways in which audiovisual texts are transposed from the source language (SL) into the target language (TL) are dubbing and subtitling. In general, the choice of one mode over the other depends on many factors, among which are the production cost, the tradition developed by individual countries and the relevance of the source text (ST) within the receiving culture.

Luyken et al. (1991) analyse the choice of a certain translation mode in relation to the specific characteristics of the receiving audience: age, education, foreign language competence. Their investigation reveals that a preference for dubbing increases with age since o lder people’s reading skills and hearing abilities decrease. Highly educated audiences and those who claim to be proficient enough to watch a programme in the

SL prefer subtitling. In contrast, those who claim not to understand a foreign language prefer dubbing (ibid.114-116). In general, Luyken et al. highlight that each of these processes employs particular techniques aiming to overcome the linguistic barriers posed by the medium itself when they claim that:

Any method of Language Transfer will inevitably interfere with the original film or programme but it should attempt to be as unobtrusive as possible so that, ideally , the new viewer’s experience of the programme will differ as little as possible from that of the original audience. Highly professional and competent application of the various methods of Language Transfer, be it subtitling, voice-over or lip-sync dubbing, is therefore essential in order to preserve the original artistic identity of the audiovisual production to the widest possible extent. For whether emotionally supported or rejected, Language Transfer will play an increasingly significant role in the future direction of the television industry and the development of European identity. (ibid.29; my emphasis)

The emphasis on the word ‘ideally’ derives from the fact that the situation portrayed by Luyken et al. can only be described as ideal. As a matter of fact, the

process of Language Transfer, or AVT (by virtue of what I have just said), often faces

a large number of constraints forcing translators and adaptors to manipulate texts in such a way that they are likely to differ greatly from the originals. Marleau (1982), Delabastita (1989, 1990), Petit (2004) etc. investigate a variety of problems and constraints related to these two modes of translation. The specific constraints and advantages of subtitling and dubbing are discussed separately in dedicated Sections 3.3 and 3.4 below. Here I concentrate on some general problems that arise in transferring audiovisual material across languages and cultures.

With reference to the peculiarities of the original cultural context, La Polla (1996:

53) underlines the fact that the original image in the audiovisual text is not and cannot

be modified because of the particular visual references it carries, which are able to speak on their own. However, some scholars in TS have recently considered the future be modified because of the particular visual references it carries, which are able to speak on their own. However, some scholars in TS have recently considered the future

AVT obviously causes a large amount of problems. As La Polla (1996: 54) explains, AVT always involves a cultural shift, not only in linguistic terms but also by virtue of the connotations that the source language can convey by means of idiomatic expression, metaphor or a character’s individual register. Although the translator may find target-culture counterparts in such cases, they will be unlikely to retain the cultural connotation of the original in its entirety. However, it is important to point out that the linguistic transfer may often suffer from the influence of the source language over the target language. Luyken et al. (1991: 159-160) give examples of Anglicisms that are found in the German dubbed versions of famous television programmes like the American soap opera Dynasty (1981, Richard and Esther Shapiro).

In addition, Luyken et al. (ibid.158) not unreasonably point out that AVT is also influenced by the human factor. In their view, variables such as the translator’s knowledge of the source culture and language (her/his expertise), and the time pressure under which translators have to work can play a significant role in terms of accuracy (ibid.163-165).

As Gambier (2003: 183) reminds us, the contrastive analysis of ST and TT can help us understand not only the language norms and the processes at work in a given

culture but it also offers the opportunity to question general concepts such as manipulation, equivalence, acceptability etc. (these issues will be discussed shortly in more detail). Ulrych (2000: 408-409) however warns us that this can be achieved only by broadening the view of the field of ‘multimedia’ or AVT studies, which should be integrated with insights from other disciplines. Along with the classical translation- related disciplines like linguistics, literature and philology, fields such as communication studies and semiotics can also adequately support such an endeavour and affirm AVT as a field in its own right (cf. also Chaume Varela 2004 for similar considerations and an application). For this reason, I support my discussion by referring to studies from fields other than TS where possible (e.g. Film Studies, but also insights offered by professionals in AVT).

Taking into consideration the complex and multifaceted context of dubbing and subtitling, Delabastita (1989) clearly states that the process can be investigated and analysed better by using a descriptive approach. This allows scholars in the field of translation studies to understand what guides the translator’s decision-making process or why s/he uses a source or target-oriented approach (Venuti 1992, 1995, 1998 respectively calls these approach es ‘foreignization’ and ‘domestication’; cf. Chapter 1, Section 2.1 for a definition). Moreover, such an investigation should take into account the kind of relationship that exists between the target culture and the source culture, and how this affects the TT. Finally, one should always be aware of the genre to which the text under investigation belongs, e.g. entertainment, drama and so on (ibid.205-209). In other words, if a researcher wants to understand the reasons why a given programme or film has been translated or manipulated, s/he should first understand the set of norms governing the cultural context within which it is Taking into consideration the complex and multifaceted context of dubbing and subtitling, Delabastita (1989) clearly states that the process can be investigated and analysed better by using a descriptive approach. This allows scholars in the field of translation studies to understand what guides the translator’s decision-making process or why s/he uses a source or target-oriented approach (Venuti 1992, 1995, 1998 respectively calls these approach es ‘foreignization’ and ‘domestication’; cf. Chapter 1, Section 2.1 for a definition). Moreover, such an investigation should take into account the kind of relationship that exists between the target culture and the source culture, and how this affects the TT. Finally, one should always be aware of the genre to which the text under investigation belongs, e.g. entertainment, drama and so on (ibid.205-209). In other words, if a researcher wants to understand the reasons why a given programme or film has been translated or manipulated, s/he should first understand the set of norms governing the cultural context within which it is

Bearing all these reflections in mind, I now move on to summarise the subtitling process, its constraints and advantages.