Translation of FEI-Based Puns

5.7 Translation of FEI-Based Puns

I explained earlier that Baker (1992: 72-78) sees idioms as frozen linguistic expressions that seldom change in form. Not surprisingly then, her insight into the problems related to the translation of idioms and translation strategies amounts to general strategies that could be applicable to other problems. For example, she suggests using the equivalent idiom in the TL, omitting the original in the TT if necessary, or opting for compensation.

Leppihalme’s (1996) study instead focuses on ‘allusive wordplays’ which include modified metaphors and idioms, catchphrases, proverbs, and so on. She carried out an

experiment in which Finnish students and translators were asked to detect allusive wordplay in the English texts provided and translate them into their mother tongue. On the basis of her informants ’ feedback Leppihalme demonstrates the high level of cultural knowledge required when dealing with allusive wordplay. Moreover, she shows that students and professional translators alike failed to transfer the communicative significance of an allusive wordplay appropriately, or its (communicative) function within the text. This also strongly affected the quality and internal coherence of the TT. She therefore suggests that transferring the function of experiment in which Finnish students and translators were asked to detect allusive wordplay in the English texts provided and translate them into their mother tongue. On the basis of her informants ’ feedback Leppihalme demonstrates the high level of cultural knowledge required when dealing with allusive wordplay. Moreover, she shows that students and professional translators alike failed to transfer the communicative significance of an allusive wordplay appropriately, or its (communicative) function within the text. This also strongly affected the quality and internal coherence of the TT. She therefore suggests that transferring the function of

5.7.1 Translation Strategies for FEI-Based Puns Veisbergs (1997: 164-171) looks into the problem of translating idiom-based puns in depth. He examines a corpus of texts by Oscar Wilde and Lewis Carroll translated into Latvian, German and Russian and develops a set of eight translation strategies, which are summarised in Table 5.5 below:

Strategy

Explanation

1. Equivalent idiom transformation The idiom-based pun is transferred into the TL. The play on the same linguistic items and idiomatic meaning is retained.

2. Loan translation The original idiom-based pun is translated literally into the TL.

3. Extension The idiom-based pun is transferred into the TL and extra information is added to the TT. By doing so, the idiom-based pun is more explicit or recognisable to its receivers.

4. Analogue idiom transformation The original idiom-based pun is recreated by means of a TL idiom that is similar in form and equivalent in meaning.

5. Substitution The original idiom-based pun is recreated by means of a TL idiom that is different in form and equivalent in meaning.

6. Compensation An idiom-based pun is added to the TT where there was none in the ST.

7. Omission a) The passage containing the idiom-based pun is completely omitted; or

b) The original pun is omitted but the idiomatic meaning of the passage is preserved.

8. Metalingual comment Footnotes, endnotes or parentheses are added to explain the original idiom-based pun.

Table 5.5: Summary of Veisbergs’s (1996: 164-171) suggested translation strategies

As with Delabastit a’s typology, these categories are not mutually exclusive and some further suggestions can be made (see below). They can also be interpreted As with Delabastit a’s typology, these categories are not mutually exclusive and some further suggestions can be made (see below). They can also be interpreted

Alternatively, the translator can choose the more source-oriented strategy suggested in (2), which allows the receivers of the TT to appreciate the image conveyed by the original FEI-based pun. However, this approach may cause a disruption in the natural flow of the target language or it may make the form of the source language idiom too visible in the TT. For example, Wilde’s pun based on the idiom to call a spade a spade was translated literally into German, Latvian and Russian in Veisbergs’s corpus (ibid.165).

Strategy (3) can be seen as a target-oriented approach. According to Veisbergs, it may be used when the target language can only partly retain the variation in form and meaning of the original idiom, so that a more explicit rendering of the pun is required. For instance, the Latvian translator preserved the pun and added extra information in square brackets to the following excerpt from Alice in Wonderland : “In most gardens … they make the [flower] beds too soft [so soft as the sleeping beds] – so that the flowers are always asleep ” (Carroll 1966:57, quoted in ibid.166).

Strategy (4) may be considered again as a compromise between foreignisation and localisation because it suggests finding an equivalent to the ST in form and meaning.

According to Veisbergs, it is used to play on the linguistic components of the analogue idiom in the TT. In Carroll’s (1966: 120) Alice in Wonderland for example, the sentence: “You will be catching a crab directly”, meaning ‘get something wrong’

is also used to evoke a rower’s defective stroke. Alice interprets it literally and says: “A dear little crab!”. In Latvian this has been translated as catching a hare and Alice’s turn as “A small little hare!”. The translation retains the dual actualization of the

literal and idiomatic meanings but it does not evoke a rower’s defective stroke (ibid.). In contrast, strategy (5) is more target-oriented. It results in a complete loss of the

image conveyed by the original idiom. This happens because the source and target idioms differ in form but have equivalent meanings. In this case the top priority is to retain the fluency and wit of the original idiom-based pun rather than its linguistic components. For example, Veisbergs quotes Oscar Wilde’s passage:

“I should have fallen madly in love with you… and thrown my bonnet right over the mills for your sake (…) As it was, our bonnets were so unbecoming and the mills so occupied in trying to raise the wind, that I never had even flirtation”.

This has been translated into Latvian as:

“(…)I would lose my head because of you and there could be nowhere to put my head on, and what else is the head needed for…”.

It is clear that the difference between techniques (4) and (5) here is not clear-cut. In my opinion, there is a very fuzzy line that separates them since it could be argued that It is clear that the difference between techniques (4) and (5) here is not clear-cut. In my opinion, there is a very fuzzy line that separates them since it could be argued that

Strategy (6) is self-explanatory and (7) may be an acceptable alternative when the pun plays a minor role in the development of the text. Omission (a) and (b) clearly resemble Delabastita’s PUN→ZERO and PUN→NON-PUN strategies discussed above. However, it should be noticed that complete omission (7a) as intended by Veirsbegs is infrequent in audiovisual translation, although I did find an example in my data. Visual constraints such as lip synchronization usually force translators to match visual and verbal text. In the data analysis that follows, I will interpret strategy (7a) both as complete omission of the text and the cancellation of the pun and the idiom alike. A sentence that fits the context of the exchange replaces the FEI-based pun but the two are not related. Option (7b) is instead used to retain the idiomaticity rather than the pun in the text (also defined as ‘neutralisation’ in TS (Ramière 2006:156); cf. Section 5.10 below and Subsection 6.5.3 in Ch. 6 in this thesis). In other words, the pun is lost but the idiom is preserved. It may be used when the text already presents a high number of wordplays, so that sacrificing one FEI-based pun may be a better option than producing an artificial effect in the TT. As with Delabastita’s EDITORIAL TECHNIQUE, (8) is clearly not applicable to audiovisual text.

In general, it is possible to notic e that Delabastita and Veisbergs’s typologies are very similar. Some of the strategies suggested by each scholar could be said to be widely applicable to various types of translation problems. However, some differences between the frameworks can be found. For example, Veisbergs considers ‘extension’ and ‘metalinguistic comment’ as two different types of techniques while Delabastita lumps them together in the ‘editorial technique’ category. This is relevant to my In general, it is possible to notic e that Delabastita and Veisbergs’s typologies are very similar. Some of the strategies suggested by each scholar could be said to be widely applicable to various types of translation problems. However, some differences between the frameworks can be found. For example, Veisbergs considers ‘extension’ and ‘metalinguistic comment’ as two different types of techniques while Delabastita lumps them together in the ‘editorial technique’ category. This is relevant to my