Humorous Culture-Specific Allusions
Chapter 6. Humorous Culture-Specific Allusions
Differences between cultures cause many more severe complications for the translator than do differences in language structure. (Nida 1969: 161)
6.1 Introduction
In this chapter, I concentrate on another recurrent mechanism of humour creation in the first series of Friends, which poses translation problems almost by definition, namely culture-specific allusions. Like other linguistic phenomena, culture-specific allusions are not humorous per se. However, they seem to be exploited to convey potential humour in my data. This intention is marked by the presence of canned laughter that accompanies them. U nlike ‘transcultural’ allusions (whose source and meaning can be recognised by both source and target culture) culture-specific allusions challenge translation because their referent can only be understood by people who are sufficiently familiar with the source culture in question (Leppihalme 1997: 66). Bearing this in mind, I investigate only those culture-specific allusions that are preceded by canned laughter in the ST and I consider how they are transferred into Italian.
Before doing so, it seems worth commenting briefly on the types of culture-specific allusions in my data. As anticipated in Chapters 1 and 4, Friends is a TV comedy series whose target audience is generally made up of teenagers and young adults with an average education. Consequently, the types of culture-specific allusions used in the ST reflect and refer mainly to the North-American culture within which the programme is set. In particular, they are mostly based on the so called ‘material’ and ‘popular’ culture, thus matching the general tone of the series. In addition, most of Before doing so, it seems worth commenting briefly on the types of culture-specific allusions in my data. As anticipated in Chapters 1 and 4, Friends is a TV comedy series whose target audience is generally made up of teenagers and young adults with an average education. Consequently, the types of culture-specific allusions used in the ST reflect and refer mainly to the North-American culture within which the programme is set. In particular, they are mostly based on the so called ‘material’ and ‘popular’ culture, thus matching the general tone of the series. In addition, most of
As I mentioned in Chapter 4, culture-specific allusions in Friends (like wordplays and metaphors) not only contribute greatly to the humour of the series, but also convey cues about the idiosyncrasies of the characters who utter them (e.g. Chandler is witty, Joey is absent-minded, etc.). Therefore, they seem to be a key factor for the programme’s success.
All the aspects I have just mentioned (humorous function, culture-specificity, temporality and to some extent characterisation) pose relevant problems for the transfer of culture-specific allusions into another language and culture. The translator is the mediator between the source and target languages and cultures. S/he is supposed to possess sufficient knowledge of the source culture to be able to recognise the culture-specific allusions in the ST and, at the same time, s/he has to be sensitive to the specific problems they pose.
Hence, before investigating the problems arising from the translation of potentially humorous culture-specific allusions, I will discuss and define this phenomenon in general terms. In order to do this, in Section 6.2 I will refer to scholars who have analysed culture-specific allusions in general (Aixelá 1996; Leppihalme 1997; Davies González and Scott-Tennent 2005) and humorous culture-specific allusions in particular (Antonopoulou 2004). In Section 6.3 I will consider some of these scholars’ suggestions for the categorisation of culture-specific allusions in terms of type (Leppihalme 1997) and source (Davies Gonzáles & Scott-Tennet 2005). In particular,
I will propose a possible combination of these taxonomies which may be more applicable to my data. In Section 6.4 I will move on to discuss the specific issues arising in the translation of culture-specific allusions that carry potential humour. In particular, I will highlight the fact that the scholars I mentioned above mainly focus on the translation of written texts. I will therefore integrate my discussion with recent studies that focused specifically on the AVT of cultural-specific allusions (Bovinelli and Gallini 1994, Ramière 2006) and their humorous function (Bucaria 2007). In Section 6.5 I will provide an overview of the strategies put forward in the literature to translate culture- specific allusions. By doing so, I will attempt to demonstrate that some of these strategies are inapplicable to audiovisual texts. Hence, I will conclude my discussion by considering which techniques can be applied in AVT.
With these premises in mind, in Section 6.6 I will start my data analysis. Firstly, I will seek to understand how the scriptwriters exploit culture-specific allusions within the fictional world of Friends for humorous purposes. Secondly, I intend to examine what translation strategies the Italian translators deployed in order to overcome the problems such phenomena pose. Finally, I take into account the differences between the ST and TT that result from the transfer of the original text into Italian, with particular reference to its humorous potential. As with wordplay in Chapter 5, my analysis is supported by At tardo’s (1994, 2001, 2002b) General Theory of Verbal Humour (GTVH) model.
In Section 6.7, I will discuss my findings. In particular, I will consider the results from the contrastive analysis of ST and TT, which seems to suggest that the Italian translators were sensitive to the problems related to culture-specific allusions. More importantly, it can be noted that, when retention was not possible, they mostly opted In Section 6.7, I will discuss my findings. In particular, I will consider the results from the contrastive analysis of ST and TT, which seems to suggest that the Italian translators were sensitive to the problems related to culture-specific allusions. More importantly, it can be noted that, when retention was not possible, they mostly opted
6.2 Defining the Concept of Culture-Specific Allusion
Before carrying out an analysis of the translation of the phenomenon and the difficulties it poses, I need to present a definition of what I mean by culture-specific allusion. In doing so, I point out the difficulty of capturing and labelling this phenomenon.
Firstly, it should be highlighted that in this thesis I do not intend to debate the general notion of allusion, which has already received a large amount of scholarly attention (cf. for example Perri 1978). In her book-length study Culture Bumps: An Empirical Approach to the Translation of Allusions , Leppihalme (1997: 6) explains that ‘allusion’ is often used as a synonym for ‘reference’. In addition, she shows that there is little agreement among scholars regarding the definition of the notion of this concept . Hence, Leppihalme uses ‘allusion’ as an umbrella term that includes: “a variety of uses of preformed linguistic material in either its original or modified form, and of proper names, to convey often implicit meaning” (ibid.3).
Other scholars and researchers in TS concentrate on the categorisation and translation of what they name as ‘culture-specific items’ (Aixelá 1996) or ‘cultural refere nces’ (Bovinelli and Gallini 1994; Davies González and Scott-Tennent’s 2005; Lorenzo et al. 2003). Since a fine distinction between ‘allusion’ and ‘reference’ is beyond the scope of this study, I will use both terms interchangeably.
Given that I specifically concentrate on the AVT of this phenomenon, I use Ramière’s (2006: 155) description of culture-specific references in AVT, which are defined as:
verbal and non-verbal (visual and auditory) signs which constitute a problem for cross-cultural transfer because they refer to objects or concepts that are specific to the original sociocultural context of the film –
i.e. that, at the time of distribution, do not exist, or deviate significantly in their connotational value from similar objects and concepts in the target culture(s) considered.
Hence, culture-specific allusions can be described as above but their humorous function has to be taken into account during the translation process. This point will be discussed in more detail in Section 6.4 below.
In the next section I consider the possibility of categorising culture-specific allusions according to a combined use of the frameworks of Leppihalme (1997) and Davies González and Scott-Tennent (2005).
6.3 Categorisation of Culture-Specific Allusions
As mentioned above, some scholars in TS have investigated the phenomenon of culture-specific allusion and its translation. Leppihalme (1997: 6) observes that allusion is often described as a literary phenomenon, while, on the contrary, it can be found in several types of text (non-fiction, films, painting etc.) and it can also rely on several types of source. For this reason, she bases her analysis on English fictional and non-fictional texts (e.g. political speeches, advertisements, newspaper articles, etc.) and their translation into Finnish. Moreover, she carries out an empirical test on recognition and understanding of allusions in English source-texts by Finnish informants. Her findings demonstrate that, more often than not, students in TS find it As mentioned above, some scholars in TS have investigated the phenomenon of culture-specific allusion and its translation. Leppihalme (1997: 6) observes that allusion is often described as a literary phenomenon, while, on the contrary, it can be found in several types of text (non-fiction, films, painting etc.) and it can also rely on several types of source. For this reason, she bases her analysis on English fictional and non-fictional texts (e.g. political speeches, advertisements, newspaper articles, etc.) and their translation into Finnish. Moreover, she carries out an empirical test on recognition and understanding of allusions in English source-texts by Finnish informants. Her findings demonstrate that, more often than not, students in TS find it
Davies González and Scott- Tennent’s (2005) study aims to train students in TS in detecting and analysing culture- specific allusions. Drawing from Nida’s (1969, 1999) work, Davies González and Scott-Tennent attempt to increase their translation students’ awareness of cultural references (ibid.166). Unlike Leppihalme, Davies González and Scott-Tennent stress the importance of recognising the source of allusion in the text. In these scholars’ opinion, this part of the analytical process can greatly help students tackle and solve the translation problems this phenomenon causes (ibid.167).
Bearing this in mind, in Subsection 6.3.1 below I present Leppihalme’s proposed categorisation of allusions based on their type. Moreover, in Subsection 6.3.2 I summarise Davies González and Scott- Tennent’s taxonomy for culture-specific references based on their source. This will be integrated with some references to similar studies (e.g. Bovinelli and Gallini 1994). More importantly, I will consider the benefits of applying a combination of both approaches to the analysis of my data.
6.3.1 Types of Culture-Specific Allusions As already mentioned in Chapter 5, multifaceted phenomena like wordplay are difficult to frame within a given set of categories. Scholars dealing with culture- specific allusions face a similarly daunting task. Nonetheless, Leppihalme stresses the validity of categorisation as an analytical tool. I tend to agree with Leppihalme on this point and for this reason I summarise her framework in Table 6.1 below. This table 6.3.1 Types of Culture-Specific Allusions As already mentioned in Chapter 5, multifaceted phenomena like wordplay are difficult to frame within a given set of categories. Scholars dealing with culture- specific allusions face a similarly daunting task. Nonetheless, Leppihalme stresses the validity of categorisation as an analytical tool. I tend to agree with Leppihalme on this point and for this reason I summarise her framework in Table 6.1 below. This table
Type of Allusion
I think I’ve become a Raffles in
(an allusion that contains a
my old age.
proper name)
Allusion proper
Key-phrase
Apparently taxis all turn into
(an allusion that does not
pumpkins at midnight .
contain a proper name)
Stereotyped allusions
Frequently used allusions that
We were ships that pass in the
have lost freshness and whose
night .
source can hardly be evoked (e.g. clichés, proverbs)
Semi-allusive comparisons
Like the land of Oz , technology (SCAs)
Superficial comparisons or
looser associations
has good and bad witches.
Eponymous adjectives
Adjectives derived from names
Orwellian images.
Table 6.1: Summary of Leppihalme’s (1997: 10-11) framework of types of allusions
In defining the ‘allusion proper’ category, Leppihalme distinguishes between those that contain a proper-name (PN) from those that do not, which are grouped into the key- phrase (KP) category (cf. Aixelá 1996: 59 for a similar approach). Leppihalme’s ‘stereotyped allusions’ instead clearly resemble the Fixed Expressions and Idioms (FEIs) I have discussed in Chapter 5. Since a large part of that chapter has been devoted to the analysis of this phenomenon and its humorous function, it will not be discussed any further here. ‘Semi-allusive comparisons’ are defined as “superficial comparisons and looser associations” (ibid.11; cf. example in Table 6.1). Eponymous adjectives are described as derived from proper names and not forming “fixed collocations with their current head words” (ibid.; cf. example in Table 6.1).
In general, Leppihalme’s categories are not clear-cut, as the author herself acknowledges (ibid.10). I find it difficult to distinguish between PNs and eponymous In general, Leppihalme’s categories are not clear-cut, as the author herself acknowledges (ibid.10). I find it difficult to distinguish between PNs and eponymous
distinguish between PNs and eponymous adjectives in my data and I treat them all as instances of allusive PNs.
6.3.2 Sources of Culture-Specific Allusions Leppihalme briefly analyses the sources (or referents) of allusions (ibid.66), but she does not provide an exhaustive categorisation of their types of source. She limits her discussion to noticing that in her corpus the category of proper-name (PN) allusions mostly consists of names of people who exist or existed in the past (e.g. artists, politicians, etc.), fictional characters (e.g. Shakespeare’s Macbeth), places, biblical names (e.g. David and Goliath, etc.) and figures of myth. More rarely, she finds references to more recent plays, films and television programmes like Willy Rus sell’s
Educating Rita and children’s classics like Alice in Wonderland (ibid. 66-68). This is likely to arise from the type of texts Leppihalme investigates. Nevertheless, Leppihalme seems to neglect other types of culture-specific allusions like those derived from the so called ‘material culture’ (e.g. proper names of things or brand names used metonymically to refer to food, drinks, toys, etc.). These types of references can cause similar problems of recognition and transfer in translation (Baker 1992: 21-26), especially when they carry a potentially humorous function or when they are used in conjunction with the visual text (cf. Bovinelli and Gallini 1994).
Similarly, key-phrase (KP) allusions in Leppihalme’s corpus seem to be mainly drawn from biblica l texts such as the New and the Old Testament, Shakespeare’s Similarly, key-phrase (KP) allusions in Leppihalme’s corpus seem to be mainly drawn from biblica l texts such as the New and the Old Testament, Shakespeare’s
Interestingly, in my data only culture-specific allusions based on nursery rhymes appear as frequently as predicted by Leppihalme for her corpus (ibid.69). This may depend on the fact that nursery rhymes are very popular in North-American (and British) culture and are also central in its children’s upbringing. In contrast, PN and KP allusions in my data usually derive from film, TV programmes, etc. Hence, I consider Davies González and Scott- Tennent’s (2005) categorisation of culture- specific referen ces based on Nida’s (1969, 1999, quoted in ibid.166-167) five-group taxonomy, which focuses on the sources of (PN and KP) allusions:
1. Material: sources related to everyday objects (e.g. food and drinks, games, units of measure, etc.);
2. Ecological: sources related to places (e.g. geography, flora and fauna, etc.);
3. Social: sources related to social organization and its manifestations in the arts, politics, history, leisure, etc. (e.g. Shakespeare, Tory, Machiavelli, Cubism; my examples);
4. Religious: sources related to rituals and ideological manifestations (e.g. Christening, Holy Communion; my examples);
5. Linguistic: understood as the means to express all the previous and which refers to attitudinal and conversational clues 1 .
1 Nida (1969: 55) only provides a brief definition of cultural references. He lists five categories but does not exhaustively explain them. Nida (1999) is based on a series of seminars that he gave at the Facultat De Ciències Humanes, Traducció i Documentació,
Universitat de Vic that do not seem to be available in another form.
Some important points should be made here. Firstly, due to the lack of examples for points (3) and (4) in the original, I use these categories according to my understanding of them. Secondly, it is not very clear what point (5) refers to. I would suggest it may denote the language code used for communicating a message (e.g. English, Italian, etc.) and/or the sociolect shared by a group of individuals (their jargon). However, due to its vagueness, I prefer not to make use of it during my data analysis. Finally, the ‘social’ category seems to contain a very large number of subcategories, whose labelling is not always precise. For example, the term ‘leisure’ seems to refer to a vague subcategory. It does not specify if it should contain games, sport, entertainment, TV and so on. Hence, I suggest a new distinction into two categories: ‘high culture/institutions’ (containing allusions deriving from literature, politics, art, history, etc.) and ‘popular culture’ (containing allusions deriving from nursery rhymes, TV, cinema, sport, etc.).
Limiting Leppihalme’s framework to PNs and KPs and revising Davies González and Scott- Tennent’s typology allows me to use them in combination to classify the examples in my ST. The quantitative analysis according to this categorisation is
contained in Section 6.6 below. The next two sections will be devoted to discussing the issues related to humorous culture-specific allusions and translation, and the strategies available to overcome the problem they pose.
6.4 Function(s) of Humorous Culture-Specific Allusions
Leppihalme (1997: 31-55) discusses the many functions of allusions and their effects. These include humour, characterisation, expression of interpersonal relationships between characters and so on. These functions can be analysed separately but they also partly overlap (ibid.31). As she explains, humorous allusions can be found in Leppihalme (1997: 31-55) discusses the many functions of allusions and their effects. These include humour, characterisation, expression of interpersonal relationships between characters and so on. These functions can be analysed separately but they also partly overlap (ibid.31). As she explains, humorous allusions can be found in
Leppihalme also suggests that characters who creatively exploit allusion within a given fictional world may be perceived as educated, erudite, and quick-witted. Moreover, this creative use of allusions can also reflect the character’s interests. In contrast, naïve and poorly educated characters are likely to make use of trite allusions (e.g. clichés) and often fail to grasp the implied meaning of allusions uttered by other characters (ibid.40). Besides, Leppihalme claims that allusions can foster power play between the characters. For example, if the ‘alluder’ (the person who utters an allusion) makes a creative use of allusion, the alludee (the person who receives the allusion) may respond to it in several ways. They may recognise the allusion, thus becoming part of the group s/he has been invited to join by means of this device. However, they may fail to understand the allusion and its meaning, explain its source, and so on. In such cases, these allusions become a device to show the alludee’s naïvity and lack of shared knowledge with the alluder (ibid.46-50). My data seems to offer evidence of this, as I will demonstrate during my analysis.
Clearly, authors are likely to exploit this type of allusion because of their multifunctionality. Hence, translators have to be particularly sensitive to their presence and function within the text. On the basis of her empirical findings (based on the questionnaires she administered to Finnish informants), Leppihalme concludes that retaining culture-specific allusions in the TT cannot be considered a valuable translation strategy because target text receivers are not likely to recognise the original Clearly, authors are likely to exploit this type of allusion because of their multifunctionality. Hence, translators have to be particularly sensitive to their presence and function within the text. On the basis of her empirical findings (based on the questionnaires she administered to Finnish informants), Leppihalme concludes that retaining culture-specific allusions in the TT cannot be considered a valuable translation strategy because target text receivers are not likely to recognise the original
Antonopoulou (2004) focuses on the use of allusive PNs in humorous discourse. She claims that retaining PN allusions in the TT is fundamental because they convey a potentially humorous effect. In her study, Antonopoulou analyses the allusive PNs in two Greek translated versions of Raymon d Chandler’s novels. She also discusses the findings of the analysis of a questionnaire she administered to Greek informants. This questionnaire contained some examples taken from the two translated texts and an alternative translation suggested by Antonopoulou herself. Both the linguistic and empirical investigation leads her to conclude that allusive PNs should be retained, especially when they are contained in comparing constructions (similes, metaphors and alike) because:
If an entity is referred to by name, then the producer of the message is assumed to have reason to believe (a) that the entity in question is worth naming and mentioning by name and/or (b) that the recipient of the message is in the position to identify the referent (ibid.243).
In addition to this, Antonopoulou points out that PNs are brief and economical ways to convey information, immediacy and simultaneity. Deciding to substitute them could therefore jeopardise the text’s effect and appreciation (ibid.248-249). All in all, Antonopoulou (ibid.250) argues that allusive PNs should be retained because they provide:
Ambience/credibility of the TT Participation of the target readership in problem-solving Membership of that readership (in-group) Brevity and simultaneously activated, image-like scenes.
It should be noticed that most examples in Antonopoulou’s data involve allusive PNs in comparative constructions (e.g. “I need a guy who can act like a bar lizard and
can backchat like Fred Allen”, from Trouble Is My Business, by Raymond Chandler 1950, in ibid.225). Thus, the co-text and context play a fundamental role during the interpretation of a humorous allusive PN. However, allusions are not always included
in such constructions. Hence, as Leppihalme suggests, other translation options should
be taken into consideration. The following section will therefore be devoted to the translation strategies that can be applied to transfer them across cultures and languages.
6.5 (AV)Translation of (Humorous) Culture-Specific Allusions
As we have seen so far, scholars in TS recognise the relevance of culture-specific allusions within the text but they seem to disagree to some extent on the translation process that should be applied to transfer them. This is further confirmed by the literature produced in TS on this topic. For example, Baker (1992: 21-42) discusses the most common problems of non-equivalence between source and target language at word level and consequently suggests eight translation strategies to overcome the problems related to culture-specific allusions. However, s trategies like ‘substitution’ and ‘omission’ can be found across studies in TS to deal with several translation problems (cf. Chapter 5 on wordplay and Chapter 7 on metaphor in this thesis). Baker herself is fully aware of this and discusses advantages and disadvantages for each translation strategy put forward in her book (ibid.). For his part, Aixelá (1996: 61-65) suggests eleven different ways to tackle the problems arising in the translation of culture- specific allusions (‘culture-specific items’ in his terminology), thus creating further terminological confusion.
Interestingly, all the scholars I have mentioned so far focus mainly on written texts, while translating audiovisual material means taking into account other kinds of contextual factors. For example, Bovinelli and Gallini (1994) highlight the fact that dubbing culture-specific references is very much dependent upon technical constraints such as lip sync or the simultaneous use of visual and verbal text. According to Bovinelli and Gallini’s data analysis, the Italian translators seem to favour a target- oriented approach. In their opinion, this allows the audience a deeper immersion into the movie experience (ibid.98).
Conver sely, Bucaria’s (2007) study of the Italian subtitling of the Late Show with David Letterman reveals a source-oriented approach in dealing with humour and culture-specific references. Bucaria suggests that this approach fails to convey the potential humour of the original ST. However, as she acknowledges, choosing such an approach is likely to depend on the fact that the ST can still be heard by the target audience. These two studies clearly show the relevance of the translation mode used in dealing with audiovisual material.
Clearly, translation scholars and practitioners alike are often caught in the domesticating or foreignising (educating) dilemma (Venuti 1992, 1995, 1998). For example, Niemeier’s (1991) paper on the translation of culture-specific references in the German dubbed version of A Streetcar Named Desire (1951, Elia Kazan, Endstation Sehnsucht ) demonstrates how scholars themselves are often at pains to favour one or the other approach.
In the case of potentially humorous culture-specific allusions in comedy, we can certainly say that, since they contribute to the entertainment function of the text, their successful translation is highly desirable. Interestingly, Leppihalme (1997) offers a useful and manageable set of strategies for translating allusive proper-names (PNs) In the case of potentially humorous culture-specific allusions in comedy, we can certainly say that, since they contribute to the entertainment function of the text, their successful translation is highly desirable. Interestingly, Leppihalme (1997) offers a useful and manageable set of strategies for translating allusive proper-names (PNs)
6.5.1 Translation Strategies for allusive Proper-Names (PNs) Leppihalme’s (1997: 79) set of suggested translation strategies for proper names (PNs) comprises:
(1) Retention of name (either unchanged or in its conventional target language (TL) form) with three subcategories: (1a) use the name as such; (1b) use the name, adding some guidance (this strategy is described as
“small additions or alterations intended to supply some of the implicit background knowledge in the allusion unobtrusively” (ibi.91); (1c) use the name, adding a detailed explanation, for example a footnote.
(2) Replacement of name by another (beyond the changes required by convention); with two subcategories: (2a) replace the name by another SL name; (2b) replace the name by a TL name.
(3) Omission of name, with two subcategories:
(3a) omit the name but transfer the sense by other means, for example by a common noun; (3b) omit the name and the allusion altogether.
It is worth noticing that in Leppihalme’s own data, the translators opted for retaining the allusive PNs in almost 70% of cases, even when the Finnish receivers
were unlikely to recognise and understand them. In light of the above, Leppihalme suggests that (Finnish) translators should make use of her set of alternative strategies, which are ordered hierarchically in a flow chart. Briefly, Leppihalme advises translators to evaluate the potential familiarity of TT receivers with an allusive PN and to retain it only when they are certain it can be recognised. If not, they should add some guidance (1b). If this is also not possible, they should opt for some form of replacement, as suggested by (2a) and (2b). Alternatively, they could use a common noun (3a) or resort to overt explanation (1c) before deciding to omit the PN altogether (3b) (see ibid.106).
In contrast to Leppihalme’s suggestions, Antonopoulou (2004) claims that modifying potentially humorous allusive PNs can jeopardise the receivers’ interpretation of the TT. For example, she claims that humorous references should not
be translated by ‘explic[it]ation’ (strategies (1b) and (1c) in Leppihalme’s terminology) because this is likely to cancel the humorous effect of the allusive PN (ibid.223). Antonopoulou also discusses the option called the ‘cultural transplantation’ (Hervey and Higgins 2001: 132-135, quoted in Antonopoulou ibid.), which suggests
replacing the source target reference with a target culture one ((2b) above). In her opinion, this strategy cannot be an adequate candidate, especially when a text is clearly set in the source text environment. This is particularly true for audiovisual texts because they combine verbal and visual text and the mismatch between the target replacing the source target reference with a target culture one ((2b) above). In her opinion, this strategy cannot be an adequate candidate, especially when a text is clearly set in the source text environment. This is particularly true for audiovisual texts because they combine verbal and visual text and the mismatch between the target
Antonopoulou’s suggestions are dependent on the fact that she analyses written texts. Other considerations concerning Leppihalme’s taxonomy have to be taken into
account when dealing with audiovisual texts. Not all the strategies provided above are applicable to such texts, and others should perhaps be included. For example, using footnotes as suggested in (1c) is not possible. Also, Leppihalme does not include the possibility of resorting to ‘compensation’ (Harvey 1995; cf. previous chapters for its discussion and application). This strategy is also applicable to the translation of culture-specific allusions, as my analysis will show later.
Although I could not find instances of this in my data, it seems important to point out that translators may also choose to deploy a culture-specific allusion that shares some similarity with the original one but proceeds from a culture other than the source or target one. These references are considered as internationally known, thus likely to
be understood by the target culture as well. Lorenzo et al. (2003: 280) call this strategy ‘internationalization’. For example, in one episode of the animated series The Simpsons (1987- , Matt Groening) a manager refers to ‘Fred and Ethel’, the main characters of an American soap opera called I Love Lucy (1951-1957, Dasi Arnaz).
Lorenzo et al. (ibid.282) show that the Spanish translator(s) repl aced it with ‘Romeo and Juliet ’ in order to convey an effect similar to that intended by the original one.
6.5.2 Translation Strategies for allusive Key-Phrases (KPs) Allusive key-phrases (KPs) are interesting sources of potential humour, especially in conversation. Therefore, they can pose significant translation problems that deserve 6.5.2 Translation Strategies for allusive Key-Phrases (KPs) Allusive key-phrases (KPs) are interesting sources of potential humour, especially in conversation. Therefore, they can pose significant translation problems that deserve
A use of a standard or official translation;
B minimum change, that is, a word-for-word translation, without regard to connotative or contextual meaning - there is thus no change that would aim specifically at the transfer of connotations;
C extra-allusive guidance added to the text. The translator adds information to the TT because s/he evaluates the needs of the TT receivers for extra explanatory material;
D use of footnotes, endnotes, translator’s prefaces and other explicit explanations overtly given as extra information and not inserted in the text itself;
E simulated familiarity and internal marking, that is, the addition of marked wording and syntax that depart from the style of the context, thus signalling the presence of borrowed words;
F replacement by a preformed TL item;
G reduction of the allusion to sense by rephrasing it, which means omitting the allusion and making its meaning overt;
H re-creation, fusion of techniques: creative construction of a passage which hits at the connotations of the allusion or other special effects created by it;
I omission of the allusion. Unfortunately, Leppihalme’s explanation of each strategy lacks examples.
However, the data analysis I provide later in this chapter will hopefully suffice. Some common features of the strategies for PNs and KPs can be highlighted here. For example, strategy (1) and its subcategories seem to match strategies (A) to (D) while strategy (2) and its subcategories resemble (F). As in the case of strategy (1c) for PNs, strategy (D) cannot be applied to audiovisual texts. While suggesting (F) as a However, the data analysis I provide later in this chapter will hopefully suffice. Some common features of the strategies for PNs and KPs can be highlighted here. For example, strategy (1) and its subcategories seem to match strategies (A) to (D) while strategy (2) and its subcategories resemble (F). As in the case of strategy (1c) for PNs, strategy (D) cannot be applied to audiovisual texts. While suggesting (F) as a
set of strategies in the next subsection. Before concluding, I would also like to mention that in Leppihalme’s data, the preferred strategy is (B)-minimum change and she suggests some possible reasons for this choice (e.g. it is a low-effort strategy, the translator could not find a better alternative, etc.; ibid.102-105). However, Leppihalme sees the limitations of this strategy since it “does not always enable the TT reader to participate in the creative process” (ibid.105) that the use of an allusion calls for. As with allusive PNs, Leppihalme presents a hierarchically ordered flow-chart of the strategies above. According to this, (A) is (not surprisingly) the favourite option while (B) and (D) would be the least desirable ones (ibid.107).
6.5.3 The AVT of Humorous Culture-Specific Allusions As explained earlier, there is little agreement among scholars in TS about what strategies should be applied in transferring culture-specific allusions. This is mainly due to the fact that they consider different aspects and functions of this phenomenon. For example, Leppihalme (1997) is oriented towards a target-culture (domesticating) procedure while Antonopoulou (2004) affirms the importance of retaining the original potentially humorous culture-specific allusions in the TT (foreignisation).
Translating culture-specific allusions (or references) in audiovisual texts is further complicated by the specific constraints imposed by the medium (cf. Ch.3 in this thesis for an extensive discussion). Ramière (2006) offers an interesting discussion on both dubbing and subtitling culture-specific allusions. In Section 6.2 above I have accepted her definition of this phenomenon because of its clarity and conciseness. More importantly, drawing from Venuti’s (1995) distinction between the foreignisation and domestication approaches, Ramière (2006: 156) presents a descriptive model for the AVT of culture-specific allusions. In Figure 6.1 below I reproduce Ramière’s model (I will explain my revision of it shortly).
She conceives the translation process as a continuum along which various options can be found. At the two ends of this scale she places the foreignisation and domestication poles respectively. She also includes other terms used in the literature to describe these techniques (e.g. ‘exoticism’, ‘foreign’, ‘naturalisation’, ‘assimilation’, etc.). On this polarised scale, she inserts those techniques that are more or less close to the two poles (e.g. transference/borrowing is closer to foreignisation; cultural substitution is closer to domestication, etc). Finally, Ramière includes the ‘omission’ and ‘naturalization’ options off-scale and accompanies them by a question mark. Although she does not explain the reason for this, I suppose it depends on the fact that they cannot be evaluated according to the foreignisation or domestication parameters.
Ramière’s model offers a clear visual representation of the various options at the translators ’ disposal while dealing with the AVT of culture-specific allusions. For the sake of completeness, I have integrated it with some of Leppihalme ’s strategies (e.g. ‘recreation’ for KPs). However, I have excluded those strategies in Leppihalme’s sets which are inapplicable to audiovisual texts (i.e. (1c) and (D) suggest the use of Ramière’s model offers a clear visual representation of the various options at the translators ’ disposal while dealing with the AVT of culture-specific allusions. For the sake of completeness, I have integrated it with some of Leppihalme ’s strategies (e.g. ‘recreation’ for KPs). However, I have excluded those strategies in Leppihalme’s sets which are inapplicable to audiovisual texts (i.e. (1c) and (D) suggest the use of
Transference/ Literal translation/ Explanation/ Cultural substitution/ borrowing calque Replacement gloss Replacement (PN (1a)/ (PN(1a)/ Re-creation (PN(2a)/ (PN(1b)/ (PN(2b)/
KP (E)) KP/(B)) Internationalization (KP(H)) KP(SL item) P(C)) compensation KP((F) –TL item)
omission? (PN(3b)/KP(I)) neutralisation? (PN(3a)/KP(G))
foreignisation domestication
exoticism/exoticisation naturalisation/assimilation
foreign/exotic familiar Other Self source-culture bias target-culture bias
Figure 6.1: Revision of Ramière’s (2006:156) model of procedures for the translation of source-culture allusions
Figure 6.1 gives a clearer and more schematic picture of the phenomenon under investigation here. In particular, it shows which strategies suggested by Leppihalme can
be used for both PNs and KPs, or only for one of these devices. Furthermore, this visual representation confirms and attempts to clarify some terminological confusion in TS. For example, it shows that the ‘literary translation’ strategy can be assimilated to (1a) for PNs and (B) for KPs. Therefore, I would like to advocate a more coherent and consistent way of defining these strategies across the field of TS.
In the following section and subsection, I will examine how the production crew and the scriptwriters in particular used culture-specific allusion for humorous (and characterisation) purposes. Moreover, I will test the model in Figure 6.1 against my data to verify which strategies were used in translating this mechanism into Italian. The differences between the ST and TT will be highlighted and discussed thoroughly.
6.6 Data Analysis
Before moving on to the discussion of some of the instances of potentially humorous PNs and KPs in my data, I will explain how I have selected and categorised them.
As with wordplay, I have considered those turns that precede canned laughter in the ST. By doing so, I have detected 66 culture-specific allusions that pose potential problems in translation. I have excluded 57 culture-specific allusions from this analysis because they are not supported by canned laughter. In addition, I have left out 18 allusions (16 PNs and 2 KPs) that could be considered as ‘transcultural’ (recognisable by the target culture) because they do not pose translation problems.
The next step of my analysis involves the categorisation of these 66 potentially humorous culture-specific allusions on the basis of a combination of Leppihalme’s (1997) categorisation of types of allusions and my revision of Davies Gonzáles & Scott- Tennet’s (2005) typology for the sources of allusions. In Table 6.2 below I provide this classification of my data:
Source of Allusion
Number of
Number of
of Proper-
of Key-phrases
Names (PNs)
(KPs)
Material (drinks, food, measures, various types of products available on the market, etc.)
Ecological (places, flora and fauna, etc.)
High culture/Institutions (literature, institutions, politics, art, history, etc.)
Popular culture (nursery rhymes, sport, show-business)
Religious (Catholicism, Judaism, Islam, events related to religion etc.)
1 1 2 Total
Table 6.2: Combination and revision of Leppihalme’s (1997: 10-11) categorisation of allusive PNs and KPs and Davies Gonzáles &
Scott- Tennet’s (2005: 166-167) taxonomy.
As can be seen, most culture-specific allusions in the ST are PNs (50) while KPs are much less frequent (16). The full list of examples is contained in Appendix III, “Humorous Culture-Specific Allusions” at the end of this thesis. Classifying the examples has not been straightforward since many of them can fall into more than one category. For example, the reference to Mr. Potato Head (cf. example (6.4) below) could be included in both the ‘material’ and ‘popular culture’ category. However, since it was first created as a children’s toy, I have subsumed it under the former group. Besides, some exchanges include more than one instance of potentially humorous culture-specific allusions and I
Table 6.2 clearly shows that the PN and KP culture-specific allusions used in the ST are mostly derived from the ‘material’ (food, drink, toys) and the ‘popular culture’ categories (films, television and people in showbusiness). As a matter of fact, the genre of
the texts under investigation plays an important role in the type(s) of allusions used. A TV comedy series such as Friends is unlikely to include biblical or Shakespearean allusions because of the type of audience it targets (people in their late teens up to those in their mid-twenties) and the characters it portrays: young high-school graduates, with the exception of Chandler and Ross who hold a university degree and PhD respectively.
The table above generally shows an effective way of categorising this multifaceted phenomenon because it takes into account both the type of allusion and its source. Before starting with my data analysis, I would like to describe the layout of the following subsections. Due to space constraints, only some examples of the 66 instances of potentially humorous culture-specific allusions in the ST are discussed here. Since the vast majority of them are PNs (50 out of 66), the following subsections are mainly devoted to their analysis and their translation. The strategies applied to the translation of KPs will be discussed in one single subsection (6.6.7).
As in Chapter 5, each subsection is named after the translation strategy adopted in the TT. For each example I first analyse the culture-specific allusion(s) in the ST. This linguistic analysis is supported by Attardo’s (1994, 2001) GTVH metric. After discussing the culture-specific allusions in the ST, I consider their translated counterparts. As in the
My investigation shows that, in contrast with Leppihalme’s findings, the Italian translators have used a wide range of translation strategies (cf. Section 6.7 on the
statistical analysis of the data). For example, many PNs have been replaced by another SL name (2a above) while in Leppihalme’s corpus this strategy is rarely used (ibid.92). However, the Italian translators very often replaced the original culture-specific allusions with a common noun (‘neutralisation’). I will provide a general overview on these findings in Section 6.7 below.
6.6.1 Transference of SL Name This foreignisation strategy has been used in my data for PNs in a small number of cases (eight instances out of 50).
Example (6.1) has been discussed in the previous chapter (cf. Subsection 5.5.) in reference to the pun it contains. I present it again here in order to discuss the two culture- specific references used by the characters. As I anticipated in Chapter 4, there is some overlapping between the three humour mechanisms I consider in this thesis. For instance some FEI-based puns exploit the metaphoric expression in an idiom (cf. Subsection 5.8.2). Some examples in Chapter 7 will further confirm this (cf. Subsection 7.7.2). As
[6.1]Chandler: I can’t believe
Chandler: I can’t believe you you would actually say that. I
Chandler: Non posso credere
are talking seriously. I’d rather would much rather be
che tu dica sul serio. Io
be Mr Peanut than Mr Peanut than
preferirei essere Mr. Peanut che
Mr Salty.
Mr Salty.
Mr Salty. ☺☺
Joey: Are you joking? Mr Salty Joey: No way! Mr Salty is a
Joey: Scherzi? Mr Salty è un
is a sailor, right? So he’s got to sailor, all right, he’s got to be,
marinaio, giusto? E quindi deve
be the toughest snack there is. like, the toughest snack there
essere lo snack più da duri che
Ross: I don’t know. I wouldn’t is. ☺☺
ci sia!
snob peanuts. They’re Ross: I don’t know, you don’t
Ross: Non lo so. Comunque, io
non snobberei le noccioline.
appetising.
wanna mess with corn nuts. ☺
Sono appetitose.
They’re craaazy.☺☺
In the ST Chandler introduces two culture-specific references. Mr Peanut is the advertising mascot of an American snack-food company called Planters. It is represented as a peanut in its shell, dressed in dandy-like style (a top hat, monocle, white gloves, spats, and a cane). He has also become a cartoon character and videogame. Mr Salty is the drawing of a pretzel that dresses like a sailor (hat and bandanna around his neck) and represents the Nabisco snack-food company. They are included into the ‘material’ category.
As I mentioned above, the group of friends are having a meal and this may be the reason why their conversation revolves around these two snacks. Chandler and Joey’s turns introduce the topic of the conversation and are supported by canned laughter. They then give way to Ross’s turn. At the character-character level, Chandler is implicitly attacking Joey because he would rather be a sailor than a classy dandy-like character. In contrast, Joey highlights the positive features of Mr Salty, who is a sailor and therefore
Salty. Joey and Chandler (and Ross at the audience-character level) can be the TAs 1 . In the TT, the Italian translators retained the original PNs. It may be argued that the
Italian audience is not likely to grasp the implied meaning of the two culture-specific allusions. However, it should be noticed that the immediate co-text offers extra information about at least Mr Salty. Moreover, the use of the original PNs seems to retain the potential funniness of the exchange at author-audience level and its ambience 2 . As can
be noticed, the two recordings of canned laughter for the culture-specific allusions were omitted in the TT. Example (6.2) below is another example where a PN is retained even if the target audience may not recognise it. As in the previous example, this choice is most probably due to the fact that the context of the exchange gives sufficient clues to understand what the PN refers to. In this scene, from Episode 22, Chandler is talking to Phoebe about the party the y attended the night before at one of their colleagues’ place. Chandler has recently been promoted and his co-workers are now his subordinates. Although he tries to recreate the in-group complicity he has lost, his former colleagues have distanced him:
1 LM: Exaggeration, analogy; SI: Context; NS: Conversation; LA: Proper name. 2 LM: Exaggeration, analogy; SI: Context; NS: Conversation; LA: Proper name.
[6.2]Chandler: I think last
Chandler: It was great last night was great. You know, the
Chandler: È stato fantastico
night. That Karaoke thing. Karaoke thing. Tracy and I
l’altra sera. Quella storia del
Tracy and I doing Ebony and doing Ebony and Ivory .☺☺
Karaoke. Tracy e io facevamo
Ebony and Ivory .
Ivory .
Phoebe: You were great! But they still made fun of you.
Phoebe: You were great. But
Phoebe: Eri magnifico! Ma ti
prendono ancora in giro.
they still made fun of you.
In the ST the culture-specific PN belongs to the ‘popular culture’ category and refers to Paul McCartney’s number-one single Ebony and Ivory launched in 1982. Paul McCartney performed it with the world famous African-American singer Stevie Wonder.
The lyrics of this song talk about how the black and white keys of a piano keyboard can live side by side in harmony. At a deeper level this song deals with racial integration suggesting that white and black people should be able to live together and respect each other. In accordance with this, Paul McCartney and Stevie Wonder seem to embody the white (Ivory) and black (Ebony) keys on the piano respectively. The allusion seems to carry potential humour because it can be related to Chandler’s attempt to regain his ex co- workers ’ friendship. Nonetheless, Chandler’s efforts do not seem to have had a positive outcome , as Phoebe’s turn points out. Hence, the potential humour of this reference is also dependent on the context within which it is embedded. The conceptual clash that the use of culture-specific allusion attempts to convey can be explained in GTVH terms by means of a contextual SO such as Ebony and Ivory/back people and white people. At a concrete level it may evoke the human/non-human SO while at a more abstract level it
seems to create a possible/impossible SO. Finally, the TA is Chandler 3 . Although a number- one single in 1982, Paul McCartney’s Ebony and Ivory is unlikely
to be recognised by most of the target audi ence of the ‘90s. However, the Italian translators may have considered that the contextual and co-textual clues (e.g. Karaoke)
3 LM: Inferring consequences; SI: Context; NS: Conversation; LA: Proper name.
TT 4 . Finally, the recording of canned laughter in the ST was deleted in the TT.
6.6.2 Explanation (or Retention and Guidance) Scholars in TS have named this strategy in different ways. For example, Veisbergs (1997: 164-171) names it ‘extension’ while Katan (1999: 131) calls it ‘explic(it)ation’ (both quoted in Antonopoulou 2004: 223). However, I use Leppihalme’s and Ramière’s terminology here for the sake of coherence. This type of strategy is situated almost half way between the foreignisation and domestication ends (cf. Figure 6.1 above) but has rarely been used in my corpus (two instances out of 50). This may be due to the constraints imposed by the translation medium (i.e. lip sync). Nevertheless, it is worth commenting on one example as proof of the variety of strategies in my data. In Episode 3, Monica is dating a man called Alan. Usually, all her friends criticise and make fun of her boyfriends. However, this time everybody is extremely fond of Alan. In example (6.3) below Chandler comments:
4 LM: Inferring consequences; SI: Context; NS: Conversation; LA: Proper name.
[6.3]Chandler: Oh, yeah. I’d
Chandler: I’d marry him just marry him just for his David
Chanlder: Io lo sposerei
for his impression of David Hasselhoff impression
solamente per la sua imitazione
Hasselhoff, the guy from alone.☺☺ You know I’m
di David Hasselhoff, quello di
Baywatch . I'll do it as well at the gonna be doing that at parties,
Baywatch . La farò anch’io alla
prossima festa. ☺
next party.
right? [Does the impression]☺☺
In (6.3) Chandler’s reference is again drawn from North-American popular culture. He mentions David Hasselhoff, a very well known actor of TV series in America, especially Baywatch (1989-1991, Gregory J. Bonann). This TV series is based on the lives of lifeguards who work in California and are physically very well trained and sexually
appealing. Chandler accompanies the second part of his turn with an impression of David Hasselhoff, thus enhancing the potential humour of his allusion. However, Alan is not as physically fit or sexually appealing as David Hasselhoff. What seems to contribute more to the potential humour of the exchange is Chandler ’s (and all the other characters’) exaggerated fondness for Alan, which is perceived at the author-audience level. Hence, according to the GTVH metric, the potential humour of Chandler’s turn could be explained by the contextual SO: Chandler/David Hasselhoff, which also evokes a sex/non-sex SO. At an abstract level it can also activate the normal/abnormal SO since David Hasselhoff is generally considered as exceptionally fit and handsome. Chandler is the TA of his own humour since he recognises he is not like David Hasselhoff 5 .
In the TT, the culture-specific PN was retained but some guidance has been added, probably because the translator felt that the Italian audience may not be familiar with the actor’s name. The name of the TV series Baywatch is instead easily recognisable. Adding it to the text facilitates the inference process because it links David Hasselhof f’s name to the TV series. In this way, the audience is more likely to recognise the reference to a
5 LM: Role exchange, analogy; SI: Context; NS: Conversation; LA: Proper name.
KRs 6 . In the ST there are two recordings of canned laughter but only the one at the end of Chandler’s turn was retained in the TT.
6.6.3 Replacement by SL Name This strategy is fairly frequent in my data (11 instances out of 50). This approach lies almost half way between the foreignisation and domestication ends. It seeks to preserve elements of the original culture and, at the same time, it (mainly) aims to convey the implied meaning of the reference. Examples (6.4) and (6.5) below show that in the TT the original culture-specific allusions have been replaced by other references that are taken from North-American culture but that are likely to be more familiar to the Italian audience. In example (6.4), from Episode 1, Rachel explains why she decided to run away the day of her wedding and expresses her feelings for her not-to-be husband Barry:
[6.4]Rachel : … And then I got Rachel: … E allora mi sono Rachel : … And then I got really really freaked out, and that’s
scared and I also realised how when it hit me: how much Barry
davvero spaventata e mi sono
much Barry looks like E.T., You looks like Mr Potato Head.☺
anche accorta di come Barry
know what I mean, it always Y’know, I mean, I always knew
assomiglia E.T. ☺Cioè capite,
looked a familiar face to me, he looked familiar, but...☺☺☺
mi era sempre sembrato un viso
familiare ma...☺ but…
In the ST , Rachel refers to Mr Potato Head, a children’s potato-shaped toy wearing moustache, glasses and a hat, which it is very popular in the United States. Therefore, it can be subsumed under the ‘material’ category. Rachel compares Barry to Mr Potato
6 LM: Role exchange, analogy; SI: Context; NS: Conversation; LA: Proper name plus explanation.
Head, which conveys an implied disparaging comment on the former. Mr Potato Head appeals to children because of his exaggerated features (e.g. big eyes and nose, thin, long arms, etc.) and his cheerful smile. However, these exaggerated features are ridiculous when applied to a human being. The GTVH metric can be used to explain the potential humour of this exchange by means of the contextual SO Barry/Mr Potato. At a more concrete level it evokes the human/non-human SO and at an abstract level it can activate
the normal/abnormal SO (cf. explanation above). Finally, the TA is Barry 7 . Rachel’s culture-specific allusion to Mr Potato Head is likely to be unfamiliar to the
Italian audience. Therefore, in the TT the translators replaced it with E.T., the famous Extra Terrestrial character fro m Steven Spielberg’s film (1982, E.T.: The Extra Terrestrial 8 ). This salvaged the potential humour o f this part of Rachel’s utterance . Like
Mr Potato Head, E.T. is perceived to be sweet but he is also known for his rather unusual features (e.g. big head, long, thin arms, etc.); thus a man with similar features would be regarded as unattractive. Interestingly, both recordings of canned laughter have been retained in the Italian TT. This may suggest the dubbing team’s confidence in choosing this option.
In example (6.5), another culture-specific allusion underwent the same type of manipulation. In this scene, from Episode 12, Ross visits his lesbian ex-wife who lives with her new partner: [6.5]Ross: Oh, that’s great, that
Ross: Oh, that’s great, that is is great! [Hugs and kisses Carol.
Ross: Fantastico! Grazie al
great!.. Hey, when did you and Then picks up a picture frame]
cielo!.. Ehi, quand’è che tu e
Susan meet Tyson? Hey, when did you and Susan
Susan avete conosciuto Tyson?
Carol: That’s our friend Tanya. meet Huey Lewis?
Carol: Quella è la nostra amica
Tanya. ☺☺☺
Carol: Uh, that’s our friend
Tanya. ☺☺☺
7 LM: Potency mapping, analogy; SI: Context; NS: Conversation; LA: Proper name. 8 LM: Potency mapping, analogy; SI: Context; NS: Conversation; LA: Proper name.
In the ST, Ross’ refers to Huey Lewis, an American musician and actor who is fairly well-built and plays in a band which is rather famous in America (Huey Lewis and The News). As such this allusion belongs t o the ‘popular culture’ category. Ross looks at a picture that cannot be seen by the audience and he mistakenly assumes that the person in it is Huey Lewis. Ross’s assumption is defeated by Carol’s turn that informs him that he is looking at the picture of a woman (Tanya) and not a man’s. Carol’s turn reveals the incongruity, thus conveying the potential humour of the conversational exchange. This
exchange can be seen as a prejudiced joke which exploits the stereotyped (and homophobic) idea that lesbian women look like men (Tanya looks like a man to Ross). The audience may therefore laugh at Ross and his mistaken interpretation. According to the GTVH, the conceptual clash in the exchange can be described by means of the contextual SO: Tanya/Huey Lewis. At a more concrete level is can also evoke the sex/no- sex SO. At a more abstract level it seems to activate the actual/non-actual SO since Tanya is not Huey Lewis. Finally, the TAs seems to be Tanya, lesbian women and Ross 9 .
The Italian translators replaced the original PN with another PN that is drawn from the same source culture. Mike Tyson is an American boxer who is now retired. His appearance is extremely masculine but his facial features have been affected by years of boxing (scars, deep-set eyes, etc). He is known world-wide, including in Italy. He is equally famous for his boxing skills and violent attitude to others. In my opinion, not only
does the Italian TT retain the entertaining features of the exchange and its KRs 10 but it also maximises its biased potential humour. The use of Mike Tyson as allusive PN creates
9 LM: Potency mapping, implicit parallelism; SI: Context; NS: Conversation; LA: Proper name. 10 LM: Potency mapping, implicit parallelism; SI: Context; NS: Conversation; LA: Proper name.
6.6.4 Neutralisation or Omission and Use of Common Noun Aixelá (1996: 64) notices that the ‘total omission’ strategy is used quite often in translation. In contrast, the analysis of my data shows that in the Italian dubbed version of the first series of Friends, the translators often opted for substituting culture-specific allusions with a common noun (22 instances out of 50). This strategy was applied mainly to allusive PNs that belong to the ‘material’ and ‘high culture/institutions’ categories. Leppihalme explains that this strategy preserves some denotative effect, although it deprives the TT of the nuances conveyed by the allusion (ibid.93). Antonopoulou’s (2004: 250) opposing view is that omitting the PN endangers the humorous effect of the text and suggests ruling out this option. I have detected two subcategories of this strategy in my data: a) when the common noun is related to the allusive PN it replaces; and b) when the common noun is not related to the allusive PN it replaces. Three examples are discussed below.
Example (6.6) below, from Episode 5, shows the use of two allusive PNs as modifiers. Chandler has asked his girl-friend Janice to meet him because he wants to end their relationship but she arrives with a present:
I bought you these. [pulls out a pair of socks]
[6.6]Janice: I got you...these.
Janice: Ho comprato per te
Janice:
Chandler: Oh, socks with a Chandler: Bullwinkle socks. ☺
questi.
moose. Wonderful! That’s so sweet.
Chandler: Oh, calzini con
I knew you had those Janice: Well, I knew you had
l’alce. Splendidi!
Janice:
with the squirrel and so I the Rocky’s, and so I figured,
Janice: Sapevo che li avevi con
thought you could also have you know, you can wear
lo scoiattolo e così ho pensato
those with the moose. You Bullwinkle and Bullwinkle, or
che potevi avere anche quelli
could wear them coupled or you you can wear Rocky and Rocky,
con l’alce. Potresti metterli
can mix and match, moose and or, you can mix and match,
appaiati o magari fare un bel
squirrel, whatever you like the moose and squirrel. ☺☺
miscuglio, alce e scoiattolo,
come ti piace di più.
most.
Whatever you want.
In the ST Janice refers to Rocky and Bullwinkle, the main characters of two American TV animated programmes that enjoyed great success in the 1960s (Rocky and His Friends and The Bullwinkle Show respectively). They are therefore part of the ‘popular culture’ category I described earlier on. The potential humour of the exchange is based on the situation. Chandler would like to end their relationship but Janice is unaware of it and brings a present . In addition, Janice’s reference to the Rocky and Bullwinkle socks and the way she explains to Chandler their multiple combinations contribute to portray her as childish and irritating. In GTVH terms, the contextual SO can be end of the relationship/exchange of presents (Rocky and Bullwinkle socks). At a concrete level the exchange seems to activate the childish/adult behaviour SO and consequently the more
abstract normal/abnormal SO. Finally, the TA is Janice 11 . The Italian translators simply replaced Rocky and Bullwinkle with the common name
of the animals they refer to, namely a squirrel and a moose. Replacing the original PNs
11 LM: Self-undermining, exaggeration; SI: Context; NS: Conversation; LA: Proper name.
Although the specificity of the exchange seems to be minimised 12 , the concrete and abstract SOs are preserved. In my opinion the original culture-specific allusion could
have been preserved. The immediate co-text could have given sufficient clues for understanding the allusion, even if the target audience was not familiar with it. An alternative solution could be to retain the proper names when they are mentioned for the first time and use the common nouns subsequently (cf. Baker 1992: 40). Finally, the two recordings of canned laughter in the ST were omitted in the TT.
As anticipated before, replacement can be made using an unrelated common noun, which however can convey the implied meaning of the original allusive PN (and its potential humour). Example (6.7) is taken from Episode 15 during which Ross dates a girl called Celia. On their first date, Ross and Celia are kissing on his sofa and Celia asks Ross to use some dirty words to arouse her. Ross is not able to do this and the day after goes to Joey for advice. Joey suggests that Ross should practise before meeting Celia again. In this scene Ross tells Joey what happened during their second date:
[6.7]Ross: I was the James
I can assure you: a kind Michener of dirty talk. ☺☺ It
Ross: Ti assicuro: una specie di
Ross:
of wizard of dirty word. I used was the most elaborate filth you
mago della parolaccia. Ho usato
the most elaborated vulgarities have ever heard. I mean, there
le volgarità più elaborate mai
ever heard. There was a bit of were characters, plot lines ☺☺,
sentite. C’era di tutto:
everything: characters, plot themes, a motif... at one point
personaggi, complotti, trame,
lines, conspiracies, traps... at there were villagers. ☺☺☺
tranelli... A un certo punto c’ho
messo anche i pirati.
one point I also added pirates.
12 LM: Self-undermining, exaggeration; SI: Context; NS: Conversation; LA: Common noun.
221
In the ST Ross refers to James Albert Michener, a bestselling American author who was awarded the Pulitzer Prize for Fiction. His novels usually tell stories about war (e.g. Tales of the South Pacific and Hawaii). Unlike the previous examples, this allusive PN belongs to the ‘high culture/institutions’ category (which includes allusions from literature). It is not surprising that such a reference is uttered by Ross who is the only one who is highly educated (University degree and PhD) among his friends. However, his personal interests in fiction have demonstrated to be unsuccessful in a courting situation. The ST presents a humorous and incongruous scenario where what was supposed to be a sexually arousing tale almost becomes a complex one with many characters. Hence, according to the GTVH metric, the clash between these two scenarios can be seen as the following SO: James Michener’s tale/dirty talk in sex. This can also evoke the sex/non- sex SO and the normal/abnormal SO. The TA is Ross himself 13 .
The Italian translators replaced the allusive PN with an unrelated common noun. The word ‘mago’ (magician) is idiomatically used in Italian to refer to someone who is really
good at doing something (e.g. computing; like the English ‘computer wizard’). The general potential humour of the exchange seems preserved since the concrete and abstract SO are preserved along with the other KR 14 . However, this general fixed expression
seems to retain only part of the specific implied humour conveyed by the original allusive PN. This seems to be confirmed by the omission of all three recordings of canned laughter present in the ST. Interestingly, the Italian translators substituted the “villagers” in the ST with “pirati” (‘pirates’) in the TT, which seems to activate a potentially humorous opposition between sex and a battle (cf. also Goatly 2007: 83-85 on the use of
13 LM: Self-undermining, exaggeration; SI: Context; NS: Conversation; LA: Proper name. 14 LM: Self-undermining, exaggeration; SI: Context; NS: Conversation; LA: Common noun.
Example (6.8), from Episode 5, is another example in which the PN (used as part of a simile) in the ST is replaced by an unrelated noun in the TT. In this scene, Monica and Joey are out for dinner with Joey’s former girlfriend, Angela, and her new boyfriend, Bob. Joey is trying to make Angela jealous by taking Monica out for dinner as his new girlfriend. Joey has told Monica that Angela and Bob are siblings. However, during the dinner Angela has her hand inside Bob’s shirt. Monica calls Joey aside and comments:
[6.8]Monica: Hello! Were we at Monica: Ma guardali! Noi Monica: But look at them! We the same table? It’s like...
are at the same table and they do cocktails in Appalachia. ☺☺☺
siamo allo stesso tavolo e loro
fanno come topo e
like mouse and cheese.
formaggio. ☺☺
In (6.8), Monica’s culture-specific PN belongs to the ‘ecological’ category since it refers to the Appalachia region in the eastern United States. Prior to the 20 th century, the
people of Appalachia were geographically isolated from the rest of the country. A politically incorrect but very popular running joke in the U.S. is that the inhabitants of this region have a tendency for inbreeding. The culture- specific PN in Monica’s turn implicitly evokes this prejudiced view. The humour is situational and based on the fact that Monica believes Angela and Bob to be siblings. In GTVH terms, the conceptual clash conveyed by Monica’s turn can be explained according to the following SO: incest in Appalachia/Angela and Bob’s incest. At a concrete level it may evoke the sex/no-sex SO and at the abstract level the normal/abnormal SO. At the character-character level the TA
In the TT, the allusive PN was omitted and replaced by a more general simile, according to which Angela and Bob are behaving like ‘a mouse with cheese’. The translators’ decision to omit this allusive PN may be explained as follows. Either they could not find an adequate alternative or they preferred to avoid the use of any solution that could be considered offensive to part of the target audience. In general the potential
humour is retained because the concrete and abstract SOs (sex/no-sex and normal/abnormal) are preserved, along with the other KRs 16 . However, it can be argued
that TT can only partly retain the implied meaning of the original. In the context, the ‘mouse and cheese’ expression can still suggest incest but this notion is not part of its
scenario. Hence, it may also tone down the potential humour of Monica’s turn. The recording of canned laughter was retained although it is shorter in length.
6.6.5 Omission of Name As anticipated earlier, this strategy has been occasionally used in my corpus (four instances out of 50). Two examples are presented below.
Example (6.9) is taken from Episode 13. Joey has found out that his father has an extramarital relationship. He is very upset and tells his father that he has to end the relationship and confess his betrayal to his mother. Once Mr Tribbiani has done so, Joey’s mother tells Joey she already knew but she was happy about it because, since his relationship with the other woman started, Joey’s father has become a much more caring
15 LM: Analogy, reas. on false premises; SI: Context; NS: Conversation; LA: Proper name 16 LM: Analogy; reas. on false premises; SI: Context; NS: Conversation; LA: common noun.
[6.9]Chandler: Things sure
Chandler: Many things sure have changed here on Waltons
Chandler: Certo che cose ne
have changed. mountain. ☺☺
sono cambiate parecchie.
In example (6.9) Chandler refers to Waltons Mountain, a fictional town in Virginia which was the setting for the American television series, The Waltons (1972-1981, Earl Hamner Jr.). The series tells the struggles of the Walton family, who live a difficult and traditional life during the period of the Great Depression and World War II. At the character-character and author-audience level, Chandler’s turn stresses the contrast between Joey’s father’s sexual life style (and his mother’s acceptance of adultery) and the Walt ons’ traditional values. In GTVH terms, the contextual SO can be the Tribbianis’ life style/the Waltons ’ life style. This can also evoke the sex/no-sex SO and at a more abstract level the normal/abnormal SO. The TAs are Joey and his family 17 .
The TV series Chandler mentions in his turn was broadcast in Italy for some time but it was not as successful as in the United States. Furthermore, its Italian title Una famiglia americana (‘An American family’) or any reference to it would hardly fit the context of the exchange. Probably, the Italian translators decided to omit this culture-specific allusion because only a part of the Italian audience would recognise it. The PN in the Italian TT is omitted and replaced with a comment that attempts to convey the intended meaning of the original. It can be said that to some extent it retains the opposition between the past (and its values) and the present (Joey’s family’s values). However, it can
17 LM: Potency mapping, inferring consequences; SI: Context; NS: Conversation; LA: Proper name.
In example (6.10), from Episode 4, Rachel, Monica and Phoebe have been delivered George Stephanopou lous’s pizza by mistake. Monica and Phoebe are rather excited because they seem to fancy this Mediterranean man who lives across the street. Rachel does not know him and asks:
[6.10]Rachel: Uh, Pheebs?
Rachel: Phoebe, Who’s George Who’s George Snuffalopagus?
Rachel: Phoebe, chi è George
Stephanopoulous? ☺☺
Stephanopoulous?
Phoebe: È un incallito
Phoebe:
A hardened
Phoebe: Big Bird’s friend. sciupafemmine.
womaniser.
In the ST, Rachel mispronounces George’s surname, which is paronymous with Snuffalopagus, a fictional character and Big Bird’s best friend in Sesame Street, a popular children’s TV programme in the United States. Therefore, I have subsumed it under the ‘popular culture’ category. Phoebe should be able to understand that Rachel mispronounced George Stephanopou lous’s name, especially because of the presence of
“George” in Rachel’s turn. However, she (apparently) ignores it and responds referring to Snuffalopagus. However, it could also be argued that Phoebe is aware of the mistake and intentionally misinterprets it so as to make an indirect sexual reference when she refers to “Big Bird”. Hence, the potential humour of this exchange can be explained in GTVH terms with the contextual SO: George Stephanopoulous/Snuffalopagus. Interestingly, in
my opinion it can evoke both the human/non-human and sex/non-sex. However, I will consider only the sex/no-sex SO here since it seems more relevant for the potential humour of this exchange and the context of the scene as a whole. At a more abstract level, this exchange seems to activate the normal/abnormal SO since George Stephanopoulous
is mistaken for a fictional character. Rachel 18 seems to be the TA of Phoebe’s comment . In the Italian TT, the translators omitted the reference to Snuffalopagus either because
they failed to recognise the paronymous wordplay or because they thought the target audience would not recognise it. They replaced this culture-specific allusion with the correct pronunciation of George Stephanopou lous’s surname and they changed Phoebe’s turn into an answer to the main topic of the conversation. In the TT, George Stephanopoulous is still the TA of the humour but for a different reason: He is portrayed as a womaniser. Also, Phoebe utters her turn in such a way that the Italian audience is led to infer that she and Monica are attracted by men who use women like objects, thus fulfilling a common stereotype in some Western societies. As a consequence of this, they also potentially become indirect targets of Phoebe’s turn while Rachel is not. Interestingly, both recordings of canned laughter in the ST were omitted in the TT.
18 LM: Role exchange, reas. from false premises, analogy; SI: Context; NS: Conv.; LA: Proper name.
6.6.6 Compensation As I observed earlier on, Leppihalme’s framework does not include the compensation option. Nevertheless, as with wordplay, I consider this phenomenon relevant to translation. Hence, I discuss an example of compensation I have found in my data for the sake of completeness. As in example (6.10) above, this strategy is used in conjunction with another translation strategy. It overlaps with Leppihalme’s ‘replacement by TL name’ technique (2b) or Ramière’s ‘cultural substitution’ (cf. Figure 6.1 above).
In example (6.11), from Episode 9, everybody is in Rachel and Monica’s for a Thanksgiving dinner. In the North-American tradition, people celebrate this festivity with
a dinner whose main course is roast turkey, with side dishes such as mashed potatoes, vege tables etc. Unfortunately, the six friends’ dinner burnt because they locked themselves out. Nonetheless, they decide to have dinner by eating cheese sandwiches. Chandler is cutting and serving them:
[6.11] Chandler: Shall I carve?
Chandler: Shall I cut, then? Rachel: By all means. ☺☺
Chandler: Allora, taglio?
Rachel: Yes, please. Chandler: Ok, who wants light
Rachel: Sì, grazie.
Chandler: Light cheese or dark cheese, and who wants dark
Chandler: Formaggio chiaro o
cheese? Please order ladies and cheese? ☺☺
abbrustolito? Ordinare signori!
Ross: Potrei avere solo il pane
gentlemen!
Ross:
Ross: Could I have only loaf about the dark cheese. ☺☺☺
I don’t even wanna know
in cassetta? ☺
bread?
In the ST, in his second turn, Chandler refers to the distinction between light meat (i.e. breast) and dark meat (i.e. legs) for turkey and poultry. Therefore, this culture-specific PN in the ST can be included into the ‘material’ group. Chandler transfers this distinction onto the types of cheese in their sandwiches. By doing so, Chandler is poking fun at the unusual situation he and his friends are experiencing. Ross also contributes to the potential humour of the exchange by playing with the word “dark”. He implicitly refers to
SO: conventional Thanksgiving/unconventional Thanksgiving. At a concrete level it may evoke the food/no-food SO (cf. Attardo 2001: 141-142) and at the abstract level it seems to activate
in GTVH
the normal/abnormal SO. The TA of the exchange could be all six friends 19 . The TT reveals interesting differences from the ST most probably due to the
translation problems that Chandler’s culture-specific allusion poses. In Italian people do not usually make a distinction between light or dark meat in poultry. The general distinction is between light types of meat (e.g. turkey, chicken) and ‘red’ meat (e.g. pork, beef). This may be the reason why translators transformed Chandler’s culture-specific allusion into a literal reference to the sandwiches t hat contain either plain (“chiaro”) or grilled (“abbrustolito” to replace “dark”) cheese. In order to compensate for this loss, in Ross’s turn a reference to a slightly Italian old-fashioned term for sliced loaf bread was added (“pane in cassetta”). Nowadays, Italian people are more likely to refer to this kind of bread using the word ‘pancarrè’. According to Harvey’s (1995: 82-84) categories, this is an example of contiguous compensation because it is placed within a short distance from the culture-specific allusion that was omitted and compensated for. In my opinion, the humour may derive from the fact that Ross refuses the cheese because the word “abbrustolito” potentially evokes the burnt turkey. Moreover, the fact that Ross uses this old-fashioned term matches his idiosyncratic features (educated but pompous at times). This may also explain why the recording of canned laughter a fter Ross’s turn was
19 LM: Potency mapping, cratylism; SI: Context; NS: Conversation; LA: Definition ?.
In the next subsection I will look at some examples of KPs and the translation strategies the translator has adopted while dealing with them.
6.6.7 Translated Key-Phrases (KPs) The translation of key-phrases (KPs) shows more interesting manipulations of the ST. This is likely due to the fact that KPs are longer stretches of text, rather than one or two words as in the case of PNs. The manipulation of two or more items in each KP seems to pose potential translation problems. As mentioned earlier, I consider 16 instances of potentially humorous KPs in the ST that are accompanied by canned laughter. They differ from allusive wordplays discussed in the previous chapter for the following reason. Allusive wordplays involve the creative exploitation and manipulation of entrenched fixed expressions or idioms. In contrast, allusive KPs are intertextual references in the narrowest sense, i.e. quotations from well-known sources as such. For example, they may
be based on nursery rhymes, books, political speeches, religious expressions, etc. Not all the strategies included in Figure 6.1 above could be detected in the corpus
under investigation. For instance, explanation/gloss and compensation could only be found in conjunction with another strategy (cf. example and (6.19) below). The most interesting finding is that the replacement with another source language KP that Leppihalme considers of “no practical value with KPs” (ibid.128) was used in my corpus
20 LM: ?; SI: Context; NS: Conversation; LA: Proper name.
(cf. example (6.14) below). Further considerations on the translation process are contained in the quantitative analysis reported in Section 6.7.
The literal translation strategy-(B) has been used both when the broader referent could
be considered internationally known (e.g. some lyrics from a song about Pinocchio) and when the context can facilitate the comprehension of the allusion (three instances out of 16). In example (6.12), from Episode 3, Ross’s monkey, Marcel, has defecated into one of Monica’s shoes while she was away. Rachel is trying to explain to Monica which shoe has been ruined. Phoebe contributes to the conversation by alluding to two nursery rhymes and mixing them together in a dubious way:
[6.12]Phoebe: Yes, yes! Like Phoebe: Sì! Come l’uomo della Phoebe: Yes! Like the man of the man in the shoe!
scarpa!
the shoe!
Ross: ...What shoe? ☺☺
Ross: ...What shoe? Phoebe: From the nursery
Ross: Che scarpa?
Phoebe: The poem for children: rhyme. “There was a crooked
Phoebe: La poesia per bambini:
“There was a crooked man, who man, Who had a crooked smile,
“C’era un uomo storto, che
had a crooked smile, who lived Who lived in a shoe, For a...
aveva un sorriso storto, che
in a crooked shoe, For a while...” [Dubious pause.]☺☺
visse in una scarpa storta per un
po’ di tempo…”☺
while…”
In the ST, Phoebe mixes two nursery rhymes that are commonly known in the United States (There was a Crooked Man and There was an Old Woman Who Lived in a Shoe). They can therefore be subsumed under the ‘popular culture’ category. The inappropriate use of the rhymes and contribution result in a potential incongruity. At the author- audience level, it seems that the scriptwriters creatively exploited the two nursery rhymes in order to reinforce the idiosyncratic features of Phoebe’s character (twisted logic, distorted vision of reality, childish behaviour, etc.). This is also underlined by her friends’ dubious pauses and looks and by canned laughter. Hence, the potential humour of Phoebe’s turn can be explained in GTVH terms as a contextual SO: correct use of nursery
She can also be perceived as the TA of her own turn 21 . Despite the fact that the original nursery rhymes can be considered as unfamiliar to the
target audience, the Italian translators literally translated the ST. This may be due to the fact that the immediate co-te xt (“la poesia per bambini”, which means ‘the poem for children’) offers sufficient clues about the sources of the culture-specific KPs. However, it could be argued that in the TT the mixing is unlikely to be perceived. As a consequence of this, the Italian audience may miss some of the inferences about Phoebe’s character. Despite this partial loss, they may still be amused by Phoebe’s inappropriate contribution to 22 her friends’ conversation . At both the character-character and author-audience level Phoebe is likely to be perceived as incapable to “exhibit contextually sensitive behaviour” (Culpeper 2001: 88-89; cf. Section 2.6 above). Finally, only one of the two recordings of canned laughter was retained in the TT and it is also shorter.
The replacement of the culture-specific KP with a TL one occurs only once in my data, probably for the same reasons discussed above for culture-specific PNs (e.g. mismatch between verbal and visual text, ambience, etc.). However, it seems worth discussing this example because it displays some creativity on the translators’ part. In example (6.13), from Episode 20, the group of friends are in Moni ca and Rachel’s flat and hiding from someone who spies on them from across the street. Joey crouches on his knees and tells Rachel and Chandler to do the same:
21 LM: Faulty reasoning, self-undermining; SI: Context; NS: Conversation; LA: Key-phrases. 22 LM: Faulty reasoning, self-undermining; SI: Context; NS: Conversation; LA: Key-phrases.
[6.13]Joey: [entering] He’s
Joey: He’s back! The peeper’s back! The peeper’s back!
Joey: È tornato! Il guardone è
back! Everybody down! [Rachel enters from her room,
tornato. Tutti giù!
Rachel: Everybody down? ducking] Get down!
Rachel: Tutti giù?
Chandler: … Giù per Chandler: ...Down on the Rachel: Get down?
terra! ☺☺
ground!
Chandler: ...And boogie! ☺☺☺
In the ST, Chandler quotes from the song from 1970s, ‘Boogie Oogie Oogie’ by a band called A Taste of Honey. I therefore subsumed this example under the ‘popular culture’ category. This song is still very well-known in the United States and belongs to the disco music genre. Its lyrics talk about dancing and enjoying a night out in clubs. Chandler exploits Joey’s and Rachel’s turns so as to deliver his humorous turn. This is based on an opposition between Joey’s suggestion (meaning ‘crouching to hide’) and the
idiomatic express ion in the song (“get down on the dance floor and dance”). At the author- audience level, the characters’ behaviour may be perceived as childish because they prefer hiding rather than dealing with the situation (i.e. asking the person to stop spying on them). In GVTH terms, the opposition can be described as a contextual hiding/dancing SO. Moreover, the exchange seems to evoke the concrete child/adult behaviour SO and therefore a more abstract and normal/abnormal SO. The TA of
Chandler’s turn seem to be Joey and Rachel 23 . In the TT, the translators made use of a famous Italian nursery rhyme that children
usually sing together, holding hands and forming a circle. When they sing the last line of the lyrics, they are supposed to crouch on their knees. Hence, the translators’ choice adequately matches the visual text. Moreover, they exploited the structure of the original exchange in a similar way. By doing so, in my opinion they effectively retained the potential humour of the original utterance. They retained the concrete and more abstract
23 LM: Reasoning on false premises; SI: Context; NS: Conversation; LA: Key-phrase.
SOs, along with all other KRs 24 . The recording of canned laughter in the TT was preserved, although shortened.
The following extract, from Episode 1, shows the use of a different source language KP in the TT to replace the original KP. The use of this strategy in my corpus (two instances out of 16) shows its feasible application in AVT. In example (6.14), from Episode 1, Joey encourages Ross to have new interpersonal and sexual relationships after
he has been left by his lesbian ex- wife. Joey uses a metaphorical expression (‘grab a spoon’) and Ross replies:
[6.14]Ross: [scornful] Grab a Ross: “Prendi un cucchiaino!” Ross: [scornful] “Grab a spoon. Do you know how long
Lo sapete da quanto tempo è che spoon!” Do you know how long it’s been since I’ve grabbed a
it’s been since I’ve grabbed a spoon? Do the words “Billy,
non prendo un cucchiaino? Da
spoon? Since they used to say don’t be a hero” mean anything
quando si diceva “Fate l’amore,
“Make love, don’t make war”. to you? ☺☺☺
non fate la guerra”.
In (6.14), Ross refers to a popular song from 1974 by Paper Lace, “Billy Don’t Be a Hero”. It tells of a woman who sings hoping for her fiancé’s return from the war. Since it was released in the 1970s, it was considered an anti- Vietnam War song. Ross’s allusion implicitly means that he has not had a sexual relationship with other women for a very long time. The exaggeration in Ross’s turn carries potential humour that can be explained in GVTH terms as the concrete SO: not having a relationship for some time/not having a relationship for decades. At a more concrete level it can also activate the sex/non-sex SO. At a more abstract level, it seems to evoke the normal/abnormal SO. Finally, Ross is the
TA of this own turn 25 .
24 LM: Reasoning on false premises; SI: Context; NS: Conversation; LA: Key-phrases. 25 LM: Parallelism, exaggeration, self-under.; SI: Context; NS: Conversation; LA: Key-phrase.
The Italian translators opted for replacing the KP probably because they (rightly, in my opinion) considered the target audience to be unfamiliar with it. Conversely, the Hippies’ motto (‘make love, don‘t make war’) is well known in Italy and world-wide, and congruous to the topic of the conversation. Moreover, it was coined during the 1960s and
1970s in the United States when this youth movement publicly demonstrated its opposition to the Vietnam War. It therefore refers to the same period of time suggested in the original. It should be also noted that the words “da quando si diceva” (‘since they used to say’) spell out that it is a reference to the time in which the expression was used. This insertion can be seen as an instance of guidance, although the original reference was replaced. For all these reasons, the Italian translation may be considered as successful in
conveying the original potential humour and its KRs 26 . The fact that no recording of canned laughter is present in the TT seems therefore debatable.
The following example (6.15) shows the application of the recreation strategy (one instance out of 16), which involves the creative fusion of two or more translation strategies (‘neutralisation’ and ‘explanation’). This exchange is taken from Episode 15 and in this scene Chandler tells his friends the reason why he resigned from his previous job and is now looking for another:
[6.15]Chandler: Hey, you guys
Chandler: Yes. You all know all know what you want to do.
Chandler: Sì. Voi sapete tutti
what you want to do. Rachel: I don’t!
cosa volete fare.
Rachel: I don’t! Chandler: Hey, you guys in the
Rachel: Io no.
Chandler: OK, you guys sitting living room all know what you
Chandler: Dunque, voi che
on the sofa know what you want to do. ☺☺ You know, you
siete sul divano sapete cosa
want. You have goals. You have have goals. You have dreams. I
volete. Avete tutti delle mete,
dreams. I don’t have a dream. don’t have a dream.
avete dei sogni. Io non ce l'ho
Ross: Hey, it sounds almost like Ross: Ah, the lesser- known “I
un sogno.
Martin Luther King’s speech. don’t have a dream”
Ross: Ehi, sembra quasi il
discorso di Martin Luther King.
speech. ☺☺
26 LM: Parallelism, exaggeration, self-under.; SI: Context; NS: Conversation; LA: Key-phrase.
In the ST, a fter Chandler’s turn about having or not having a dream, Ross makes a reference to Martin Luther King’s famous speech that has been popularly known as “I
have a dream”. This example can therefore be included in the ‘high-culture/institutions’ category. The main topic of Martin Luther King’s speech was his hope to live in a
country with equal rights for white and black people. Ross wittingly plays with the title in order to poke fun at Chandler’s previous turn. Hence, the clash between any potential humour of Ross’s turn can be seen as deriving from the contextual SO: Chandler’s
speech/ Martin Luther King’s speech. At a concrete level it also seems to evoke equality/inequality. At a more abstract level the SO can be normal/abnormal because
Ross compares the problems that Chandler has at work with a major racial issue. Finally, Chandler can be seen as the TA of the potential humour in the exchange 27 .
Despite the fact that the allusion is fairly famous and therefore recognisable by the Italian audience, the translators opted to omit it. They replaced it with an overt reference to the fact that Chandler’s wording is reminiscent of a famous speech (“discorso”). Moreover, they added Martin Luther King’s so as to clarify that that speech belongs to him (‘neutralisation’ and ‘explanation’ strategies respectively). As can be seen, this
ch oice salvages the intended meaning of Ross’s turn but not his playful use of the KP. Consequently 28 , the potential humour of Ross’s punch line is dramatically minimised . It is
therefore not surprising that the recording of canned laughter that supports it in the ST was omitted in the TT.
27 LM: Referential ambiguity; SI: Context; NS: Conversation; LA: Key-phrase. 28 LM: ?; SI: Context; NS: Conversation; LA: Common noun and Proper name.
The total omission strategy is used in a quarter of cases in my data (four instances out of 16). This may be due to the fact that using allusive KPs for humorous purposes requires the exploitation of various items in the KP, thus posing a greater number of translation problems. In example (6.16), from Episode 2, Rachel is looking for her engagement ring because she wants to return it to Barry, her ex-fiancé:
[6.16]Rachel: I know I had it
I know I had it this this morning, and I know I had
Rachel: So che ce l’avevo Rachel:
morning, and I know I had it it when I was in the kitchen
questa mattina. E so che ce
when I was in the kitchen with...
l’avevo in cucina, quando…
Chandler: Quando? ☺☺
when...
Chandler: Dinah? ☺☺☺ Chandler: When?
In the ST, Chandler utters the name “Dinah” which could therefore be considered as an allusive PN. However, Chandler’s turn can be seen as an exploitation of a culture-specific
KP because it refers directly to the American folk song I’ve Been Working On the Railroad . This song was first published in the 1890s but became popular in the United States with a later version in the 1920s. Therefore this allusive KP can be subsumed under the ‘popular’ category. ‘Someone is in the kitchen with Dinah’ is its most famous line, which is followed by a line that says someone makes love to Dinah in the kitchen. Hence, Chandler exploits Rachel’s turn to evoke the various associations this song conveys, namely a man who gets up early to work and another who has sex with this woman called Dinah. The potential humour of this exchange can be explained in GTVH terms as a contextual SO: being in the kitchen/being in the kitchen with Dinah. At a concrete level it can therefore evoke the sex/non-sex SO while at the abstract level is may activate the
It goes without saying the North-American folk song mentioned above is probably unknown to most Italians. Therefore the translators replaced the word “with” in Rache’s turn with the word “quando” (when) in the TT. Subsequently, they substituted Chandler’s reference to “Dinah” with a repetition of the word “quando”, which is expressed in a questioning tone. This may be due to the fact that Rachel moves towards the kitchen while she tries to remember where she lost her ring. She soon realises that she may have left it in the lasagne that she prepared for Monica’s parents. Everybody knows this is likely to upset Monica, and Ch andler’s turn underlines this. However, the omission of the KP in the TT arguably cancels the potential humour of the exchange altogether. A possible alternative could have been to replace the original with a TL allusion. For example, “dimmi quando” is a famous line of the Italian song “Quando, quando, quando” from the 1960s by Tony Renis. This song talks about the love of a man for a woman. Although it may cause a mismatch between verbal and visual text, this solution could (at least partly) preserve the original intended effect. Interestingly, the recording of canned laughter in the TT after Chandler’s turn seems to underline the fact that Monica is going to be upset with Rachel.
Finally, example (6.17) is based on a complex exploitation of two culture-specific KPs, which are omitted in the TT. In Episode 9 Joey has accepted to model for an advertisement without knowing what it is for. He soon finds out that his face has been associated with a campaign against sexually-transmitted diseases and that the posters can
29 LM: Referential ambiguity; SI: Context; NS: Conversation; LA: Key-phrase.
[6.17]Joey: Set another place
Joey: Set another place at the for Thanksgiving. My entire
Joey: Aggiungi un posto a
table. My family thinks I have family thinks I have VD. ☺☺
tavola. Anche la mia famiglia
pensa che abbia la sifilide. ☺
VD too. Chandler: Tonight…on a very Chandler: Va bene, d’accordo, Chandler: OK, I agree, but
special Blossom. ☺☺
ma ti sei fatto visitare? ☺☺
have you been for a check-up?
In the ST, Chandler pokes fun at Joey by using an expression that has recently entered the North- American colloquial language, which therefore belongs to the ‘popular’ category above. It derives from the fusion of the advertising expression “Very special episode” and the NBC show Blossom, which was broadcast in the 1990s and told the life of an American teenager name Blossom. The former was originally used in American television commercials in the 1980s and 1990s to introduce an episode of a situation comedy or television drama that dealt with a serious and/or controversial social issue (often in a forced and/or awkward manner). The phrase “very special Blossom” has since been used pejoratively to refer to television shows with heavy-handed moralizing. Moreover, in the TV series, Blossom’s ‘simple-minded’ brother is called Joey. This factor creates an implicit parallelism between this character and Joey in Friends who is also characterised as simple-minded. In GTVH terms, the potential humour of this exchange can be seen as a contextual SO such as venereal disease/TV show. At the concrete level it evokes the sex/no-sex SO while the abstract level the actual/non-actual SO since Joey
does not suffer from venereal disease. Finally the TA is Joey 30 . In the TT, the KP was omitted altogether but the Italian translators attempted to
compensate for this loss by making Chandler’s sarcastic comment on Joey’s health more
30 LM: Implicit parallelism; SI: Context; NS: Conversation; LA: Key-phrase.
and the TA are retained, along with the structure of the exchange 31 . Nonetheless, the translation seems to lack the original creativity of the ST. Interestingly, the PN in the
passage (Thanksgiving) was omitted, probably because it has already been used by other characters throughout the episode (see Baker 1992: 21-42). As a final note, the recording of canned laughter that supports Chandler’s turn in the ST was retained in the TT with equal length.