MD PHD THESIS The Audiovisual Translatio

Margherita Dore

(BA in Modern Languages, MSc in Translation Studies)

Thesis submitted for a degree of Doctor in Philosophy Department of Linguistics and English Language Lancaster University September 2008

Declaration

I hereby declare that this thesis is my own work and has not been submitted for an award of higher degree elsewhere.

Margherita Dore, September 2008 Lancaster University

Ai miei genitori, mia sorella e i miei fratelli

Acknowledgments

In reaching the final stage of this endeavour, I would like to thank all those people who helped and supported me throughout it. Firstly, I would like to thank my supervisor Dr. Elena Semino whose continuous guidance and support often went beyond the academic involvement a student could normally expect. Secondly, I am grateful to my family for their love and encouragement. Words may not express my affection for them but dedicating this work to them will hopefully demonstrate it.

I would also like to express my gratitude to my colleagues Yufang Ho and Dimitra Valdimirou who made this experience at the Department of Linguistics and English Language at Lancaster University more enjoyable. I would also like to thank all my friends for being there and believing I could achieve this more than myself. In particular, I would like to thank Irene Mulas, Tiziano Satta, Luca Mura, Theodoris Papadopoulos, Cleopatra Kouveli, Daniela Ponzio and George Kollias, Ramin Ramezani, Hayat Kara, Bruno Ca sella and Mišela Mauric, and the Italian friends in Lancaster who made these last few months unforgettable. I am particularly grateful to Michela Masci for being an enthusiastic colleague and great friend during my teaching years at the Department of European Languages and Culture at this University. Special thanks go to Yannis Katsaros for his loving support and friendship.

Last but not least, I am deeply indebted to the Regione Sardegna a nd their “Master & Back” programme, which financially supported most of my Doctoral research.

Abstract

Humour is a relative, idiosyncratic and generally complex phenomenon, which also varies according to culture and time. It is therefore not surprising that scholars in various fields of research (e.g. Palmer, Attardo, Oring amongst others) struggle to provide a unified definition of humour. However, they attempt to unveil the mechanisms that this phenomenon involves and the function(s) it has within the text in which it occurs. In Translation Studies, some scholars (e.g. Delabastita, Zabalbeascoa, Chiaro to name just a few) have produced a fair amount of literature on the audiovisual translation (henceforth AVT) of humour, concentrating in particular on those language and culture-specific features (punning, wordplay, allusive wordplay, etc.) that pose significant problems in translation. In doing so, they have taken into account those factors that influence the translator’s decision making process such as time pressure and expertise.

On the grounds of these considerations, this study aims at contributing to this on- going research in the AVT of humour, and dubbing in particular. To this end, I have carried out an in-depth analysis of the original North-American and the Italian dubbed version of the first series of the TV comedy programme Friends (aired for the first time in U.S.A. in 1994, in Italy in 1997). My investigation is obviously based on the scholarly research on the AVT of humour but it also draws insights from various fields (e.g. Film Studies, Corpus Linguistics, Cognitive Linguistics and Stylistics). More importantly, I have supported my textual and contrastive analysis of the source text (ST) and target text (TT) by means of the Semantic Script Theory of Humour (SSTH, Raskin 1985) and in particular the General Theory of Verbal Humour (GTVH, Attardo and Raskin 1991, Attardo 1994, 2001).

By means of this eclectic approach, I have attempted to explain how the scriptwriters of Friends exploited wordplay, culture-specific allusions and creative metaphors for humorous purposes. Moreover, I have found that they use these devices in order to convey idiosyncratic clues about the six main characters and to enhance the themes of the series (i.e. friendship, interpersonal relationships, work, and sex). My contrastive analysis of the ST and the TT indicates that the Italian translators were sensitive to the role these mechanisms play in the success of the series. Hence, they deployed several translation strategies to retain them, which often resulted in a high level of manipulation of the ST. More importantly, my research demonstrates that such a manipulation produced some interesting differences between the two datasets in terms of humour potential. Finally, it confirms that dubbing can greatly influence the translators’ decision making process. As a matter of fact, this translation mode allows translators to adopt creative solutions that are not applicable in subtitling.

List of Acronyms

AVT: Audiovisual Translation BT: Blending Theory CMT: Conceptual Metaphor Theory FEI: Fixed Expression and Idiom GTVH: General Theory of Verbal Humour HS: Humour Studies KR: Knowledge Resource LA: Language LM: Logical mechanism NS: Narrative strategy RQ: Research Question SC: Source Culture SI: Situation SL: Source Language SO: Script opposition SSHT: Semantic Script Theory of Humour ST: Source Text TA: Target TC: Target Culture TL: Target Language TS: Translation Studies TT: Target Text

Table of Contents

List of Acronyms

vii

Table of Contents

viii

List of Figures

xi

List of Tables

xii

Chapter 1. Introduction

1 1.1 Introduction

1 1.2 The Scope of this Study: Humour and its Translation

2 1.3 A Preliminary Introduction to Friends

5 1.3.1 World-Wide Success

6 1.3.2 Academic Research

7 1.4 Research Questions

10 1.5 The Structure of the Thesis

Chapter 2. Humour Studies and Humour in Comedy

16 2.1 Introduction

16 2.2 Defining Humour and its Relationship with Laughter

18 2.3 Overview of the Theories of Humour

21 2.4 Script-Based Theories

26 2.4.1 The Semantic Script Theory of Humour

27 2.4.2 The General Theory of Verbal Humour

34 2.4.3 Application of the GTVH and Some Criticism

38 2.5 Humour in Conversation

40 2.5.1 Function(s) of Humour in Conversation

42 2.6 Humour in TV Comedy

44 2.7 Conclusions

Chapter 3. Audiovisual Translation and Humour

49 3.1 Introduction

49 3.2 Audiovisual Translation (AVT)

50 3.3 Subtitling

55 3.4 Dubbing

57 3.4.1 Constraints and Advantages of Dubbing

60 3.5 Italy and its Dubbing Tradition

64 3.5.1 Historical Background

65 3.5.2 Present Situation

66 3.6 On the (Im)Possibility of Translating Humour

73 3.6.1 Attardo’s Theory of Humour Translation

78 3.7 The AVT of Humour

80 3.7.1 Priorities and Strategies in the AVT of Humour

82 3.8 Conclusions

Chapter 4. Data and Methodology

91 4.1 Introduction

91 4.2 The Data

92 4.2.1 Description of Friends

92 4.2.2 Reasons for Choosing this Data

94 4.3 Some Considerations Regarding the ST and TT

95 4.3.1 The Two Parallel Corpora

95 4.3.2 Canned Laughter

98 4.4 Methodology

102 4.4.1 Technical Issues

103 4.4.2 Identifying Instances of Potential Humour in the Data

104 4.4.3 Identifying Script Oppositions and Targets in the Data

110 4.4.4 Further Methodological Issues

Chapter 5. Humorous Wordplay

116 5.1 Introduction

116 5.2 Wordplay

119 5.3 Punning

5.3.1 Punning and Humour 121 5.3.2 Categorisation of Puns

122 5.4 Translation of Puns

125 5.5 Data Analysis

128 5.5.1 PUN→PUN

131 5.5.2 PUN→NON-PUN

138 5.5.3 PUN→RELATED RHETORICAL DEVICE

141 5.5.4 PUN→ZERO PUN

143 5.5.5 COMPENSATION

145 5.5.6 Preliminary Conclusions

147 5.6 Puns Based on Fixed Expressions and Idioms (FEIs)

149 5.6.1 Categorisation of FEIs

150 5.6.2 FEIs and Variation

152 5.6.3 Variation of FEIs and Humour

156 5.7 Translation of FEI-Based Puns

159 5.8 Data Analysis

5.7.1 Translation Strategies for FEI-Based Puns

163 5.8.1 Substitution

164 5.8.2 Omission

167 5.8.3 Preliminary Conclusions

173 5.9 Rhymes

175 5.10 Findings and Conclusions

Chapter 6. Humorous Culture-Specific Allusions

185 6.1 Introduction

185 6.2 Defining the Concept of Culture-Specific Allusion

188 6.3 Categorisation of Culture-Specific Allusions

189 6.3.1 Types of Culture-Specific Allusions

190 6.3.2 Sources of Culture-Specific Allusions

192 6.4 Function(s) of Humorous Culture-Specific Allusions

194 6.5 (AV)Translation of (Humorous) Culture-Specific Allusions

197 6.5.1 Translation Strategies for allusive Proper-Names (PNs)

199 6.5.2 Translation Strategies for allusive Key-Phrases (KPs)

201 6.5.3 The AVT of Humorous Culture-Specific Allusions

203 6.6 Data Analysis

207 6.6.1 Transference of SL Name

210 6.6.2 Explanation (or Retention and Guidance)

214 6.6.3 Replacement by SL Name

216 6.6.4 Neutralisation or Omission and Use of Common Noun

219 6.6.5 Omission of Name

224 6.6.6 Compensation

228 6.6.7 Translated Key-Phrases (KPs)

230 6.7 Findings and Conclusions

Chapter 7. Humorous Metaphors

246 7.1 Introduction

246 7.2 Conceptual Metaphor Theory

248 7.2.1 Metaphor and Variation

250 7.3 Blending Theory (BT)

252 7.4 Complementary use of CMT and BT

256 7.5 Metaphor and Humour

258 7.6 Translation of (Humorous) Metaphor

261 7.6.1 Translation Strategies for Metaphor

265 7.7 Data Analysis

267 7.7.1 Transference

270 7.7.2 Substitution

280 7.7.3 A Complex Example: SEX IS A ROCK CONCERT

285 7.8 Findings and Conclusions

Chapter 8. Conclusions

300 8.1 Introduction

300 8.2 Main Findings

301 8.2.1 Research Question 1

8.2.2 Research Question 2 309 8.2.3 Research Question 3

311 8.3 Contribution

313 8.3.1 Implications for HS

314 8.3.2 Implications for TS

316 8.4 Issues Arising From the Analysis

318 8.4.1 Limitations of this Study

319 8.4.2 Humour and Canned Laughter

319 8.5 Suggestions for Further Research

321

Appendix I – Summary of Episodes

324

Appendix II – Humorous Wordplay

334

Appendix III – Humorous Culture-Specific Allusions

338

Appendix IV – Humorous Metaphors

345

CD-Rom Content

Primary Online Resources

378

Secondary Online Resources

378

List of Figures

36

Figure 2.1: Reproduction of the hierarchical organisation of Knowledge Resources

67

Figure 3.1: Hours of dubbed and subtitled programmes broadcast weekly in Italy

67

Figure 3.3: Percentages of dubbed programmes broadcast weekly on national Italian channels

Figure 6.1: Revision of Ramière’s model of procedures for the translation of source-culture allusions 206 Figure 7.1: Grady et al.’s conceptual integration network: surgeon as butcher 254

Figure 7.2: Con ceptual integration network: SEX IS A ROCK CONCERT, Men’s point of view

289

Figure 7.3: Conceptual integration network: SEX IS A ROCK CONCERT, Women’s perceived

point of view 290

List of Tables

Table 2.1: Rep roduction of Attardo’s (1994) categorisation of Theories of Humour

Table 2.2: Summary of Script Oppositions postulated in Raskin (1985)

Table 4.1: Number of spoken words in the ST and the TT

Table 4.2: Recordings of canned laughter in the ST and the TT

Table 4.3: Summary of Script Oppositions used during the analysis in this thesis

112 Table 5.1: Modified version of Delabastita’s (1996) typology grid 123 Table 5.2: Summary of Delabastita’s (1996) suggested translation strategies 126

Table 5.3: Categorisation of puns in the ST

Table 5.4: Comparison of puns in the ST and the TT

149 Table 5.5: Summary of Veisbergs’s (1997) suggested translation strategies 159

Table 5.6: Comparison of FEI-puns in the ST and the TT

Table 5.7: Summary of translation strategies applied to the TT

Table 6.1: Summary of Leppihalm e’s (1997) framework of types of allusions

Table 6.2: Combination and revis ion of Leppihalme’s (1997) categorisation of allusive PNs and KPs and Davies Gonzáles & Scott- Tennet’s (2005) taxonomy.

Table 6.3: Contrastive analysis of the use of translation strategies for PNs and KPs

Table 7.1: Summary of translation strategies applied to the TT

Table 8.1: Concrete SOs in Wordplay, Culture-Specific Allusions and Metaphor in the ST and

the TT (detailed) 303

Table 8.2: Concrete SOs in Wordplay, Culture-Specific Allusions and Metaphor in the ST and

the TT (general) 303

Table 8.3: Abstract SOs in Wordplay, Culture-Specific Allusions and Metaphor in the ST and

the TT (detailed) 305

Table 8.4: Abstract SOs in Wordplay, Culture-Specific Allusions and Metaphor in the ST and

the TT (general) 306

Table 8.5: TAs of Wordplay, Culture-Specific Allusions and Metaphor in the ST and

the TT (detailed) 307

Table 8.6: TAs of Wordplay, Culture-Specific Allusions and Metaphor in the ST and

the TT (general) 307

Table 8.7: General strategies for Wordplay, Culture-Specific Allusion and Metaphor

Table 8.8: Instances of canned laughter for Wordplay, Culture-Specific Allusions and Metaphor

in the ST and the TT 320

Chapter 1. Introduction

Analyzing or judging the translation of humour should always involve understanding to the best of one’s ability what the translator’s motivations, criteria and circumstances were in dealing with each item of the text. (Zabalbeascoa 2005: 206)

1.1 Introduction

In this thesis I conduct a contrastive analysis of the fist series of the TV comedy programme Friends (1994-2004, Marta Kauffman and David Crane) and its dubbed Italian version. The former is the Source Text (ST) and the latter is the Target Text (TT). In particular, I concentrate on three general mechanisms of humour creation that are often regarded as sources of translation problems: wordplay, culture-specific allusions and metaphor.

Consequently, this study combines insights from both Humour Studies (HS) and Translation Studies (TS), and its subfield of research Audiovisual Translation (AVT). However, the inner complexities of humour, its development and translation within a multisemiotic system such as the audiovisual setting call for an eclectic approach that extends beyond these fields. Therefore, this study also integrates observations by scholars in Film Studies, Corpus Linguistics, Cognitive Linguistics and Stylistics. Furthermore, it takes into accounts suggestions provided by professionals in AVT.

In this introductory chapter I will first present the reasons that motivate this study. Subsequently, I will briefly introduce my data and highlight its undisputed success across the world in terms of popularity. I will then summarise some of the academic research that Friends has inspired in many fields.

The world-wide popularity of this TV comedy series motivates my research. As a matter of fact, this sitcom is successful outside the boundaries of the language and The world-wide popularity of this TV comedy series motivates my research. As a matter of fact, this sitcom is successful outside the boundaries of the language and

1.2 The Scope of this Study: Humour and its Translation

Among the many cognitive abilities of human beings, creating humour may be considered one of the most complex. Humour can be described as a linguistic, semiotic, cognitive and social phenomenon. Its fascination lies in the fact that it can serve a wide range of purposes: in-group bonding (Archakis and Tsakona 2005: 41), disparagement, correction of socially improper behaviour (cf. Superiority Theory, Raskin 1985, Attardo 1994), and so on and so forth. It is therefore not surprising that scholars from different disciplines (e.g. Linguistics, Psychology, Philosophy, Cognitive Linguistics, etc.) are interested in its multifaceted nature. This academic interest has culminated in the creation of a research field in its own right called Humour Studies (HS).

HS has stimulated research and produced interesting debates. With this thesis, I aim to contribute to the on-going research in this field. In particular, I hope I can shed some light on three mechanisms (wordplay, culture-specific allusion, metaphor) used in Friends in order to create humour (although they can be also found in various types of texts). In addition, I am also interested in testing the applicability of the Semantic Script Theory of Humour (henceforth, SSTH, Raskin 1985) and in particular the General Theory of Verbal Humour (henceforth, GTVH, Attardo and Raskin 1991; Attardo 1994, 2001) to the analysis of humorous narratives and their translation. The GTVH metric helps to detect linguistic, pragmatic and contextual factors that can HS has stimulated research and produced interesting debates. With this thesis, I aim to contribute to the on-going research in this field. In particular, I hope I can shed some light on three mechanisms (wordplay, culture-specific allusion, metaphor) used in Friends in order to create humour (although they can be also found in various types of texts). In addition, I am also interested in testing the applicability of the Semantic Script Theory of Humour (henceforth, SSTH, Raskin 1985) and in particular the General Theory of Verbal Humour (henceforth, GTVH, Attardo and Raskin 1991; Attardo 1994, 2001) to the analysis of humorous narratives and their translation. The GTVH metric helps to detect linguistic, pragmatic and contextual factors that can

As mentioned above, my main concern is the translation of humour in the audiovisual setting, with specific reference to dubbing. Wordplay, culture-specific allusions and metaphor appear to be intriguing mechanisms for the production of humour in Friends. More importantly, the possibility of their transfer across languages and cultures is often challenged. According to some scholars in TS, the process of humour translation is impossible (e.g. Lendvai 1996, Hickey 1999, etc.) while others hold the opposing view (Delabastita 1996, Zabalbeascoa 1996). Chiaro (2005) summarises the issue when she points out that:

[H]umour discourse, which is naturally impeded by linguistic and social barriers, actually succeeds in crossing geographical frontiers. The translation of Verbally Expressed Humour (VEH) concerns one of the most complex types of language to translate owing to the fact that it needs to come to terms with the very tenets of translation theory, those of equivalence and (un)translatability (ibid.135).

‘Equivalence’ is a controversial term in TS. A concise but comprehensive overview of the issues revolving around this concept can be found in Kenny (1998a), who generally defines equivalence as: “the relationship between a source text (ST) and a target text (TT) that allows the TT to be considered as a translation of the ST in the first place”. Here I will simply point out that the concept of formal equivalence ‘Equivalence’ is a controversial term in TS. A concise but comprehensive overview of the issues revolving around this concept can be found in Kenny (1998a), who generally defines equivalence as: “the relationship between a source text (ST) and a target text (TT) that allows the TT to be considered as a translation of the ST in the first place”. Here I will simply point out that the concept of formal equivalence

As can be seen, humour translation (and translation in general) poses a range of “objective problems” (pragmatic, linguistic and textual) that can be further complicated by “subjective difficulties” (e.g. translators’ expertise, time pressures) (Nord 1991, quoted in Popa 2005: 51). The objective problems that arise in dubbing

are directly related to the multisemiotic nature of this translation mode. Constraints such as lip synchronization and the combination of visual and verbal text come into play. Researchers need to take into account all these factors in order to understand the way professionals tackle the problems translation poses (cf. the quotation from Zabalbeascoa 2005 at the beginning of this chapter).

Unlike some scholars in TS who offer prescriptive models that suggest how to treat

a given phenomenon during the translation process (cf. Newmark’s model for the translation of metaphor in Ch.7 in this thesis), the scholars mentioned above favour an

approach that takes into account the contextual and cultural factors influencing the work of the translator (cf. also Delabastita’s and Veisbergs’s models in Ch.5 and Leppihalme’s and Antonopoulou’s suggestions in Ch.6). This view falls into the framework of Descriptive Translation Studies which investigate translations “as they manifest themselves in the world of our experience” (Holmes, 1988: 71). Translators’

behaviour is analysed according to the socio-historical context they work in and the translation norms such context has established (Toury 1995). As a consequence of this, researchers can offer an insight into the translation process they analyse and possibly detect procedural patterns. For example, they may be able to establish whether a source- or target-oriented approach is favoured. In discussing literary translation, Venuti (1992, 1995, 1998) respectively calls these approaches ‘foreignisation’ and ‘domestication’. In a foreignising or source-oriented approach, translators attempt to retain in the TT the linguistic and cultural differences of the ST, thus making evident that the former is a translated version of the latter. In a domesticating or target-culture approach, the TT is made fluent, “intelligible and even familiar to the target-language reader ” (Venuti, 1992: 5; cf. also Nida’s concept of dynamic equivalence reported above). These concepts can obviously be applied to the analysis of any type of translate text, including TV comedy.

With these premises in mind, I will conduct my research on the Italian dubbed version of the first series of Friends by considering the Italian cultural context (i.e. its dubbing tradition) and the t ranslators’ working environment and situation. This can help me understand the reasons why they opted for particular solutions rather than others. This contrastive analysis can also help me highlight the differences between the ST and TT. By doing so, I hope to shed some light on the translation of humour in the first series of Friends and (if possible) draw some general conclusions about it.

1.3 A Preliminary Introduction to Friends

Friends is a North American TV comedy programme created by Marta Kauffman and David Crane. It comprises ten series in total. The National Broadcasting Company (NBC) broadcast it weekly in the U.S.A. from 1994 to 2004 (Walte 2007: 55). Full Friends is a North American TV comedy programme created by Marta Kauffman and David Crane. It comprises ten series in total. The National Broadcasting Company (NBC) broadcast it weekly in the U.S.A. from 1994 to 2004 (Walte 2007: 55). Full

1.3.1 World-Wide Success Friends nd was broadcast for the first time in the U.S.A on 22 September 1994. The

NBC aimed to produce a successful sitcom that would ensure and maintain good ratings. In their report on the pilot episode, the NBC analysts discussed the viewing rates in relation to the audience the series intended to target (18-24 year old viewers). Moreover, they commented 1 on both the characters and storyline’s credibility . The

NBC analysts seemed sceptical about the future success of the series and concluded their report by giving it a failing grade.

Despite this initial uncertainty, the series soon became an acclaimed success and the six main actors were nominated and won many awards for their performance in the series: Jennifer Aniston (starring as Rachel Green), Courteney Cox (Monica Geller), Lisa Kudrow (Phoebe Buffay), Matt LeBlanc (Joey Tribbiani), Mathew Perry (Chandler Bing) and David Schwimmer (Ross Geller). In the U.S. the ten series scored an average of 25 million viewers per series. The programme was exported to other English-speaking countries such as the United Kingdom (cf. Ross 1998: 91-95) and Australia 2 , thus extending its popularity. Similar success soon followed world-

1 The report is available at: http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0510041friends1.htmlfind (last visited: 09/08/2008)

2 Information on Friends ’s ratings in the U.S. and other English-speaking countries can be found at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friends and http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0108778/ . These websites also

contain information regarding the various prizes the main actors and the series itself were awarded. I contain information regarding the various prizes the main actors and the series itself were awarded. I

Interestingly, in the U.S.A. the ten series of Friends were usually broadcast on Thursdays at 8.30 or 9.30 p.m., which is considered primetime. This contributed to the programme’s high viewing rates. In Italy the first four series were broadcast for the first time by the state-owned channel RAITRE around 8.30 p.m. Due to its increasing success, Friends was transferred to RAIDUE, a more popular RAI channel. Series five to ten were broadcast by this channel around the same time (8.00 p.m.). Primetime on Italian TV is usually around 9.00 p.m. or later; nevertheless, the scheduling of the programme just before this time guaranteed high viewing rates for Friends. On a recent visit to Italy, I have found that both RAIDUE and ITALIA UNO (a privately owned TV channel) are currently rerunning the programme, thus confirming its enduring popularity.

The success of the series has also produced a wealth of interest in the academic community. In the next section I will summarise some scholarly research on the series.

1.3.2 Academic Research Scholars and researchers have investigated Friends from different points of view. For instance, Ross’s (1998: 92) study focuses on the language of humour. In discussing the way North-American TV comedy developed, Ross notices that Friends moves away from the idea of the family, which is the central focus of the traditional sitcom.

am aware that Wikipedia and The Internet Movie Database (IMDb) cannot be considered entirely reliable sources of information. However, I used them here so as to give a general idea of Friends as a word-wide phenomenon.

3 Information on the broadcasting of Friends and viewing ratings in Italy are available at: http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friends . Cf. footnote 2.

This seems to have contributed to its success, which is also confirmed by related merchandise produced and marketed across the world (ibid.) 4

Fouts and Burggraf (2000) consider the use of disparaging comments regarding women’s body weight in a series of TV sitcoms, one of this being Friends. They claim that they have chosen Friends because of its popularity among young adolescents (ibid.926). Tagliamonte and Roberts (2005) instead investigate the language in Friends . Their analysis attempts to verify whether the language used on television can

influence the way people talk. Interestingly, their study suggests that the repeated use of intensifiers such as ‘so’, ‘very’ and ‘really’ in Friends has encouraged their everyday use in English.

The investigation of the humour in Friends has also been the subject of several studies . For example, Purandare and Litman (2006) analyse the actors’ acoustic prosody in Friends by means of computerised programmes. They show that while expressing humour the male characters tend to use a higher pitch of voice while women use a lower one. Hence, they suggest a gender difference in humour production in the series (ibid.212). It would be interesting to verify whether dubbed versions retain similar prosodic features.

Walte (2007) carried out an extensive study of the humour in the ten series of Friends . She aims to understand who the initiators and targets of the humour of the series are. Moreover, she attempts to verify how the humour developed throughout the ten series of the programme. Finally, she considers the themes upon which the humour develops and their relation to the characters’ gender.

On the basis of her analysis, Walte claims that the characters are almost equally the targets of the humour in the series but Chandler is often the initiator of disparaging

4 Cf. also Friends ’s official website at: http://www2.warnerbros.com/friendstv/index.html .

humour towards his friends and others. In contrast, Joey and Phoebe do not joke about others whereas Ross often makes fun of himself. As Walte explains, these results reflect the way the scriptwriters of the series portray the six main characters (i.e. Chandler is quick-minded and sarcastic, Joey simple minded, etc.; ibid.81-83). Regarding the relevance of sexuality and taboo-related topics in Friends, Walte finds that sex- and taboo-related jokes are very frequent. In particular, Joey appears to be the one who mostly utters (in)direct sex-related comments, which are also consistent with his character (e.g. womaniser). Interestingly, Chandler and Rachel are those who are mostly targeted by sex-related jokes (ibid.96-97). As for the development of the humour in the series, Walte points out that major changes in terms of initiators or targets of jokes and sex-related jokes are not relevant. Hence, the humour can be seen as constant throughout the ten series (ibid.104). Finally, Walte finds that in general the three male characters seem to be more responsible to the production for humour than the female ones but the difference is not extremely marked (ibid.108).

More importantly, Walte concludes that what seems to appeal to the audience is the fact that the characters in Friends experience situations that can happen to anybody in life. However, these situations often lead the characters to confront non-standard problems the audience can laugh about. In addition, she claims that Friends seems to include some soap-opera elements (Ross is in love with Rachel, Chandler and Monica eventually fall in love and marry) that appeal to the audience and make them loyal to the series (ibid.116-117). Despite the fact that romance can be found in various types of fictional productions apart from soap-operas (e.g. novels, TV dramas, etc.), it may certainly help to maintain good viewing rates. Interestingly, during my analysis in Chapters 5, 6 and 7 I reach similar conclusions about the main characters and the More importantly, Walte concludes that what seems to appeal to the audience is the fact that the characters in Friends experience situations that can happen to anybody in life. However, these situations often lead the characters to confront non-standard problems the audience can laugh about. In addition, she claims that Friends seems to include some soap-opera elements (Ross is in love with Rachel, Chandler and Monica eventually fall in love and marry) that appeal to the audience and make them loyal to the series (ibid.116-117). Despite the fact that romance can be found in various types of fictional productions apart from soap-operas (e.g. novels, TV dramas, etc.), it may certainly help to maintain good viewing rates. Interestingly, during my analysis in Chapters 5, 6 and 7 I reach similar conclusions about the main characters and the

I will return to Walte’s study in Chapter 8, where I will summarise my findings. Scholars in TS have also devoted much attention to the translation of Friends.

Lebtahi (2004) compares the French subtitled and dubbed versions of various Anglo- American sitcoms, including Friends. Romero Fresco (2006) specifically concentrates on the dubbed version of Friends into Spanish. According to his findings, the language used in the Spanish version does not flow naturally and is often inconsistent in terms of register (ibid.147). Ranzato (2006) reaches similar conclusions in her comparative examination of the Italian, Spanish, French and Brazilian-Portuguese versions of Friends. In particular, Ranzato shows how the Italian and Spanish versions tend to manipulate the text to the extent that it becomes banal while the French is more faithful to the ST. Interestingly, Ranzato points out that the Portuguese version tends to be more explicit regarding taboo-related topics (ibid.152-159). It should be noticed that the Brazilian-Portuguese version is probably subtitled and this may to some extent influence the translators’ decision making process (cf. Bucaria 2007 on the use of subtitling in translating humour).

As can be seen, Friends is not only a world-wide success in terms of viewing ratings and revenues but it is also the object of considerable academic interest. Hence, Friends constitutes a valid candidate for the study of humour in audiovisual material and its transfer across linguistic and cultural boundaries.

1.4 Research Questions

It can be said that Friends is a TV comedy programme whose main objective is to entertain its audience. Hence, it relies on the production crew and in particular the scriptwriters’ ability to convey potential humour via the characters and the fictional It can be said that Friends is a TV comedy programme whose main objective is to entertain its audience. Hence, it relies on the production crew and in particular the scriptwriters’ ability to convey potential humour via the characters and the fictional

Furthermore, nowadays state-owned and private TV channels across the world purchase a large amount of entertainment programmes produced in other countries, especially the U.S. (cf. Ch. 3). Due to this continuously growing market, the AVT of humour becomes increasingly important everywhere in the world. The case of the long-established dubbing tradition in Italy seems worth researching because it has developed its own peculiarities (cf. Ch. 3, Section 3.4).

Bearing in mind the specificity of the text under investigation and the peculiar constraints and advantages existing in dubbing, I intend to focus my investigation on the translation of three main mechanisms for the creation of humour: wordplay, culture-specific allusions and metaphor. These phenomena are exploited in Friends for humorous purposes, as I will show, but are also regarded as potentially problematic in the translation literature. In particular, I aim to answer the following Research Questions (RQ):

RQ1. How are wordplay, culture-specific allusions and metaphor used for

humorous purposes in the first series of Friends (Source Text)?

RQ2. What strategies have been adopted in order to translate humorous instances of wordplay, culture-specific allusions and metaphor in the Italian dubbed version of the first series of Friends (Target Text)?

RQ3. What differences between the Source Text and the Target Text does a contrastive analysis of these three phenomena reveal, with specific reference to humorous potential?

I will return to my research questions at the end of each chapter of data analysis and in the concluding Chapter 8. At the end of this thesis I hope I will be able to draw general conclusions about the findings in my data. In addition, I will also suggest further implications for the on-going research in both HS and TS.

1.5 The Structure of the Thesis

This thesis comprises eight chapters, including this introductory chapter. In Chapter 2, I provide an overview of relevant areas of research from HS. Because of the focus of this thesis, I concentrate on the development of incongruity-based theories and their application to the linguistic investigation of humour. In particular, I devote a large part of my discussion to Ras kin’s (1985) Semantic Script Theory of Humour (SSHT) and its further development, the GTVH (Attardo and Raskin 1991; Attardo 1994, 2001), mentioned earlier. I specifically consider their applicability to the study of potentially humorous texts longer than jokes. In addition, I discuss the possibility of using the GTVH as a tool for revealing the differences between the ST and TT, with specific reference to their potential humour. In the second part of the chapter I take into account the peculiarities and functions of humour in conversation. I This thesis comprises eight chapters, including this introductory chapter. In Chapter 2, I provide an overview of relevant areas of research from HS. Because of the focus of this thesis, I concentrate on the development of incongruity-based theories and their application to the linguistic investigation of humour. In particular, I devote a large part of my discussion to Ras kin’s (1985) Semantic Script Theory of Humour (SSHT) and its further development, the GTVH (Attardo and Raskin 1991; Attardo 1994, 2001), mentioned earlier. I specifically consider their applicability to the study of potentially humorous texts longer than jokes. In addition, I discuss the possibility of using the GTVH as a tool for revealing the differences between the ST and TT, with specific reference to their potential humour. In the second part of the chapter I take into account the peculiarities and functions of humour in conversation. I

In Chapter 3, I present the second part of my literature review. Firstly, I describe the similarities and differences between the two most used translation modes in AVT, which are subtitling and dubbing. As my main interest is the dubbing of Friends, I focus on the various constraints and advantages that this translation mode involves (e.g. lip synchronisation, omission of original soundtrack, time pressure, etc.). Secondly, I discuss the historical and cultural reasons that led Italy to adopt dubbing rather than subtitling as its main AVT mode. Subsequently, I explain the present situation of dubbing in Italy. I then move on to consider the specific issues that the translation of humour raises. In particular, I offer an overview of the on-going debate on the (im)possibility of translating humour. This is followed by a brief summary and discussion of Attardo’s (2002a) theory of humour translation and Zabalbeascoa’s (1996) study of the priorities in dubbing humour.

In Chapter 4, I present my data and methodology. I describe Friends in more detail and explain the reasons for choosing the first series. I give an account of some interesting differences between the two datasets, which include, in particular, a striking difference in use of canned laughter in the ST and TT. I then outline the methodology according to which I have carried out my analysis. This includes a detailed description of the approach I use to select instances of potential humour in the ST. Moreover, I explain how I apply Raskin’s SSTH and Attardo’s GTVH to my data.

Chapter 5 is the first of three chapters of data analysis. I concentrate on wordplay as a mechanism of humour creation in Friends that potentially poses translation problems. I first review the relevant literature on the categorisation of puns and puns based on fixed expressions and idioms (most notably Delabastita 1996, Moon 1998,

Veisbergs 1997) and then I carry out my data analysis. A briefer discussion on the creation and translation of wordplay based on rhyming is also included. In general, my analysis confirms the difficulties relating to the translation of wordplay due to its language dependence. In addition, it shows how wordplay is used to convey characterisation cues and to support the themes of the series. The contrastive analysis of the two datasets demonstrates that the Italian translators strived to retain the original mechanism . When this was not possible they attempted to retain the ST’s entertainment function by means of other strategies. The translations of the ST into Italian resulted in some differences in the potential humour and characterisation. I provide a detailed discussion of my findings at the end of the chapter.

Similarly, in Chapter 6, I start by considering some relevant studies regarding culture-specific allusions, with particular reference to their potentially humorous function. In order to categorise my data, I discuss the possibility of combining some scholarly research that classifies this phenomenon according to type (Leppihalme 1997) and source (Davies González and Scott-Tennent 2005). The analysis reveals that the types and sources of culture-specific allusions in my data are coherent with its genre (TV comedy programme starring six main characters of average education, apart from Ross). Moreover, it shows that a large amount of culture-specific allusions are drawn from the so- called ‘popular’ culture, which fit the fictional world of the series. Hence, culture-specific allusions contribute to the characterisation of the six main characters. All these factors confirm the difficulty of transferring the culture- specific allusions in Friends into Italian. The contrastive analysis of the ST and TT demonstrates that the Italian translators deployed various translation strategies in order to retain both the original mechanism of humour and the text’s entertaining function. However, when this was not possible, they attempted to retain at least the potential Similarly, in Chapter 6, I start by considering some relevant studies regarding culture-specific allusions, with particular reference to their potentially humorous function. In order to categorise my data, I discuss the possibility of combining some scholarly research that classifies this phenomenon according to type (Leppihalme 1997) and source (Davies González and Scott-Tennent 2005). The analysis reveals that the types and sources of culture-specific allusions in my data are coherent with its genre (TV comedy programme starring six main characters of average education, apart from Ross). Moreover, it shows that a large amount of culture-specific allusions are drawn from the so- called ‘popular’ culture, which fit the fictional world of the series. Hence, culture-specific allusions contribute to the characterisation of the six main characters. All these factors confirm the difficulty of transferring the culture- specific allusions in Friends into Italian. The contrastive analysis of the ST and TT demonstrates that the Italian translators deployed various translation strategies in order to retain both the original mechanism of humour and the text’s entertaining function. However, when this was not possible, they attempted to retain at least the potential

In Chapter 7, I discuss the way humour is conveyed in Friends by means of metaphor. As with the other mechanisms, I first discuss some relevant literature regarding metaphor production and comprehension. In particular, I refer to two influential approaches in metaphor research: Conceptual Metaphor Theory (CMT) and Blending Theory (BT). I then consider the relationship between humour and metaphor and the problems arising in transferring potentially humorous metaphors across languages and cultures. The analysis of the ST shows that the scriptwriters seem to exploit the image or the linguistic expression upon which these metaphors are based in order to convey humour. More importantly, they use these creative metaphors so as to transmit idiosyncratic features about the character who utters them (e.g. Rachel is a shopaholic; Joey is a womaniser; etc.). The contrastive analysis of the ST and TT shows that the Italian translators attempted to transfer the metaphor, sometimes substituting the source domain in the TT. As with the other mechanisms, the translation process resulted in some differences in terms of the potential humour and characterisation.

Finally, in Chapter 8, I reflect in more detail on my analysis and elaborate its results. I then pinpoint the implications of my research for both HS and TS. I conclude by considering some limitations of my analysis as well as possible avenues for further research.

Chapter 2. Humour Studies and Humour in Comedy

And conversation is the natural home of punning, allusion, and joking. (Norrick 1993: 1)

2.1 Introduction

The difficulty that arises in any attempt at defining humour in general terms is caused by the fact that humour itself is a relative, idiosyncratic concept that varies according to culture and time. As a matter of fact, individuals in every social group or culture make great use of humour in their everyday life and conversations. It is therefore not surprising that Humour Studies is an interdisciplinary field that covers research from anthropology, psychology, philosophy and linguistics (Norrick 1993: 3, Palmer 1994: 3). Scholars interested in humour have sought to explain its essence, mechanism(s) and effects on society by means of different approaches and from different points of view.

The goal of the present chapter is to offer an overview and discussion of some of the most prominent theories of humour that can hopefully provide the reader with sufficient knowledge on this fascinating phenomenon. Since each chapter of data analysis in this thesis focuses on one type of humour creation (Ch. 5 discusses the use of wordplay; Ch. 6 deals with culture-specific allusions; Ch.7 investigates the use of potentially humorous metaphor), the relevant literature on each of these topics is not introduced here.

Before presenting my overview, in Section 2.2 I will consider some scholars’ attempts at defining the concept of humour, its use and functions in everyday life and language. In particular, I will refer to the controversial relationship between humour and laughter. This is an important point because it will form the basis against which I Before presenting my overview, in Section 2.2 I will consider some scholars’ attempts at defining the concept of humour, its use and functions in everyday life and language. In particular, I will refer to the controversial relationship between humour and laughter. This is an important point because it will form the basis against which I

In Section 2.3 I will summarise some of the theories of humour which were mostly developed throughout the twentieth century. In Section 2.4 this will culminate in a discussion of the currently most influential theories for the analysis of humour. I will first introduce Raskin’s (1985) Semantic Script Theory of Humour (SSTH) and its main tenets. I will then move on to describe its subsequent revision: the General Theory of Verbal Humour (GTVH), first outlined in Attardo and Raskin (1991) and further developed in Attardo (1994, 1998, 2001). I will also consider some scholarly research based on the application of the GTVH and some criticism that has resulted from it.

In Section 2.5 I will briefly discuss important issues relating to the production of humour in conversation. This is particularly relevant because to some extent sitcoms attempt to replicate everyday language and situations (Bubel and Spitz 2006: 73). In Section 2.6 I will focus on the specific case of humour in TV comedy, the way it is construed and perceived. I will point out the differences between humour in naturally occurring language and comedy. In particular, I will suggest that conversational exchanges in comedy are not entirely realistic and are often exaggerated for humorous purposes.

In Section 2.7 I will conclude this overview by reporting Nilsen’s (1989:123) definition of humour. It summarises in a fairly concise way most of the different positions I will introduce below. However, this cannot be a definite explanation of what humour is. As this thesis will demonstrate, on-going research is still needed to shed light on this phenomenon, as well as its translation.

2.2 Defining Humour and its Relationship with Laughter