The Power of Film Translation

by Agnieszka Szarkowska

Whether domesticating or foreignising in its approach, any form of audiovisual translation

ultimately plays a unique role in developing both national identities and national stereotypes.
The transmission of cultural values in screen translation has received very little attention in the
literature and remains one of the most pressing areas of research in translation studies.

Mona Baker and Brao Hochel (1997:

76)

Key words:

Film translation, subtitling, dubbing, domestication, foreignisation, target culture,

source culture

Abstract

The objective of this paper is to demonstrate the great power of film translation.
This aim is accomplished by presenting the major modes of film translation, their
world distribution and history, which are then followed by an analysis of dubbing
and subtitling from the perspective of domestication and foreignisation.

Introduction

ach country cultivates a different tradition of translating films and subscribes to one of the
two major modes: dubbing and subtitling as far as cinema translation is concerned, or
sometimes to a third, minor, modevoiceoverin the case of television translation. The
decision as to which film translation mode to choose is by no means arbitrary and stems from
several factors, such as historical circumstances, traditions, the technique to which the
audience is accustomed, the cost, as well as on the position of both the target and the source
cultures in an international context (see Dries 1995). This paper will focus on cinema
translation only, which is of course not to say that television translation is less worthy of
academic investigation. On the contrary, analysis of television translation constitutes an
excellent material for further research, and it is only disregarded here for reasons of clarity and
lucidity of argumentation.

The first part of this paper sets out to present the above-mentioned translation modes and
their world distribution, next trying to account for them from the perspective of history and
culture. Subsequently, an attempt is made to show the enormous power that these modes
exert on audiences and entire cultures. The paper aims to demonstrate that dubbing is a form
of domestication whereas subtitling can be regarded as foreignisation.

Types of film translation

There are two major types of film translation: dubbing and subtitling; each of them interferes
with the original text to a different extent.

On the one hand, dubbing is known to be the method that modifies the source text to a large
extent and thus makes it familiar to the target audience through domestication. It is the method
in which "the foreign dialogue is adjusted to the mouth and movements of the actor in the film"
(Dries 1995: 9 qtd. in Shuttleworth and Cowie 1997: 45) and its aim is seen as making the
audience feel as if they were listening to actors actually speaking the target language.

On the other hand, subtitling, i.e. supplying a translation of the spoken source language
dialogue into the target language in the form of synchronised captions, usually at the bottom of
the screen, is the form that alters the source text to the least possible extent and enables the
target audience to experience the foreign and be aware of its 'foreignness' at all times.

Classification of countries by translation modes they employ

Before presenting the historical circumstances and their influence on particular cultures, let us
have a closer look at the division of countries according to the type of screen translation they
use (as presented in The Routledge Encyclopaedia of Translation Studies 1997: 244). The
Encyclopaedia, however, does not differentiate between cinema and television translation.

First, there are the source-language countries, which in the contemporary world means
English-speaking countries such as the United States or the United Kingdom, where hardly
any films are imported. The foreign ones tend to be subtitled rather than dubbed. In Britain,
film translation does not appear to be a significant issue as the great majority of imported films
are American and require no translation.

Second, there are the dubbing countries, and this group comprises mainly French-, Italian-
German-, and Spanish-speaking countries (sometimes referred to as the FIGS group), both in
and outside Europe. In these countries the overwhelming majority of films undergo the process
of dubbing. This is mostly due to historical reasons since "in the 1930s dubbing became the
preferred mode of film translation in the world's big-market speech communities" (Gottlieb
1997: 310).

Third, there are the subtitling countries, which are characterised by a high percentage of
imported films, and thus there is a great and steady demand for translation. Subtitling is
preferred to dubbing in countries such as the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Denmark,
Greece, Slovenia, Croatia, Portugal and some non-European countries. In Belgium or Finland,
where there are large communities speaking two languages, films are usually provided with
double subtitles.

The last group, according to the Routledge Encyclopaedia, comprises voice-over countries
mostly those that cannot afford dubbing, e.g. Russia or Poland.
Such a division, however, seems to be a simplification as it does not differentiate between
cinema and television translation. For example, Poland is listed as a voiceover country,
whereas it mostly uses subtitling in the cinemas, except for some dubbed productions for
children. Furthermore, in her article about linguistic transfer in Eastern Europe, Dries stresses
different patterns between Eastern and Western Europe, especially a surprising preference for
dubbing in the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Bulgaria, and Hungary, despite its high cost.

On the whole, it can be stated that especially in Western European countries dubbing is
preferred in larger and more affluent countries, which can expect high box office receipts,
whereas subtitling is used in smaller ones, whose audiences comprise more restricted
markets. The cost alone, however, does not define the choice of translation mode. It is history
that can shed some light on the question.

Film translation in historical perspective

In the times of silent movies, translation was relatively easy to conduct: the so-called intertitles
interrupted the course of a film every couple of minutes, so the target language titles could
easily be translated and inserted in place of the original ones.

The problem arose with the appearance of 'talkies' in the late 1920s. At first, American film
companies tried to solve it by producing the same film (using the same set and scenario, but
different directors and actors) in various language versions. However, this soon turned out to
be unprofitable, as the films produced were of poor artistic quality and they did not win over
the public. The studios that had been built in France for this purpose began to produce dubbed
versions of films instead (see Danan 1991: 607).

Iwasaki Akira, a Marxist critic, found talkies "anti-internationalistic" because of the way the
national character of films was emphasised by the sound (see Nornes 1999). The new
invention "enabled Hollywood to avoid any interruption in its dominance of the international
film market" (ibidem). Talkies guaranteed that the audience was very much aware of the
source culture and its nature, and thus they helped cement Hollywood's leading position.

The introduction of talkies exerted a far-reaching influence on both larger and smaller
countries. As film production costs rose, it became increasingly difficult for smaller countries to
export their productions andlimited by their small domestic marketstheir home production
decreased, which led to a rise in film imports. As for the larger European countries, they "were
better equipped to continue producing their own films, but were also faced with powerful
American competition" (Danan 1991: 607). This situation, i.e. the wide gap between larger and
smaller countries, was to be reflected later in the choice of the film translation mode: larger
countries tended to dub imported foreign productions, while smaller ones settled on subtitling.

From the early 1930s until early 1950s American film companies reigned over the entire movie
industry as they monopolised the recording equipment. During World War II the American film
industry flourished, and as a result, in the period following the war "European countries were
easily flooded with new films as well as with the 2500 backlogged American movies produced
during the war" (Danan 1991: 608).

It took some time for European economies to recover, and in the 1950s larger states, such as
France, Italy, Germany and Spain, introduced protective measures aimed at lessening the
influence of American films in their territories. For instance, import quotas were imposed in
order to protect domestic production, and special taxes were levied on imported films in some
countries (France, Italy) which required that "profits by American companies had to be
reinvested locally" (Danan 1991: 608). At the same time, domestic production in France, Italy,
Germany and Spain was supported by the government through various subsidies and loans.
By that time it was clear that film had become an extremely influential and profitable medium
and everyone wanted to get the largest possible slice of the "film cake."

The table below shows that smaller European countries were producing fewer films than larger
countries, and importing a host of both American and European films. As for the larger
countries, protective policies introduced by their governments resulted in an increase in
domestic film production and a decrease in foreign (mainly American) films importation. These
policies also generally improved the domestic/imported films ratio in larger countries.

Domestic and Foreign Film Production in Selected Countries

between 1951 and 1962
Italy W.Germ. Spain Sweden Denmark Finland Norway Nether. Total
Domestic Films 1915 1164 877 309 182 254 138 N/A
Imports
American 2613 2441 1162 2061 2209 2352 2251 2438 17527
British 482 461 307 581 458 442 625 670 4026
Italian N/A 372 340 198 133 256 203 393 1895
French 478 514 292 437 372 472 395 659 3619
W. German 293 N/A 153 230 428 367 346 749 2566
Swedish N/A N/A N/A N/A 155 134 294 N/A 583
Total imports 4406 4768 2816 3765 3898 4419 4478 5232
Domestic Films
30.3 19.6 23.7 7.6 4.5 5.4 3 N/A
% of Total Films
Imported Film
69.7 80.4 76.3 92.4 95.5 94.6 97
% of Total Films
(Danan 1991: 6091)

What follows is a brief account of the historical factors that influenced the choice of the film
translation mode in some European countries.

There are several factors that contributed to the fact that France decided to adopt dubbing
when it comes to translating foreign films. First, "France always felt it had a cultural mission
within the film art form" (Danan 1991: 610). The French seem to be one of the few nations
deeply concerned about the purity of their culture and they strive to protect it from any foreign
(read: mostly American) influence. Second, "standardised French was (...) historically a
successful instrument of political and cultural centralisation" (Danan 1991: 612). Furthermore,
many French speakers believe that their language is superior, and some French speakers
appear to be truly convinced that it has remained the lingua franca; at least that seemed to be
true some years ago (see Hendrykowski 1984: 250). This view still persists in the official
circles, which is reflected in how the Acadmie Franaise perceives its role now 2:

A la fin du XXe sicle, c'est une autre tche qui attend l'Acadmie.

La langue a atteint la plnitude de ses qualits, qui en ont fait depuis deux
sicles le langage des lites du monde entier. Le rayonnement de la
langue franaise est menac par l'expansion de l'anglais, plus
prcisment de l'amricain, qui tend envahir les esprits, les crits, le
monde de l'audiovisuel.

Le dveloppement de l'anglais est souvent favoris par l'irruption des

nouvelles techniques, le dveloppement acclr des sciences, le
rapprochement inou que permettent les mdias et les autres moyens de
communication, tous facteurs qui bousculent le vocabulaire traditionnel et
imposent marche rapide l'adoption de nouveaux mots.

Le 4 aot 1994 est vote la loi relative l'emploi de la langue franaise

(dite loi Toubon ), qui favorise l'emploi du franais dans les
inscriptions, les documents publics ou contractuels, les services publics,
les congrs, les mdias, etc.3

In addition, the French have always perceived translation of any kind as a violation, which is
clearly visible in the words of Victor Hugo expressing his views in the name of the entire
nation: "when you offer a translation to a nation, that nation will almost always look at
translation as an act of violence against itself" (qtd. by Andr Lefevere 1992: 14). And last but
not least, one of the factors which contribute to the choice of dubbing as the film translation
mode is the fact that the French are accustomed to hearing French both on TV and in cinemas
due to a significant number of domestic productions dominating the market. Thus, such
audiences automatically demand domestication in the form of dubbing. The foregoing reasons
make the French dub rather than subtitle foreign films.

Germany, Italy and Spain form a completely different group. Just a few decades ago, they
were fascist countries convinced of their own superiority and excellence, and the "post-war
film industries were a direct legacy of earlier fascist governments" (Danan 1991: 611). The
dictators were fully aware that "hearing your own language serves to confirm its importance
and reinforces a sense of national identity and autonomy" (Mera 1999: 82). For example, in
Spain:

Franco also ruled against any non-dubbed version in an attempt to keep

the supremacy of the national language as the expression of cultural,
political and economic power.

(Del Camino Guetirrez Lanza 1997: 44)

Also in Germany and Italy, governments adopted regulations promoting or even enforcing
dubbing as the mode of film translation. In Spain, between 1936 and 1975 there were over
ninety ministerial guidelines (rdenes) published, which were a form of prescriptive
censorship. Showing films in a foreign language was officially banned "because of the evil
effects that film release can produce on society" (ibid.: 41):

Queda prohibida la proyeccin cinematogrfica en otro idioma que no sea

el espaol, salvo autorizacin que conceder el Ministerio de Industria y
Comercio y siempre que las pelculas en cuestin hayan sido
previamente dobladas. El doblaje deber realizarse en estudios
espaoles que radiquen en el territorio nacional y por personal espaol.
(ibidem) 4

The use of the native language, once obligatory under the pressure of the authorities, affected
not only the translation strategy of the period but it also continues to determine the preference
of the movie audiences in these countries for dubbing:

Therefore, it should not be surprising that movie audiences in Spain have

become accustomed to the film-dubbing technique over the years.
Bearing in mind that audiences are becoming larger and the general
public does not tend to make an effort to read the subtitled text on the
screen, it is not going to be easy to eradicate this long-standing tradition in
Spain.

(ibid.: 44)

Like Spain, and due to the regimes that were in power before WW II, Germany and Italy were
subjected to compulsory indoctrination, a remnant of which is now dubbing. "The three fascist
countries realized the appeal and impact films with sound could have on the masses" (Danan
1991: 611). It is interesting to notice that even though the regimes ceased to exist, they
indirectly continue to exert a profound influence today: "in an effort to build strong nationalistic
states and spread fascist ideology, these countries nationalised and reorganised their
respective film industries and created infrastructures that are still central to their film industries
today" (ibidem).

In contrast to larger countries, such as France, Italy, Spain and Germany discussed above,
smaller countries, like the Netherlands, Belgium, Sweden, Portugalto name just a few
followed a different path with regard to film translation. Their decision to adopt subtitling as the
major translation mode was motivated by several factors: small size of their populations, which
translated into limited receipts from box office tickets sales; low cost of subtitling in comparison
with dubbing; presence of more than one language in a country (e.g. Belgium) where double
subtitles in two languages are screened; significant number of imported films, etc.

The film industry, however, is not limited solely to Europe. The entire contemporary world is
inundated with American productions. It all began at the turn of the 20 th century when the
United States began to establish its unquestionable position among the mighty of this world.
By 1890, 'the frontier' had disappeared. It was the time for America to decide whether or not it
would follow the footsteps of other empires and acquire some land for colonies, which at that
time was the actual sign of power. The US, however, due to several factors, resolved not to
imitate the traditional patterns. Instead, it expanded the Monroe Doctrine 5 and became the
world's dominant power by shifting the strategy to cultural and economic hegemony: "The
United States has pursued massively exploitative neo-colonial policies, running local
economies through multinational corporations without actually 'possessing' the countries as
colonies" (Robinson 1997: 17). The so-called American way of life, the free market economy,
and democracy became instant symbols of American culture. It is possibly through films
among other factorsthat American values spread all over the world and began to signify
universal, ideal, or standard values. This can be treated as another form of colonisation.

Film translation in the era of globalisation

"Globally, this is the age of mass communications, of multimedia experiences and a world
where audiences demand the right to share the latest text, be it film, song, or book
simultaneously across cultures" (Bassnett qtd. by lvarez 1996: 1). Therefore, there is a huge
demand for (mainly) American productions and, in response to it, markets are flooded with
them.

The issue of power in translation seems to be especially pertinent and applicable to

contemporary cinema. As a host of translation scholars has agreed recently, translation does
not take place between words but rather between cultures. The text is perceived as an integral
part of the world and not as "an isolated specimen of language" (Snell-Hornby 1998: 43).
Consequently, the process of translation is seen as cross-cultural transfer, which is
determined by the degree of prestige the source and target cultures have, as well as by their
reciprocal relations.

English-speaking countries, and the United States in particular, have the upper hand and are
pulling the strings in the movie industry today: "globalisation is generally synonymous with
unidirectional Anglicisation, the dominance of the English language and Anglo-American
culture at the expense of other languages and cultures" (Cronin 1996: 197). An interesting
point that proves American dominance and its narrow-mindedness concerning other cultures
are the 'Oscars' awarded annually by the Academy Awards, an institution which aspires to
global renown, where among a host of categories there is one given to the best 'foreign' film,
"where 'foreign' means anything that is not English" (Mera 1999: 79).

However, it is not only money that decides on the choice of translation mode. The choice of
the translating strategy largely depends on the attitude of the target culture vis--vis the source
culture, and it is not uncommon that it is political factors that determine the chosen mode. On
the whole, Western European countries do not openly oppose American productions. In Arabic
countries, on the contrary, there is a strong resistance towards adopting the norms and habits
of the (American) adversary. In contrast and opposition to Hollywood, Indian cinematography,
under the name of Bollywood, has developed and now flourishes in its own territory as well as
in other countries with strong anti-American attitudes. Some experts claim that "globalisation
isn't merely another word for Americanisationand the recent expansion of the Indian
entertainment industry proves it" (Power & Mazumdar 2000: 52). Moreover, being anti-
American in the Middle East works in Bollywood's favour. It is "the non-American quality of
Indian movies that draws audiences" (ibid.: 56). Quite naturally, many people are more likely
to choose a film concerning issues familiar to them.

In conclusion, it becomes apparent that translating films is not merely a linguistic problem but
rather an activity that is "conditioned to a large extent by the functional needs of the receiving
culture and not, or not just, by the demands made by the source films" (Delabastita 1990: 99).

Dubbing as a form of domestication

Domestication is here understoodafter Lawrence Venutias "translating in a transparent,

fluent, 'invisible' style in order to minimise the foreignness of the target text" (Munday 2001:
146). The result is that all foreign elements are assimilated into the dominant target culture,
thus depriving the target audience of crucial characteristics of the source culture, which is also
shown in the following quote:

The dominant trend towards domestication in translating from American

English over the last three centuries has had a normalising and
neutralising effect, depriving source text producers of their voice and re-
expressing foreign cultural values in terms of what is familiar (and
therefore unchallenging) to the dominant culture.

(Hatim and Mason 1997: 145).

To put it differently, domestication is the approach that favours and privileges the target culture
over the source culture, moving the author/creator towards the reader/audience. Translation is
often seen as a form of conquest (see postcolonial translation theories, e.g. Robinson 1997)
and can even become an expression of nationalism. It is a process which includes not only
translating a text, but also other related actions:

Translation is often regarded with suspicion because it inevitably

domesticates foreign texts, inscribing them with linguistic and cultural
values that are intelligible to specific domestic constituencies. This
process of inscription operates at every stage in the production,
circulation, and reception of the translation. It is initiated by the very
choice of a foreign text to translate, always an exclusion of other foreign
texts and literatures, which answers to particular domestic interests. It
continues most forcefully in the development of a translation strategy that
rewrites the foreign text in domestic dialects and discourses, always a
choice of certain domestic values to the exclusion of others. And it is
further complicated by the diverse forms in which the translation is
published, reviewed, read, and taught, producing cultural and political
effects that vary with different institutional contexts and social positions.
(Venuti 1998: 67).

Dubbed films may frequently appear to the viewer to be brand-new products rather than
transformed ones; a dubbed film ceases to be a 'foreign' film in order to become just a film. "In
the international marketplace the film original thus functions as a transnational decultured
product; it becomes the raw material that is to be re-inscribed into the different cultural
contexts of the consumer nations through the use of dubbing" (Ascheid 1997: 40). As has
already been established above, audiences which are accustomed to dubbing, when hearing
their own language feel reassured as to its importance "wychodzc z bezceremonialnego
zaoenia, e 'cay wiat' mwi po francusku czy angielsku" 6 (Hendrykowski 1984: 250). Thus,
dubbing decreases the sense of 'otherness' and is an excellent example of domestication.

Dubbing can also be perceived as "an assertion of the supremacy of the national language
and its unchallenged political, economic and cultural power within the nation's boundaries"
(Danan 1991: 612). By implementing policies, governments of dubbing countries stressed the
importance of the existence of one standardised national language, often banning the use of
dialects in order to strengthen the national unity. For example, in Italy, where the process of
country unification was completed only in 1870, there were still many regions in 1920s and
1930s in which only local dialects were spoken, while modern Italian was virtually a foreign
language. Mussolini ruled that all the imported movies had to be in standard Italian, which
made the cinema a major means of imposing a national language.

Among all kinds of film translation, dubbing is the one that interferes the most in the structure
of the original. Many critics raise objections as to its authenticity. In principle, dubbing is
considered by some to be less authentic than subtitling because "the original performance is
altered by the addition of a different voice" (Mera 1999: 80). The unity of the soundtrack
inevitably undergoes reprocessing and it is more difficult for the viewer to believe and trust the
new voices ofoften very famousactors. Therefore, in many dubbing countries, e.g. in Italy,
some dubbing actors are used consistently with a particular actor. This, in turn, may lead to
insuperable problems, as was in the case of one Italian dubbing artist who dubbed the voices
of both Robert De Niro and Al Pacino for a number of years until the two actors met on the set
of Heat in 1995. For obvious reasons, another actor was needed to substitute for one of the
stars. This, however, did not satisfy Italian audiences, who felt there was something wrong
with Pacino's voice as it was not what they were used to hearing.

Some claim, however, that it is dubbingand not any other form of screen translationthat
can aspire to being the 'ideal' form of film translation in terms of faithfulness, on the
assumption that strictly linguistic considerations should not determine the overall value of a
translation. In dubbing, the translator has to be faithful not only in the theatrical sense but also
in terms of phonological synchronisation (see Piekos 1993: 131). What is more, dubbing is
closer to the original in the sense that as far as the viewing process is concerned "only
decoding of the moving images and sound are required" (Mera 1999: 80), which actually
seems to be more authentic.

In dubbing there are frequent incongruities between what real actors say and how they move
their lips, and the dubbed voices, which affects the audience, largely on a subconscious level.
However, recent technology has developed a method of digital alteration of real actors' lip
movement in order to fit new translated dialogue:

The slight tampering with the image by adapting the movements of the
characters' lips to the dubbing script has yielded magnificent results
whenever it was implemented and can ultimately solve the infamous
shortcomings of lip-movement dischrony, especially in close-ups.

(Karamitroglou 1998)
What is more, having the voices of the original actors on separate tracks, which has been
made possible only recently thanks to new technological advances, enables retaining the
original background sound as well as the music and special effects and thus "smooth blending
with the new dubbing voices" (ibidem). On the one hand, this will improve the quality of
dubbed films, but on the other it will augment interference into the original even more.

Undoubtedly, dubbing is a powerful target culture-oriented tool which makes the source text
conform as much as possible to standards held by the target culture, which in fact is consistent
with Venuti's definition of domestication.

Subtitling as a form of foreignisation

Foreignisation is an approach to translation which can be described as "sending the reader

abroad," as Venuti aptly put it (qtd. by Munday 2001: 147). It is a method which assumes that
the translated text does not 'pretend' to be an original (as is the case with domestication) and
where the foreign identity of the source text is highlightedwhich makes the ideological
dominance of the target culture impossible. Foreignisation privileges the source culture, and it
evokes a sense of 'otherness,' emphasising the foreign nature of a film.

Amongst the major methods of translating films, subtitling involves the least interference with
the original; in other words, it is the most neutral, minimally mediated method. Therefore, it is
subtitling that contributes to experiencing the flavour of the foreign language, its mood and the
sense of a different culture more than any other translation mode. This is mainly due to the
fact that the original soundtrack and dialogues are not tampered with, as is the case in
dubbing. Moreover, "hearing the real voices of the characters not only facilitates
understanding in terms of the specific dialogue or plot structure, but gives vital clues to status,
class and relationship" (Mera 1999: 75). Although there are significant cuts in the length of the
dialogues due to the intrinsic nature of subtitling, much of what is lost can be compensated for
while hearing the original.

Subtitling is becoming a preferred mode of translation not only owing to financial

considerationsit is much cheaper to satisfy the expanding needs of film markets by providing
subtitles, which are more economical and easier to producebut also because "to viewers in
subtitling countries, the economic advantages are secondary; retaining the authenticity of the
original production is paramount" (Gottlieb 1997: 310). For these viewers, subtitling is a more
authentic mode than dubbing. The audience is not allowed to forget about the foreignness of a
translated film and is constantly reminded of its authenticity as it hears the original dialogues
throughout the film.

Because English has been the lingua franca in the modern world for a number of years,
knowledge of this language has increased dramatically and is now widespread. For example,
in Greece over 60% of people between the ages 15-28 hold the Cambridge First Certificate
(see Karamitroglou 1999). Accordingly, many people (in the subtitling countries) go to cinemas
because they are offered a unique chance to listen to the original English dialogue; they only
consult the subtitles when they find it necessary. However, this situation increases the
criticising power of such people and makes them act as experts in the field of subtitling, which
in fact they are not. Obviously, dubbers do not have to confront such a problem, as the
audience is not given a chance to compare the original dialogues with their translation.
Interestingly, because of the 'otherness' that subtitling emphasises, it can sometimes be
perceivedin the case of non-English speaking filmsas "a hindrance to the potential
enjoyment of a film or television programme by the narrow-mindedness of the English
speaking nations" (Mera 1999: 79).

In recent years there has been a considerable rise in the interest in multiculturalism and
national diversity, along with the departure from the notion of melting pot. For several decades
almost every country in the world has cultivated its own unique tradition of filmmaking as well
as rendering foreign productions into the target language. Certain styles have come to be
known and instantly recognised by viewers world-wide. Translation in the form of subtitling
seems to go along those lines. While meeting and satisfying viewers' expectations and
curiosity concerning other cultures, it ensures the originality and hence the foreignness of
films. At the same time, unlike dubbing, it allows the original soundtrack to be retained and
thus "the integrity of a holistic performance to be preserved" (Mera 1999: 75). Thus, the
characteristic features of particular artists' style are maintained and insights into the characters
can be gained "through the inflections of their voices" (ibidem).

It is frequently the case that during the course of a film there appear some non-verbal signs,
e.g. notices, tokens, trademarks or road signs in the background. These seem to give away
dubbing, which attempts to function as the original; at the same time the signs give more
credibility to subtitling, which from the very beginning makes it clear that what the audience is
watching is actually foreign. It is also easier for the subtitler to explain the meaning of the sign
by inserting a subtitle with the target language equivalent (e.g. in capital letters or italics to
differentiate it from spoken utterances), than it is for the dubber to solve such a problem.

The foreignisation of a film can be augmented by the fact that subtitling involves a change
from a spoken medium, the original, to a written medium in the form of one- or two-liners at the
bottom of the screen. Mera claims that: "subtitles change film from an audio-visual medium to
a more literary medium which requires a greater level of attention from a viewer than a dubbed
film" (1999: 79). However, latest research with regard to the cognitive activity required by
subtitling from viewers (see Delabastita 1990: 98) demonstrated that reading subtitles does
not

require a conscious cognitive effort on the part of those accustomed to

this mode of translation. People who read subtitles do not exhibit the
typical eye movement patterns of 'ordinary' reading behaviour. Rather,
their eyes tend to make no more than a few quick jumps from one
keyword to another. The whole process of subtitle perception tends to be
largely automated, so much so that viewers who have no need of subtitles
find it hard to avoid reading them (ibidem).

The obvious downside of subtitling are the enormous shortcuts made in the process. Some
researchers counted that as much as half of the original dialogue is lost due to the spatial
constraints (see de Linde & Kay 1999). The translator not only translates but also resolves
which fragments to omit, which of them are irrelevant, and which are vital to the target
audience. In an attempt to convey 'the core' of the script, translators often forget that it is not
only the dialogues from the main plot that constitute the substance of a film. Other factors,
such as various dialects, idiolects, register or expressions of politeness, which frequently
undergo reduction, can be equally important in the full comprehension of a particular work.
Consequently, "the minor subtractions that litter these scenes may not seem significant in
terms of the general understanding, but during the course of a whole film they add up to a
large number of drastically altered meanings" (Mera 1999: 78).

On the other hand, there are instances in which subtitlers patronise their audience by
supplying the subtitles which are obvious and transparent. For example, some commonly
comprehensible expressions like "yes" or "no" are rendered unnecessarily in countless cases.
Also various onomatopoeic expressions such as "Grrr! Grrr!" (in Cinema Paradiso) leave at
least some of the viewers dissatisfied, as they feel they are looked upon condescendingly.
Sometimes, however, some onomatopoeic expressions vary from language to language, as is
the case with some other animal sounds. For instance, in Snatch one of the protagonists
imitates the sounds made by a pig, saying: "oink oink", which wasquite understandably
rendered into Polish as "chrum chrum" since those two onomatopoeic expressions differ
noticeably. All of the foregoing clearly reflects the crucial role of the translator in the translation
process.

From the discussion above, it clearly appears that subtitling can be considered part of the
foreignisation realm: the crucial role of the source culture is stressed, foreign identity
highlighted and the influence of the target culture minimised.

Conclusion

Films can be a tremendously influential and extremely powerful vehicle for transferring values,
ideas and information. Different cultures are presented not only verbally but also visually and
aurally, as film is a polysemiotic medium that transfers meaning through several channels,
such as picture, dialogue and music. Items which used to be culture-specific tend to spread
and encroach upon other cultures. The choice of film translation mode largely contributes to
the reception of a source language film in a target culture.

On balance, there is no universal and good-for-all mode of translating films. As was stated
above, the methods are dependent upon various factors, such as history, tradition of
translating films in a given country, various audience-related factors, the type of film to be
rendered, as well as financial resources available. What is also of primary importance here is
the mutual relationship between the source and target cultures, as it will also profoundly
influence the translating process.

All things considered, the two major translation modes, i.e. dubbing and subtitling, can be said
to occupy the two opposite ends of the domestication-foreignisation continuum. As it was
shown in this article, dubbing is a domesticating strategy which neutralises foreign elements of
the source text and thus privileges the target culture. In contrast, subtitling is an example of a
foreignising strategy since it stresses the foreign nature of a film and it is a source-culture-
bound translation. It is clear that translated material can be domesticated or foreignised to
different extents, and hence be placed somewhere along the domestication-foreignisation
continuum.

References

lvarez, Romn, M. Carmen-fica Vidal (eds) (1996) Translation, Power,

Subversion. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

Ascheid, Antje (1997) "Speaking Tongues: Voice Dubbing in the Cinema of

Cultural Ventriloquism". In The Velvet Light Trap, no. 40, p. 40.

Baker, Mona (1997) Routledge Encyclopaedia of Translation Studies. London

and New York: Routledge.

Cronin, Michael (1996) Translating Ireland. Cork, Ireland: Cork University Press.

Danan, Martine (1991) "Dubbing as an Expression of Nationalism" Meta, XXXVI

4, pp. 606-614.

Delabastita, Dirk (1990) "Translation and the mass media". In Susan Bassnett
and Andr Lefevere (eds) Translation, History and Culture. London: Pinter
Publishers.

Del Camino Gutirrez Lanza, Maria (1997) "Spanish Film Translation: Ideology,
Censorship and the National Language". In The Changing Scene in the World
Languages. American Translators Association Scholarly Monograph Series. Vol.
IX, pp. 35-45, Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Dries, Josephine (1995) "Breaking Eastern European Barriers" Sequentia, vol. II,
No. 4 June/July/August 95, p. 6.

Gottlieb, Henrik (1990) "Quality Revisited: The Rendering of English Idioms in

Danish Subtitles vs. Printed Translations". In Anna Trosborg (ed.) Text Typology
and Translation, Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Hatim, Basil and Ian Mason (1997) The Translator as Communicator. London:
Routledge.

Hendrykowski, Marek (1984) "Z problemw przekadu filmowego". In Edward

Balcerzan (ed.) Wielojzyczno literatury i problemy przekadu artystycznego,
Wroclaw: Zakad Narodowy im. Ossoliskich, pp. 243-259.

Karamitroglou, Fotios (1999) "Audiovisual Translation at the Dawn of the Digital

Age: Prospects and Potentials" Translation Journal, vol. 3, no. 3. Retrieved 20
April 2002 from http://accurapid.com/journal/09av.htm

Lefevere, Andr (1992) Translation / History / Culture. A Sourcebook. London

and New York: Routledge.

de Linde, Zo and Neil Kay (1999) The Semiotics of Subtitling, Manchester: St.
Jerome Publishing.

Mera, Miguel (1998) "Read my lips: Re-evaluating subtitling and dubbing in

Europe" Links & Letters 6, 1999, pp.73-85.
 Munday, Jeremy (2001) Introducing Translation Studies. Theories and
Applications. London and New York: Routledge.

Nornes, Abe Mark (1999) "For an Abusive Subtitling. Subtitles of Motion

Pictures" Film Quarterly, spring 1999. Retrieved 2 May 2000 from
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1070/is_3_52/ai_54731368/pg_4

Paquin, Robert (1998) "Translator, Adapter, Screenwriter. Translating for the

audiovisual" Translation Journal, vol. 2, no. 3. Retrieved 20 April 2002 from
http://accurapid.com/journal/05dubb.htm

Piekos, Jerzy (1993) Przekad i tumacz we wspczesnym wiecie. Warszawa:

PWN.

Power, Carla and Sudip Mazumdar (2000) "Bollywood goes global" Newsweek
Feb. 28, 2000, pp. 52-58.

Robinson, Douglas (1997) Translation and Empire. Postcolonial Theories

Explained. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing.

Shuttleworth, Mark and Moira Cowie (1997) Dictionary of Translation Studies.

Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing.

Snell-Hornby, Mary (1988) Translation Studies. An Integrated Approach.

Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Venuti, Lawrence (1998) The Scandals of Translation. Towards an Ethics of

Difference, London and New York: Routledge.

1 "These figures were based on three types of statistics provided by various official agencies or
governments. In some countries, the actual numbers of imported films were provided; in
others, the numbers of released films were reported; in some other cases the numbers were
based on films submitted for censorship. In spite of minor inconsistencies, combining the three
kinds of figures provides a significant way of comparing film imports" (Danan 1991: 613).
Other information concerning the sources used in the chart can be found in Danan (1991).
2 Source: http://www.academie-francaise.fr/role/index.html (January 2005)
3 At the end of the 20th century, the Acadmie is challenged with a new task. The French
language has a host of qualities which for two centuries have made it the language of the
elites in the entire world. Its area of influence is threatened by the expansion of English, or
more precisely American English, which has been encroaching on the minds, writings, and the
world of audiovisual media. The spread of English is often favoured by invasion of new
technologies, rapidly developing sciences, unprecedented 'shrinking' of the world, which is
facilitated by media and other communication means, and all other factors revolutionizing
traditional vocabulary and quickly imposing new words onto the language. On 4 August 1994 a
law was enacted concerning the use of the French language (known as the 'Toubon law'),
which encourages the use of French in writings, public documents or agreements, in public
services, conferences, media, etc." (translated by Magdalena Kaczorowska)
4"Movie projection in a language other than Spanish is prohibited unless permission from the
Ministry of Industry and Commerce is granted; the films in question always must be dubbed.
Dubbing shall be done in Spanish studios located on Spanish territory and by Spanish
personnel" (my translation).
5
One of the cornerstones of American foreign policy concerning, among other things, non-
colonisation.
6"blindly assuming that the whole world speaks French or English" (my translation)or any
other language used in dubbing, for that matter.

Copyright Translation Journal and the Author 2005

URL: http://accurapid.com/journal/32film.htm
Last updated on: 03/26/2006 16:35:24

http://aaboori.mshdiau.ac.ir/StudentProjects/power_of_film_translation.htm

12/11/11 10:16 am