See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at:

http://www.researchgate.net/publication/233578733

Translation and masscommunication: Film and T.V.

translation as evidence of
cultural dynamics
ARTICLE in BABEL DECEMBER 1988
DOI: 10.1075/babel.35.4.02del

CITATIONS

READS

36

127

1 AUTHOR:
Dirk Delabastita
University of Namur
27 PUBLICATIONS 63 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE

Available from: Dirk Delabastita

Retrieved on: 03 January 2016

Translation and mass-communication:

film and T.V. translation as evidence of cultural dynamics
Dirk Delabastita

0.

Introduction

0.1. The social sciences have often tended to select their subjects for study on the
basis of their high prestige according to the norms of the culture in which they
function, or even according to the value system of the cultural paradigm within
which the scholars themselves operate. That is one of the underlying reasons why,
for example, the scholarly study of popular culture has had such a slow start or
why, for that matter, translation has so long been the Cinderella of linguistic and
literary studies. Accordingly, it is hardly surprising that phenomena such as translation in mass communication have so far been ignored almost completely, however much the quantitative importance of these phenomena is in evidence, and
however much they may be assumed to play a crucial role in the linguistic, artistic,
ideological, etc. organisation of our modern societies.
In recent years, however, it has begun to dawn on an ever growing number of
scholars that an a priori selective approach towards culture often contributes to
the consolidation of certain cultural tendencies, rather than to an adequate
analysis. In the field of literary studies, for instance, this insight has found expression in the claim that the student of literature can hope to understand the structure
and the evolution of literature and its relation to other linguistic and cultural
forms of expression only if he agrees to adopt much more comprehensive schemes
of analysis than were ever used before. Thus topics like translation, popular literature, children's literature, epigonic writing, non-literary discourse, criticism, the
academic study of literature itself, literary institutions, and so forth, have become
no less a part of his research domain than the traditional canonized works. In fact
the very mechanisms through which canonization does or does not occur have
become the central object of historical scrutiny. From such a point of view, translations turn out to be key texts allowing the scholar to detect the tensions and
evolutionary tendencies within literatures and cultures and the mechanisms
obtaining between different cultural systems.
In this context I cannot further enlarge upon these developments in literary

Babel 35:4 (1989), 193218. DOI 10.1075/babel.35.4.02del

ISSN 05219744 / E-ISSN 15699668 Fdration Internationale des Traducteurs (FIT) Revue Babel

194

Dirk Delabastita

studies; for more information the reader is referred to Even-Zohar & Toury 1981,
Hermans 1985, Lambert 1980, etc. I would merely point out the fact that the
hypotheses proposed by these and other scholars have not yet realized their
descriptive potential outside the domain of literature as fully as seems possible.
The present paper, then, aims at showing that the historical-descriptive, structural-semiotic, systemic schemes that have been alluded to in the previous lines
provide the scholar with the tools to carry out research into mass communication
translation in a more adequate manner than was previously imaginable. I will
focus on two specific forms of mass communication film and T.V. while
stressing that similar investigations into translation with other forms of mass communication such as the press, advertising, popular music, etc., can and should be
set up as well. Obviously, I am not claiming that the subtitling and dubbing of
films and T.V. programmes have never been seriously studied before; my bibliography, which is far from complete, testifies to the contrary. However, it appears
that the few translation scholars, sociologists, psychologists, film experts and technicians who have so far dealt with our topic have only considered certain aspects
of the problem and ignored others, depending on their particular line of approach
or practical needs. In addition, the importance of a few particular questions has
apparently been recognized by virtually none of them. This paper, therefore,
seeks to offer a. systematic outline of the whole field of the problem. It is not a
report on extensive previous or ongoing research but it is to be seen as an
organized inventory of questions and hypotheses that should direct any future
research. I have structured this paper after the tripartite model of translational
relationships developed by Gideon Toury (Competence Norms Performance), since I believe that it provides us with the distinctions necessary for our
purpose. For further reading on this model see Toury 1980. By way of introduction, the following schematic characterisation of Toury's theses will perhaps be
sufficient.
Toury challenges the formerly predominant opinion that it is the task of translation studies to devise "optimal" methods of translation. The discipline should
aim at describing actual translation practices (that is to say, empirical phenomena)
rather than developing ideal definitions (that the actual facts do not fail to fall
short of). It is accepted that there are many possible ways of translating a text
(theoretical level of competence). In particular cultural situations, however, one
will often observe certain regular patterns of behaviour (empirical level of performance). This allows the scholar to assume an intermediate level of norms which
denote particular types of translational behaviour as more or less desirable (level
of required relationships between S.T.s and T.T.s). The translation scholar is not
supposed to identify with any specific norm-governed concept of translation.
Rather, Toury insists on the usefulness of interpreting the variety of historical
practices in terms of the "systemic" or functional needs of the receiving language,
literature and culture. The methodological observation of translation performance

Translation and mass communication

195

and the reconstruction of translation norms should be in continual interplay with

the development of the competence component.
0.2. Before I start on the actual analysis, some preliminary terminological notes
are called for. Firstly, for the sake of verbal economy I will use the term "film" in
a very general sense, so that it also includes T. V. programmes of all kinds. Whenever any of these distinctions are relevant to my argument, they will, of course, be
made explicit.
Secondly, the term "translation" will equally be used in an unusually broad
sense, albeit for conceptual rather than for practical reasons. I will take "film
translation" to stand for the whole set of operations that is to say, including certain operations on the level of non-verbal signs that accompany and make possible the transfer of a film from a source culture A into a target culture B. It is
assumed that the processes of interlingual recoding ("translation" in the traditional sense) that mostly characterize such an intercultural transfer cannot be
explained if they are isolated from the whole bundle of relations between the original and the translated film. The rationale behind this terminological usage should
become clear in the further course of this paper and it will be given some extra
thought in my concluding section.
Thirdly, the notions "translation" (translator, etc.), "source film" and "target
film" require additional clarification in view of certain peculiarities relating to the
production and distribution of films. It is a well-known fact that films are not just
produced for the home market but rather for a wide international market. One
can hardly say that, e.g., an American film is originally produced for the American film audiences and subsequently translated or made suitable for export. The
chain of events which brings a film from an American studio into a Belgian or a
Japanese cinema is rather involved and it is sometimes very hard to distinguish
between production phenomena (level of text) and reception phenomena (level of
metatext). In this context it will be remembered that techniques such as subtitling
and dubbing (cf. play-back, postsynchronisation) are also very common in the
production of "original" films (and that they have even led to several avant-gardist
experimentations). In the Hollywood era certain production houses even had their
own local branches in Europe which had to finish the film in accordance with the
native language and taste, as well as with the censorship regulations locally in
force! Therefore, the term "translator" in this paper is a shorthand term to indicate all the instances involved in carrying out the various operations between any
two stages in the cross-cultural distribution of a film. Thus, many selections and
decisions have been made before the film reaches the team responsible for its
actual linguistic adaptation (translation in the narrow sense) and they may still be
made afterwards. These facts, however, in no way invalidate our interpretation of
the functional dimension (section 3) of these various processes of translation.
However, they certainly do imply the need to carry out a careful "text study" in

Dirk Delabastita

196

order to find out what shifts took place at what stage, before any precise hypotheses can be ventured concerning the reasons for the various shifts. Incidentally, it
should be noted that the scholar of translation sometimes has to reckon with similar complex filiations between source and target texts in the case of "ordinary"
translation as well (older texts, strategies of large publishing houses, etc.).
1.

Competence: possible relationships

1.1. On the level of translational competence I will have to consider a number of

questions that relate to the theoretical translation potential of films. I should first
of all attempt to establish the entire set of possible relationships between a
"source" film and a "target" film. What are the various possible ways in which a
film can be translated? In answering this question, I should of course attempt to
avoid being swayed by any normative considerations. The researcher cannot
afford, for instance, to ignore those modes of translation which happen to be "unacceptable" according to his own set of norms. In fact, such "illegitimate" translation strategies may well be acceptable in different cultural situations and it is
therefore reasonable to expect that the competence model should be able to "generate" them.
This issue of the possible modes of film translation is greatly complicated by
the peculiar semiotic nature of the film sign. Before the problem of film translation methods can be tackled, it should therefore be established what sort of a
"text" a film is. At this point we realize the need to consult the experts in film
semiotics. It is a well-known fact that film establishes a multi-channel and multicode type of communication. As opposed to radio communication or communication through books, for instance, film communication takes place through two
channels rather than one: both the visual channel (light waves) and the acoustic
channel (air vibrations) are simultaneously utilized. An exception might perhaps
have to be made here for silent movies, even though piano players or orchestras
often provided a musical accompaniment to the film projection. In addition, some
films have made use of other channels as well consider the use of the olfactory
channel in the so-called smell-o-vision movies of the 1950's, or of the tactile channel in Earthquake (1974) but these remain fairly isolated examples and we are
not guilty of serious oversimplification if we omit them.
The acoustic and the visual channels are the means by which the film message
reaches its audience. They should not be confused with the codes that are used to
produce the film's actual meaning. There is in fact a multitude of codes that gives
shape to any film as a meaningful sign and that enables its spectators to make
sense of it. The following list contains some of the major sign systems of which
film producers and consumers avail themselves;
- the verbal code (which is actually an aggregate of various linguistic and paralinguistic subcodes: think of the various geographical, temporal, stylistic and social

Translation and mass communication

197

dialects of a language, etc.);

- literary codes and theatrical codes (conventions of plot construction, models for
dialogues, acquaintance with narrative strategies, with argumentation
techniques and with literary genres and motives, etc.);
- proxemic codes, kinesic codes, vestimentary codes, make-up codes, politeness
codes, moral codes, and so forth (enabling us among other things to understand
and assess the non-verbal behaviour of the characters);
- the cinematic code (rules and conventions of the cinema; its techniques, genres,
etc.).
Signs from these codes may be combined in a whole range of ways to form the
"macro-sign" of the film as a whole. In this important respect film is very similar
to theatre. The theatrical performance is not, as Keir Elam puts it, "a single-level
led and homogeneous series of signs or signals that emerges, but rather a weave of
radically differentiated modes of expression, each governed by its own selection
and combination rules" (Elam 1980:44).
1.2. A film constitutes a complex sign, in a way not unlike the theatrical perfor
mance sign. From a different perspective, however, film communication and
theatre communication show an important difference which has a direct bearing
on the translation potential of a film as opposed to the translation potential of
drama texts/theatre texts. The explanation of this difference will take us directly
into the heart of the problem of film translation.
One of the major semiotic differences between a theatre performance and a
film projection is the fact that the latter confronts the audience with a complex
sign, the material structure of which was almost entirely determined beforehand,
whereas in the former case the performance sign is on each occasion being mate
rially constituted in the very process of the performance. Any theatre perfor
mance is a one-off event and no second performance will be exactly like it in its
materially identifiable constituents. A film performance, on the other hand, is
perfectly reproducible in material terms. Of course, as Mukaovsk reminds us,
one and the same materially fixed "artefact" can lead to the construction of differ
ent "aesthetic objects" hence my insistence on the "material" character of the
shifts in the ensuing scheme but that point is not relevant to the present discus
sion. Nor does the existence of certain imperfect reproductions compare the
output of a cheap portable T.V. set with what is possible in a modern cinema
fundamentally detract from my basic argument. It is precisely by virtue of this fea
ture of material reproducibility that film is commonly regarded as a phenomenon
of mass-communication: through mechanical reproduction it is in principle acces
sible to a large and not previously delimited group of people, irrespective of local
barriers. One may be inclined to admit that this differentiation between theatre
and film is of a gradual rather than of a binary nature. The example of silent
movies accompanied by "live" music, for instance, is clearly an intermediate case

198

Dirk Delabastita

and, more generally, one should certainly not ignore the semiotic relevance of the
idiosyncratic conditions of each film projection, nor the fact that modern theatre
makes frequent use of mass communication repeatables such as sound-tapes or
film fragments, etc.
But in general terms the distinction holds well, and it has major consequences
for the translational afterlife of films as opposed to less "fixed" forms of performing arts. The main implication is of course that any translation of a film will be
governed by a number of constraints that pertain to the conditions of its material
transmission. Early French translators/producers of Shakespeare's Othello, for
instance, could replace Desdemona's handkerchief with a crucifix, not only
because the classicist theatrical code and the contemporary codes of behaviour
would not allow one to show publicly a handkerchief on the stage in a serious play
but also because the flexible nature of theatrical communication made it possible for them to carry out the change in the first place. On the other hand, whenever the modern translator of cinema or T. V. is facing a particular linguistic, cultural or aesthetic code-incompatibility between the source system and the target
system, his range of possible action will necessarily be restricted by the much more
stringent technical constraints of the film medium. In other words, if one wants to
study the possible modes of transfer of film signs from a source set of codes to a
target set of codes, one might do well to take into account from the outset the
material parameters within which any such translation process is necessarily effectuated. In the remaining part of subsection 1.2, then, I would like to present a
scheme of possible modes of film translation which is accordingly based on the
main distinction to be made with regard to the material or technical transmission
of film signs, that is to say, the distinction between the sound channel and the vision channel.
Of course, our scheme will have to include a number of other distinctions as
well. For one, it should be realized that the distinction "acoustic channel/visual
channel" cannot be linked up directly to the distinction "verbal signs/non-verbal
signs" as if the two distinctions were parallel. In most films the visual channel is
used to transmit verbal signs as well. Examples are framing devices such as the
title, the "THE END" indication, or the credit titles; in addition, letters, newspapers or other documents may be visually presented for perusal; and more generally the images of a film are often well-stocked with graphic representations of linguistic signs such as in road signs, place names, advertisements and so forth. Conversely, the acoustic channel can also transmit other than verbal signs, music and
background noises being the most obvious examples. These facts should make us
wary of confusing the translation of a film's dialogues with the translation of "all
the verbal signs" contained in the film; but this issue will be taken up in section 4.
At present the distinction between verbal and non-verbal signs will be used to
insert an extra differentiation into our initial distinction between the visual channel and the acoustic channel. As a result the following four categories are
obtained:

Translation and mass communication

a.
b.
c.
d.

199

visual presentation - verbal signs

visual presentation - non-verbal signs
acoustic presentation - verbal signs
acoustic presentation - non-verbal signs

type of sign (code)

transmission (channel)

Reality tends to be less clear-cut than such divisions may suggest but in general
this categorization of film signs will be workable. The distinctions between a and
b and between c and d respectively are, moreover, upheld by certain technical features. Dubbing firms, for instance, are often provided with a separate so-called
"international tape", which contains all the acoustically transmitted signs of the
original film except for the spoken dialogues.
The four categories that have just been distinguished constitute one axis of
my film translation scheme, namely the axis specifying the type of film signs upon
which the various translation procedures will be performed. The second axis will
specify exactly what types of operations are involved. This second set of distinctions is in fact readily available to us, as it was provided many centuries ago by the
ancient rhetoricians. It comprises: repetitio (the sign is formally reproduced in an
identical manner), adiectio (the sign is reproduced with a certain addition), detractio (the reproduction is incomplete, it implies a reduction), transmutatio (the com-

V
I
S

verbal signs

A
L

non-verbal
signs

u
A
C
O
U
S
T
I
C

repetitio

adiectio

detractio

substitutio

transmutatio

verbal signs

non-verbal
signs

Fig. 1. Scheme of potential translational relationships between a source film and a target film

200

Dirk Delabastita

ponents of the sign are repeated in a somewhat different internal order, there
being an alteration of the sign's textual relations) and substitutio (the sign is
replaced with an altogether different sign). The combination of our two axes yields
the following scheme: see fig. 1. It will be commented upon in subsection 1.3.
1.3. What matters is not the scheme as such, but rather the concepts that lie
behind it. Basically, my scheme aims at encompassing more than the two possibilities which are traditionally identified with film translation, i.e. dubbing and
subtitling. In order to avoid certain terminological difficulties cf. the practical
problem that our metalanguage does not provide a convenient label for each
specific transformation I have preferred to leave all the boxes in my scheme
blank. In fact, the scheme contains, inter alia, the following options:
- acoustic verbal signs x substitutio = dubbing: the source film signs are reproduced but without the acoustic verbal signs, which are replaced by target language acoustic verbal signs; see also subsection 1.4.1;
- visual verbal signs x adiectio = subtitling: the target film macrosign is an exact
copy of the source film sign apart from the addition of new visual verbal signs;
see, however, also the latter part of subsection 1.4.2;
- deletio: visual and/or acoustic, and verbal and/or non-verbal signs have been
deleted (cuts);
- repetitio: the film is reproduced unchanged with all its original material features
(linguistically, this is a case of 'non-translation');
- transmutatio: the various signs of the source film are reproduced identically, but
in a different order and formation;
- adiectio: new images, dialogues or sounds have been introduced;
- acoustic signs x repetitio: the issue of a soundtrack which (mostly) contains the
musical parts of the film's acoustic signs.
Again, it should be clear that this list is only selective and that the scheme
could account for more options than those I have just outlined. Let us now consider three further remarks that are crucial for a correct interpretation of my basic
competence scheme.
1. The translation procedures specified by the scheme do not necessarily refer to
films as complete units, but may also be applied to shorter segments. Therefore,
from the perspective of the film as a whole, they can and mostly will be combined
in various ways. Example one: the title, the theme song and the credits can be
copied directly (repetitio), whereas the dialogues in the narrative itself may be
replaced by a synchronized text. Example two: a source film sign in which two languages A and B are used may be translated in such a way that spoken text in language A is dubbed, whereas spoken text in language B is translated by means of
subtitles. Example three: the first and the last words of, say, the account of a witness in a news report may be copied directly (repetitio), whereas the main and cen-

Translation and mass communication

201

tral part of his speech is replaced by a dubbing commentator's translation. In this

manner numerous combinations are possible. Moreover, certain forms of simultaneous combination have to be included. In example three, for instance, the
voice of the source language speaker may still be faintly audible in the
background. Example four: dubbing and subtitling may be combined, for instance
for the benefit of viewers who are hard of hearing. In this context certain technical
innovations such as Teletext and stereo television should be mentioned because
they allow the viewer autonomously to make a selection from and/or to combine
different modes of film translation at will.
2. A film is an organized whole or "text", the various component signs of which
enter into complex sets of relations. By the same token, any translational operation that is performed on a single source film sequence affects the whole of the
text structure, and imposes a set of constraints on the translator where other
sequences have to be translated. Example one: a scene that has been cut (both
sound and vision) may confront the translator with the need to make use
elsewhere of certain other reductions or additions in order to safeguard character
coherence, plot coherence, etc. Example two: the adoption of a strategy that is
repetitive throughout (non-translation) might imply the need to insert an introductory addition in order to facilitate comprehension. Of course, the translator
may prefer to neglect these constraints to a certain degree the same holds good
for the constraints that will be discussed in section 1.4 but that is dependent on
his norms. Example three: on account of the general principle of deixis (see, e.g.,
Elam 1980:26-27, 72-74, 139-148), by means of which the language is rooted in the
filmic action, the non-verbal, visual elements of the film may impose certain constraints on the rendering of the verbal parts.
3. It is important to note that the scheme is of a purely "quantitative" nature in
that it only indicates the patterns of sign-type redistribution that the translator
imposes on his source film. It specifies, for instance, that a dub version of a film
substitutes target language spoken verbal signs for source language spoken verbal
signs, but it does not include any statement regarding the precise linguistic, stylistic, etc. relationships between both sets of verbal signs. Similarly, our scheme
describes subtitling as the addition of visual verbal signs to the integrally repeated
source film without in any way qualifying the actual relationships that may obtain
between the source verbal text and the subtitled text. Yet this issue is obviously
of enormous importance. We have to conclude, then, that our scheme is only a
first step towards the development of a competence model and that each of the
possible modes of translation that it contains should be further analysed so as to
provide further specifications. In doing so the researcher will obviously have to
combine his knowledge of the specific technical and semiotic constraints that each
mode involves with what he knows about translation processes in general. The
various descriptive categories that the discipline of translation studies has devel-

202

Dirk Delabastita

oped will thus prove indispensable for his purpose; think of categories such as
'exotisation' versus 'naturalisation' of sociocultural references, expressive amplification or expressive reduction, shifts of register, formal types of equivalence, and
so forth. In my second section, which will deal with translation norms, I will give
examples of the way in which these additional categories can be relevant.
The previous paragraphs have attempted to outline ways in which the question of the potential relationships between films and translated films may profitably be tackled. Clearly, the scholar who aspires to build up a theory of film translation is facing an up-hill task. However, even a provisional model such as the one
sketched above will enable the scholar to deal with the empirical reality of film
translation, i.e., with translation norms and translation performance, in a more
efficient manner than would be feasible with static definitions and partial
approaches. Even in this early state of its development our competence model
performs the crucial function of constantly reminding the scholar that no possibilities should be excluded on the basis of normative a priori considerations.
Moreover, there is no doubt that our competence scheme is capable of further
refinement through the confrontation with actual translation reality.
1.4. I will now conclude this section on the competence component with some
brief notes on two specific modes of film translation, namely dubbing and subtitling. Some crucial features of both have been stipulated above: they have been
defined through their position in our diagram, and in subsection 1.3 it was pointed
out that they should be studied in the context of the film sign as a whole and that
the precise formulation of the target dialogues forms an additional problem to be
investigated by the translation scholar. I will now consider some further particular
points.
1.4.1. Dubbing. The technical procedures of dubbing (or "synchronisation") have
been fairly well described in various publications; see, for instance, Delmas 1978,
Hesse-Quack 1978: Chapter 3, and so forth. Caill 1967 gives a short historical
survey of the technique. It emerges that the dubbing process is very much a matter
of teamwork. It evolves in various stages (including the phonetic analysis of the
original dialogues, the production of the target language text, verification tests,
the recording of the new dialogue, the mixing of the sound tape) which are very
considerably interrelated. Inevitably, the cost of a synchronized version is rather
high. The production chain often includes a number of interventions by the film
distribution companies. The latter actually commission the translation and very
often it is they who basically determine the concept of the final product; in those
cases the synchronisation firms merely execute a well-defined order.
The replacement of acoustic verbal signs with translated acoustic verbal signs
is in varying degrees subject to an important semiotic constraint. Because speaking characters in a modern film are conventionally supposed to constitute iconic
signs the audience expects the characters in the film to produce spoken language

Translation and mass communication

203

like people in real life; that is to say, they insist on a greater or lesser degree of
synchrony of visual articulatory movements on the one hand and audible sound
production on the other. Accordingly, the audience will be disturbed by any
degree of disharmony between these two elements. It is important not to restrict
this problem of synchrony to the movements of the actors' lips only. Sometimes
the whole body of the actor is involved; think of the opposite gestures that people
in different cultures may make to accompany the words for "yes" or "no". These
aspects of the film translation problem are probably the ones focussed upon most
intensely so far (see especially Fodor 1976); the scholars in this field can rely on
a certain tradition of research in "visual phonetics" which has developed in the
context of logopaedics (cf. techniques of lip reading). Very frequently the problem of dialogue dubbing or even the problem of film translation in general!
is in fact reduced to the problem of synchrony. The use of the term "synchronization" as a synonym for dubbing is a case in point. Such opinions, however, have to
be dismissed as oversimplifications, for several reasons. Firstly, the stringency of
the constraint of synchrony is dependent on the type of film shot in each individual
scene to be translated. Close-up shots of the character speaking may impose heavy
demands on the translation team. In this way, the giant close-up view of Orson
Welles' lips pronouncing the word "rosebud" at the beginning of Citizen Kane
(1941) is an unusually problematic example. On the other hand, in many scenes
the character who speaks is not even within view. The angle and the distance of
the camera and the general visibility conditions are important factors here. So is
the narrative structure of the film; the use of an off-screen narrator in the original
film, for instance, drastically simplifies matters from the point of view of synchronisation. Secondly, the stringency of the constraint of synchrony in film translation ultimately depends on a semiotic convention of "realism" and it is, therefore, a norm-governed concept: see section 2. To the extent that the constraint of
synchrony effectively does govern the translator's behaviour, it will naturally
impose strong restrictions on the degree of semantic and syntactic equivalence
between source film dialogue and target film dialogue.
1.4.2. Subtitling. The technical aspects of film subtitling have also been
adequately described; see, for instance, Baker et al. 1984 or Warlop et al. 1986.
From the technical point of view a distinction has to be made between subtitle
production for T.V. and for cinema film. New, computer-controlled systems have
recently been worked out for T.V. subtitling. In any case subtitling usually involves few people and it is considerably cheaper than producing a dubbed version.
An important problem with subtitling derives from the fact that the film
dialogues are usually delivered at a faster speed than a translation that is rendered
graphically on the screen can keep up with; consequently, a certain compression
or reduction of the text seems to be unavoidable. This constraint is in fact bound
up with certain semiotic conventions, since we know from experience that written
communication in general tends to proceed faster than spoken communication

204

Dirk Delabastita

rather than slower! A first convention relates to the amount of visual verbal signs
that is allowed to "displace" original non-verbal visual signs. Mostly a maximum
of some 60 or 70 characters is accepted, which are distributed over one or two
lines to be introduced at the bottom of the screen. When this maximum number of
characters is adhered to, and double subtitles have to be provided (i.e., bilingual
titles), the translators will have to make do with even less space. A second convention pertains to the presentation time of each subtitle. Presentation time should be
long enough to allow for what is believed to be an adequate understanding by nonprofessional readers; moreover, presentation time can be arranged so as to match
maximally the stretch of speaking time in order to help the viewer in allotting each
phrase to the correct personage.
The field of experimental psychology is in an excellent position to test the
effect of the two last-named factors on the cognitive perception of film readers/
viewers. Similar empirical tests (involving an eye-movement registration
apparatus) are being undertaken, for instance, under the direction of Prof. Gry
d'Ydewalle in the laboratory of experimental psychology of the K.U. Leuven. In
this context, however, two things should be borne in mind. Firstly, the reception
of subtitled films cannot be entirely explained by quantitative factors, such as the
amount of graphic characters on the screen or the length of presentation time. We
may assume that it is equally governed by certain "qualitative" factors such as the
linguistic/stylistic/cultural translation policy followed. Secondly, if it can be established within certain qualitative parameters that particular quantitative proportions yield better results in terms of audience comprehension, this should not
be taken as a warrant to abandon our non-exclusive approach in favour of a search
for the "best methods" of film translation. Such a practical orientation is of course
perfectly legitimate that is the least one can say but it does not fit easily
within our particular descriptive framework. The constraint of the limited text
space is also ultimately a norm-governed one; see section 2. To the extent that it
is effectively observed by the translator, it gives rise to a major problem of selection, the central question being what source dialogue material has to be transferred and what information (stylistic-linguistic information, elements regarding plot
or character, cultural references, etc.) can be deleted. This deletion problem is
connected with another problem to be solved by the subtitler, namely the asymmetry of spoken language and written language. Is it necessary, or indeed possible, to render the informative value of suprasegmental phonetic features such as
intonation, etc. in writing? What is to be done about dialects, colloquial vocabulary, taboo language, elliptic syntax, non-grammatical utterances, or defective
speech? These are questions which deserve much further research. In the last
paragraph of this section on subtitles, however, I must return to an issue of a more
general semiotic purport.
Like any translation, the subtitles constitute a "metatext", i.e. a text referring
to another text. Their actual semiotic status is dependent upon a set of cultural
conventions. If these are operative the subtitles will be accepted as not affecting

Translation and mass communication

205

the original unity of sound and vision, and they will be regarded as if they were an
"invisible" addition to the original film. Their unobtrusiveness might become evident, for instance, by testing the hypothesis that a joke which the viewer reads in
the subtitles before it has been completed by the speaker is "really" fired off only
when its actual speaker has entirely fulfilled his joking speech act. It is on the basis
of similar conventions that one can classify subtitles as an instance of mere "addition". For those who do not share these conventions, the status of subtitles as
supplementary and subsidiary "glosses" will be much less evident, and the
superimposition of the subtitles on to the original unity of sound and vision will
rather be felt to impinge on its (artistic) integrity. Experimental psychology has of
course provided ample empirical evidence which would seem to corroborate such
an attitude by its demonstration of the relatively high visual and cognitive effort
that the reading of subtitles involves. Moreover, even in the purely "material"
terms of our scheme above, the classification of subtitles as a "visual addition of
verbal signs" is not at all universally valid. If one takes into account the fact that
the visual verbal signs of the subtitles are very often introduced within the visual
frame of the original film rather than underneath it, subtitling necessarily involves
the suppression or displacement of a certain amount of the original visual information. This "mutilation" of the original image is precisely what the opponents of
subtitling object to. In many if not in most cases, then, from the material point of
view subtitles actually constitute a case of substitution (visual non-verbal information is replaced by visual verbal information). A case of translation which is highly
relevant in this respect can only be mentioned very briefly, since it involves a
series of additional problems: certain T.V. stations optionally provide "subtitles"
in the sign-language of the deaf-mute. These are of a visual and non-graphic
nature, and they often occupy an entire corner of the screen.
2.

Norms: required relationships

2.1. Film translations can potentially be made in various ways. The translation of
film, then, constitutes a typical situation where one can expect norms to guide the
selection of actual behaviour in each specific historical set of circumstances. As a
result of such norms the different possible modes of translation will not all be "in
free variation", as some of them will in the given conditions implicitly or explicitly
be judged as "better" solutions than the others. Accordingly, the effect of norms
can be deduced from particular regularities of behaviour, which means in this
case, from the systematic occurrence or non-occurrence of specific strategies in
translation. Norms may also find a more "direct" expression in metatexts on the
practice of film translation, such as in prescriptive statements but also in scholarly
discussions of the subject. An example of the former would be Helene Reid's article (1978), whose significant title is "Sub-titling, the intelligent solution"; an
example of the latter is contained in Fodor's (1976:9) unqualified claim that "the

206

Dirk Delabastita

chief requirements of a satisfactory synchronization involve a faithful and artistic

rendering of the original dialogue, an approximately perfect unification of the
replacing sounds with the visible lip movements, and bringing the style of delivery
in the new version into optimal artistic harmony with the style of acting". As Yann
Lardeau (1982: 68) puts it, "les problmes de traduction de cinma conduisent
invitablement a une rflexion sur le doublage, avec ce qui semble sa consquence
oblige, l'nonciation d'un jugement de valeur, pour ou contre". It is a significant
fact that Lardeau himself turns out to be unable to avoid the normative pitfall
after having correctly detected it.
In the present section I will provisionally show at what various levels norms
may be active and can be analysed in film translation. In doing so I am mapping
out the contours of a still virgin area of research. There is, of course, no point
in looking for one single norm which supposedly governs "the" translation of
films in general. Rather does it appear that we have to attempt to identify a complex interactive group of related norms. The reconstruction of these norms can
start with a study of the metatexts (critical and scholarly reflection at various
moments) but it will finally have to be based on the systematic observation of
actual translation behaviour. By studying whole series of phenomena (i.e. on the
basis of non-selective corpora) the researcher will discover both consistencies and
variations of behaviour. The former will lead him to the formulation of the relevant norms. The latter may be interpreted in various ways: the norm may be weak
and allow of certain deviations (bordering on "free variation"); the norm may
have been disregarded in spite of its stringent character (in which case the deviation is likely to be condemned); there may be a hesitation that is indicative of the
advent of a new, alternative norm. Perhaps the researcher simply has to look for
a deeper underlying explanation (cases of "bound variation").
2.2. The checklist of questions with which the researcher has to approach the
empirical facts is predictably very elaborate. For the sake of clarity I will split it up
into two parts. The first part is of a purely descriptive nature and it is geared to the
identification of the translation type of each individual film translation belonging
to the corpus. It follows from the structure of Toury's tripartite model Competence Norm Performance that the questions in the first list can be theoretically deduced from the distinctions that we have put forward in our passages on
the competence component. I will only briefly enumerate the most important
points and outline the relevance of some of the questions.
Some general questions
- What target language has been selected by the translators? Example: the target
society may be multilingual; some of its languages may be culturally peripheral.
- If the target language has different major geographical variants, which one has
been selected? Example: the option between a "Dutch" and a "Flemish" variant
of Dutch, or between an Australian, British, American, or "mid-Atlantic" vari-

Translation and mass communication

207

ety of English; this question relates to the important hypothesis that linguistic
usage on T.V. has a major modelling impact on the linguistic norms of a speech
community.
What technique is used by the translators in the various types of source text
scenes (titles, credit titles, off-screen narrator, dialogues, music, verbal text visually presented, etc.)? What is the dominant technique in the film as a whole?
Example: Belgium and the Netherlands have generally a clear preference for
subtitling; France, Germany and Italy clearly opt for dubbed versions; still other
countries may be of an intermediate type.
Are there any additions or any reductions? If so, what types of dialogues,
scenes, etc., have been introduced or deleted? Example: the deletion of "unnecessary" descriptive or lyrical scenes, of sexually or politically provocative
scenes, etc.
Is more than one translation alternative being offered to the public? Examples:
stereo T.V. allows a film to be broadcast both in the original and in a dubbed
version so that the viewer can choose either channel; teletext subtitles may be
tuned in to or may be left out; the commercial cinema circuit may offer films in
dubbed version whereas a smaller circuit for film-lovers projects original versions with or without subtitles.
In what manner are the translations labelled as non-original texts or as
metatexts if at all?
Is it possible to identify any intermediary translation? Example: films made in
little-known languages may be translated via an intermediary version.
What are the translator's methods if two or more languages are used in the
source film?

As to dubbing specifically
- To what extent have the translators made an attempt at synchrony of visible
body movements and audible speech? Examples: the account of an expert or a
witness in T.V. news broadcasts is often dubbed without any attempt at synchrony whatsoever; Cary (1985:70) makes mention of a Hamlet "remarkably"
dubbed into French even though synchrony is not heeded; some German translators questioned by Hesse-Quack (1969:99) declare lip-synchrony to be an
"anachronistic and unnecessary requirement".
- To what extent do the dubbing voices make an effort to "act" their dialogues in
a manner maximally similar to the expressive qualities of the original spoken
text? Examples: in certain East European countries entire programmes are dubbed by one and the same actor, who performs both the male and the female
roles and who uses a neutral intonation throughout; in various West-European
countries the dubbing actors do perform their lines in an expressive manner, but
in doing so they follow an acting code which is proper to the receiving film translation traditions rather than to the source film.

208

Dirk Delabastita

As to subtitling specifically
- Are the subtitles in one language, or do the subtitlers offer a bilingual or double
translation? Example: in a bilingual area such as Belgium, the Basque region of
Spain, etc. double subtitles are not uncommon. If subtitling is bilingual, which is
the order of presentation (e.g., first line versus second line)?
- What are the maximal and the average number of characters in the subtitled
text? How long are presentation times?
- What type of source text information has been deleted, if any?
- Has an attempt been made to connote the subtitles as "spoken language", or are
they in a standard "realistic" "literary" dialogue?
Some general qualitative aspects
- Do syntax and style have a foreign ring?
- What has happened to such prosodic features (verse, metre, etc.) as the original
may show?
- What is the attitude towards loan words and foreign idioms and expressions?
- Have foreign cultural elements been retained, naturalized, deleted?
- How have taboo elements been dealt with?
- What have the translators done with source film sequences where a polemical
stance is taken vis--vis the target culture? Example: Hesse-Quack (1969) discovered that German dubbing versions tend to discard allusions to Germany's "recent past"; sometimes, when Germans are being ridiculed in the original film,
the joke is made to bear upon another nationality;
- Is it possible to detect the introduction of certain genre-markers, i.e. of conventional or even stereotyped elements that conform the target film to the audience
expectations? In other words, is the target film a more outspokenly recognizable
token of a target culture film genre than a more "faithful" reproduction would
have been? If so, what exactly were the translators models? Example: HesseQuack (1969) discovered that long foreign-cinema films are systematically trimmed by German dubbing firms so as to prevent them from exceeding a length of
90 minutes, apparently because this length is part of their conception of a
"proper" movie.
2.3. The above list of questions pertains to individual film translations. In our
examples we have already implicitly suggested that certain patterns are likely to
manifest themselves if those questions are put for a whole series of texts, more
particularly if different target cultures are compared with each other. Our second
set of questions aims precisely at organising such systematic observations. If largescale application of our first set of questions yields a heterogeneous mass of data,
the variables of which the second list consists will enable the scholar to detect the
normative mechanisms that have governed the production of the translations in
his corpus. Our second list of questions is meant to be as open and hypothetical as

Translation and mass communication

209

the first one; in fact, the researcher should not preclude the relevance of any new
variable, i.e., the possibility of a coherence hitherto undetected. Even so, the variables that are listed below are likely to supply a sound basis for his screening, as
their pertinence has been well established in the field of literary translation. Here,
then, are the questions:
- What is the source language and culture? Example: it is not uncommon to translate verbal film signs that are spoken in a non-standard variety of the target language (e.g. dialect).
- What precisely is the target culture of the translation (linguistic borders and cultural borders do not necessarily coincide)? Example: a distinction might have to
be made between Dutch subtitles produced in/for Flanders, those produced in/
for the Netherlands, and those produced for both; a similar question applies to
translations produced in British, American or Australian English.
- Does the target culture entertain frequent relations with the source culture?
Does the latter enjoy a high prestige in the former, or does the source culture
rank as a minor or uninteresting culture?
- What is the text type of the source film? Example: film types that mainly serve
to communicate information ("facts") are often treated differently from texttypes in which entertainment ("fiction") is the primary goal.
- As it is hard to define text types in an a-historical manner, it might be useful to
replace the previous question with this one: to which (historical) genre does the
source film belong? Example: documentary, interview, reportage, western, cartoon, video-clip, musical, soap opera, and so forth. At this level an important
distinction between T.V. (-genres) and cinema (-genres) may arise. The broad
question of genre comprises a number of further potentially relevant discriminations:
- Are we dealing with a genre in which the qualities of the vocal performance are
believed to be an integral part of the whole artistic sign? Examples: filmed versions of famous theatre performances, opera films, musicals.
- Is a specific audience aimed at in terms of literacy? Example: films for children,
elderly people, immigrants, films in the context of literacy campaigns; one of the
few T.V. programmes in the Low Countries where dubbing is systematically
practised is the children's programme Sesamstraat.
- What is the cultural status of the genre? Example: soap operas as opposed to
films that are held in high artistic repute; in Flanders the BBC productions of
Shakespeare's plays have not been subtitled by a member of the BRT translation pool but by one of the region's foremost Shakespeare translators (Willy
Courteaux).
- Does the source film have a particular status within the genre to which it
relates? Example: many of W. Disney's films belong to the genre of the animated cartoon or of children's films, but on account of their special, canonical

210

Dirk Delabastita

status within their genre they might well be given a different translation treatment.
- Does the genre to which the source film originally belongs exist in the receiving
culture? Do the source film's (linguistic, stylistic, cultural, filmic) models find a
counterpart in the target culture?
2.4. If the study of actual translation performance is guided by these and similar
questions, the scholar will gradually be enabled to formulate his hypotheses concerning the motivations behind the translator's behaviour. It will probably turn
out that some of the norms relevant to the corpus under study have in fact nothing
to do with translation as such or with film and T.V. as such. That would not be a
surprising conclusion since we accept that cultures are complexly structured
phenomena (or "systems"). The norms that will emerge can be expected to
relate to:
- genre conceptions within the target film and T.V. system: what does a "good"
soap opera, news report, etc., look like? What are the norms and current opinions regarding the relative value and function of the "image" vs. the "words" in
the artistic unity of films?
- the structure of the target literary polysystem: what are the literary categories
and models by means of which the target culture organises its experiences?
- the linguistic organisation of the target culture: what varieties, registers, styles
does the target language have at its disposal? How do the spoken and written
language relate to each other? What are the attitudes towards neighbouring languages (openness vs. purism), and what foreign-language teaching policies are
being followed?
- what is the openness of the target culture with regard to other cultures? what
relations does it have with various other cultures: dominance, subordination,
competition, non-relations? what is the international prestige of the target culture? is it a stable system or is it in a period of rapid change?
- in connection with the previous questions: what is the dominant conception of
translations in other fields such as literary translation, Bible translation, technical translation, and so forth?
It is our basic hypothesis that at least some of these variables have an effect
in the empirical reality of film translation. Of course, in assessing the extent of
that effect, it is also necessary to take into account certain considerations such as
the cost of various translation procedures, the financial and technological
resources of the target mass-media centres, and so forth. However, one may
assume that these practical constraints never have the final word since additional
funds can always be provided and technological infrastructure can be created
whenever it is felt to be culturally necessary that such measures be taken. Thus
our orientation implies that the study of film translation and of any other form

Translation and mass communication

211

of translation is necessarily part of the larger project of the analysis of the

"polysystem" of culture as a whole. This relatedness works both ways. On the one
hand, the study of translation contributes to an understanding of our cultures:
their internal structures, their interrelations, their historical evolutions. On the
other hand, the description of certain phenomena which are at first sight in no way
connected with his research topic as such may still supply the student of film translation with insights that are central to his particular research. As a conclusion to
this section I will give a very selective list of some of these related themes. The
study of these items may not be the first concern of the scholar of film translation,
but it will be indispensable when it comes to reconstructing the norms governing
his corpus:
- Besides translated or "imported" films the total supply of films at a given
moment also consists of newly produced films ("production") and of re-issued
older material ("tradition") (see Lambert 1980). What are the relative quantitative proportions of production, tradition and import, both in general terms and
according to the various genres?
- How do the previous questions have to be answered with respect to other cultural domains such as literature, theatre and the like?
- What are the principles guiding the transposition of books into films?
3.

Performance: actual relationships

In point of fact, the domain of performance has been dealt with continuously
in the previous sections since every real translation relationship between a source
film and the target film should fall within the compass of our competence model
(section 1), and since its actual occurrence can be explained by reference to a complex of target culture norms (section 2). In the present section, then, I propose
to proceed from theoretical and methodological matters to a somewhat more
pragmatic approach, and to indicate a few domains where practical research can
start immediately. The optimal concrete modalities of future research projects
cannot be discussed here, but at least one important requirement should be evident from the foregoing pages: an international orientation is quite indispensable.
It would seem that a European country like Belgium offers optimal conditions for
carrying out and centralizing such research, in that it has a central geographical
location and excellent cable-T.V. facilities. In the longer run world-wide satellite
connections will probably further increase the accessibility of foreign stations for
comparative purposes.
In the following few lines I would like to suggest a few types of research which
might be expected to yield worthwhile results more or less immediately.
a. Inventories can be drawn up both nationally and internationally of the various
companies, institutions, television stations and all other bodies that concern themselves with the business of film translation. This work, which must include a sur-

212

Dirk Delabastita

vey of all the economic, commercial and organisational aspects of our problem
(material infrastructure), will finally relate film translation to the entire structure
of mass media in a given culture and across the boundaries of individual cultures.
b. Statistical repertoire studies can be made of the total supply of T. V. broadcasting during a certain period (say, an average week). Comparisons can be made
between various stations, between various nations, etc. The parameters for statistical processing have been discussed in the second section above. They include:
relations between import, production and tradition; distribution of translation
techniques, and so forth.
c. It should be fairly easy to make international comparisons of the different versions of certain programmes which are distributed and translated into various cultures. Programmes such as the Eurovision Song Contest, international press
issues, major documentary series (Cosmos, etc.) and the various soap operas that
roam the world (Dallas, etc.) appear to be suitable subjects for such an analysis.
d. The fact that a large majority of films is based on written (literary) sources and
that translational activities are taking place in literary communication just as much
as in film communication will frequently offer excellent opportunities for interesting "square" comparisons involving: the written work both in the source language
and in the target language, and the film version both in the source language and
in the translated version. The following chart provides a simple representation of
the complex relationships involved:

Fig. 2
It should not be hard to find examples which will fit this chart if one selects and
systematically compares examples that belong to different genres (literary genres,
film genres), to different source and target cultures, to different stages in the
evolution of a single target culture, etc., one is likely to find various significant
convergences and divergences. By the same token it is obvious that similar comparisons will shed light on the dynamic relationships between the literary system
and the film system in the relevant cultures. Nowadays one finds many books
which are based on and posterior to popular T.V. series or films. Translations of
such films/books will also offer important evidence concerning the study of these
relationships.

Translation and mass communication

213

e. Tests could be devised for measuring the relationships between multilingual

television supply and the average proficiency level in foreign languages of certain
population groups. To what degree can we validly suppose that subtitling translation methods have a considerable didactic impact?
4.

Further outlook

So far this paper has mainly consisted of theoretical and methodological

points, and of hypotheses and questions. The appropriate way to round off such
an essay is, unavoidably, to stress the urgent need for further research to be carried out along the lines sketched out in the previous pages. In the present case this
means that a joint effort on the part of mass-communication experts, of translation scholars, of linguists, sociologists, sociolinguists, psychologists and others is
called for and that I have to stress the fact that each of the scholars involved
should realise the limited scope of his own contribution rather than claim the
whole of the research territory for his own particular branch. I hope to have established at least the rudiments of a framework within which any such partial, or preferably less partial, research project might proceed with a proper sense of perspective.
Finally, I would like to take up a question which was raised in the early sections of this paper. To what extent is it advisable to make use of the term "translation" at all when dealing with the transfer of films from one linguistic/cultural
community to another? One cannot but be struck by the fact that the term "adaptation" is frequently suggested as an alternative to "translation" in the few scholarly and not-so-scholarly discussions of film translation that I have been able to
collect; there is an unmistakable hesitation among translators, critics and scholars
regarding the applicability of the term "translation". One might venture the
hypothesis that this same hesitation is responsible for the fact that translation
studies of all disciplines have been rather reluctant to include film translation
among their subjects of study.
Naturally the answer to this problem depends upon one's conception of what
a translation is. If translation is defined as a process of linguistic recoding that
should aim at a maximal transfer of source text syntax and semantics into the
target language, then clearly film translation is emphatically not a form of genuine
translation. It is obvious at first sight that the empirical relationships between
source films and target films can hardly be exhaustively described in terms of a
maximally faithful linguistic recoding process:
- many verbal elements of the source film are not translated at all;
- the constraints of synchrony (dubbing) and of text compression (subtitling) are
often felt to be so stringent that the source-text verbal signs which are effectively
translated fail to meet the usual criteria of syntactic or semantic faithfulness to
the original;

214

Dirk Delabastita

- more often than not the translation of the dialogues is accompanied by some
other operation (mainly cutting) which sometimes even involves the need to
"tamper" with the source film dialogues to an even higher degree.
It will be evident that none of these features is compatible with a strict, normative
linguistic definition of translation. Hence it could reasonably be argued that
"adaptation" would be a better term for what we have so far discussed as "translations"; the latter term would accordingly be confined to indicating only those
operations which concern the replacement of source-film verbal material with
"equivalent" target-language verbal material. However, such a distinction
between adaptation (the whole of the process) and translation (the verbal component of it) is open to criticism on various counts. Firstly, it is an arbitrary distinction which overlooks the interrelatedness of the various processes that link up a
source film and a target film; it is impossible to understand the how and the why
of the narrowly verbal translational relationships between a source film and a
target film if they are viewed as isolated from the entire range of relationships.
Secondly, to the extent that the term translation can be used to denote the final
product of the translation process, it will refer to the target film as a whole, and
hence also to its "non-translated" and non-verbal parts. The third reason, however, is probably the most important one. In fact, it is not just film translation in
the wide sense I have adopted which fails to fit the static "ideal" linguistic definitions of translation. One can easily think of literally thousands of texts that we
accept as being "translations" and which also fail to come up to the normative
definitions of translation.
Indeed, in most cases the translators of poetry, of plays, of novels, of tourist
brochures, etc., do not translate mere semantic and syntactic structures either.
Rather do they translate texts into texts, and in that process a lot of things may
happen which are quite similar to the manifold operations that occur in film translation and which defy any static definition: reductions, additions, stylistic or
ideological shifts, adaptation of sociocultural data, changes in the visual (graphic)
presentation of the text, and so forth.
The conclusion seems to be that a narrow, normative definition of translation
is in danger of being applicable only to very few, well-selected cases, and of being
unsuitable for a description of most actual facts. That is why I have rejected a minimal definition of translation and why I have opted for a highly flexible notion.
However, there is admittedly another ambiguity that besets my use of the
term translation. If the preceding argument may seem acceptable from the conceptual point of view, one could legitimately raise a terminological objection to
the fact that the term in my usage can apply both to the object-level of the historical facts (translation as a norm-governed concept) and to the meta-level of scholarly description. It has to be acknowledged for instance, that certain operations
contained in my competence component such as the consistent application of
"repetition" on all levels will hardly ever be covered by any historical definition

Translation and mass communication

215

of translation. This problem, however, is of a terminological nature and if it

should prove to be awkward, it can fairly easily be solved by henceforth considering "translation" to be a purely historical category and by deleting it altogether
from our scholarly metalanguage. On the latter level it could be replaced by a
term such as "transfer" or "transfer text", etc. In a way, this point allows me to
end this paper on an optimistic note, by pointing out that such a decision would in
fact be in line with certain of the most promising tendencies within the discipline
of translation studies: "having once adopted a functional(istic) approach, whereby
the object is theory dependent, modern translation theory cannot escape transcending "borders". Just as the linguistic "borders" have been transcended, so
must the literary ones be transcended. For there are occurrences of a translational
nature which call for a semiotics of culture, and, in the context of the latter, it is
at least Even-Zohar's expressed belief that transfer/interference theory will no
longer be developed detached from translation theory" (Even-Zohar & Toury
1981: X-XI).

About the author

Dirk Delabastita (1960) was a research assistant at the department of literary studies of the KU
Leuven (with a grant from the Belgian National Fund for Scientific Research) until 1988. He is
currently a teaching assistant at the Department of English of the Facults Universitaires NotreDame de la Paix, Namur (Belgium). He is one of the co-editors of Van Gorp's Lexicon van
Literaire Termen and has written articles and reviews in the field of Translation Studies. He is
working on a Ph.D. dissertation on the problem of wordplay translation.
Address: Kortrijksestraat 71, B 3200 KESSEL-LO (Belgium)

NOTE
* This paper originates from a seminar session held in the context of the European Institute for Literary and Cultural Studies (A joint programme of the University of Pennsylvania and the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, 1987 edition) and as such it is to a large extent the result of a collective effort. I gratefully acknowledge my debts to many people, including Prof. Jos Lambert, Prof. Rik Van Gorp, Prof.
Theo Hermans, Dr. Jan Baetens, Dr. Dirk De Geest, Dr. Lieven D'hulst, Jan Flamend, and above all
to Patrick Cattrysse. I should also like to thank Julian Ross for checking my English and Johan Nootens
(BRT), who kindly provided me with many useful references. Needless to say all remaining defects are
my own responsibility.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Baetens Beardsmore, H. and H. van Beeck. 1984. "Multilingual television supply and language
shift": The International Journal of the Sociology of Language 48: 65-79.
Baker, R.G. 1981. Guidelines for the Subtitling of Television Programmes for the Deaf and Hard
of Hearing. Southampton: Southampton University.

216

Dirk Delabastita

Baker, R.G., A.D. Lambourne and G. Rowston. 1984. Handbook for Television Subtitlers.
Revised edition. Winchester: I.B.A. Engineering Division.
Benjamin, W. 1985 (1936). Het Kunstwerk in the Tijdperk van zijn Technische Reproduceerbaarheid. [etc.]. Nijmegen: SUN.
Bentele, G. and E.W.B. Hess-Lttich. 1985. Zeichengebrauch in Massenmedien. Tbingen:
Niemeyer.
Borges, J.L. 1982. "Over nasynchronisatie". Literair Paspoort 107-108.
Braem, H.M. 1968. "bersetzter und Fernsehen". Der bersetzer 5: 2, 4.
Caill, P.-Fr. 1960. "Cinma et traduction". Babel 6: 103-109.
Caill, P.-Fr. 1965. "La traduction au cinma". In: Italiaander, R. (ed.) bersetzen. Vortrge
und Beitrage vom internationalen Kongress literarischer bersetzer in Hamburg, pp. 116-122.
Hamburg: Athenaum.
Caill, P.-Fr. 1967. "La traduction au cinma". Le Linguiste/De Taalkundige 13: 5-6, 1-4.
Cary, E. 1960. "La traduction totale". Babel 6: 110-115.
Cary, E. 1956. "La traduction cinmatographique". In: La traduction dans le monde moderne,
Genve: Georg. pp. 105-113.
Cary, E. 1985. "Comment s'effectue le doublage cinmatographique?" In: Comment faut-il
traduire? Introduction, bibliographie et index de Michel Ballard. pp. 65-71. Presses Universitaires de Lille, s.l..
Chion, M. 1982. La voix au cinma. Paris: L'toile.
Cinma et traduction. Special issue of Babel 6 (1960), 3.
Comstock, G. et al. 1978. Television and Human Behavior. New York: Columbia University
Press.
Curtis, J.-L. 1986. "Traduire, c'est trahir". Tlrama 1919 (22 Oct. 1986), 69-70.
Danan, M. Forthcoming. "Dubbing as an expression of nationalism". Meta (in press).
Delmas, Chr. 1978. "Les traductions synchrones". In: Horguelin (ed.) 1978, pp. 413-419.
De Neve, M. 1985. "En bovendien vertalen ze niet alles!" Taalbeheersing in de praktijk. I 10181019, nr. 212 (mei-juni 1985).
D'Haeyer, W. 1964. "Film en TV-adaptatie en -vertaling" Le Linguiste/De Taalkundige 10: 6,
13.
D'Haeyer, W. 1968. "Moeilijkheden bij de vertaling van T.V.-films". Le Linguiste/De Taalkundige 14: 14,5.
Dollerup, C. 1974. "On subtitling in television programmes". Babel 20: 197-202.
d'Ydewalle, G., P. Muylle & J. van Rensbergen. 1985. "Attention shifts in partially redundant
information situations". In: Groner, R. et al. (eds) Eye Movement and Human Information
Processing, pp. 375-384. Amsterdam: Elsevier North Holland.
Elam, K. The Semiotics of Theatre and Drama. Methuen, London, 1980. 248 pp.
Even-Zohar, I. & G. Toury (eds) 1981. Translation Theory and Intercultural Relations. Tel
Aviv: The Porter Institute for Poetics and Semiotics. Special issue of: Poetics Today 2
(1981).
Fischer-Weimann, W. 1973. "Der Film Knig Lear. Aufgaben und Probleme der
deutschsprachigen Synchronisation". Shakespeare-Jahrbuch 109: 74-80.
Fodor, I. 1969. "Linguistic and psychological problems of film sychronisation". Acta Linguistica
Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 19: 69-106 and 379-394.
Fodor, I. 1976. Film Dubbing: Phonetic, Semiotic, Esthetic and Psychological Aspects. Hamburg: Buske. 109 pp.
Grlich, E.J. 1967. "Italienische Filme in deutscher Betitelung" Idioma 4: 31-33.
Hermans, Th. (ed.) 1985. The Manipulation of Literature. Studies in Literary Translation. London & Sydney: Croom Helm. 249 pp.
Hesse-Quack, O. 1967. Der bertragungsprozess bei der Synchronisation von Filmen. Eine
interkulturelle Untersuchung. Mnchen/Basel: Reinhardt. 249 pp.

Translation and mass communication

217

Horguelin, P.A. (ed.) 1978. La traduction, une profession/Translating, a Profession. Actes du

Ville Congrs mondial de la FIT. Ottawa: Conseil des traducteurs et interprtes du Canada.
xxi 4- 576 pp.
Ills, V. "(Nederlandse vertaling: drs. M.L. Bulten-Wolff)". NRC/Handelsblad, Cultureel Supplement, 16 augustus 1974.
Just, M.A. & P.A. Carpenter. 1986. The Psychology of Reading and Language Comprehension.
Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Lambert, J. 1983. "Un modle descriptif pour la description de la littrature. La littrature
comme polysystme". Preprint. KUL, Afdeling Algemene Literatuurwetenschap. 27 pp.
L'Anglais, P. 1960. "Le doublage, art difficile". Journal des Traducteurs 5: 4, 109-113.
Lardeau, Y. 1982. "Les voix artificielles du cinma". Thtre public, 44: 68-70.
Luycken, G. 1987. "In other words". Cable & Satellite Europe 5: 30-34 and 6: 57-61.
Malm, J. 1983. "Translation for TV and how we do it in Sweden". In: Actes du 9me Congrs
mondial de la F.I.T (Varsovie 1981), pp.405-408.
Marleau, L. 1982. "Les sous-titres... un mal ncessaire". Meta 27: 3, 271-285.
Mayoral, R., D. Kelly & N. Gallardo. 1988. "Concept of constrained translation. Non-linguistic
perspectives of translation". Meta 33: 356-367.
Milosz, A. 1983. "Traduction et adaptation de textes filmiques destins aux besoins de la
cinmatographie". In: Actes du 9me Congrs mondial de la F.I. T. (Varsovie 1981), pp. 352356.
Minchington, J. 1987. "Fitting titles". Sight & Sound 56: 279-282.
Moulaert, P.. 1962. "La langue des opras". Le linguiste/De taalkundige, 4: 10-11.
Mounin, G. 1967. "bersetzung und Film". In: Die bersetzung. Geschichte, Theorie, Anwendung. pp. 141-147. Mnchen: Nymphenburg.
Muylaert, W., J. Nootens, D. Poesmans & A.K. Pugh. 1983. "Design and utilisation of subtitles
on foreign language television programmes". In: P.H. Nelde (ed.) Theorie, Methoden und
Modelle der Kontaktlinguistik, pp. 201-214. Bonn: Dummler.
Myers, L. 1973. "The art of dubbing". Filmmakers Newsletter 6: 6, 56-58.
Nir, R. 1984. "Linguistic and sociolinguistic problems in the translation of imported TV films in
Israel". The International Journal of the Sociology of Language 48: 81-97.
Nol, Cl. 1970. "Le doublage de films". Traduire 64: 3-10.
Nootens, J. 1986. "Watching and reading television. Audience behaviour and subtitling".
Unpublished paper (delivered at the EMI conference, Manchester, May 1986).
Pauwels, L. "Wordt het electronisch beeld ook bij ons de belangrijkste cultuurdrager?" In: Dillemans, R. e.a. Cultuur, een uitdaging, pp. 38-55. Leuven: Davidsfonds. s.d..
Reid, H. 1978. "Sub-titling, the intelligent solution". In: Horguelin (ed.) 1978, 420-428.
Reid, H. 1986. "The relationship of subtitling to programme genres and audience categories. A
preliminary paper for the study on language barriers". 1986. Unpublished paper (delivered
at the EMI Conference, Manchester, May 1986).
Reid, H. 1983. "The translator on the screen". In: Actes du 9me Congrs mondial de la F.I. T.
(Varsovie 1981), pp. 357-359.
Reiss, K. 1971. Mglichkeiten und Grenzen der bersetzungskritik. Mnchen: Max Hber. 124
pp.
Rowe, T.C. 1960. "The English dubbing text". Babel 6: 116-120.
Salomon, G. 1979. Interaction of Media. Cognition and Learning. San Franciso: Jossey-Bass.
"Stockholm 87 Confrence de l'UER sur le doublage et le sous-tirage". Revue de l'UER, 38:
6, 8-31.
Thibault-Laulan, A.-M. 1973. "Image et language". In: Pottier, B. et al. Le Language. Paris:
Centre d'Etude et de Promotion de la Lecture. Les dictionaires du savoir moderne.
"Traduction et cinma". Le linguiste/De taalkundige 1 (1956), 5 & 10.

218

Dirk Delabastita

Toury, G. 1980. In Search of a Theory of Literary Translation. Tel Aviv: The Porter Institute for
Poetics and Semiotics. 159 pp.
Van den Broeck, R. & A. Lefevere. 1984. Uitnodiging tot de vertaalwetenschap. Muidenberg:
Coutinho. 202 pp.
Vanderplank, R. 1988. "The value of teletext sub-titles in language learning". ELT Journal 42:
272-281.
Van Wermeskerken, S. 1956. "Filmvertaalperikelen". Van Taal tot Taal 1: 1, 8-10.
Vge, H. 1977. "The translation of films: Sub-titling versus dubbing". Babel 23: 120-125.
Warlop, L., J. Van Rensbergen & G. d'Ydewalle. 1986. "Ondertiteling op de BRT". Leuven:
KUL Laboratory of Experimental Psychology. (= Psychological Reports nr. 55.)
Wilss, W. (ed.) 1980. Semiotik und bersetzen. Tbingen: Gunter Narr.

RSUM
Tout bien considr, on ne peut que s'tonner de la disproportion entre l'importance vidente du phnomne de la traduction dans les mass-media audio-visuels (importance qui peut
tre dfinie en termes la fois quantitatifs et qualitatifs) d'une part, et l'attention minimale que
la science de la traduction y a accorde d'autre part. Bien qu'il y ait bon nombre de publications
ce sujet, la majorit d'entre elles sont d'orientation purement technique; en outre, leur teneur
est souvent prscriptive plutt que descriptive.
En passant, cet article traite des causes de cette disproportion remarquable, mais avant tout
nous avons l'intention d'indiquer de quelle faon la lacune pourrait tre comble. Le modle
que nous proposons est bas sur des schmes de recherche dont l'utilit a amplement t tablie
dans le domaine de la traduction littraire. En suivant Gideon Toury, nous prsumons qu'il faut
distinguer plusieurs niveaux de relations traductionnelles. Ainsi, la pratique de la traduction
dans le domaine du film et de la tlvision l'intrieur d'une situation socioculturelle donne
(niveau de la performance) repose sur des choix faits parmi un ensemble d'alternatives assez
vaste (niveau de la comptence); cette slection est gouverne par le niveau intermdiaire des
normes. Les chercheurs de la traduction audiovisuelle devront se rendre compte de ces distinctions. Parmi leurs tches les plus immdiates, nous comptons:
- l'laboration d'un modle de comptence, c'est--dire, d'une thorie de la traduction audiovisuelle qui soit exempte de toute immixtion normative et qui soit fonde sur des disciplines diverses (smiotique du film, thorie de la traduction, etc.); notre article essaye de jeter les bases d'une telle thorie;
- l'analyse systmatique et impartiale de la ralit historique des traductions afin de dcouvrir
les mcanismes normatifs qui ont orient les stratgies des traducteurs; ce dessein, nous
proposons un inventaire comprenant ces paramtres dont la pertinence nous semble fort probable.