Faculteit Letteren & Wijsbegeerte
Kelsey Ruys
Are you making a mochrie? The translation of ambiguous language play illustrated with examples from Whose Line Is It Anyway?
Masterproef voorgedragen tot het behalen van de graad van
Master in het Vertalen
2014
Promotor Prof. Dr. Gert De Sutter Vakgroep Vertalen Tolken Communicatie 2
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Foremost, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my supervisor Prof. Dr Gert De Sutter for his excellent guidance and continuous support.
Besides my supervisor, I would also like to thank Dr Klaar Vanopstal and Prof. Dr Guy Rooryck for their valuable advice.
My sincere thanks go to my employers for allowing me to postpone deadlines whenever it was necessary.
Last but not least, I would like to thank Timothy Jacob Corwin and Scott Emblen-Jarrett who, being native speakers of the English language, were always prepared to provide me with advice.
3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 Introduction ...... 6
1.1 Subject and purpose ...... 6
1.2 Methodology ...... 7
1.2.1 Research question ...... 7
1.2.2 WLIIA ...... 7
1.2.3 Categories ...... 8
1.2.4 Difficulties ...... 9
1.3 Structure ...... 10
2 Language play ...... 11
2.1 Language play versus wordplay ...... 11
2.2 Definition of language play ...... 12
2.2.1 Intention ...... 13
2.2.2 Ambiguity ...... 14
2.3 Categories ...... 15
2.3.1 Homonymy and polysemy ...... 15
2.3.2 Homophony ...... 16
2.3.3 Paronymy ...... 17
2.3.4 Sexual allusions ...... 18
3 Sexual allusions ...... 19
3.1 Definition of sexual allusion ...... 19
3.2 Subcategories ...... 21
3.2.1 Form-based sexual allusions ...... 21
3.2.2 Metaphorical sexual allusions ...... 21
4 Untranslatability of humour ...... 23
5 Previous research ...... 27
5.1 Research by Schröter (2005) ...... 27 4
5.2 Research by Gottlieb (1997) ...... 28
5.3 Media-specific constraints ...... 28
6 Translation strategies ...... 31
7 Discussion ...... 33
7.1 Homonymy and polysemy ...... 33
7.2 Homophony ...... 35
7.3 Paronymy ...... 36
7.4 Sexual allusions ...... 39
8 Conclusion ...... 42
9 Bibliography ...... 44
10 Appendix ...... 46
10.1 Homonymy and polysemy ...... 46
10.1.1 Clear cases ...... 46
10.1.2 Doubtful cases ...... 47
10.2 Homophony ...... 48
10.3 Paronymy ...... 49
10.4 Sexual allusions ...... 51
10.4.1 Form-based sexual allusions ...... 51
10.4.2 Metaphorical sexual allusions ...... 51
5
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
Ep. Episode LDOCE Online Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English Online OALD Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary 7th Edition OED Online Etymology Dictionary WLIIA Whose Line Is It Anyway
6
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Subject and purpose
Audiovisual translation is a quite recent, yet fast growing research area in translation studies. Thanks to subtitlers, it is possible for many comedy shows to be understood by a non-English audience. However, when reading subtitles, few foreign-language viewers realise how difficult the translation of humour can be. Through this research, we strive to provide more insight into the translation strategies used when translating ambiguous language play, in particular sexual allusions, from English into French. Previous research conducted by Schröter (2005) on language play in general showed that slightly over 50% of the language play was translated as language play in the target language, implying that almost half of the language play was omitted in the subtitles. Research conducted by Gottlieb (1997) focused on a specific category of language play: wordplay. He found that slightly less than 50% of the wordplay in his research was rendered as wordplay in the target language. This led to the conclusion that approximately 50% of the language play and wordplay in the source text tends to be rendered as language play in the target text, while an alternative solution is sought for the other half. However, their research did not take sexual allusions into account. Sexual allusions still being a neglected field therefore needs more investigation.
We decided to focus on the translation of sexual allusions and other forms of ambiguous language play, i.e. homonymy, polysemy, homophony and paronymy. More information about these categories can be found in section 2.3. The examples that belong to these categories can be considered very language-specific. The following hypothesis therefore seems reasonable: Sexual allusions are more likely to be translated as language play of the same category, as they can be considered less language-specific and more universal than wordplay.
This research was based on a new definition of language play (cf. section 2.2) focusing on the concept of ambiguity, an important element in Anglo-Saxon humour, instead of the manipulation of the language in its entirety. This allowed us to step outside the categories that are usually being examined, such as paronymy and homonymy, and to examine sexual allusions as well. In order to gain better insight into the translation strategies used when translating sexual allusions and the other aforementioned categories of language play, we examined seven episodes of the improvisation show WLIIA. 7
1.2 Methodology
1.2.1 Research question
This research was based on the central research question: Which translation strategies do translators use when translating ambiguous language play, in particular sexual allusions, from English into French? This question led to the following sub-questions:
- How can language play be defined? - What difficulties arise when trying to define language play? - How does language play differ from wordplay? - Which categories can language play consist of? - What restrictions can translators experience when translating humour and language play? - What does previous research reveal about language play and the translation thereof? - How can sexual allusions be defined? - What additional restrictions can audiovisual translation impose on the translator?
All these questions will be answered in the theoretical framework of this research. To this end, we often used examples from WLIIA to illustrate certain difficulties and categories of language play.
1.2.2 WLIIAI
WLIIA is a comedy TV show in which Colin Mochrie, Ryan Styles, Wayne Brady and a fourth performer, improvise characters, scenes and songs in the style of theatre-sports games. Originally a British show, an American version, hosted by Drew Carey, was created afterwards. The examined episodes all belong to the first season which was recorded in 1998.
The majority of the items of language play were extracted from the games ‘Hats’ and ‘Let’s Make a Date’. In ‘Hats’, the performers are split into two groups. Each group has a box filled with random hats. They have to use these hats to come up with examples of the world’s worst dating service video. The performers usually invent a pun-laden pick-up line that matches the hat that they are wearing. In ‘Let’s make a date’, three actors are contestants on a dating-type
I Information source: http://www.urbandictionary.com
8
show. The fourth actor has to guess the characteristic or identity that the contestants were given a few seconds beforehand by asking them questions.
The first ten episodes of the American version were provided with French and Spanish subtitles. The DVD has region code one, meaning that the target audience is the United States and Canada. One of the actors, Colin Mochrie, is a Canadian stand-up comedian. Hence it is very likely that the French subtitles are aimed at a Canadian audience. We examined seven episodes that were chosen based on the number of items of language play present that were relevant for this research. All episodes were filmed in 1998, when television censorship in the United States was even stricter than it is today.
This research was mainly based on the work of Schröter (2005) and Gottlieb (1997). Schröter (2005) provided the framework for our definition of language play. Gottlieb (1997) inspired us when we established the translation strategies used in this research. Given that the focus lies on humorous ambiguity, a narrower definition of language play applies here. Furthermore, Freddi and Pavesi (2009) provided useful information about the constraints that are inherent in subtitles. These constraints will be discussed in chapter 5.
1.2.3 Categories
Based on our own definition of language play and on the work of Schröter (2005) and Gottlieb (1997), four distinct categories of language play have been outlined: homonymy and polysemy, homophony, paronymy and sexual allusions. The table below mentions the number of instances that each category contains. A distinction has been made between clear cases of language play and doubtful cases.
Homonymy and polysemy Homophony Paronymy Sexual allusions clear doubtful clear doubtful clear doubtful clear doubtful 5 1 3 0 9 0 17 0
= 35 items of language play
The categories share the same characteristic that each example in them has several layers and can therefore be considered ambiguous. The definitions given by Schröter (2005) were often helpful when establishing our own definition. However, we could not find the information necessary to provide us with a framework for defining the term sexual allusion. In order to 9
create an appropriate definition, we based ourselves on a general definition of its hypernym allusion and our own definition of ambiguity. The definition of sexual allusion can be found in section 3.1. Contrary to the other three categories, this category was not mentioned by Schröter (2005). This is probably due to the fact that his corpus mainly consists of animated cartoons and a mix of cartoon and non-cartoon elements, while our corpus consists of episodes of an improvisation show wherein the actors often prod the censors by coming up with clever sexual allusions. These sexual allusions were divided into two separate categories: form-based and metaphorical sexual allusions (cf. section 3.2). Some sexual allusions belonged to one of the other three categories as well, and contained, for instance, homonymy. Whenever this was the case, we classified the example as a form-based sexual allusion, since the sexual connotation that the expression carried along seemed to be the core element of the joke. Such overlap has always been treated consistently. However, there is one exception. If an example contained both paronymy and a sexual allusion, we classified it as paronymy. This was the case with two examples of which the focus of both was clearly put on the paronym. A detailed description of one of these examples can be found in section 7.3, i.e. example 7.7. We expect form-based sexual allusions to be more difficult to translate than metaphorical sexual allusions, as the translator will have to take at least two elements into account: the sexual connotation that the expression carries along and the focus on the formal aspects of the term.
In this research, each category will be provided with a new definition and examples from the show. These examples were added after the theoretical framework was established in order to prevent them from influencing our objectivity. The theoretical framework of this research has therefore never been adjusted to the results of our analysis.
1.2.4 Difficulties
We were fully aware of the risks pertaining to an inductive research method, and therefore tried to interpret the translations as objectively as possible by taking all options into account, especially when the motivation behind the translation was inconclusive. In cases of doubt, we consulted native speakers of the English and French language. Their contributions have always been approached with caution.
Not being a native speaker of neither English nor French caused some of the main difficulties. In order to fully grasp language play and its translation, a profound knowledge of the culture 10
and the language of both the source and target text is of vital importance. Unless the language play and its translation was very obvious, which was especially the case with metaphorical sexual allusions, we consulted at least one native speaker for each item discussed.
Furthermore, it was difficult to find a watertight definition that suits the notion of ambiguous language play. Some sexual allusions mainly hinged on the interaction between the visuals and the audio. However, we decided to count them as language play, as our definition was based on the concept of ambiguity. The interaction between the visuals and the audio created in that case a second layer regarding the meaning of the expression.
1.3 Structure
The next chapter contains the theoretical framework of this research. Firstly, we will explain the difference between language play and wordplay (cf. section 2.1). Secondly, the definition of language play and the categories relevant thereto will be elaborated upon (cf. section 2.2). Finally, three out of four categories will be discussed, each provided with an example (cf. section 2.3). The fourth category, sexual allusions, will be examined in chapter 3 in which we will try to define what a sexual allusion is. Afterwards, we will discuss the relevant subcategories. Chapter 4 offers an overview of what has been written regarding the (un)translatability of humour. In chapter 5, we will take a closer look at the research conducted by Schröter (2005) and Gottlieb (1997). Chapter 6 will focus on the translation strategies relevant to this research. In chapter 7, there will be an overview of the results provided with examples and relevant statistics. Finally, chapter 8 provides a brief conclusion and recommendations for future research.
11
2 LANGUAGE PLAY
2.1 Language play versus wordplay
To date, little research has been conducted on the translation of language play. The research already carried out often involves wordplay, which is defined as “making jokes by using words in a clever or amusing way, especially by using a word that has two meanings, or different words that sound the same.” (OALD, 2005). In this case, the term wordplay is too narrow a concept, as the ambiguity that was examined during this research does not merely involve words, but also expressions. Hence, language play seemed to be a more appropriate term, as it concerns the manipulation of language as a whole. An example of language play used in WLIIA during the game ‘Let’s Make A Date’ can be found below.
2.1 The actor is wearing a black top hat that is often associated with Abraham Lincoln. GREG: I haven’t had it in four score and seven years.
By using the phrase four score and seven years, the actor creates a cultural reference and a sexual allusion at the same time. First of all, it is a reference to the Gettysburg Address, a speech that was held by Lincoln in 1863. Lincoln’s famous quote Four score and seven years ago actually means 87 years ago, meaning the year 1776 - the year of the signing of the Declaration of Independence - when counting back from the year of the speech. In this dating- video context, it is as if the actor is saying that it has been 87 years since he had sex. This cannot be considered wordplay, yet the actor does play with an expression and uses it in an ambiguous manner.
However, this does not rule out the possibility that language play and wordplay can overlap. As Schröter (2005) already mentioned, wordplay can be regarded as a subcategory of language play. This means that every type of wordplay is automatically a form of language play, but this is not necessarily the case the other way around. Schröter (2005) made a clear distinction between punning forms of language play and non-punning forms, such as rhyme, alliteration and play with grammar. However, these non-punning forms were not used in the episodes that were examined or the actors never used them in an ambiguous way. That is why they are irrelevant for this research and why they will not be mentioned. 12
2.2 Definition of language play
Schröter (2005) defines language play as follows: Language-play, contrary to normal, or non-playful, fragments of conversation or writing, is marked in the sense that the linguistic building blocks involved draw attention to themselves and their form, in addition to functioning as transmitters of content. In other words, language-play is present where the peculiarities of a linguistic system (or linguistic systems) have been exploited in such a way that an aural and/or visual (and by extension: cognitive) effect is achieved that would not be present, and perhaps consciously avoided, in language used with a focus on propositional content. (Schröter, 2005, p. 78)
In essence, Schröter (2005) regards language play as a way of manipulating language for the sake of standing out in a phrase, by relating information in a unique form without sacrificing the meaning of the content itself. Such manipulations can be found in the example below.
2.2 The actor was given the identity of a bad stand-up comedian. COLIN: Some people think it's because of the heavy rains lately. It was raining cats and dogs. I stepped into a poodle.
The speaker creates language play by manipulating the word puddle into poodle. The proverb raining cats and dogs along with the paronym II lead to a humorous effect as a poodle is a dog breed. This shows how the flexibility of a language permits the user to be funny or to display a form of intellect through ambiguous reference.
Although the definition given by Schröter (2005) seems to be appropriate to describe language play in general, a narrower definition of language play applies to this research, as the focus lies on ambiguity instead of the manipulation of language in its entirety. Schröter (2005) also examined, for instance, alliteration, a non-punning form of language play that is created through the manipulation of an expression by selecting words that start with the same letter or sound, but that cannot be considered ambiguous. We consider language play as a multi-layered figure of speech, i.e. an expression that is intentionally altered or used in an ambiguous, clever way in order to create a humorous effect. In this research, such manipulations were very often, in some way or another, related to the context. Many forms of language play arose from games wherein the actors were given a strange characteristic or identity. An example from the game ‘Let’s Make A Date’ can be found below:
II A term slightly altered on purpose or replaced by a term with a very similar pronunciation, but with a different meaning. 13
2.3 Actor B is a loudmouthed sports fan who is shouting in the bleachers. A: If you were going to buy me like a pet, what kind of pet would that be and what would you call it? B: I probably wouldn't buy it for you, I'd steal it. Steal! Steal! What's going through your mind? Are you crazy? Get some eyes in your head!
In his role as a sports fan, the performer uses the verb steal in a double way, emphasizing the homonym used. The first time, it refers to the act of taking something from someone without their permission and without giving it back (OALD, 2005). However, when he uses the verb for a second and a third time, he does so in a fanatical way. This leads us to think that he is encouraging a sports team, as the term can be related to baseball, basketball and ice hockey. In that context, the verb is defined by LDOCE Online as follows:
a) to run to the next base before someone hits the ball in the sport of baseball; b) to suddenly take control of the ball, puck etc, when the other team had previously had control of it, for example in basketball or ice hockey.
The second and third steal are ambiguous, since the performer could also simply repeat the first steal, maintaining its original meaning, because he wants, for example, to make himself clear.
2.2.1 Intention
However, when looking at this new definition of language play, some questions arise inevitably. How can one know whether the language play was created intentionally rather than by coincidence? For instance, how can a paronym, a word slightly altered on purpose, be distinguished from a malapropism, the accidental use of an incorrect word that resembles the intended one? As we consider language play to be intentionally ambiguous in order to evoke laughter, we decided to take the reaction of the audience into account. If the audience was laughing, the language play was categorized as ‘with intent to amuse’. Yet, a malapropism can evoke laughter as well. The definition given by OALD (2005) even starts with “An amusing mistake […]”. As the laughter of the audience alone was not sufficient to determine whether it concerned intentional language play or not, we also tried to categorize each example based on the functions of wordplay listed by Delabastita (1993). If the form of language play both had the intent to amuse and fulfilled at least one of the functions given by 14
Delabastita (1993), it was categorized as a clear case of language play. The following functions were relevant to the examined episodes of WLIIA:
- “animating characters: individuals and interactions”: the use of wordplay adds in this case to the portrayal of the characters and to the contexts and dialogues in which they find themselves. As the actors were often given a particular characteristic or prop, over half of all the language play used had, among others, this function. - “tricking the censor: taboo”: the actors often tried to avoid censorship, which was, back in 1998 when the episodes were filmed, very strict in the United States. This did not only include sexual allusions, but also curse words. These often seemed to be used intentionally to mock the censors. - “supporting witty dialogue”: as Schröter (2005) already explained, wordplay can be a way to control and develop a dialogue, for instance, as a cue to turn change. Two examples had this function.
All cases, but one, combined the category ‘with intent to amuse’ with one or more of the above-mentioned functions. However, this exception was still registered as language play. The speaker uses the same word twice, each time in a different way:
2.4 COLIN: Enough about yesterday! Every song a hit, every hit a smack! But you know what? I even have a song on this album! Remember that?
The performer seems to try to link the two hits to each other, which leads to laughter, as the second hit has an entirely different meaning than the first hit. The first time, it refers to a very successful song. The second time, it refers to the act of hurting somebody by slapping them. By adding a smack, the language play seems to be implied.
2.2.2 Ambiguity
Other than whether the language play was used intentionally or not, it was also important to know whether it was used ambiguously or not. But what exactly is ambiguity? As already stated by Delabastita (1993, p. 77), the term ambiguity is, ironically enough, ambiguous.
OALD (2005) provides three definitions, two of which were relevant to this research: a) [U] the state of having more than one possible meaning b) [C] a word or statement that can be understood in more than one way 15
In the first definition, the term seems to refer to finite ideas without determination of the intended idea, which is the case with, for instance, homonyms. The second definition seems to imply that the term or statement is open to interpretation, which can be the case with, for instance, sexual allusions. However, this can also be the case with homonyms, since they can be interpreted in multiple ways as well because of their double meaning. It can be therefore stated that the line between the above-mentioned definitions is incredibly thin. Yet, OALD (2005) seems to make a clear distinction between both, as ambiguity is uncountable in the first definition and countable in the second definition. LDO Online does not make this distinction and describes ambiguity, referring to it as both countable and uncountable, as “the state of being unclear, confusing, or not certain, or things that produce this effect”. In this research, ambiguity is defined as something that is open to interpretation due to its lack of specificity, as this applies to each expression having several layers. Each form of ambiguous language play discussed in this research corresponds to this definition.
2.3 Categories
Based on the above-mentioned definition of language play and the examined episodes, four categories emerged, three of which were also examined by Schröter (2005): homonymy and polysemy, homophony and paronymy. Contrary to us, Schröter (2005) turned homonymy and polysemy into two separate categories, because homonymy concerns terms lacking a clear etymological relationship, while polysemy involves terms that are etymologically connected to each other. In this research, homonymy and polysemy constitute one category, because their main trait, i.e. identical words having more than one meaning, is the same. Our fourth category, sexual allusions, was not examined by Schröter (2005). This can be put down to our different corpora, as Schröter (2005) especially examined animated cartoons, while we focused on a comedy show in which the actors often try to bend the censorship rules.
2.3.1 Homonymy and polysemy
Homonyms and homophones were not regarded as one category, since not all homophones are homonyms. Homonyms do not have different spellings, which is the case with homophones. Regarding polysemy, both homonymic and polysemous puns share the characteristic of having multiple meanings for identical words. Hence the reason why they were regarded as one category. Homonymy and polysemy are distinguished from one another by the relatedness of the meanings of the words. As Schröter (2005, p. 164) already explained, homonyms have unrelated meanings. Their identical form can be put down to coincidence. 16
Bat, for instance, is defined by LDOCE Online as “a small animal like a mouse with wings that flies around at night”, and “a long wooden stick with a special shape that is used in some sports and games”. None of the definitions are connected with each other. This is not the case with polysemy, as polysemous words are the result of semantic processes, such as semantic shifts and extensions. Glass, for example, is defined by LDOCE Online as “a transparent solid substance used for making windows, bottles etc”, but also “a container used for drinking made of glass”. The polysemy here is based on metonymy, the use of the name of something that is closely linked to the thing meant. In this research, homonymic as well as polysemous puns were considered language play, as the actors seemed to be aware of their double senses and used such puns intentionally. This can be demonstrated by the example below.
2.5 The actor is wearing a sunflower mask and has to come up with an example of the world’s worst dating service video. WAYNE: I like to take things as they come, and I’m all for letting our love grow.
After having said that, the actor stretches up as if he is literally ‘growing’. This shows his awareness of the multiple meanings of to grow. It is expected to be figurative, as it is used in the phrase I’m all for letting our love grow, meaning to develop. However, since the performer is wearing a sunflower mask and acts as if he is growing taller, it can also be interpreted literally, meaning an increase in size.
2.3.2 Homophony
As Schröter (2005, p. 165) already stated, homophony occurs when two words are pronounced the same, but have - unlike homonymy and polysemy - a different spelling. Gottlieb (1997, p. 210) emphasizes its phonemic ambiguity being its central feature at play. For instance, knight and night are homophones, as they share the exact same pronunciation, indicated by OALD (2005) as /naɪt/. Yet, they are spelt differently. In WLIIA, three examples of homophony were extracted, one of which we thought was rather doubtful at first:
2.6 Ryan is a contestant on a dating-type show. He was given the identity “pig farmer from Arkansas”. Greg has to guess his identity by asking questions. GREG: I love the out of doors. If we were going to go somewhere, you know, outside, where would you go? 17
RYAN: Well, I’ve never been inside, so uh... I don’t know. We might roll around in the mud for a while. I’d take good care of you. You wouldn’t get hurt, have to take me to the court to sue... Sue! Sue! Sue!
The performer seems to use sue as a homophone. The first time, the term was used in its meaning of making a claim against somebody in court (OALD, 2005). However, in his role of pig farmer from Arkansas, he repeats the word sue several times with a loud and high-pitched voice, as if he is calling for someone or something. In this case, the second, third and fourth sue seem to refer to the sound that hog callers make to draw the attention of their pigs. However, the typical hog call often sounds like sooey instead of sue. Not all dictionaries mention sooey (sometimes spelt as sooie or souie), but Merriam-Webster does, stating it is probably derived from the word sow. The phonetics are also given and differ from the first sue, i.e. \ˈsüē, -üi\ instead of \ˈsü\. Nevertheless, the performer uses the exact same pronunciation, which leads us to think that he might use sue as an onomatopoeia for the noises that pigs make. Yet, the first hypothesis seems more likely, because the hog call is also used in the famous chant for the Arkansas Razorbacks football team. On top of that, Arkansas is known for its hog calling contests. While watching some of those contests, we noticed that some pig callers derived from the phonetics, and, indeed, pronounced sooey as sue.
2.3.3 Paronymy
A paronym is here defined as a term that is slightly altered on purpose or replaced by a term with a very similar pronunciation, but with a different meaning. As Schröter (2005) points out, the similarity is questionable as it is a rather vague concept. In this research, a term was considered a paronym if it evoked laughter, presumably because it was being associated with another, similar term. Another option was counting how many letters the terms differed from each other. Depending on that number, the term would be classified as a paronym or not. However, this can lead to the exclusion of paronyms that, although the terms differ more than usually from each other, are still recognized by the audience and evoke the association aimed at by the speaker. That is why we decided not to use this technique.
In our definition of language play given in section 2.2, language play and ambiguity were inextricably linked to each other. This leads us to the question whether paronymic wordplay can be considered ambiguous or not. According to Delabastita (1993), this is not the case. He states that “even though there is a pun that confronts both readings through association, from 18
a strictly linguistic point of view, only the second meaning is pertinent.” (Delabastita, 1993, p. 78). It is true that paronyms do not share the exact same spelling nor pronunciation, such as homonyms do. However, it is worth noting that paronyms can be ambiguous on a cognitive level, as they can indeed bring associations along. If the paronym is grasped by the audience, they should have at least two different concepts in mind. This brings us back at the first definition of ambiguity given by OALD (2005) in section 2.2.2, even though, as De Vries and Verheij (1997, p. 76) point out, paronyms, contrary to homonyms, do not share the exact same form, but a very similar one instead.
2.3.4 Sexual allusions
The fourth category of ambiguous language play will be explained in a separate section, as it requires more extensive information.
19
3 SEXUAL ALLUSIONS
3.1 Definition of sexual allusion
According to the OED, allusion stems from the Latin noun allusionem, meaning “a playing with, a reference to”. The noun is derived from the Latin verb alludere and goes back to the 16th century.
Neither OALD (2005), Merriam-Webster nor LDOCE Online provide a separate entry for the term sexual allusion. Oxford Dictionaries Online defines allusion as “an expression designed to call something to mind without mentioning it explicitly; an indirect or passing reference.” Although this definition can apply to sexual allusions as well, it is nevertheless too vague, since we are discussing a hyponym of allusion and not the general term itself. We have therefore defined the term ourselves. In this research, a sexual allusion is considered a statement having a double layer the surface of which is what is obvious, while the sexual connotation underneath has to be interpreted by the receiver. It is worth noting that an allusion can only be interpreted correctly by one who is experienced enough to do so. It requires experience in the matter and often knowledge about the language and the culture. The example below illustrates this.
3.1 The actor is wearing a horned Viking helmet and has to come up with an example of the world’s worst dating service video. COLIN: C’mon, I’m horny!
In the above-mentioned allusion, the obvious is that the performer is wearing horns, which is therefore the first meaning implied. The sexually aroused part comes with knowledge of the term horny and what it implies. The fact that he is sexually excited is the meaning behind it. As already stated, the audience has to interpret the allusion first in order to grasp the ambiguity behind the term. The same goes for the translator. According to Brotcorne (2008, p. 24), a translator might misinterpret or even fail to recognize a reference. This can lead to “an inaccurate or a misleading translation” of the allusion. Although sex is a universal subject, we found that some sexual allusions were still very hard to grasp as a non- native. This was due to the many cultural references that were related to them. In chapter 7 we will take a look at those allusions and the translation strategies used to translate them. It is also worth noting that the above-mentioned example also contains polysemy, as the term is in relation to the resemblance of an erection to a horn. According to the OED, horny is related to 20
the slang expression to have the horn, meaning to have an erection. We therefore classified this example as a form-based sexual allusion. More information about this subcategory can be found in section 3.2.
In the episodes of WLIIA, the performers frequently used film, television and musical allusions. As Brotcorne (2008, p. 20) already explained, film and television allusions usually refer to titles of films or series, characters and their performers, and famous scenes or quotes. Musical allusions refer to the name or the lyrics of well-known songs. Brotcorne (2008) also states that musical allusions include nursery rhymes, musicals, movie and television soundtracks, composers and singers. Although we did include sexual allusions in this research, television, film and musical allusions were not taken into account unless they contained homonymy, polysemy, homophony, paronymy or a sexual allusion as well. Below, a comparison is made between a musical allusion that was not included (example 3.2) and a television allusion (example 3.3) that was. It is important to mention that the episode was recorded in August 1998.
3.2 The performers can only speak in questions. The scene is a hotel that is on fire. A: What's going on? B: Will God save us? A: Is God a fireman? B: What if God were one of us?
By that last sentence, the performer seems to refer to the song “One of us” by Joan Osbourne, which was released in 1995. The song has been a worldwide hit ever since. The literal lyrics are “what if God was one of us” instead of “were”, but this could be a mistake by the performer himself or he could have replaced it for undetermined reasons. This is simply a cultural reference being used in the context of the rules of the game. The performer used a cultural reference for the sake of it being a cultural reference. Therefore, we did not register this as an example of language play. However, we did register the following allusion.
3.3 The performer has to come up with an example of the world’s worst dating service video. He is wearing a halo. RYAN: Care to be touched by an angel?
21
This could be implied as a musical allusion, a television allusion and a sexual allusion at the same time. ‘Touched by an angel’ is a famous American drama series that went on air in the 90s. However, it is also a track on the album ‘Gloria!’ by Gloria Estefan. The album was released in 1998, a few months before the episode was filmed that includes the above- mentioned example. However, the first hypothesis seems more likely, as the drama series was a huge hit. Since the performer is wearing a halo, the sentence can be interpreted literally, turning it into a sexual allusion. Therefore, the sentence was considered ambiguous.
3.2 Subcategories
As we already mentioned earlier, we divided the category ‘sexual allusions’ into two subcategories: form-based and metaphorical sexual allusions.
3.2.1 Form-based sexual allusions
Form-based sexual allusions can be considered strong language play, as the term itself carries along phonemic, graphemic or, as Gottlieb (1997) called it, single-word ambiguity. Thus, the ambiguity does not only result from the interaction between a term and the image that the term evokes, it also results from the speaker’s focus on the formal aspects of the term. This can be illustrated with the following example.
3.4 The performer is wearing a sorcerer’s hat. He has to come up with an example of the world’s worst dating service video. RYAN: I see great things in the future for us. I know! I've got crystal balls!
A crystal ball is a globe made of glass that is used by fortune tellers to predict the future. The plural, crystal balls, is less common than the singular. The phrase can be easily associated with balls as in testicles, a term that is very often plural in that context. It can be stated that the performer uses a term that tends to be associated with sexual matters. On top of that, the sexual allusion contains a homonym, as balls can be interpreted in multiple ways.
3.2.2 Metaphorical sexual allusions
Contrary to form-based sexual allusions, metaphorical sexual allusions do not tend to focus on the formal aspects of the term, but on the image that a term or a phrase evokes instead, which is clearly demonstrated by the following example.
22
3.5 Wayne, a superhero called Playful Licking Puppy Boy, attaches himself to Greg’s leg. Greg is a superhero called Fruit and Vegetable Man. GREG: Playful Licking Puppy Boy… Please, please, you’re making my celery stalk go wild.
When Wayne attaches himself to Greg’s leg, his hand is almost touching Greg’s crotch. The term celery stalk can easily be associated with Greg’s crotch, as a celery stalk has some slight similarities to a penis. On top of that, a phrase such as make something go wild can be associated with sexual excitement.
23
4 UNTRANSLATABILITY OF HUMOUR
As every type of language play examined had a humorous effect, we will be taking a look at the (un)translatability of humour, followed by the translation of language play. Humour can be considered culture related as it depends on people’s knowledge and expectations whether they will grasp the joke or not. A person’s cultural background can be a factor in interpreting a piece of comedy (Vandepitte, 2010, p. 126). This can be illustrated with an example of WLIIA:
4.1 The actor has to come up with an example of the world’s worst dating service video. He is wearing a knight’s helmet. COLIN: You don’t need to worry, I’m a Trojan!
A Trojan is a citizen of Troy which suits the knight’s helmet the performer is wearing as he can therefore be associated with a Trojan soldier. From that angle, the sentence can be understood as Don’t worry, I will protect you. However, it requires cultural knowledge to see through the fact that Trojan is an ambiguous term, since it also refers to a popular American brand of condoms that was named after Troy’s impenetrable walls. In this regard, the sentence is also a humorous way to say Don’t worry, I won’t get you pregnant. As Laurian (2011, p. 186) already stated, jokes can become increasingly difficult to translate if they allude to cultural issues, and if they contain homonymic or homophonic puns. Just like Vandepitte (2010), Laurian (2011) emphasizes that cultural knowledge is of vital importance in order to understand humour. The above-mentioned form of language play both contains a cultural reference, i.e. the brand name, and lexical ambiguity, i.e. the double meaning of Trojan. Therefore, it is important for the audience and the translator to look beyond the surface in order to fully grasp the joke.
A direct translation should be avoided, as lexical ambiguity varies from language to language, the same way that culture does from community to community, and humour from individual to individual. Schröter (2010, p. 142) explains that translating such ambiguity literally would lead to a loss of the pun. This was illustrated by Hillman (2010) who discussed several puns of the movie ‘Das Leben der Anderen’.
4.2 Two Stasi officers are sitting at a table. A: Was ist der Unterschied zwischen Erich Honecker und ‘nem Telefon? B: Keiner! Aufhängen! Neu wählen! 24
The above-mentioned example was translated as:
A: What’s the difference between Honecker and a Telephone? B: None at all. Hang up, try again!
The lexical ambiguity that is clearly present in the German joke seems to be lacking in the English translation. Aufhängen can both refer to hanging up a telephone and hanging a person. The same ambiguity can be found in neu wählen which means to dial a new number as well as to hold new elections. The sentence can be translated as Hang up the phone, dial again and Hang Honecker, vote again. According to Hillman (2010, p. 390) the pun was reduced, leading to a loss of a crucial narrative link, since it is a film that, in using doublespeak, uses words as a reference to both itself and the history that the film is attempting to portray.
Chario (2010, p. 1) argues that it is therefore important to create similar ambiguity in the target text. The translator should also find an appropriate solution for possible culture related references mentioned in the source text. Chiaro (2010) adds that it is also necessary to respect the skopos of the source text. That is why the translator should come up with a similar pun that makes the target audience laugh like the source audience did. Below, the official French translation of example 4.1 can be found along with the original version.
4.3 COLIN: You don’t need to worry, I’m a Trojan ! French: Ne t’inquiète pas. J’ai le bout dur.
As we already explained, the English pun hinges on the lexical ambiguity of Trojan. In the French version, it seems that the translator tried to create similar ambiguity. Avoir le bout dur is slang for to have an erection. At first sight, this does not necessarily seem to be funny. However, as the performer is wearing a pointed knight’s helmet, bout dur could be interpreted literally. It then refers to a hard tip. In that regard, the ambiguity in the source text has been maintained. Chiaro (2010, p. 1) concludes that the translation is a success if the humour in the target text makes the audience laugh. However, we do not know whether the French audience laughed at the language play used in the target text. The few native speakers that we consulted did not think the French language play was funny, because the ambiguity of bout dur seemed to be less obvious than the ambiguity of Trojan. Nevertheless, a large-scale research might as well indicate that the French version does evoke laughter. It is therefore impossible to base 25
ourselves on the reaction of the audience to decide whether this translation was a success or not. Yet, we can state that an attempt seems to have been made to pertain the ambiguity in the source text. On top of that, both the English and French form of language play seem to be based on the interaction with the visuals.
As Schröter (2005, p. 95) already stated, it has long been assumed that language play, and puns in particular, are untranslatable. Yet, this myth of untranslatability has already been debunked by, among others, Delabastita (1993), Gottlieb (1997), and Schröter (2005), all three of whom summed up possible translation strategies used by translators when translating language play or puns. More information on the translation strategies relevant to this research can be found in chapter 6. Schröter (2005, p. 102) points out that, when taking a look at translatability, puns should be seen as a part of the text as a whole, instead of isolated. Their translatability is therefore also dependent on how acceptable alternative solutions might be. He adds that the translation of language play can be problematic, because the semantic contents and the form of words usually do not overlap with their counterparts in a foreign language. This is when the translator often has to make a sacrifice in either the meaning of the word or the form or even both. Culture references add to the difficulty degree of the translation. In WLIIA there was often an interaction ongoing between the language play and the visuals. This interplay can further restrict the translators, although it can also enlarge their freedom. When the source text does not allow a similar translation in the target language, the interaction between the audio and visual channels could make it easier for translators to invent a new joke based on the visuals alone. A possible example hereof can be found below.
4.4 The actor has to come up with an example of the world’s worst dating service video. He is wearing a crocodile mask. RYAN: I'll be the best date you ever had! And that’s no croc! French: Je te promets un rendez-vous… plein de mordant!
Croc is the informal abbreviation for crocodile. Its homophonic counterpart, crock, is taboo slang for something that is not true. (OALD, 2005) In that regard, the sentence means that he is not lying. As the performer is wearing a crocodile mask, the pun is implied. The French translation contains a homonym. Plein de mordant is a fixed phrase, meaning in this case intense. However, when taken literally, it can also mean ‘full of bite’. The latter sense goes well with the crocodile mask. It is very likely that the visuals allowed the translator to derive from the original language play and come up with something new that nevertheless fits the 26
mask in a similar way. Both the English and the French versions are therefore ambiguous. However, whether the visuals restrict or enlarge a translator’s freedom depends entirely on each form of language play individually and the context in which it was used. In example 4.1 we saw that the ambiguity seemed to have suffered from the translation. This might have been the case because the target language did not allow the translator to come up with a similar form of language play that fitted the performer’s helmet in the way that the original version did.
27
5 PREVIOUS RESEARCH
5.1 Research by Schröter (2005)
Research conducted by Schröter (2005) and Gottlieb (1997) confirmed that language play cannot be considered untranslatable. Below, we will discuss the overall conclusions of their research.
Schröter (2005) examined which translation strategies were applied to translate language play in the subtitles and dubbing of 18 movies. A total of 99 versions in German, Swedish, Danish and Norwegian were looked into, yielding almost 800 separate examples of language play. The source text of the corpus was English. When initially collecting examples, Schröter (2005) lacked a clear definition of language play. His first approach was to be too liberal instead of excluding potential items of language play. Only the English source texts were examined for language play. The passage in the target text was looked into if the original passage contained potential language play. In order to avoid missing compensatory language play, Schröter (2005) also checked the ten seconds before and the ten seconds after the original location of the language play. His research led, among others, to the following conclusion:
My study on German and Swedish dubbing, as well as German, Swedish, Norwegian and Danish subtitling, of language-play in American and British films showed that all of the strategies were used to some extent, but that, in fact, the TL versions very often featured language play in the same spot as the SL version. (Schröter, 2010, p. 142)
Slightly over 50% of the language play was translated as language play in the target language. In all the other cases, the language play was lost or it was doubtful whether the target text contained language play or not. (Schröter, 2005, p. 371). According to Schröter (2005, p. 372) the results were especially linked to how likely it was that a direct transfer was possible without losing the playful elements. This happened more frequently than one would expect. In fact, direct transfer appeared to be the most common translation strategy, regardless of whether the language play was consequently maintained or not. He adds that the most determining factors in how the language play was translated, were the features of the original language play and the factors related to the individual translators themselves. 28
5.2 Research by Gottlieb (1997)
Gottlieb (1997) examined the Danish subtitles of the British, satirical series Carrott’s Commercial Breakdown, but focused on wordplay instead of language play. He analysed a total of 51 cases of wordplay and classified them as lexical, collocational and phrasal homonymy, homophony, homography and paronymy. These categories were partially maintained by Schröter (2005), with the difference that he regarded phrasal, collocational and lexical homonymy as homonymy. Schröter (2005) also added polysemy to the list of classifications. The research of Gottlieb (19997) was based on the hypothesis that homophonic and homographic wordplay are harder to translate than paronymic wordplay, because it is very unlikely that that the source and target language have identical-sounding or identically spelled expressions with a similar meaning detached to them. Furthermore, he expected an overall correspondence between the English wordplay and the Danish equivalents, based on the fact that Danish humour is said to be close to English humour and that both Germanic languages are linguistically related (Gottlieb, 1997, p. 211).
Although the first hypothesis was found to be valid, this was not the case for the second one. According to Gottlieb (1997), only 25 items of wordplay out of 51 were rendered as wordplay in the Danish version. Three possible factors which might have caused this were given:
- “language-specific constraints”: this includes the presence of elements that do not have any linguistic equivalent in the target language; - “human constraints”: constraints such as a lack of skills that a good translator ought to possess, time pressure, etc; - “media-specific constraints”: constraints linked to the medium used, i.e. subtitling. We will elaborate on these constraints below in section 5.3.
Gottlieb (1997) added a fourth factor, i.e. translational norms, but this constraint was not relevant for his research and will therefore not be discussed. The media-specific constraints have already been discussed by Díaz Cintas and Remael (2007) and Gottlieb (1997).
5.3 Media-specific constraints
According to Remael (2010, p. 12), audiovisual translation is a quite recent, yet fast growing research area in translation studies. The demand for subtitles emerged along with talking movies that were introduced in the 1920s. On top of that, the export of American movies worldwide raised the need for translation. Yet the interest of researchers was not aroused until 29
the early 1990s. Hillman (2010) notes that subtitles gained more attention because of the increase in distribution of audiovisual products. Moreover, DVDs were invented during that period. They offered a larger storage capacity, and therefore allowed subtitles to be added in various languages. Other reasons given by Remael (2010) include the rising importance of the Internet and the globalization of audiovisual distribution. As we saw in the previous chapter, the research conducted by Schröter (2005) and Gottlieb (1997) focused on subtitles in movies and series. However, it is worth noting that subtitling covers a broader spectrum. Remael (2010) observes that subtitles can also be found in museums and opera. That list can be further extended with the media and advertising sector and theater productions.
According to Díaz Cintas and Remael (2007), subtitlers are often confronted with constraints that are inherent in the medium itself. A similar view has been expressed by Schröter (2005) who points out that translation problems are more likely if the source text has the form of a multimedia product, since subtitlers then have to deal with additional restrictions. One of those restrictions was described by Freddi and Pavesi (2009). They report that translating subtitles may be restricted by the fact that subtitlers ought to take two communication channels into account: a visual channel and an audio channel. The visual channel includes written text and non-verbal signs, such as body language. If the actor confirms something and nods, it can be rather confusing if the subtitle contains a negation, since the audience would expect the actor to shake his head instead. The audio channel consists of what the actors say and all the other sounds, such as a television playing in the background. This turns subtitling into a complex matter which is described by Freddi and Pavesi (2009) as follows:
First, the relative importance of each system can vary. Second, even the verbal component of an AV text is never purely ‘verbal’: its shape is determined by the sign systems that surround it. Indeed, integration of the verbal component in a complex sign system meant to be watched, heard and sometimes read, often results in this component taking a hybrid form, i.e., one that is neither purely written nor purely spoken language. (as cited by A. Remael, 2010, p. 13)
In addition, each subtitle has a maximum and a minimum number of characters per line and is constraint in time. According to Gottlieb (1997), a maximum of ten characters per second is preferable. On top of that, each subtitle block can only contain a maximum of seventy characters. Besides the number of characters and the screen space, Hillman (2010) and Gottlieb (1997) mention the speed of the dialogue as a technical limit. The speed of the dialogue may pose a problem if the actors give a lot of information in a fast pace, forcing the 30
subtitler to be selective. A way to solve this problem could be text reduction. Furthermore, Hillman (2010) considers the transfer of spoken to written language to be problematic sometimes. When composing subtitles, one is not merely translating, but actually transcribing what is being dictated. This can cause problems in that the subtitler has to remember that the original dialogue existed orally, and in order to retain the sense or meaning of the phrase these problems continually arise proving the process to be strenuous by its very nature. It is complex in that if the viewer is paying close attention to the scene in the show or film, they will not (fully) understand the actual words being spoken, but they should grasp the feeling by the tonality of the actors' voices. But then subtitlers also need to be sure that the subtitles themselves accurately reflect those tones and expressions. Gottlieb (1997) describes this problem as a gap between the two modes of reception. The source audience can listen to the dialogue in their mother tongue, while the target audience has to read the subtitles in their mother tongue, while listening to the dialogue in a foreign language.
When it comes to translating humour, it can be stated that translation likely becomes more difficult if the visual components are part of the joke or language play. As we discussed earlier, subtitlers have to take visual signals as well as audio signals into account (Freddi and Pavesi (2009). During the analysis of language play used in WLIIA, many examples were extracted from ‘Hats’, a rapid-fire game. The performers get a box of hats and other props, and each one of them has to pick a prop at random and come up with examples of the world’s worst dating service video. Language play was often used and was, in every case, determined by the hat. D. Chiaro (2010) already explained that translating humour becomes more difficult if the joke is inextricably linked to the visual components. In episode 103, the performer is holding the Statue of Liberty’s flame when he says in an effeminate way I’m just one flame looking for another. Flame is a paronym of flamer, an offensive way to indicate homosexuals. In this case, the interaction with the non-verbal signs is crucial. Since he was holding the Statue of Liberty’s flame and pronounced the sentence in an effeminate way, the pun was implied.
31
6 TRANSLATION STRATEGIES
Besides the aforementioned constraints, Gottlieb (1997) established several translation strategies. According to Gottlieb (1997), the wordplay in subtitles can be:
- “rendered verbatim, with or without humorous effect”; - “adapted to the local setting, to maintain humorous effect”; - “replaced by non-wordplay”; - Left out but compensated for in another part of the text that allows it; - Left out without being compensated for in another part of the text.
When establishing our own translation strategies based on the work of Gottlieb (1997), we thought it was important to make a distinction between the translation of language play of the same category and the translation of language play of a different category. For instance, if paronyms were often translated as language play, the results could be misleading without taking this distinction into account. If the majority of those paronyms are translated into, for instance, homonyms, then this points to the fact that, although many paronyms were translated as language play, they are still very hard to translate, since translators tend to replace them by language play of a different category. This would mean that it is harder to create paronymy in the target text than homonymy. In our research, language play can therefore be:
- Translated as language play of the same category: the original paronym is, for instance, translated as a similar paronym in the target language; - Translated as language play of a different category: the original paronym is, for instance, translated as a homonym in the target language; - Replaced by non-language play with a humorous effect: the language play was, for instance, replaced by a joke; - Replaced by non-language play without a humorous effect; - Omitted entirely but compensated for in another part of the text; - Omitted entirely without being compensated for.
As we already mentioned, we divided sexual allusions into two categories: form-based and metaphorical sexual allusions. If a form-based sexual allusion was translated into a metaphorical sexual allusion or vice versa, this was indicated as “translated as language play of the same category”, but in order to provide as much clarity as we did for the other 32
categories, we also indicated if the focus on the formal aspects was maintained, omitted or, if it wasn’t there in the first place, if it was created. The following abbreviations were used:
- SA+ > SA: a form-based sexual allusion was translated as a metaphorical sexual allusion; - SA+ > SA: a form-based sexual allusion was translated as a metaphorical sexual allusion; - SA > SA: a metaphorical sexual allusion was translated as a metaphorical sexual allusion; - SA > SA+: a metaphorical sexual allusion was translated as a form-based sexual allusion.
33
7 DISCUSSION
Below we will discuss at least two examples of each category of language play that was examined along with their French translation. The examples were chosen based on the different translation strategy used. After the examples, an overview of the results will be given, indicating the overall translation strategies used along with their frequency.
7.1 Homonymy and polysemy
As we already mentioned in section 2.3.1, homonymic and polysemous terms concern identical words having more than one meaning. Polysemy can merely be distinguished from homonymy by its relatedness of the meanings of the words.
The example below was translated as language play of the same category.
7.1 The actors have to improvise a song for the ‘getting your pizza late hoedown’. COLIN: I'm waiting for my pizza it's been 3 hours now I'm getting really angry just like a British cow It really is upsetting I'm going to really go When he gives me my pizza I won't give him his dough
French: J’attends ma pizza, depuis trois heures déjà Je deviens enragé comme un alpaga C’est vraiment énervant, je vais m’en aller Quand il livrera ma pizza, il n’aura pas son blé
As the performer is improvising a song about his pizza that is being delivered late, it is likely that he uses the word dough because it is a homonym. In this context, it is expected to mean money as he sings I won’t give him his dough. However, this game requires the ending to not only rhyme but also to be funny. Since he is talking about pizzas, dough can also refer to “a mixture of flour, water, etc. that is made into bread and pastry” (OALD, 2005), i.e. a pizza ingredient. The French translation is very similar. Dough was replaced by blé, a homonym referring both to money and wheat.
34
Not every item of language play in this category was translated as language play of the same category. The following items were replaced by non-language play without a humorous effect.
7.2 COLIN: Enough about yesterday! Every song a hit, every hit a smack! But you know what? I even have a song on this album! Remember that?
French: Assez parlé du passé. Chaque chanson est un tube. Vous savez quoi? J’ai une chanson là-dessus. Tu te souviens de ça?
The double meaning of hit (cf. example 2.4) was lost in the French translation. The French sentence, chaque chanson est un tube, only refers to the first part of the English sentence, i.e. every song a hit. The second part, every hit a smack, was omitted. Therefore, the language play was lost.
The following example was the only item of language play that we decided to classify as doubtful.
7.3 The performer is wearing a Scottish tam and has to come up with an example of the world’s worst dating service video. He talks with a Scottish accent. WAYNE: That’s great! They call me Black Angus!
French: On m’appelle l’Écossais noir.
Black Angus is a common beef breed of cattle that originates from Scotland. Since the actor is black, the phrase has a double sense. Black then refers to his skin color, while Angus is a Scottish name. In French, no language play was used. The joke was lost as they translated the sentence literally. We registered this case as a doubtful example of homonymy and polysemy, because it does not concern a single term but a phrase instead.
This category contained five clear examples and one doubtful case. The two aforementioned examples, among which the doubtful case, were replaced by non-language play without a humorous effect. The other four examples were translated as language play of the same category. 35
7.2 Homophony
7.4 The actor has to come up with an example of the world’s worst dating services video. He is wearing a miner’s helmet. RYAN: I'd like to take you out for a few drinks, but... I'm a minor.
This was translated as:
RYAN: J’aimerais t’inviter à boire un verre, mais je suis mineur.
In this case, minor is a homophone. As the performer talks about going out for a drink but not being able to because he is a minor, he implies that he is under the age of 18. However, the term can also be interpreted as miner, since the performer is wearing a miner’s helmet. Although formal correspondence is rarely a good solution in translation, it did work here. The French term mineur is a homonym that is used in the same semantic fields as the original English homophone. According to the Oxford Dictionary of Word History, miner originates from minour, an Old French term. Both minor and mineur are derived from Latin. Hence, the English language play was rendered as language play of a different category.
Another example of this category, which we already discussed briefly (cf. example 2.6), was translated as non-language play of a different category.
7.5 Ryan is a contestant on a dating-type show. He was given the identity “pig farmer from Arkansas”. Greg has to guess his identity by asking questions. GREG: I love the out of doors. If we were going to go somewhere, you know, outside, where would you go? RYAN: Well, I’ve never been inside, so uh... I don’t know. We might roll around in the mud for a while. I’d take good care of you. You wouldn’t get hurt, have to take me to the court to sue... Sue! Sue! Sue!
The homophone sue was replaced in French by the homonym ma cochonne, which can mean sweetheart as well as female pig. We first doubted whether it was a homonym or not, since the first meaning is not registered in Le Petit Robert. However, it seemed wrong to classify it as non-language play, since the double sense of the term is clearly implied. Hence, the above- mentioned homophones were lost in the translation and replaced by homonyms. 36
7.3 Paronymy
As we explained earlier, a paronym is a term that is slightly altered on purpose or replaced by a term with a very similar pronunciation, but with a different meaning.
7.6 The performer has to act as if he is a bad stand-up comedian. COLIN: Well, it seems all the fish in the rivers are dying. Could this be an act of cod? French: Tous les poissons de la rivière sont morts. Se seraient-ils noyés?
In his role as a bad stand-up comedian, the performer replaces the word God by cod, creating the paronym an act of cod for the commonly used collocation an act of God. In the French subtitles the performer asks himself whether the fish have possible drowned. Hence the subtitler used a different approach as the language play was replaced by a joke. It is highly likely that the French joke is deliberately weak, since this would fit the performer’s characteristic that he was given. In both the source and target text, the fact that all the fish in the rivers are dying was used as the build-up for the punch line. In other words, the build-up was almost rendered verbatim, whereas the paronymy itself was replaced by non-language play with a humorous effect.
7.7 Two performers have to improvise a scene in Ancient Egyptian. Greg and Ryan translate what the other performers, talking gibberish, are possible saying. GREG: Cleopatra arrives in her barge. Do you wish to see you, um, her, you see her, you... I cannot speak, I am so excited. RYAN: Yes, I will see her. And I hope she's not on her pyramid.
This was translated as:
GREG: Cléopâtre arrive dans sa barge. Désirez-vous le voir? La voir? Je suis trop excité, je ne peux plus parler. RYAN: Oui, je veux la voir. J’espère que son minou n’est plus indisposé.
Pyramid can be considered a paronym of period, as the first syllable of both words is pronounced as /'pIr/. On top of that, they both contain the consonants p, r and d, and, since to be on your period is a frequently used collocation, pyramid becomes a transparent paronym of period. As the performers are talking about Cleopatra, the term pyramid adds to the humour, because both are associated with Egypt. The French translation is very similar, although the 37
paronym was replaced by minou, a homonym. In French, minou is used to refer to a cat, or, to the French slang term for vagina, pussy. Given that indisposé is used in French to say that a woman is on her period, it can be stated that the main image has been maintained. The same goes for the association with Egypt, as cats were considered to be sacred animals in Ancient Egypt. Hence the paronymic language play of the source text was translated as language play of a different category, i.e. homonymic language play.
In a few cases, the paronymic language play was translated as non-language play without a humorous effect. In the following example, the language play was translated literally, leading to its loss.
7.8 The performers have to improvise a song about commercials. Each performer has to come up with one chorus. The first two sentences and the last two sentences usually rhyme. The first chorus went as follows: I’m in advertising, you know my name is Rick And I am really groovy, ‘cause I am not a … brick I sit and sell you stuff, stuff that you don’t need Because I have one motivation, and that is massive greed
This was translated as:
Je suis dans la pub et je m’appelle Rick Je suis très branché, je n’ai rien d’une brique Je vous vends des trucs qui ne vous serviront à rien Parce que ma seule motivation, c’est ma grande cupidité et le gain
During the improvised song about commercials, the performer seems to try to find a word that rhymes with Rick. He comes up with brick, but in the video, it is quite clear that he actually wanted to say prick or dick, as these words would fit in the sentence, while brick makes no sense at all. However, as language was strictly censored back then, it is possible that the performer realises that he cannot use the word prick or dick. That might explain why he just said brick. It can also be an intended paronym as he might as well deliberately say brick, knowing very well that the audience expects him to finish the sentence with prick or dick. By creating a paronym, he can still make the audience clear what he actually wants to say without being censored. The French translator translated brick literally into brique. We have looked for French curse words and dirty terms that rhyme with brique, but we could not find any. Two French native speakers confirmed that the French sentence does not make any sense, as it does not seem to contain a paronym. The translator might have opted for brique, because 38
that way the word rhymes with Rick and at least the original meaning is maintained, i.e. “baked clay used for building walls” (OALD, 2005). Another option would have been changing the name Rick and turning it into something that does make a rhyming paronym possible. Yet, this could stir up distrust towards the translator, as the French audience can hear the performer say You know my name is Rick, while reading a completely different name. This could be one of the reasons why the translator decided to opt for the original name along with a literal translation. Nonetheless, this led to non-language play and the loss of the humorous effect.
However, the majority of the paronyms were translated as paronyms in the target language. Below, we will briefly discuss one example, because the target audience seems to have played an important role for the decision of the translator.
7.9 During this game two performers are pitchmen who are trying to sell a CD called ‘Songs of the Lifeguard’. The third performer has to improvise a sample of the song. A: You know, there's over 300 songs on this two T, TD -- I'm having problems speaking today. B: It's that darn coffee! Well, let's go right on to our next song, the great salsa hit, "Son of a Beach."
This was translated as:
A: Il y a plus de 300 chansons sur ce tété… CD… J’ai du mal à parler aujourd’hui. B: C’est le café, ça. Passons à la chanson suivante, le hit salsa “fils de dunes”.
As the subject is lifeguards, one of the performers creates the paronym son of a beach, which actually refers to the profanity son of a bitch. In English, the paronym can be considered very transparent as only one vowel sounds slightly different. The English paronym was translated as a French paronym, although the latter seems to be less transparent. Fils de dunes could allude to the profanity fils de pute, the French equivalent of son of a bitch. When showing this to a French native speaker, he did not grasp the paronym. However, this could be explained by the fact that this native speaker lives in France and not Canada. French-speaking Canadians often have a good knowledge of English. By hearing son of a beach, they would 39
probably realise that the actor actually implies son of a bitch. When keeping in mind that the original language play aims at that profanity, the French subtitle becomes more transparent, and fils de dunes can then be more easily recognized as an allusion to fils de pute.
This is the only category in which four translation strategies were used. The table below offers an overview.
Translation strategy Number of items Percentage Translated as language play of the same category 3 33,3% Translated as language play of a different category 2 22,2% Replaced by non-language play with a humorous effect 2 22,2% Replaced by non-language play without a humorous 2 22,2% effect Total 9 100%
In 66,7% of the cases, the paronym was not maintained in the target text and replaced by a different form of language play (22,2%) or non-language play (44,4%) instead.
7.4 Sexual allusions
As we already mentioned, a sexual allusion is here considered a statement having a double layer the surface of which is what is obvious, while the sexual connotation underneath has to be interpreted by the receiver. In some cases, the focus lies on the formal aspects on the term, because the allusion also contains, for instance, homonymy. As we explained earlier, we made a distinction between form-based and metaphorical sexual allusions (cf. section 3.2).
The following example contains a form-based sexual allusion containing homonymy. The homonym was lost in the translation.
7.10 In his role as a pitchman, Ryan tries to sell an album called “Songs of a bus driver”. One of the improvisers just performed a sample of the album, imitating Michael Jackson’s dance moves. RYAN: Michael Jackson, a wonderful singer and a great head coach. French: Michael Jackson, quel chanteur, quel fin psychologue.
Head coach could be funny in multiple ways. It can be regarded as both a sexual allusion and a homonym. Since the focus lies on the sexual connotation that the word carries along, we decided to classify it as a sexual allusion. As the theme during this game was Songs of the bus 40
driver, coach can refer to a bus, but also to “a person who trains a person or team in sport” (OALD, 2005). Sometimes gym teachers are associated with child abuse. That is a possible explanation why the performer calls Michael Jackson a great head coach, since he was accused of sexually abusing little boys. Yet, it is not entirely clear in which sense head is used. It could imply that Michael Jackson is the main coach of, for instance, a sports team. In that case, it hinges mainly on the association of coaches with child abuse. However, the head part could also be added deliberately, as to give head means to perform oral sex on a male. In that regard, head coach would also be a neologism. Two native speakers interpreted the joke that way. A third native speaker merely saw the link between coaches and pedophiles. Either way, head coach implicates Michael Jackson as a child abuser, and thus functions as a sexual allusion. As coach means both bus and trainer, the example was classified as a form-based sexual allusion. The French subtitles feature a similar association. Just like coaches, psychologists tend to have the reputation of abusing their power. Therefore, a similar sexual allusion was used in the translation, though the double meaning of coach and the possible double meaning of head was lost.
The example below contains a metaphorical sexual allusion. However, it was translated as a form-based sexual allusion.
7.11 The actor is wearing a knight’s helmet and has to come up with an example of the world’s worst dating service video. RYAN: Care to be a knight rider? French: Monter, tu aimes ça?
‘Knight rider’ was a popular American television series that was later adapted into a movie and a video game. The main character was undercover agent Knight. The second protagonist was a car that Knight was partnered with: Knight Industries Two Thousand. As the performer is wearing a knight’s helmet knight rider gets a sexual connotation. The allusion mainly hinges on the interaction between the phrase and the hat that the performer is wearing. The French subtitles contain a homonym. Monter can both mean to mount an animal, in this case a horse, and to ride someone. The loss of the cultural reference seems to be more or less compensated by the homonym. It should be mentioned, however, that night rider is a term that does exist according to Urban Dictionary. It then means “A white woman who chooses to only, or most often, sleep with the blackest of men.” The term can only be found in Urban Dictionary, other dictionaries do not mention it. However, it was entered in 2005, a long time 41
after the episodes were broadcast. We therefore did not classify the English example as a form-based sexual allusion, because the actor most likely referred to the American series.
At the start of this research, we claimed that sexual allusions are more likely to be translated as language play of the same category, because they are less language-specific than, for instance, paronymy. On top of that, sex is a universal topic. We also expected form-based sexual allusions to be more difficult to translate than metaphorical sexual allusions. To our big surprise, all seventeen sexual allusions were translated as language play of the same category, leading to a 100% match between the source and target text. Three metaphorical sexual allusions were given an additional layer and were translated as form-based sexual allusions. Out of the four form-based sexual allusions, only one was translated as a metaphorical sexual allusion, losing its focus on the formal aspects of the term. The table below summarizes the results for this category.
Translation strategy Number of items Percentage Translated as language play of the same category 17/17 100% Form-based sexual allusions 4 SA+ > SA+ 3/4 75% SA+ > SA 1/4 25% Metaphorical sexual allusions 13 SA > SA 10/13 77% SA > SA+ 3/13 23%
42
8 CONCLUSION
In this research, we examined the translation strategies that translators use when translating ambiguous language play from English into French. We especially focused on sexual allusions, a category that is still neglected in the field. We investigated 17 sexual allusions and 18 other items of language play that concerned homonymy, polysemy, homophony and paronymy. Every sexual allusion was translated as language play of the same category. This supports our hypothesis that sexual allusions are more likely to be translated as language play of the same category. Language specificity did not pose any major problems, which was sometimes the case with the other categories. As every sexual allusion hinged on the interaction between the term and the image that the term evoked, a literal translation was often possible, since images related to terms can be considered more or less universal, especially when it concerns a topic such as sex. We also stated that form-based sexual allusions were probably harder to translate than metaphorical sexual allusions. However, in over 70% of the cases, the subcategory that applied to the source text also applied to the target text. Nevertheless, we only found 4 form-based sexual allusions. More extensive research is recommended in order to draw a definite conclusion.
Whereas every sexual allusion was translated as language play of the same category, this was absolutely not the case with language play that belonged to the categories. Only 38% of the language play that belonged to the other three categories was translated as language play of the same category. Approximately 28% of the examples was translated as language play of a different category. Another 22% was replaced by non-language play without a humorous effect, which we found to be a rather high percentage given the fact that it concerns a comedy show. Finally, 11% of the remaining language play was replaced by non-language play with a humorous effect. Two translation strategies that we established were not used: omission with compensation and omission without compensation. Given the context, this could be expected, as it would be very inappropriate to simply drop a joke in the subtitles. The performers often use one-liners which more or less forces the translator to come up with something. Leaving the subtitle blank or creating a non-humorous subtitle would not match the visuals in this case. Such one-liners also made compensation in another part of the text rather impossible.
However, this means that in 66% of the cases, some form of language play was introduced in the target text. When compared to the research conducted by Schröter (2005) and Gottlieb (1997), this percentage is rather high. We believe that the following consideration should be 43
taken into account. As we already explained, the DVD has region code one, meaning the target audience is both the USA and Canada. One of the actors is Canadian. This is probably the reason why French subtitles were provided. Compared to the French culture, the Canadian culture has far more in common with the American culture. It can also be assumed that at least the majority of the francophone Canadian viewers has a decent knowledge of the English language, the dominant language in Canada. On top of that, the comedy show requires a certain openness towards the English language. Some farfetched translations seem to indicate that the translator assumed that the audience probably has enough knowledge of the English language to grasp them nonetheless (cf. example 7.9).
The limited number of language play items being the obvious weakness of this research, we believe future research should be more extensive. It is recommendable for researchers to verify first whether it is possible to contact the translator or not. An interview with the translator could take away many doubts about his or her motivation and intention. It is also worth noting that language play as defined by Schröter (2005) can also be found in video games. The translation of language play in video games is still a neglected field. Although the phenomenon seems rather rare, there are various titles that include language play, such as Rayman Origins and Animal Crossing: New Leaf. Earlier in 2014, Ubisoft released Child of Light, a short video game in which every dialogue is in rhyming verse. As it was undoubtedly a huge challenge to the author to write such a screenplay, it must have been even a far bigger challenge for the translators. Yet, the game was translated into seven languages. The material to examine particular instances of language play in an entirely new medium is definitely there, it just has to be investigated.
44
9 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Brotcorne, S. (2008). Alluding across language barriers: a theoretical study of allusion and its translation illustrated by examples from Little Britain [master thesis]. Ghent University. Chiaro, D. (2010). Translating Humour in the Media. In Translation, Humour and the Media. London: Bloomsbury Academic. De Vries, A. en Verheij, A. (1997). A Portion of Slippery Stones. Wordplay in Four Twentieth-Century Translations of the Hebrew Bible. In Essays on Punning and Translation. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing. Delabastita, D. (1993) There’s a Double Tongue: An investigation into the Translation of Shakespeare’s Wordplay, with Special Reference to Hamlet. Amsterdam & Atlanta: Rodopi. Díaz Cintas, J., & Remael, A. (2007). Audiovisual Translation: Subtitling. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing Gottlieb, H. (1997). You got the picture? On the polysemiotics of subtitling wordplay. In Essays on Punning and Translation. [Online] http://books.google.be/ [15.12.2013] Hillman, R. (2010). Spoken Word to Written Text Subtitling. In The Oxford Handbook of Translation Studies. Oxford: OUP Oxford. Laurian, A. (2001). La compréhension de l’humour. In Les mots du rire: comment les traduire? Berne: Peter Lang AG. Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary of Current English (7th ed.). (2005). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Oxford Dictionary of Word History. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Remael, A. (2010). Audiovisual Translation. In Handbook of Translation Studies (Vol. 1). [Online] http://books.google.be/ [15.11.2013] Schröter, T. (2005). Shun the Pun, Rescue the Rhyme? [Online] http://www.diva- portal.org/smash/get/diva2:6402/FULLTEXT01.pdf [14.12.2013] Schröter, T. (2010). Language-play, Translation and Quality – with Examples from Dubbing and Subtitling. In Translation, Humour and the Media. London: Bloomsbury Academic. Vandepitte, S. (2010). Translating Untranslatability. Gent: Academia Press.
Allusion (n.d.). in Online Etymology Dictionary. Retrieved from http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=allusion&allowed_in_frame=0 Allusion (n.d.). in Oxford Dictionaries Online. Retrieved from http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/allusion?q=allusion Ambiguity. (n.d.). in LDOCE Online. Retrieved from http://www.ldoceonline.com/dictionary/ambiguity Bat [Def. 1 & 2]. (n.d.). in LDOCE Online. Retrieved from http://www.ldoceonline.com/dictionary/bat_1 Glass [Def. 1 & 2]. (n.d.). in LDOCE Online. Retrieved from http://www.ldoceonline.com/dictionary/glass_1 Horny (n.d.). in Online Etymology Dictionary. Retrieved from http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=horny&allowed_in_frame=0 Night Rider. (n.d.) in Urban Dictionary. Retrieved from http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Night+Rider 45
Sooey. (n.d.). in Merriam-Webster. Retrieved from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sooey Steal [Def. 1 & 6]. (n.d.). in LDOCE Online. Retrieved from http://www.ldoceonline.com/dictionary/steal_1
46
10 APPENDIX
10.1 Homonymy and polysemy
10.1.1 Clear cases
Ep. Source text Translation Translation strategy 101 WAYNE: Tha-tha-thank you-you-you for- WAYNE: Merci d’être avec nous. Les Translated as language play of the same for-for com-coming-ing out-out-out. The-the- Bulls vont clairement remporter le match. category the Bull-Bull-Bulls look-look like-like they- Le meilleur nouveau venu de l’année est they will-will sweep-sweep-sweep the-the clairement le numéro 24. Voilà pour le whole-ole thing-thing-thing. The-the-the roo- sport. oo-kie of-of-of the-the-the year-ear-ear happ- app-ens to be-be-be number-number twenty- four-our. Ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha. That-at's the- the-the spor-or-or-orts.
BRAD: Thank you, Carlos, I echo that BRAD: Merci. On est sur la même sentiment. longueur d’onde. 102 KATHY: If you were going to buy me like a KATHY: Si tu devais m’acheter un Translated as language play of the same pet, what kind of pet would that be and what animal, ce serait quoi et comment le category would you call it? nommerais-tu?
RYAN (loudmouthed sports fan in the bleachers): I probably wouldn't buy it for RYAN: Je ne te l’achèterais pas, je le you, I'd steal it. Steal! Steal! What's going volerais. Comme on vole le ballon! Mais through your mind? Are you crazy? Get some ça va pas, non? T’es malade? Ouvre les eyes in your head! yeux! 47
102 DREW: Laura, let's do the getting your pizza DREW: Laura, on y va pour Les Pizzas qui Translated as language play of the same late hoedownIII. arrivent froides. category
COLIN: COLIN: I'm waiting for my pizza it's been 3 hours now J’attends ma pizza, depuis trois heures déjà I'm getting really angry just like a British cow Je deviens enragé comme un alpaga It really is upsetting I'm going to really go C’est vraiment énervant, je vais m’en aller When he gives me my pizza I won't give him Quand il livrera ma pizza, il n’aura pas son his dough blé 103 WAYNE (wearing a sunflower mask): I like WAYNE: Je prends les choses comme Translated as language play of the same to take things as they come, and I'm all for elles viennent. Laissons mûrir notre category letting our love grow. amour. 103 Enough about yesterday! Every song a hit, Assez parlé du passé. Chaque chanson est Replaced by non-language play without every hit a smack! But you know what? I un tube. Vous savez quoi? J’ai une a humorous effect even have a song on this album! Remember chanson là-dessus. Tu te souviens de ça? that?
10.1.2 Doubtful cases
Ep. Source text Translation Translation strategy 103 WAYNE: (wearing a Scottish tam; WAYNE: On m’appelle l’Écossais noir. Replaced by non-language play without a speaking with a Scottish accent) That’s humorous effect great! They call me Black Angus!
III Hoedown is a game of WLLIA in which the performers improvise a song about a certain subject. They usually follow the AABB rhyme scheme with the last line being the punch line. 48
10.2 Homophony
Ep. Source text Translation Translation strategy 103 RYAN: (wearing a miner's helmet) I'd like RYAN: J’aimerais t’inviter à boire un verre, Translated as language play of a different to take you out for a few drinks, but...I'm a mais je suis mineur. category minor. 103 RYAN (wearing a crocodile mask): I'll be RYAN: Je te promets un rendez-vous… Translated as language play of a different the best date you ever had! And that’s no plein de mordant! category croc! 106 GREG: Contestant number three: Hello. GREG: Candidat n°3… Translated as language play of a different RYAN (a Pig farmer from Arkansas): How RYAN: Ca va? category are you? GREG: Good. How are you? GREG: Bien et toi? RYAN: I'm very good, thank you. RYAN: Très bien, merci. GREG: I love the out of doors. If we were GREG: J’adore la nature. Si on allait dehors going to somewhere, you know, outside, ensemble, ça serait où? where would you go? RYAN: Well, I've never been inside, so RYAN: Je ne suis jamais dedans. Alors… uh... I don't know, we might roll around in On pourrait se rouler dans la boue. Je the mud for a while, I'd take good care of m’occuperais de toi, ma cochonne. Hein, you. You wouldn't get hurt, have to take me ma cochonne? Ma cochonne. Ma to the court to sue... Sue! Sue! Sue! cochonne.
49
10.3 Paronymy
Ep. Source text Translation Translation strategy 101 Well, it seems all the fish in the rivers are Tous les poissons de la rivière sont morts. Replaced by non-language play with a dying. Could this be an act of cod? Se seraient-ils noyés? humorous effect 101 It was raining cats and dogs. I stepped into a Il a plu comme vache qui pisse et j’ai Translated as language play of the same poodle. It's like puddle, but spelled marché sur un pis. C’est comme pisse mais category differently. écrit différemment. 103 WAYNE: (holding a torch) I'm just one WAYNE: Je suis une flamme qui cherche Replaced by non-language play with a flame looking for another! sa jumelle. humorous effect 106 WAYNE (wearing a Greek laurel): My last WAYNE: Mon dernier copain m’a refilé un Translated as language play of the same boyfriend gave me Hermes. Hermès. category 107 DREW: So let’s hear the Commercial DREW: C’est parti pour la chanson sur la Replaced by non-language play without a Hoedown. pub. humorous effect
GREG: GREG: I’m in advertising, you know my name is Je suis dans la pub et je m’appelle Rick Rick Je suis très branché, je n’ai rien d’une And I am really groovy, ‘cause I am not a brique … brick Je vous vends des trucs qui ne vous I sit and sell you stuff, stuff that you don’t serviront à rien need Parce que ma seule motivation, c’est ma Because I have one motivation, and that’s grande cupidité et le gain massive greed 107 GREG: Thank goodness you're here, Ice GREG: Dieu merci, tu es là, Joueur de Translated as language play of a different Hockey Kid. Hockey. category RYAN: Oh, my pleasure. (he tilts his skates RYAN: Tout le plaisir est pour moi. Il y a sideways to spray ice on Greg) My God, une invasion de frisottis. there's frizzy hair everywhere! … … COLIN: Well, everything is solved, I have to go work on my new Pauly Shore movie. COLIN: Tout est résolu. Je dois aller 50
Dah! travailler sur mon film avec Pauly Shore. RYAN: Well, thank God everything's RYAN: Dieu merci, tout est réglé. J’y vais, solved. I should stay, but what the puck. “hockey”? 107 GREG: Cleopatra arrives in her barge. Do GREG: Cléopâtre arrive dans sa barge. Translated as language play of a different you wish to see you, um, her, you see her, Désirez-vous le voir? La voir? Je suis trop category you... I cannot speak, I am so excited. excité, je ne peux plus parler. RYAN: Yes, I will see her. And I hope she's RYAN: Oui, je veux la voir. J’espère que not on her pyramid. son minou n’est plus indisposé.
108 RYAN: You know, there's over 300 songs RYAN: Il y a plus de 300 chansons sur ce Translated as language play of the same on this two T, TD -- I'm having problems tété… CD… J’ai du mal à parler category speaking today. aujourd’hui. COLIN: It's that darn coffee! Well, let's go right on to our next song, the great salsa hit, COLIN: C’est le café, ça. Passons à la "Son of a Beach." chanson suivante, le hit salsa “fils de dunes” 117 (Colin is in front of a teenage beach dance Replaced by non-language play without a party scene)IV humorous effect RYAN: Colin, I know this must be a real RYAN: Colin, vous êtes presque à la beach for you to be out there, and we plage, ici, non? Ces informations sont appreciate all the information you’ve given appréciées. us.
IV Colin is standing in front of a green screen as a field reporter, while another performer is a news anchor. The audience and the anchor can see the footage shown on the screen, but the reporter, Colin, can only see a green screen. 51
10.4 Sexual allusions
10.4.1 Form-based sexual allusions
Ep. Source text Translation Translation strategy 103 COLIN: (wearing a Viking helmet) Come COLIN: Allez, j’ai le bout dur. Translated as language play of the same on, I'm horny! category SA+ > SA+ 103 RYAN: (wearing a sorcerer's hat) I see RYAN: Je vois de belles choses dans le Translated as language play of the same great things in the future for us. I know! I've futur pour nous. Je le sais, mes boules sont category got crystal balls! en cristal. SA+ > SA+ 106 COLIN(wearing a pointed knight's helmet): COLIN: Ne t’inquiète pas. J’ai le bout dur. Translated as language play of the same You don't need to worry, I'm a Trojan. category SA+ > SA+ 106 (Wayne just performed a song in Michael Translated as language play of the same Jackson’s style) category RYAN: Michael Jackson, a wonderful RYAN: Michael Jackson, quel chanteur, SA+ > SA singer and a great head coach! quel fin psychologue.
10.4.2 Metaphorical sexual allusions
Ep. Source text Translation Translation strategy 103 RYAN (wearing an elaborate crown): I may RYAN: J’ai peut-être le goût du Translated as language play of the same taste like butter. beurre. category SA > SA 103 GREG (wearing a sheik’s headdress): I GREG: J’espère que le sable un peu Translated as language play of the same hope you don’t mind sand in everything. partout ne te dérange pas. category SA > SA 103 WAYNE (wearing a swami’s turban): I am WAYNE: Je prévois une soirée très Translated as language play of the same predicting a lot of booty tonight! chaude. category SA > SA+ 52
103 GREG (game: Let’s Make a Date): Well, GREG: Numéro un, j’aime les fêtes de Translated as language play of the same Number One, I love holidays. If I was a fin d’année. Si j’étais une dinde, tu me category turkey, what would you stuff me with? farcirais avec quoi? SA > SA
WAYNE: Aw, girl, that’s pretty simple. I’d stuff you with croutons. I’d stuff you with WAYNE: C’est simple, ma belle. Je te salt. I’d stuff you… farcirais de croûtons. Je te farcirais de sel. Je te farcirais de… 106 RYAN (Ryan has a knight's helmet): RYAN: Monter, tu aimes ça? Translated as language play of the same Care to be a knight rider? category SA > SA + 106 GREG (wearing a black top hat): I haven't GREG: Ca fait sept ans que je ne l’ai Translated as language play of the same had it in four score and seven years. pas fait. category SA > SA 106 RYAN (wearing a Robin Hood hat): All I RYAN: Je cherche une poignée de gais Translated as language play of the same want is a few merry men. lurons. category SA > SA+ 106 COLIN (wearing a tall hat with a fuzzy ball COLIN: Et ce n’est que mon chapeau. Translated as language play of the same on the end): And that’s just my hat! category SA > SA 106 RYAN (wearing a halo): Care to be RYAN: Ca te plairait d’être touchée Translated as language play of the same touched by an angel? par un ange? category SA > SA 106 COLIN (in love with Greg who is talking to COLIN: J’ai vu comment tu l’as regardé. Translated as language play of the same Wayne): I saw the way you looked at him but Mais tu es assez grand pour nous deux. category I don’t care. You’re big enough for the SA > SA both of us. 107 WAYNE (singing a song to a girl from the WAYNE: Oh May, donne-moi ton Translated as language play of the same audience called May who works as a baker): amour. Même s’il fait chaud dans ton category Oh May, oh May, give me your lovin’. I four. SA > SA know it’s too darn hot in your oven. 53
108 GREG (Fruit and Vegetable Man): Playful GREG: Petit Chiot Lécheur. S’il te plaît. Translated as language play of the same Licking Puppy Boy… Please, please, you’re Tu rends ma branche de céleri category making my celery stalk go wild. complètement dingue. SA > SA 117 RYAN: RYAN: Translated as language play of the same I had a blind date just the other night J’ai eu un rendez-vous arrangé l’autre category The type of girl that really shouldn’t be in the soir SA > SA light Le genre de fille qui devrait rester dans le She wasn’t really attractive, she was kind of noir bland Elle n’était pas belle, plutôt assez fade But she still beat the hell out of using my Mais elle s’est bien servie right *hand* (censored)