Investigating Subtitling Strategies for the Translation of Wordplay in Wallace and Gromit – An Audience Reception Study by Svea Schauffler A Thesis Submitted for the Degree of PhD Modern Languages Teaching Centre School of Modern Languages and Linguistics July 2012 Abstract This thesis constitutes an experimental, receptor-oriented study which investigates the reception of two different strategies for subtitling English wordplay into German. Two translations of the animated short film Wallace and Gromit in A Matter of Loaf and Death are screened for test audiences, whose reaction is then recorded in a questionnaire. The existing translation, which was broadcast on German television and published on DVD, follows an approach based on formal equivalence and therefore rarely diverges from the original dialogue at word level, but equally sacrifices parts of the extensive humorous content inherent the text. This is contrasted by a specifically produced alternative translation which prioritises equivalence of effect, the transfer of linguistic humour at the cost of formal similarity. The research project also explores the influence of source language comprehension on the reception of both versions, as it is assumed that a formally different subtitle text could be interpreted as "incorrect" by members of the audience with knowledge of English. In light of the fact that English as a second language is spoken by a growing number of people in the German language community, the effect of this development on the viewers' requirements for audiovisual translation strategies and modes of linguistic transfer are considered relevant for the field. Furthermore, the reception of subtitling by a German audience is investigated in this context. 1 Contents Abstract ............................................................................................................................. 1 Contents ............................................................................................................................ 2 Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................... 4 Figures and Tables ............................................................................................................. 5 Chapter 1: Introduction..................................................................................................... 6 Chapter 2: Audiovisual Translation ................................................................................. 14 2.1 A polysemiotic form of translation ........................................................................... 16 2.2 Advantages and challenges ....................................................................................... 23 2.2 The situation in Europe regarding AVT ..................................................................... 27 2.3 AVT and AVT research in the digital age ................................................................... 32 Chapter 3: Humour and Translation ............................................................................... 37 3.1 Existing research in the area ..................................................................................... 41 3.2. Approaches to the translation of humorous texts ................................................... 45 3.2.1 Meaning and equivalence .......................................................................... 45 3.2.2 The role of skopos ...................................................................................... 48 3.2.3 Domesticating and foreignising approaches .............................................. 50 3.3 Wordplay ................................................................................................................... 52 3.3.1 Concepts and definitions ........................................................................... 52 3.3.2 Typology ..................................................................................................... 57 3.3.3 Strategies for wordplay translation ........................................................... 62 Chapter 4: The Corpus .................................................................................................... 66 4.1 The art of animation ................................................................................................. 66 4.1.1 Animated films in AVT research ................................................................. 72 4.1.2 Clay animation............................................................................................ 73 4.1.3 Aardman Animations and the Wallace and Gromit films .......................... 76 4.2 The film used in the reception study: A Matter of Loaf and Death .......................... 78 4.2.1 Intertextuality ............................................................................................ 79 2 4.2.2 Culture-specific references ........................................................................ 83 4.2.3 Wordplay relying only on the verbal sign system ...................................... 86 4.2.4 Wordplay relying on the visual and verbal sign systems ........................... 90 4.2.5 Wordplay relying only on the visual sign system ....................................... 94 4.3 The existing translation of A Matter of Loaf and Death ........................................... 98 Chapter 5: Methodology ............................................................................................... 113 5.1 The alternative wordplay translations used in the reception study ....................... 113 5.2 Assessment of English knowledge amongst German groups ................................. 127 5.3 The questionnaires .................................................................................................. 136 5.4 Quantifying responses ................................................................................ 147 5.5 Data collection ........................................................................................................ 149 5.5.1 Participants .............................................................................................. 149 5.5.2 The screening process .............................................................................. 150 Chapter 6: Data analysis ............................................................................................... 152 6.1 Hypotheses .............................................................................................................. 152 6.1.1 Independent Variables ............................................................................. 152 6.1.2 Dependent Variables ................................................................................ 153 6.2 Results ..................................................................................................................... 157 6.2.1Comparison of groups for extraneous variables ....................................... 157 6.2.2 Comparison of groups for Humour Reception ......................................... 159 6.2.3 Within-group analysis for Humour Reception and extraneous variables 162 6.2.4 Comparison of groups for Subtitle Reception .......................................... 166 6.3 Preliminary conclusions and further hypotheses ................................................... 170 6.3.1 Comparing for more than one variable between groups ........................ 172 6.3 Qualitative comments ............................................................................................. 175 Chapter 7: Discussion and conclusion ........................................................................... 183 References ..................................................................................................................... 188 Appendices .................................................................................................................... 198 A. Translation Overview ............................................................................................ 198 B. Information Sheets ................................................................................................ 200 C. Questionnaires ...................................................................................................... 202 D. Tables .................................................................................................................... 209 3 Acknowledgements I am indebted to a large number of people who contributed to this undertaking in various ways. Some of them shall be mentioned here. I would like to express a heartfelt Thank You to my supervisors Lena Hamaidia and Dr. Julia Dobson for their continuous encouragement and support throughout this project, both academically and personally, and for always looking out for me. A special Thanks also to Lena for her part in making it all possible, and for convincing me that “everything will turn out for the best”. Also thanks to Dr. Paul O’Neill for his much appreciated help with statistics, and for relishing a challenge. A sonorous Dankeschön to all participants in Germany and the UK, and to Nadja and Wolfgang Schauffler for their help with recruiting audiences, organising screenings and providing Apfelsaftschorle in the hot German summer of 2010. Thanks also to Gudrun Schauffler for being an endless source of wisdom, sympathy and enthusiasm. I would like to thank my trusted proofreaders Sarah Kemp and Brian Irwin, as well as Catherine Moir and Andrew Wormald