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?