Stylisation and representation in subtitles: can less be more?

Abstract

This article considers film dialogues and interlingual subtitles from the point of view of linguistic and cultural representation, and revisits from that perspective the question of loss, as a platform for considering alternative views on the topic and broader theoretical issues. The cross-cultural pragmatics perspective and focus on viewers' reactions that dealing with representation entails cast the question of loss in a different light and opens up avenues for alternative modes of analysis. They make room for subtitles to be construed as producing their own systems of multimodal textual representation and modes of interpretation, and for their text to be recognised as having a greater expressive and representational potential than face values might suggest. This is the argument, informed by Fowler's Theory of Mode (1991Mode ( , 2000, that is taken up in the paper, and harnessed to the review of examples or observations from recent studies on subtitles, and complementary evidence from dubbing. The capacity of subtitles to produce insights into the cultures and languages represented is of particular interest, and has wider implications for the culturally instrumental functions of subtitles and translation strategies.

Subtitling Taboo Language: Using the Cues of Register and Genre to Affect Audience Experience?

“…It would be interesting to see if similar practice can be observed, while using the macro factor of genre could bring insights to the study of other aspects of non-standard language use. Beyond these further questions, this analysis has, I hope, added further weight to the argument for taking a macro approach to audiovisual translation (implicit here, as I have demonstrated, in a consideration of genre) as developed by Pérez-González (2007) and Guillot (2102a, 2012b)/Fowler (1991 in particular. Such an approach has the potential to be very fruitful for audiovisual translation research in general, especially if it encourages researchers to respond to the call from, among others, Díaz Cintas (2001), Gambier (2003; and Guillot (2010) for more detailed and sophisticated reception-based studies where the general audience expectations that I have only been able to speculate about here can be verified and explored in an empirical way.…”

“…The analysis of the examples reveals in some instances, in example one and in particular in example two, some partial transfer of film dialogue taboo language into subtitles which I am arguing may indicate the practice of subtitlers cueing audience reactions to the discourse practice of certain characters. In Guillot (2012a, 2012b)/Fowler's (1991 terms, normal communicative competence is sufficient in audience members to recognise the triggers that are provided. The combination of the particular film genre of social realism and the concordant register properties of field and tenor, plus the register and background of the characters involved in the exchanges do, in these two examples, appear to set up perceived expectations of discourse representations which will feature taboo language.…”

“…For example, case study work by the following focuses, in part or wholly, on the transfer of taboo language in audiovisual translation: Mailhac (2000); Díaz Cintas (2001); Chen (2004); Scandura (2004);Pujol (2006); Taylor (2006a);Fong (2009);and Greenall (2011). The argument underlined by Hatim and Mason above, that micro-analysis of the subtitling of de-contextualised segments has limitations and that a macro approach to the entire subtitling text as a system is desirable for understanding the impact of choices made by subtitlers is one which has in particular been advanced by Pérez-González (2007) for dubbing and Guillot (2008;2010;2012a;2012b) for subtitling. Their work provides important theoretical background for the topic under investigation here.…”

“…Like Pérez-González for dubbing, Guillot (2012a;2012b) highlights for subtitling the interdependence of linguistic choices and narrative/filmic structure. She draws on Fowler's (1991; cognitively-driven Theory of Mode which foregrounds multimodality at the level of text itself and takes into account the interaction of text features and readers' perception rather than text features alone (Guillot 2012a: 109) to demonstrate the expressive richness and capacity for representation of subtitles as systems of multimodal textual representation setting their own modes of interpretation.…”

“…Texts are not characterised as categories of text or structure, in other words, but as categories of experience" (Guillot, 2012b: 483). For Guillot (2012b), the use of cues to trigger audience experience is one way that the constraints of the heightened stylization of film dialogue and subtitles can be negotiated. She makes it clear that the cues she identifies function in conjunction with a range of other features present in the film text as a whole; and, importantly, that they do so (after Fowler 1991; in a non-random way, that they are, as described above, part of a system: Shifting away from the relationship between source dialogues and their subtitles […] and focusing instead on the representations that subtitles may convey to viewers about other languages and cultures […] makes room for subtitles to be construed as producing their own systems of multimodal textual representation and modes of interpretation.…”