How should culture be rendered in subtitling and dubbing?
A reception study on preferences and attitudes of end-users
Petar Božović | University of Montenegro
Empirical reception research in audiovisual translation (AVT) has long been neglected as most previous studies focused primarily on features of AVT as a product and the producers of AVT, but not on end-users. The importance of these studies is emphasized by the fact that AV content is designed for target audiences. Knowing their preferences, expectations and needs can inform the industry and, thus, increase positive reception, placement and usability of the product. The present contribution aims at answering the question of whether there is a difference in preferences when it comes to translation strategies used for rendering the elements of culture (EC) in two different AVT modalities (subtitling and dubbing) and what could be the underlying reasons for it. For this purpose, we conducted an experiment with 136 participants among the undergraduate students at two universities in Montenegro. Results indicate that end-users have different general preferences and expectations for these modalities. We hypothesize that the observed differences are related to the “vulnerability” of subtitling. Furthermore, fluctuations from the general preference in subtitling have been noted in monocultural ECs in connection with encodedness of the EC in source text humor. This shows that industry’s translation guidelines should be modality-specific and that an over-simplistic approach to the treatment of such a complex issue as rendering culture within certain modalities should be avoided.
Keywords: reception studies, subtitling, dubbing, elements of culture
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Recent AVT reception research
- 3.Study design
- 3.1Participants
- 3.2Stimuli
- 3.3Procedure
- 4.Results and discussion
- 4.1H1: The majority of the participants will prefer the foreignization approach in subtitling and the domestication approach in dubbing
- 4.2H2: Specifically in cases of mono or microcultural ECs, the general preferred approach will be a domesticated one
- 5.Conclusion
- Note
-
References
Published online: 04 April 2019
https://doi.org/10.1075/babel.00082.boz
https://doi.org/10.1075/babel.00082.boz
References
Antonini, Rachele
Caffrey, Colm
Denton, John; and Debora Ciampi
Di Giovanni, Elena
2016 “Closing the Circle of AVT: Analyzing Audiences, Evaluating Reception”. Nitra: Paper presented at Audiovisual Translation: Dubbing and Subtitling in the Central European Context (June 15–17).
Diaz Cintas, Jorge; and Aline Remael
Fuentes Luque, Adrian
Gambier, Yves
2006 “Multimodality and Audiovisual Translation”. Copenhagen: Paper presented at Marie Curie Euroconferences MuTra (May 1–5).
Hlavac, Jim
Kovačić, Irena
Leppihalme, Rita
Orrego-Carmona, David
O’Sullivan, Carol
Pedersen, Jan
Perego, Elisa
Požgaj Hadži, Vesna
Schauffler, Svea
Schutze, Carson T.; and Jon Sprouse
Cited by
Cited by 3 other publications
Božović, Petar
Pinheiro, Rui, João Barroso & Tânia Rocha
Wu, Zhiwei & Zhuojia Chen
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 07 april 2022. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.