Cover not available
Article published In:
Target
Vol. 23:2 (2011) ► pp.178–205

Explicitations and other types of shifts in the translation of irony and humor

| Bar Ilan University
The goal of this article is to examine the differences in the use of explicitation strategies when translating irony and humor, based on a comparative model that distinguishes between cues for the two phenomena. The study suggests that translations of irony manifest more explicitations, whereas translations of humor yield more non-explicitating shifts. This finding can be interpreted as indicating that while the explicitation of humor may override its function altogether, the explicitation of irony does not necessarily do so, since the implied criticism is not eliminated. This finding further strengthens the claim that irony is inherently critical, whereas humor is not.
Keywords: irony, humor, translation, explicitation, shift
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.The first stage of the model: Pragmatic cues for interpreting irony and humor
  • 3.Explicitation versus non-explicitating shift
    • 3.1Explicitation
    • 3.2Non-explicitating shifts—obligatory versus non-obligatory
  • 4.Applying the model and classification
    • 4.1Non-obligatory explicitation
    • 4.2Obligatory explicitation
    • 4.3Non-obligatory non-explicitating shift
    • 4.4Obligatory non-explicitating shift
  • 6.Conclusions
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 22 December 2011
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/target.23.2.03hir
References (78)
References
Primary Sources
Anónimo. 1952, first in 1554. Lazarillo de Tormes. Buenos Aires: Espasa-Calpe.Google Scholar
. 1997. Chayei Lazarillo Ish Tormes Korotav Utlaotav. Tel Aviv: Am Oved. In Hebrew.Google Scholar
Cervantes Saavedra, Miguel. 1968. Don Quijote de la Mancha, texto y notas de Martín de Riquer. Barcelona: editorial Juventud.Google Scholar
. 1994. Hahidalgo Hacharif Don Kichote de la Mancha. Tel Aviv: Hakibbutz Hameuchad. In Hebrew.Google Scholar
Etxebarría, Lucía. 1999. Amor, curiosidad, prozac y dudas. Barcelona: Random House Mondadori.Google Scholar
. 2004. Ahava, Prozac, Sakranut Usfekot. Tel Aviv: Am Oved. In Hebrew.Google Scholar
Heller, Joseph. 1955. Catch 221. New York: Dell Publishing Co. Inc.Google Scholar
. 1970. Milkud 221. Tel Aviv: Bitan. In Hebrew.Google Scholar
Mendoza, Eduardo. 1979. El misterio de la cripta embrujada. Barcelona: Seix Barral.Google Scholar
. 2005. Taalumat Hakever Hamekhushaf. Tel Aviv: Hakibbutz Hameuchad. In Hebrew.Google Scholar
Parent, Gail. 1976. David Meyer is a Mother. New York: Bantam.Google Scholar
. 1989. David Meyer Hu Ima. Tel Aviv: Kineret. In Hebrew.Google Scholar
Shem, Samuel. 1978. The House of God. New York: Dell.Google Scholar
. 1987. Beit Haelohim. Lod: Zmora Bitan. In Hebrew.Google Scholar
Vargas Llosa, Mario. 1977. La tía Julia y el escribidor. Buenos Aires: Punto de lectura.Google Scholar
. 1984. Doda Julia Vehakatvan. Jerusalem: Keter. In Hebrew.Google Scholar
. 1973. Pantaléon y las visitadoras. Madrid: Punto de lectura.Google Scholar
. 1973. Pantaléon Ve”sherut Hamevakrot”. Jerusalem-Tel Aviv: Schocken. In Hebrew.Google Scholar
Secondary Sources
Alexander, Richard J. 1997. Aspects of Verbal Humour in English. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.Google Scholar
Attardo, Salvatore. 1997. “The Semantic foundation of cognitive theories of humor”. Humor 101. 395–420.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2003. “Introduction”. Journal of Pragmatics: The Pragmatics of Humor 311. 1287–1294.Google Scholar
Asscher, Omri. 2007. Stylistic Norms and Hebrew Translation of British humor. (M.A. thesis under the supervision of Dr. Nitsa Ben-Ari, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, 2007).Google Scholar
. 2010. “A model for Hebrew translation of British humor: Amplification and overstatement”. Target 22:2. 237–263.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baleghizadeh, Sasan and Sharifi, Ahmad. 2010. “Explicitation of implicit logical links in Persian-English translation”. Translation & Interpreting 2:2. 57–65.Google Scholar
Becher, Viktor. 2010a. “Towards a more rigorous treatment of the explicitationhypothesis in translation studies”. trans-kom 3:1. 1–25.Google Scholar
. 2010b. “Abandoning the notion of “translation-inherent” explicitation: against a dogma of translation studies”. Across languages and cultures. 11:1. 1–28.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2011. “When and why do translators add connectives? A corpus-based study”. Target 23:1. 26–47.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Blum-Kulka, Shoshana. 1986. “Shifts of Cohesion and Coherence in Translation”. Julianne House and Shoshana Blum-Kulka, eds. Interlingual and Intercultural Communication: Discourse and Cognition in Translation and Second Language Acquisition Studies. TÜbingen: Gunter Narr Verlag, 1986. 17–35.Google Scholar
Booth, Wayne C. 1961. The rhetoric of fiction. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Catford, John C. 1965. A Linguistic Theory of Translation: An Essay in Applied Linguistics. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Clark, Herbert H. Richard J Gerrig. 1984. “On the Pretense Theory of Irony”. Journal of Experimental Psychology/General 113:1. 121–126.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dagut, Menachem. 1981. “Semantic ‘voids’ as a problem in the translation process”. Poetics Today 2:4. 61–71.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dascal, Marcelo. 1983. Pragmatics and the Philosophy of Mind. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dascal, Marcelo and Elda Weizman. 1987. “Contextual Exploitation of Interpretation, Clues in Text Understanding: an Integrated Model”. Jef Verschueren and Marcella Bertuccelli-Papi, eds. The Pragmatic Perspective. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 1987. 31–46.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dictionary.com, LLC. (2011). Retrieved from: .[URL]
Englund Dimitrova, Birgitta. 2005. Expertise and Explicitation in the Translation Process. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Garmendia, Joana. 2010. “Irony is critical”. Pragmatics & Cognition 18:2. 397–421.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grice, Herbert Paul. 1968. “Utterer’s meaning, sentence meaning, and word meaning”. Foundations of Language 41. 1–18.Google Scholar
. 1975. “Logic and Conversation”. Peter Cole and Jerry L. Morgan, eds. Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts. New York: Academic Press. 1975. 41–58.Google Scholar
. 1978. “Further notes on logic and conversation”. Peter Cole, ed. Pragmatics 91. New York: Academic Press. 1978. 113–127. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haverkate, Henk. 1990. “A Speech act Analysis of Irony”. Journal of Pragmatics 14:1. 77–109.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hickey, Leo. 1998. “Perlocutionary Equivalence: Marking, Exegesis and Recontextualisation”. Leo Hickey, ed. The Pragmatics of Translation. Cleavdon: Multilingual Matters. 1998. 217–232.Google Scholar
Hirsch, Galia. 2008. Between Irony and Humor: a Pragmatic Model Based on Textual Analysis of Literary Works and their Translations. (Phd dissertation under the supervision of Prof. Elda Weizman, Bar Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, 2008).Google Scholar
. 2011a. “Redundancy, irony and humor”. Language Sciences 331. 316–329   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2011b. “Between Irony and Humor: A Pragmatic Model”. Pragmatics & Cognition, 19:3. 530–561.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jeffers, Jennifer. 1995. “Beyond Irony: The Unnamable’s Appropriation of its Critics in a Humorous Reading of the Text”. The Journal of Narrative Technique 25:1. 47–66.Google Scholar
Klaudy, Kinga. 1996. Back-Translation as a Tool for Detecting Explicitation Strategies in Translation. Kinga Klaudy, Jose Lambert and Aniko Sohár, eds, Translation Studies in Hungary. Budapest: Scholastica. 1996. 99–114.Google Scholar
. 2003. Languages in Translation: Lectures on the Theory, Teaching and Practice of Translation. Budapest: Scholastica.Google Scholar
Levenston, Edward A. 1976. “Towards a Comparative Stylistics in English and Hebrew”. English Teacher’s Journal (Israel) 151. 16–22.Google Scholar
Leuven-Zwart, Kitty van. 1989. “Translation and original: Similarities and dissimilarities, I”. Target 1:2. 151–181.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1990. “Translation and original: Similarities and dissimilarities, II”. Target 2:1. 69–95.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Malmkjær, Kirsten. 1998. ”Cooperation and Literary Translation”. Leo Hickey, ed. The Pragmatics of Translation. Cleavdon: Multilingual Matters. 1998.Google Scholar
Nida, Eugene A. Charles R Taber. 1969. The Theory and Practice of Translation. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Pápai, Vilma. 2004. “Explicitation: A universal of translated text?” Anna Mauranen and Pekka Kujamäki, eds. Translation Universals. Do they exist? Amesterdam-Philadelphia: Benjamins. 2004. 143–164.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Olohan, Maeve. 2004. Introducing Corpora in Translation Studies. Oxford: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Oring, Elliott. 1989. “Between jokes and tales: on the nature of punch lines”. Humor 2:4. 349–364.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Øverås, Linn. 1998. “In search of the third code: An investigation of norms in literary translation”. Meta 43:4. 571–588.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Raskin, Victor. 1985. Semantic Mechanisms of Humor. Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar
Raskin, Victor and Salvatore Attardo. 1994. “Non-literalness and non-bona-fide in language: An approach to formal and computational treatments of humor”. Pragmatics & Cognition 2:1. 31–69.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Séguinot, Candace. 1988. “Pragmatics and the explicitation hypothesis.” TTR: Traduction, Terminologie, Rédaction 1:2. 106–114.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1989. “The Translation Process: An Experimental Study”. Candace Séguinot, ed. The Translation Process. Toronto: H.G. Publications. 1989. 21–42.Google Scholar
Shlesinger, Miriam. 1989. Simultaneous interpretation as a factor in effecting shifts in the position of texts on the oral-literate continuum. (Unpublished MA Thesis, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, 1989).Google Scholar
. 1995. “Shifts in cohesion in simultaneous interpreting”. The Translator 1:2. 193–214.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shuttleworth, Mark and Moira Cowie. 1997. Dictionary of Translation Studies. Manchester: St. Jerome.Google Scholar
Sperber, Deidre and Dan Wilson. 1981. “Irony and the Use-Mention Distinction”. Peter Cole, ed. Radical Pragmatics. New York: Academic Press. 1981. 295–318.Google Scholar
Toury, Gideon. 1977. Translational Norms and Literary Translation into Hebrew, 1930–1945. Tel Aviv: The Porter Institute for Poetics and Semiotics, Tel Aviv University. In Hebrew.Google Scholar
. 1980. In Search of a Theory of Translation. Tel Aviv: The Porter Institute for Poetics and Semiotics, Tel Aviv University.Google Scholar
. 1995. Descriptive Translation Studies and Beyond. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2004. “Probablistic explanations in translation studies: Welcome as they are, would they qualify as universals?” Mauranen and Kujamäki 2004. 15–32.Google Scholar
Vinay, Jean-Paul and Jean Darbelnet. 1958. Stylistique comparée du franÇais et de l’anglais: Méthode de traduction. London-Toronto-Paris: Didier.Google Scholar
Weissbrod, Rachel. 1992. “Explicitation in translations of prose-fiction from English to Hebrew as a function of norms”. Multilingua 11:2. 153–171.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1996. “ ‘Curiouser and Curiouser’: Hebrew Translations of Wordplay in Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland”. The Translator 2:2. 219–234.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Weizman, Elda. 1984. “Some Register Characteristics of Discourse Structure in Journalisitic Language”. Applied Linguistics 11. 39–50.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2001. “Addresser, addressee and target: Negotiating roles through ironic criticism”. Edda Weigand and Marcelo Dascal. Eds. Negotiation and Power in Dialogic Interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2001. 125–137.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2008. Positioning in media dialogue: The case of news interviews on Israeli television. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Weizman, Elda and Marcelo Dascal. 1991. “On Clues and Cues: Strategies of Text Understanding”. Journal of Literary Semantics XX:1. 18–30.Google Scholar
Wilson, Deidre and Dan Sperber. 1992. “On Verbal Irony”. Lingua 871. 53–76.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ziv, Avner. 1984. Humor and Personality. Tel Aviv: Papyrus. In Hebrew.Google Scholar
Cited by (12)

Cited by 12 other publications

Zehnalová, Jitka & Helena Kubátová
2022. A methodology of translatological and sociological cooperation in data collection, analysis, and interpretation. Target. International Journal of Translation Studies 34:2 ► pp. 196 ff. DOI logo
Hirsch, Galia & Enora Lessinger
2021. Obscuring the speaker’s stance: when explicitating results in implicitation. Meta 65:3 ► pp. 745 ff. DOI logo
Casado Valenzuela, Alicia
2019. Los universales de localización. Babel. Revue internationale de la traduction / International Journal of Translation 65:5 ► pp. 678 ff. DOI logo
Hirsch, Galia
2017. Who is the victim? When the addresser of the echoed utterance and the target of the irony differ. Text & Talk 37:2 DOI logo
Hirsch, Galia
2020. Adequate contextual explicitation in translation. Target. International Journal of Translation Studies 32:3 ► pp. 456 ff. DOI logo
Hirsch, Galia
2020. Irony, humor or both?. In The Discourse of Indirectness [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 316], ► pp. 19 ff. DOI logo
Hirsch, Galia
2020. Humorous and ironic readers' comments to a politician's post on Facebook: The case of Miri Regev. Journal of Pragmatics 164 ► pp. 40 ff. DOI logo
Hirsch, Galia
2022. Whose side are we on?. Pragmatics. Quarterly Publication of the International Pragmatics Association (IPrA) ► pp. 149 ff. DOI logo
Verschueren, Jef
2016. Contrastive pragmatics. In Handbook of Pragmatics, DOI logo
Verschueren, Jef
2022. Contrastive pragmatics. In Handbook of Pragmatics [Handbook of Pragmatics, ], ► pp. 349 ff. DOI logo
한미애
2015. Translation of Irony in Chae Mansik’s Satirical Fictions. The Journal of Translation Studies 16:5 ► pp. 183 ff. DOI logo
Hirsch, Galia & Shoshana Blum-Kulka
2014. Identifying irony in news interviews. Journal of Pragmatics 70 ► pp. 31 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 10 july 2024. 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.