The choice between subtitling and revoicing in Greece: Norms in action

Fotios Karamitroglou
Faculty of English Studies, University of Athens, Greece

Normative behaviour in situations of language transfer has been gaining ground in Translation Studies and research. The choice between subtitling and revoicing is such a situation, on a rather preliminary level. This article is a summary of an empirical study into why human agents decide to subtitle rather than revoice children’s TV programmes. Not surprisingly, the trend seems to arise from other audiovisual forms and media. Overall, however, the positive audience response towards certain dubbed products seems to depend more on the good promotion and quality of the specific programmes than on the individual merits of any language transfer method per se, as most language transfer commissioners seem indifferent to the implications of such a choice.

Table of contents

The audiovisual map of Europe divides its member states into predominantly ‘subtitling’ or predominantly ‘dubbing’. On this map, Greece has been traditionally charted as a predominantly subtitling country (Papadakis 1998: 65; Luyken et al. 1991: 181). A survey conducted in 1989 showed that 90% of TV programmes broadcast in Greece were subtitled, only 5% dubbed, and another 5% voiced-over (Luyken et al. 1991: 33; Screen digest 1992: 157). Nevertheless, when it comes to children’s TV programmes in particular, the situation seems to be modified since “cartoons are invariably revoiced even in subtitling [ p. 306 ]countries...because of the age-range of their expected audience and because of the need to preserve their visual integrity” (Luyken et al. 1991: 134).

Full-text access is restricted to subscribers. Log in to obtain additional credentials. For subscription information see Subscription & Price. Direct PDF access to this article can be purchased through our e-platform.

[ p. 314 ]References

Aaltonen, Outi
1995 “Subtitling as culture-bound meaning production”. Communication audiovisuelle et transferts linguistiques / Audiovisual communication and language transfer [= Translatio: Nouvelles de la FIT Nouvelle série XIV: 3–4]. 384–387.Google Scholar
AGB Hellas
eds. 1995TV Yearbook 94–95. Athens: Organopublica A.E.Google Scholar
eds. 1996TV Yearbook 95–96. Athens: Organopublica A.E.Google Scholar
Blane, Sandra
1996 “Interlingual subtitling in the languages degree”. Penelope Sewell and Ian Higgins, eds. Teaching translation in universities: Present and future perspectives. London: CILT 1996 183–207.Google Scholar
Davies Messenger, Máire
1989Television is good for your kids. London: Hilary Shipman.Google Scholar
Doulkeri, Tessa
1992Elliniki Tileorasi: Empeiriki Ereuna [Greek television: Empirical research]. Athens: Pappazisi.Google Scholar
Dries, Josephine
1995Dubbing and subtitling: Guidelines for production and distribution. Düsseldorf: The European Institute for the Media.Google Scholar
Fodor, István
1976Film dubbing: Phonetic, semiotic, esthetic and psychological aspects. Hamburg: Helmut Buske.Google Scholar
Goris, Olivier
1993 “The question of French dubbing: Towards a frame of systematic investigation”. Target 5:2. 169–190.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Herbst, Thomas
1995 “People do not talk in sentences: Dubbing and the idiom principle”. Communication audiovisuelle et transferts linguistiques / Audiovisual communication and language transfer [= Translatio: Nouvelles de la FIT Nouvelle série XIV: 3–4]. 257–271.Google Scholar
Ivarsson, Jan
1992Subtitling for the media. Stockholm: Ljunglöfs Offset AB.Google Scholar
Karamitroglou, Fotios
1999 “Audiovisual translation at the dawn of the digital age: Prospects and potentials”. Translation journal 3:3. 1–6.Google Scholar
2000Towards a methodology for the investigation of norms in audiovisual translation: The choice between subtitling and revoicing in Greece. Amster¬dam-Atlanta, GA: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Kilborn, Richard
1993 “ ‘Speak my language’: Current attitudes to television subtitling and dubbing”. Media culture and society XV:4 (October 1993). 641–660.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Luyken, Georg-Michael et al
1991Overcoming language barriers in television: Dubbing and subtitling for the European audience. Düsseldorf: The European Institute for the Media.Google Scholar
Myers, Lora
1973 “The art of dubbing”. Filmmakers newsletter 6:6. 56–58.Google Scholar
O’Connell, Eithne
1998 “Choices and constraints in film translation”. Lynne Bowker, Michael Cronin, Dorothy Kenny and Jennifer Pearson, eds. Unity in diversity: Current trends in Translation Studies. Manchester: St Jerome 1998 61–67.Google Scholar
Panourgia, Eumorfia
1998 “Television and video in English for science and technology”. ELT review 6. 4–5.Google Scholar
Papadakis, Ioannis
1998 “Greece, a subtitling country”. Yves Gambier, ed. Translating for the media: Papers from the International Conference Languages & the Media. Turku: University of Turku, Centre for Translation and Interpreting 1998 65–70.Google Scholar
Ross, Nigel
1995 “Dubbing American in Italy”. English today 11:1. 45–48.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Screen digest
1992 “Watching your language: Foreign version issues”. Screen digest (July), 153–160.[ p. 315 ]Google Scholar