104 Discourse and register analysis approaches

imagine that the TT reader would be able to retrieve it easily from the title of the film or the early scenes. Also, the use of Ratsel ('enigma') in German sentence 6 is lost in the translation; however, the word enigma appears in the English title of the film. TT sentence 5 is, moreover, far more informal.

There are mismatches of tenor arising from the non-translation of the German subjunctive in the reported speech after berichtete er ('he told of. . .'). The German sei, habe, gdbe and so on are either omitted or translated by a declarative sentence ('He had never seen another human being'). On the other hand, there are stronger interpersonal features in the final sen­tence in the English TT, with the two interrogatives (where and who) and the negative no one. Yet, from another perspective, this might be an example on the part of the translator of the well-known strategy of compensation, with TT sentence 5 adding to the text an element of modality that was provided by the subjunctive in the German. The concept of mismatches does not really allow for compensation.

The result of the analysis points to the TT being what House calls an 'overt' translation. Subtitling is in fact an evident example of overt transla­tion, since at all times during the film the TT reader is reminded visually of the translated words. However, because of the way the short written ST above has been reworked, it may be more correct to say that it is a summary translation or version.

Case study 2

This case study examines the English translation of the award-winning Mathieu Kassovitz French film La haine ('Hate') (1995). It is the stark story of three youths living in a poor area of Paris and of the violence and aggres­sion that characterizes and permeates their environment. Their idiolect (or sociolect, as it is mainly a class-based speech) is indicative of the identity they have constructed for themselves: it is aggressive, full of slang and obscenities, and often with little cohesion. This mirrors the poverty of their surround­ings and their youth. It is thus a sociolect that has a purposeful semiotic function in the film. Its systematic recurrence amongst all three friends also fulfils the criteria presented by Hatim and Mason (1997: 103) for discourse that requires careful attention in translation.

The extra formality of the written subtitle tends to dictate against the reproduction of very informal speech patterns. Nevertheless, the translators make an effort to reproduce some of the effect of the lexicogrammatical features, including the evaluative nominal forms pigs and bastards (for police) and dickhead and wanker (for idiot). However, there is a tendency for the TT to normalize the grammatical patterns in the TT, which produces increased cohesion and conventional thematic patterns. Thus, the ST je lui aurais mis une balle . . . BAAAAAAP! ['I'd have put a bullet in him . . . ZAAAAAAP!'] becomes the formal and grammatically complex 'If Hubert hadn't been there, I'd have shot him'. It is also difficult to imagine English-speaking

105

SUMMARY

youths using the polite imperative 'Talk nicely!' for Tu ne paries pas comme qal ft

['You don't talk like that!'! or such a syntactically correct negative as 'He

didn't do anything' (rather than 'He ain't done nothing/nuffin'/nowt').

The dynamic element of language noted by Hatim and Mason has here

been overlooked or reduced by the translator. The increased cohesion of the

TT and the reduction in some of the evaluative and interpersonal lexical items means that the identity constructed by the ST sociolect is less coher­ ent. Also, the function it plays in binding the three main characters against the outside world is blurred.

Discussion of case studies

These briefcases studies have shown how discourse and register analysis can explain how texts construct meaning. House's model is perhaps designed more for the uncovering of 'errors' in a formal written TT: the analysis of the Kaspar Hauser example pointed out many such mismatches but not necessarily the reasons for the reworking. The reasons are likely to do with the unusual on-screen constraints, such as the numbers of words that can fit on the screen, the need to keep the TT words legible when superimposed on the German text, and probably the commission's views on what was acceptable to the TT audience. Investigation into the specific translation commission for this text may uncover some interesting issues.

The brief case study of La haine indicates the potential of Hatim and Mason's flexible approach to analysis. An analysis of the lexicogrammar and discourse semantics of the characters' speech can explain the construction of their sociolect. The initial findings concerning the translation of informal grammatical patterns in the film would seem to corroborate Hatim and Mason's comments about the difficulties posed to translators by the dynamic element of communication. The characters' aggressive sociolect clearly reflects their sociocultural environment, yet it undergoes shifts in the TT. However, on many occasions the violence of the speech is communi­cated in the sound track, even if the TT receiver cannot understand the words. This is indicative of the complex nature of film translation, with its audio and visual input, which a text-based discourse analysis may struggle to explain.

Summary

The discourse and register analysis approaches described in this chapter are based on the model of Hallidayan systemic functional linguistics which links microlevel linguistic choices to the communicative function of a text and the sociocultural meaning behind it. House's (1977, 1997) model of register analysis is designed to compare an ST-TT pair for situational variables, genre, function and language, and to identify both the translation method employed ('covert' or 'overt') and translation 'errors'. It has been criticized

for its confusing and 'scientific' jargon; however, it provides a systematic means of uncovering some important considerations for the translator.

Works by both Baker (1992) and Hatim and Mason (1990, 1997) bring together a range of ideas from pragmatics and sociolinguistics that are rele­vant for translation and translation analysis. Baker's analysis is particularly useful in focusing on the thematic and cohesion structures of a text. Hatim and Mason, also working within the Hallidayan model, move beyond House's register analysis and begin to consider the way social and power relations are negotiated and communicated in translation. This ideological level is further developed in the culturally oriented theories discussed in chapters 8 and 9. First, in chapter 7, we look at other theories that attempt to place translation in its sociocultural context.

Further reading

For a more detailed introduction to the workings of systemic functional linguistics see Eggins (1994) and G. Thompson (1995). Halliday (1994) is the most detailed account, but it is very complex. Leech and Short (1981) is a well-known application of the model for the analysis of literary prose. See also Simpson (1993) for a related model for the analysis of modality, transi­tivity and narrative point of view. See Halliday and Hasan (1976) for cohe­sion. See Gutt (1991: 46-9) for criticisms of House's register analysis and Fawcett (1997: 80-4) for a more balanced assessment.

For discourse analysis based on specific languages, see Delisle (1982; for French and English), Taylor (1990; for Italian and English) and Steiner and Ramm (1995; for German and English). Bell's Translation and Translating (1991) outlines the systemic functional model clearly but refers little to translation. For analysis of thematic structure from a functional sentence perspective, see Enkvist (1978) and Firbas (1986, 1992).

For pragmatics, see Leech (1983) and Levinson (1983); see also Austin (1962) and Grice (1975). For language as social semiotic, see Halliday (1978).

Discussion and research points

1. 'Unlike the scientifically (linguistically) based analysis, the evaluative judgement is ultimately not a scientific one, but rather a reflection of a social, political, ethical, moral or personal stance' (House 1997:116). How far do you agree with this statement and what implications does it have for the evaluation of translations?

2. Carry out a register analysis on an ST-TT pair using House's model. What differences, if any.are there in text function? What 'mismatches' or errors are there? Is it a covert or overt translation? What might be motivating any differences you note? How useful is House's model for understanding the translation process that has produced the TT?

3. The text in box 6.4 is part of a speech by Vice President of the European Commission Sir Leon Brittan to the European Parliament in Strasbourg on 3 May 1999. After following up the relevant recommended reading, carry out a Hallidayan analysis of this text focusing (a) on thematic and information structures and (b) on cohesive patterns.

Box 6.4

Let me now turn to bananas. The Commission decided last week - with the consent of the Council of Ministers - not to appeal on either the substance of the issue or the so-called systemic question, but we do intend to pursue the latter issue, the systemic issue, in the panel which you brought against Section 301 of the US Trade Act. We also intend to pursue it in the dispute settlement understanding review and if necessary in the next trade round.

On the substance of the issue, our intention now is to change our regime in order to comply with the WTO [World Trade Organization] panel ruling. I believe that everybody has agreed that our objective has to be conformity with the WTO. But this will not be easy. We intend to consult extensively with all the main players with the objective of achieving a system which will not be threatened by further WTO challenges. I discussed this issue in Washington two weeks ago with the US agri­culture secretary among others. My meetings were followed by discussions at official level. Subsequently, the Council asked the Commission to put forward pro­posals for amending the banana regime by the end of May in the light of further contracts with the US and other parties principally concerned.

How useful do you consider such an analysis to be for a translator? One of the criticisms of the Hallidayan model is that it is biased towards English. Try translating the text into your mother tongue or main foreign language. How applicable is the linguistic analysis to your TL?

The official translations of this speech are available on the European Parliament website (http://www2.europarl.eu.int/omk/omnsapir.so/debats). Compare how the translators have dealt with cohesion and thematic structure.

'Grice's maxims seem to reflect directly notions which are known to be valued in the English-speaking world,for instance sincerity, brevity,and relevance' (Baker 1992:237). Consider Grice's maxims with relation to the languages in which you work. What examples can you find of different maxims? How can a translator deal with any differences?

Follow up what Baker and Blum-Kulka say about cohesion and coherence. What examples can you find from your own languages to support the assertion that explicitation of cohesive ties is a universal feature of translation? How do translators tend to deal with literary and other texts that are deliberately lacking in conventional cohesion or coherence?

Read the cases studies in Hatim and Mason's The Translator as Communicator. How far do you agree with Venuti's criticisms (see section 6.5 above) that such linguistics-oriented models are 'conservative'?

Case study 2 above is a discussion of La haine, in particular the problem of the semiotics of sociolect and the difficulties of translating it. How would or did your own TL deal with the translation of this film? Find examples of other films and novels containing dialects or sociolects. Is there a pattern to the way that they are translated? What does this indicate about the discourse of those involved in the translation process.