Noise Makers For Cheer Competition

points (I): The translation and movies Clinic

Commentary on comments on the post of Patxi The miracle of editing

might start saying the phrase typical: "I'm glad you asked me '... In the world of translation, we always complain. We complain about how little we get paid. We complain about the ridiculous deadlines that give us to translate vast amounts of text. We complain because no one appreciates. We complain because nobody knows what it means to translate. We complain because nobody seem to realize when a translation is well done. We complain because everybody criticizes us when a translation appears shoddy. In short, we are about whiners.

I, as translator, I share many of these complaints, but the truth is that overall I am very satisfied with my work, so I'm not complaining. Also, I think people do that we value: even if negative, the fact that the issue of translating the titles of movies unleashed "passions" is a sign that it appreciates the work of translation ...

But I have to give you a story 'surprising' the title of the movie does not "translate" the translator of the film. Usually decides who distributes the title: that is, who pays for the translation and who expects to benefit by the fact that it was translated and distributed in a new market. The translator the most you can do is propose several titles then choose the one they like. It is logical to be so: it is neither good nor bad, it's what you get. Let's start

how I think you value the suitability of a translated title. And, first, let's ask the most basic: what is a title? In linguistics, specifically in discourse analysis, it is considered that the title of a text (a film is considered a text) has a value cataphoric: that is, announce things to come. It is a synthesis of text expected. It may be purely informative, but it is also possible and likely to indicate what the author considers most important text you typed. In this sense, when translating a text, faithfully translate the title is part of the respect due to the original author.

So far we all agree. The problem is that you value their fidelity to the original author as a mere literalism. Ie I have the feeling that only you look at if you have translated literally (word for word) the original title. But when there is no means to be faithful to the words, we must be faithful to the meaning. What do we mean by that sense of ? Well, we're talking everything: to words, his meaning , the intention of the petitioner to effect that has on the recipient and purpose to be achieved with the text. In this sense, we could say that should translate well to have many lovers but at the same time be faithful to all, or at least the more we care ...

be faithful to the words and their meanings, we know what you mean. Being faithful to the author's intention, in the case of a movie title implies realize what wanted to highlight Film and respect. Let's illustrate with an example of Sleepless in Seattle. In this case, we emphasize that the main character can not sleep and lives in Seattle. It is obvious that these two aspects of the film does stand out Sleepless . If you translate it literally Sleepless in Seattle, they would respect the original intent to emphasize those two aspects. But then what would be faithful to the effect that the original text on the original recipient and transferring the same effect would be the recipient of the translation? In this case, we can say that the original target are U.S. persons and the recipient Anglophone translation are people Castilian English.

start with the par-sleepless sleepless ... As far as I know, I have the feeling that sleepless not necessarily have the connotation of "disorder" does have insomniac. To say that English is suffering insomnia not Suffer from says Sleeplessness but Suffer from insomnia. So, if we use the word insomniac (the most literal translation) add a connotation that is not the original. That is, we are faithful to the words, the meaning and intent of the title, but we are unfaithful to the effect on the recipient.

And what about Seattle ? Well, it is an American city and probably in Spain or know where exactly (see Geography: USA & EU ) and, although we know, how important is for us that Tom Hanks is in Seattle or Chicago ? Well, very little. So, if the film moved from one place to another, we must also take into account what is relevant in each room, perhaps to the American public has some importance that the geographical setting of the film is Seattle, but for the English public it is rather irrelevant in the case as it is a romantic movie. (If a documentary about anti-globalization movements in Seattle title, would be different: the protests began in Seattle in 1999, so in that case might be relevant.) In short, for a commercial film romanticona, better ignore the American city in question when we moved to Spain, because putting it in the title would not get to never have the same effect as the original has the original audience.

I said that should translate well to have many lovers but at the same time be faithful to all, or at least the more we care ... And I have already suggested that the words lover are less important. Well, in this case I can think of a title which, while not literal, it would be faithful to the meaning, the purpose and intent: sleepless nights. Perhaps if the film had taken that title you would have no "alarm" so ...

But what about the last of the lovers whom I have named, that is, the purpose pursued with the text? Will agree with me that what you want especially when there is a commercial film like this is to make money, right? Well yes, this is done and there are people who invest in it and that's why some people pay for their translation ... Therefore, not decide the title translator therefore has the final say who has invested in that movie. In this sense, the title is not a cataphoric nor anything that has to 'respect' is the bait for people to go to the movies. That purpose is the most important lover when "translate" the title of a film. And if marketers (no translation experts) consider Sleepless is more commercial in Spain sleepless nights, Sleepless is the best degree possible as a translation of Sleepless in Seattle ...

So we can say that that "translates" not the words of the title, but its purpose. In this sense, Sleepless is a faithful translation of the original. Because, as Rodrigo says in the comments original post, what they did to translate the film is to look at some important and put it in a striking and suggestive title: exactly what did the producers of the film when decided by Sleepless in Seattle. Have not translated the words, but the process itself to decide a title, taking into account all relevant factors in the context. And he has done faithfully, right?