The translation of wordplay in literary texts: Typology, techniques and factors in a corpus of English-Catalan source text and target text segments

The translation of wordplay in literary textsTypology, techniques and factors in a corpus of English-Catalan source text and target text segments* Josep Marco Universitat Jaume I (Castelló, Spain) The present study aims to analyse wordplay translation on the basis of the three aspects mentioned in the title — wordplay typology, translation techniques and relevant factors. The theoretical framework is eclectic but draws particularly on Delabastita (1996, 1997) and Lladó (2002). Empirical analysis is based on three English source texts and six Catalan translations, and focuses on two main issues: the frequency distribution of pairs of ST + TT segments across translation techniques, and the possible correlation(s) between translation techniques and factors influencing decision-making. It is observed that translators tend to use techniques implying a negative punning balance, i.e. resulting in some degree of loss of punning activity. Moreover, some factors identified in the literature are seen to correlate with the use of particular translation techniques. Finally, in the last section an attempt is made to go beyond description and explanation and to assess wordplay translation techniques in terms of their suitability as translation solutions. Keywords: wordplay translation, techniques, factors, punning balance, literary translation, English-Catalan 1. Conceptual background This article is an attempt to analyse three important aspects of wordplay translation: the nature of wordplay, the techniques used in its translation, and the factors that are likely to impinge upon wordplay translation. It is important to define and classify the phenomenon under scrutiny in order to set limits to one’s task. Secondly, it is necessary to identify one or more relationships between source-text (ST) and target-text (TT) segments. Several terms have been used to refer to such a Target 22:2 (2010), 264–297. doi 10.1075/target.22.2.05mar issn 0924–1884 / e-issn 1569–9986 © John Benjamins Publishing Company The translation of wordplay in literary texts 265 relationship (e.g. procedure, method, shift, strategy, technique, solution type); in this paper the term technique, as defined by Hurtado (e.g. 2001: 268), will be preferred. As has been argued elsewhere (Zabalbeascoa 2004, Marco 2004, 2007), classifications of translation techniques for particular translation problems are better suited to accounting for the specifics of each problem than general typologies, postulated as valid for any textual segment. Finally, the identification of the factors at work in the translation of wordplay will enable us to (tentatively) move towards explanation, i.e. towards determining why certain techniques are preferred under certain circumstances. Not all relevant factors are accessible through textual analysis, as some of them are closely related to the translator’s personality and skills or to the features of the translation brief and therefore could only be accessed via questionnaires or interviews. As a result of this limitation, emphasis will be laid on textual factors deriving from the nature of wordplay. 1.1 Definition and typology Leech (1969: 209) defines the pun as “a foregrounded lexical ambiguity which may have its origin either in homonymy or polysemy”. But the pun is only one of the possible manifestations of wordplay, as Leech himself makes abundantly clear in his account of “the technical aspects of punning and related forms of word-play” (1969: 210). Thirty years later, Delabastita provides a more thorough and more inclusive definition of wordplay (1996: 128): it is a textual phenomenon; it exploits structural features of the language(s) involved; it is perceived as communicatively significant; and it is based on more or less similar forms conveying more or less different meanings. The latter element ties in with homonymy and polysemy, which were part of Leech’s definition. But what Delabastita’s definition clearly shows is that wordplay draws not only on the paradigmatic axis, which involves exploiting the language potential, but also on the syntagmatic one, insofar as it is a communicatively relevant (i.e. functionally motivated) textual phenomenon. These features, even if they did not find their way into Leech’s definition above, were visibly present in his discussion of the phenomenon of wordplay too. Delabastita (1996: 128) uses two criteria to establish a typology of wordplay: a. the type of formal similarity between the lexical units at play: homonymy, homophony, homography and paronymy (the relationship operating between words having very similar though not identical sounds and spellings); b. the vertical/horizontal distinction. Vertical puns are those in which the two (or more) meanings that can be activated are co-present in the same word or sequence, whereas in horizontal puns the two (or more) meanings in question are distributed over two (or more) words or sequences. 266 Josep Marco The combination of these two criteria gives rise to Delabastita’s well-known grid with eight slots, reproduced below as Table 1. Table 1. Classification of wordplay according to Delabastita (1996: 128) Homonymy VERTICAL Pyromania: a burning passion Homophony VERTICAL Wedding belles Homography VERTICAL MessAge [name of mid-1990s rap band] HORIZONTAL How the US put US to shame Paronymy VERTICAL Come in for a faith lift [slogan on church] HORIZONTAL Carry on dancing carries Carry to the top [article on ambitious young dancer named Carry] HORIZONTAL Counsel for Council home buyers HORIZONTAL It’s G.B. for the Beegees [article on pop band touring Britain] However, it must be said that this classification is just one of many possible ways of dealing with a typology of wordplay. For one thing, Delabastita himself suggests (1997: 4) that it would be much more productive to classify wordplay in terms of clusters of mutually independent criteria. Thus, a given instance of wordplay might be characterised by means of several distinctive features, but each feature would constitute a continuum or cline instead of being reduced to a binary opposition (+/-). Delabastita mentions three criteria which have been used in wordplay classification and would lend themselves to this kind of treatment: the distinction between play with words and play with sound (which would also include alliteration), the distinction between homonymy and polysemy, and the deliberate nature and textual relevance of wordplay. Lladó (2002), in a very thorough study of wordplay and its translation which is firmly rooted in rhetoric, both ancient and modern, engages with Delabastita’s proposal and acknowledges both its potential and its limitations. Its main limitation for Lladó (2002: 47) is that “the pun is just one form among many that could be considered and belongs to a particular national tradition”.1 What particular national tradition is being referred to is not specified by Lladó, although the nature of Delabastita’s studies points to the English-speaking one. The underlying argument is clear, at any rate — there is more to wordplay than just the pun, and it is the pun that Delabastita is mainly concerned with. Lladó’s definition of wordplay overlaps with Delabastita’s to a great extent, especially with regard to its textual nature. Wordplay based on the signifier is “a textual problem which must be solved in the framework of textual effects” (2002: 21; author’s emphasis). However, Lladó’s classification clearly reveals a wider scope, as The translation of wordplay in literary texts 267 well as the rhetorical affiliation mentioned above. Here is a summary of his classification (Lladó 2002: 125): 1. Wordplay based on consonance (defined as phonetic similarity), which includes the following figures: paronomasia, alliteration, assonance, antanaclasis, polyptoton, derivation, homoioteleuton, apophony, cacophony and neologism. 2. Wordplay based on polysemy, which includes syllepsis and zeugma. 3. Wordplay based on homophony, or complete phonetic identity, whose typical manifestation is the calembour. 4. Wordplay based on transformation, which includes all figures based on the alteration of the phonetic and graphic structure of a word in order to create a different one, such as anagram, portmanteau word, metathesis, metagram, heterogram and palindrome. Delabastita’s classification would be able to account for Lladó’s first three categories and part of the fourth (portmanteau words, metatheses, metagrams), which, taken together, roughly overlap with the notion of pun; but some tropes under the fourth heading cannot be made to fit into it. An anagram, for instance, is a rearrangement of the letters in a word or sequence of words to produce a different sequence, on condition that each letter in the original sequence is used only once. Now, if we take André Breton’s famous anagram “Avida Dollars” (‘greedy for dollars’) for Salvador Dalí, it can hardly be said that this kind of wordplay matches our notion of pun, as the formal similarity between the two expressions is far from apparent, either on the visual or the audible plane. What brings both sequences together is an (elaborate) underlying criterion, which does not appeal either to the ear or to the eye. The same argument could be applied to the heterogram, “a written sequence in which all the letters used are different” (Lladó 2002: 187), and the palindrome, in which a linguistic sequence reads the same from left to right as from right to left. A famous English palindrome is “Able was I ere I saw Elba”, which refers to Napoleon’s exile to the island of that name. In view of these cases, it seems clear that the notions of pun and wordplay are not co-extensive. Be that as it may, in the present study Delabastita’s classification will be followed, for three reasons. Firstly, because it accounts for all the instances of wordplay found in the corpus. Secondly, because it has gained currency in translation studies and found its way into several analyses (e.g. Mateo 1995, Lladó 2002, Klitgård 2005, Díaz Pérez 2008). And thirdly because Lladó’s proposal, terminologically accurate as it is, introduces a high degree of complexity which may not be productive enough when it comes to analysing translation facts. Even though classifying ST segments may be a necessary step in translation-oriented analysis, what really matters is classifying translation options and discerning patterns (if 268 Josep Marco possible) in those options. Therefore, using too complex a typological framework may be inefficient, in the sense of showing a negative cost-benefit balance, and can be said to defeat its own purpose. 1.2 Wordplay translation techniques Several classifications of wordplay translation techniques have been put forward by scholars who have engaged in empirical research. Again, the one most widely known and used is Delabastita’s, which includes the following techniques (1996: 134): 1. pun → pun: the ST pun is translated by a target-language pun, which may differ more or less widely from the ST pun in terms of formal or semantic structure or of textual function; 2. pun → non-pun: the ST pun may be replaced by a non-punning phrase which can relay both meanings of the source pun or just one; 3. pun → related rhetorical device: the ST pun is replaced by a wordplay-related rhetorical device (repetition, alliteration, rhyme, irony, paradox, etc.) in order to recreate the effect of the ST pun; 4. pun → Ø: the ST fragment where the pun occurs is omitted; 5. pun ST = pun TT: the translator relays the ST pun in its original formulation, i.e. without actually “translating” it; 6. non-pun → pun: the translator introduces a pun when translating a ST passage where none occurred, possibly in order to compensate for a previous or subsequent loss, or for some other reason; 7. Ø → pun: new textual material is added which includes a pun, probably also to compensate for a loss; 8. editorial techniques, such as explanatory footnotes or endnotes, translator’s comments in a prologue or foreword, etc. The two volumes edited by Delabastita in 1996 and 1997 contain other attempts at classifications of wordplay translation techniques — even if sometimes their concern is not wordplay in its entirety but a particular kind of wordplay. Thus, Veisbergs (1997) focuses on idiom-based wordplay and provides the following list, in which the order suggests no preference but goes from a higher level of faithfulness to relatively ‘freer’ approaches (1997: 163–171): 1. equivalent idiom transformation, which occurs when the source and target languages present equivalents with respect to the ST idiom, its components and the transforming elements; The translation of wordplay in literary texts 269 2. loan translation: the original idiom is translated linearly, with all its components. It works with logical and transparent idioms; 3. extension: insertion of some additional explanatory information, which may take the form of an unobtrusive editorial comment after a loan translation; 4. analogue idiom transformation: using a stylistically close idiom which will thus yield to contextual transformation; 5. substitution (similar to analogue idiom transformation): there is willingness on the translator’s part to change the image underlying the idiom altogether so as to achieve a similar (punning) effect; 6. compensation: when the translator feels that equivalence should be achieved at the level of the whole text, i.e. globally not locally; 7. omission (loss, zero translation), which can adopt two forms: “either the relevant passage is omitted altogether, or the idiom is preserved in terms of its contents but with loss of the wordplay” (1997: 169); 8. metalingual comment: editorial techniques such as footnotes, parentheses, etc. Some of these techniques could only be applied to the particular kind of wordplay that the author intends to bring under scrutiny, whereas others have a broader scope. In the latter case, though, Veisbergs’ categories do not always coincide with Delabastita’s. In that respect, it may be interesting to draw attention to Offord’s classification, which shows a remarkable degree of overlap with Delabastita’s, even though it is based on a limited corpus: three plays by Shakespeare and a number of French translations of those plays. Offord (1997: 241) puts forward a six-fold typology: a) ignore the pun completely; b) imitate Shakespeare’s technique; c) major explicitly on the primary or surface meaning; d) major explicitly on the secondary, underlying meaning; e) mention both meanings; f) create new wordplay. In the present study, Delabastita’s typology will be adhered to, though with a couple of modifications. Firstly, technique 1 (pun → pun) will be broken down into two separate techniques depending on whether the translation output is relatively similar to the ST pun or not: pun → similar pun and pun → different pun. This distinction is arguably warranted by the assumption that the attitude underlying the use of each of these techniques may be quite different: whereas pun → similar pun may be the result of isomorphism across languages, it seems clear that pun → different pun requires a deliberate effort at recreation on the translator’s part. And secondly, technique 5 (pun ST = pun TT), which is couched in rather ambiguous terms, will be referred to as direct copy, a term coined by Delabastita himself in a previous study (1987) and also adopted by Mateo (1995). In the study just mentioned, Delabastita distinguished between direct copy (rendering the 270 Josep Marco source-text expression with source-language signifiers) and transference (rendering the original expression with target-language signifiers), but direct copy will be used here to cover both possibilities, in order to avoid terminological proliferation and potential confusion. The final list of techniques to be used in the present study could be arranged along a cline based on the idea of the punning balance, i.e. the relationship between the ST and TT segments in terms of loss, preservation or gain. Some techniques involve punning loss, as the original pun becomes a TT segment which cannot be regarded as a pun, either because omission (pun → Ø), direct copy, or neutralisation (pun → non-pun) have taken place, or because a related rhetorical device has been used. The latter technique brings the solution closer to the status of wordplay, but cannot be regarded as a pun proper. The techniques pun → similar pun and pun → different pun involve preservation of the punning balance, for obvious reasons. And the techniques no pun → pun, and Ø → pun imply punning gain, thus drawing a symmetrical pattern with the ones described above. The only technique that does not fit into the pattern is editorial techniques, as they imply addition of information and do not affect the solution itself, so to speak, but run parallel to it. In fact, editorial techniques seldom, if ever, occur on their own, but are usually coupled with another technique (e.g. neutralisation or direct copy). Figure 1 shows the arrangement of techniques along the punning balance cline. punning loss preservation gain omission direct copy pun → non-pun pun → related rhetorical device pun → similar pun pun → different pun non-pun → pun Ø → pun Figure 1. Arrangement of wordplay translation techniques (excepting editorial techniques) along the punning balance cline Figure 1. Arrangement of wordplay translation techniques (excepting editorial 1.3 Factors that impinge upon thecline techniques) along the punning balance translation of wordplay The point of departure for my discussion of factors will be the (theoretical, or assumed) untranslatability upon the translation of wordplayas no surprise or, indeed, nov1.3. Factors that impinge of wordplay. It will come elty that wordplay has often been claimed to be untranslatable. Rabadán (1991), The point for instance, of departurewordplay as an area ofwill be the (theoretical, or assumed) presents for my discussion of factors non-equivalence across languages, and identifies non-equivalence —come as no surprise or, indeed, novelty that untranslatability of wordplay. It will which in principle implies no more than mismatch, or lack of isomorphism, across language systems with regard to a particular wordplay has often been claimed to be untranslatable. Rabadán (1991), for instance, element — with untranslatability, a concept that belongs to the level of parole, not presents author distinguishes “three main reasons for and insurmountable diflangue. Thiswordplay as an area of non-equivalence across languages, the identifies nonficulties” posed by wordplay (1991: 128): than mismatch, or lack of equivalence – which in principle implies no more isomorphism, across language systems with regard to a particular element – with untranslatability, a concept that belongs to the level of parole, not langue. This author distinguishes “three main reasons for the insurmountable difficulties” posed by wordplay (1991: 128): The translation of wordplay in literary texts 271 1. natural lack of isomorphism between English and Spanish, which becomes apparent in the different arbitrary lexical accumulations in each system, i.e. in the different distribution of signifiers and signifieds; 2. the impossibility to treat the phonetic and graphic combinations in each language, i.e. their formal characteristics, as “functional equivalents”; 3. the motivated intratextual use of the linguistic sign (foregrounding), which turns it into the text itself, the matter, and that is the translator’s impossible challenge: there is no way to translate “linguistic materiality”. Reasons 1 and 2 belong to the level of langue, as they point towards lack of fit across language systems, thus constituting arguments against equivalence rather than against translatability. Lack of fit permeates all levels of the language system but, even so, translation is not impossible. However, reason 3 belongs to the domain of parole, which is the field where the battle for the translatability of linguistic elements and resources is fought, and must accordingly be regarded as an argument against the translatability of wordplay. However, later on Rabadán qualifies her own claim by saying (1991: 129): “At any rate, a pun’s equivalence potential is determined by the extent to which the three assumptions above are present”. In other words, rather than untranslatability, the focus of our discussion will be degrees of translatability: the more a pun depends for its effect on the linguistic materiality of words, the lower the degree of translatability, and vice versa. In the Catalan-speaking domain, Mallafrè (1991) has reached similar conclusions, although his approach to the problem is not as systematic as Rabadán’s. Mallafrè, like Rabadán, assumes that translating wordplay is an impossible task, although he hastens to qualify and relativise that assumption. His experience as translator of Joyce’s Ulysses (among other works) into Catalan has led him to the conclusion that not all instances of wordplay are equally untranslatable. It is at this point that the notion of the factor reveals its relevance and, indeed, its usefulness. Puns, or instances of wordplay in general, will be more or less translatable depending on the factors impinging on their translation. And they may also help us account for the use of translation techniques, or clusters of techniques, and thus enable us to move beyond description towards explanation. A review of the literature on wordplay translation yields the following list of factors to be borne in mind. Empirical analysis will subsequently show to what extent they are actually relevant. 1. Isomorphism, which is closely connected with the degree of historical kinship, or relatedness, between the languages involved — the closer the languages, the likelier it will be to find a potential equivalent (Rabadán 1991: 128–129, Delabastita 1996: 135). 272 Josep Marco 2. Degree of cultural specificity of the elements making up the pun (Delabastita 1996: 135–136, Lladó 2002: 140), which may be represented as a cline going from shared extralinguistic reality to those referents which are peculiar to a given cultural community. 3. Translator-related subjective factors, mentioned by Weissbrod (1996: 221): “talent, proficiency, and willingness to spend time finding solutions to the problems that arise”. 4. “Objective factors”, or “working conditions”, also identified by Weissbrod (1996: 221), which must be distinguished from the characteristics of the brief proper (function of target text, type of target reader, etc.). 5. Translation norms of the target system, which, according to Weissbrod (1996: 221), are half-way between the subjective and the objective, as they are shared by a group of individuals but are not totally objective. 6. Textual genre (Manini 1996: 173; although the term he uses is text-type, the concept is the same). The translation of wordplay in a novel, for instance, can differ widely from the translation of wordplay in a play intended for performance. 7. Target readership, or “intended audience”, also mentioned by Manini (1996: 173). It is such an obvious factor in any translation act that it is not necessary to dwell upon it. Suffice it to say that a pun may be essential in a translation intended for adult readers but irrelevant or even absurd in one addressed to children. 8. Kind of linguistic structure played upon. In this respect, Delabastita claims that wordplay can exploit the following levels of structure (1996: 130): phonological and graphological, lexical (polysemy and idioms), morphological and syntactic. Other authors have concentrated on particular kinds of wordplay pertaining to one of these levels of structure. Thus, Veisbergs (1997) deals with idiom-based puns. Manini (1996), in his turn, focuses on meaningful names, i.e. those names whose relationship with the character they refer to is not arbitrary but motivated, as they highlight one the character’s physical or moral features. Finally, Leppihalme (1996, 1997) concerns herself with the translation of allusion. Although the issue of allusion is larger than that of wordplay, puns based on idioms or cultural items are a sub-group of allusions. Therefore, Leppihalme’s work is relevant to my present object of study. 9. Stylistic function or motivation (also referred to as semiotic value). It is virtually impossible to draw an exhaustive list of all the possible stylistic functions that a pun may fulfil, as the contexts in which puns occur and the intentions behind their use are manifold. Zabalbeascoa (1996: 244) claims that both the functions of humour (escapist entertainment, social criticism, pedagogical device, moralising intention) and the mental state and attitude reflected by it (bitterness, cynicism, irony, etc.) can be manifold. McKerras (1994), in his The translation of wordplay in literary texts 273 turn, considers that creating humour is just one possible function of wordplay, to which others must be added (1994: 7): “providing linkage, marking a climax, evoking a hidden idea, humor, cleverness of writing style, and poetic effect”. Lladó (2002: 210), following in the footsteps of Guiraud (1953), summarises the functions of wordplay under five headings: comedy, parody, irony, knowledge and metatextuality. Be that as it may, there are two further aspects which must be considered in conjunction with the particular function accomplished by an instance of wordplay: its scope (whether it is local or global in the text) and the kind of relationship observed between wordplay and the structural elements that make up the fabric of the text (plot, characters, theme, metaphorical patterns, etc.). 10. Relative frequency of wordplay. Offord (1997: 255) claims that “the low frequency of occurrence of puns in the original plays seems to promote their more deliberate use by translators”. In other words, the number of puns encountered in the source text is in inverse proportion to the percentage of puns which are rendered as such in the target text. This is of course a provisional hypothesis, as the empirical basis of the study does not warrant any generalisation of its conclusions. 11. Type of wordplay. Again, Offord (1997: 258) claims that vertical and horizontal puns are dealt with differently in his corpus, i.e. they tend to be translated by means of different techniques. This is again a hypothesis, for the same reason as above. 12. Domain(s) of experience, or isotopy/-ies (Greimas 1966), in which the instance of wordplay is embedded. Alexieva (1997), working within a cognitive framework, suggests that a pun is a clash not between two possible word meanings, but between two domains of human experience or knowledge. More relevantly to our purposes here, she posits a direct link between the domains involved in an instance of wordplay and its rhetorical effect by claiming that a pun’s comic effect rests upon the distance between the two domains involved and the way they are connected. Lladó (2002), following in the tradition of semiotics, uses the term, ‘isotopy’, instead of ‘domain’ to refer to all semantic features pointing in the same semantic direction in a text. These two terms obviously come from different fields of study, but they may be regarded as quasi-synonyms for the purposes of our present study. The argument is similar to Alexieva’s above, with slight terminological changes: the greater the distance between the two (or more) isotopies activated by wordplay, the more surprising the effect. 274 Josep Marco 2. Aims and methodology As stated at the beginning, the present study aims to analyse wordplay translation on the basis of the three aspects considered in the previous section — wordplay typology, translation techniques and relevant factors. More particularly I hope that my empirical analyses will enable me to answer two main questions: a. what is the frequency distribution of pairs of ST + TT segments across the translation techniques identified? b. is there any discernible correlation between translation techniques and factors influencing decision-making? As to the method employed, it might be said to consist of the following steps: 1. corpus selection; 2. identification and classification of puns both in the ST and in the TT; 3. identification and classification of translation techniques used and relevant factors present for each pair of ST + TT segments; 4. quantitative analysis of techniques; 5. qualitative analysis of the correlation between techniques and factors; 6. drawing conclusions. Before going on to report on corpus analysis proper, a few remarks are in order with regard to corpus selection. Wordplay has often been regarded as a textual anomaly, a consideration that can hardly have encouraged its use on a frequent or indeed systematic basis. Therefore, it is never easy to build a wordplay-rich corpus which is at the same time consistent and representative. A remarkable instance of a wordplay-rich corpus showing a high degree of consistency is the one compiled by Lladó (2002), for instance, who centres his study of wordplay translation on a number of French-speaking novelists (Queneau, Roussel, Jarry and Perec) for whom wordplay, in all its variety, rather than a resource to be deployed locally in order to achieve a particular rhetorical effect, is a structural device (Lladó 2002, 15): we want to state quite clearly that in the framework of this study we will only be concerned with such modes of manipulation as fulfil a central role in the literary form, not as mere expressive resources but as broad segmental units permeating the signifying and narrative structures. Thus, the resources and figures under scrutiny here, embedded in the form of literary fiction, “originate in a textual need”, to borrow Paul Zumthor’s words. Equally excluded are those works which are only affected by wordplay in a fragmentary, occasional and anecdotic way. However, what is gained in consistency is lost in scope, as the results of Lladó’s study are only valid in the context of a particular genre (the novel) at a particular The translation of wordplay in literary texts 275 time. Therefore, corpus selection for this study was guided by two complementary criteria: a. the kind of structural relevance just described by Lladó. Oscar Wilde’s The Picture of Dorian Gray (PDG) and The Importance of Being Earnest (IBE) and Graham Swift’s Last Orders (LO) are far from sharing a common literary affiliation, as the authors selected by Lladó may be claimed to do, but wordplay does fulfil an important role in their development, as will be seen in our analysis; b. some degree of variety, especially in terms of textual genre and target readership, so as to determine the relevance of these factors. Table 2 offers details of corpus composition, both with regard to source texts and target texts. This corpus cannot be regarded as representative of anything — a given genre, a particular period, a way of understanding (and activating) creativity in literature, etc. — on the ground of its very obvious limited scope. However, it may be varied enough to contribute to an understanding of the correlation between translation solutions and factors at play. Table 2. Source and target texts making up the corpus used in the present study Number Author / Translator 1 1/1 1/2 1/3 Oscar Wilde Oscar Wilde / Jordi Larios Oscar Wilde / Rafael Tasis Oscar Wilde / Carolina Q. Knowles Oscar Wilde Oscar Wilde / Jaume Melendres ST or TT title The Picture of Dorian Gray El retrat de Dorian Gray El retrat de Dorian Gray El retrat de Dorian Gray The Importance of Being Earnest La importància de ser Frank Public. Genre year 1890 1998 2000 1992 Novel Novel Novel Novel Target audience General reading public General reading public General reading public Teenage reading public; abridged version Theatre audience Theatre audience General reading public General reading public General reading public 2 2/1 2/2 3 3/1 1895 1998 Drama Drama Drama Novel Novel Oscar Wilde / Antoni La importància d’ésser 1994 V. Pérez i Sancho seriós Graham Swift Graham Swift / Carme Geronès and Carles Urritz Last Orders Les últimes voluntats 1996 1999 276 Josep Marco 3. Analysis of wordplay translation in the corpus 3.1 Techniques The most sweeping generalisation that can be made with regard to the translation techniques employed in the corpus is that the translators tend to use techniques resulting in a negative punning balance, i.e. techniques which imply loss in terms of punning activity with regard to the ST. The corpus includes a total of 65 original puns, which yield 104 translated segments, across three translations of The Picture and two of The Importance. The number of techniques employed, though, is still higher than that (110), as translators sometimes use two techniques in the same pair of segments (e.g. direct copy + editorial techniques, direct copy + related rhetorical device, etc.). Table 3 shows the frequency distribution of pairs of ST + TT segments across translation techniques. Table 3. Frequency distribution of pairs of ST + TT segments across translation techniques Translation technique pun → similar pun pun → different pun pun → non-pun pun → related rhetorical device pun → direct copy pun → Ø (omission) editorial techniques non-pun → pun Ø → pun TOTAL Absolute frequency of occurrence 29 6 30 4 16 19 6 0 0 110 Relative frequency of occurrence 26.36% 5.46% 27.27% 3.64% 14.54% 17.27% 5.46% 0% 0% 100% If this distribution is placed along the punning balance continuum, as suggested in the previous section, the result is Figure 2. The four techniques whose use yields a negative punning balance (i.e. pun → Ø, direct copy, pun → non-pun and related rhetorical device), taken together, account for 62.72% of the cases, whereas the two techniques implying a neutral punning balance (neither gain nor loss, i.e. pun → similar pun and pun → different pun) cover 31.82% of the occurrences. There are no cases in the corpus of a positive punning balance, as non-pun → pun and Ø → pun are never employed. Editorial The translation of wordplay in literary texts 277 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 JP Ø pun direct pun copy non-pun pun related pun similar pun di erent non-pun rhetorical device pun pun pun Ø pun Figure 2. Wordplay translation techniques and their frequency of occurrence along the punning balance continuum techniques have been left out of the count, as well as out of the continuum, because they do not affect the translated segment itself and never occur by themselves. The technique pun → similar pun is only possible when there is isomorphism. If the linguistic structure on which wordplay operates is an idiom, then isomorphism involves availability in the target language of another idiom which is similar both in form and function to the ST one, as in the following example:2 (54) IBE / Pérez i Sancho Algernon: (…) The amount of women in London who flirt with their own husbands is perfectly scandalous. It looks so bad. It is simply washing one’s clean linen in public. Algernon: (…) És d’escàndol el munt de dones que a Londres galantegen amb els seus mateixos esposos. Sembla tan de poca educació. És si fa no fa com rentar la roba neta en públic. (Back translation: It’s a scandal how many women in London flirt with their own husbands. It seems so rude. It’s more or less like washing clean clothes in public.) The instance of wordplay just quoted rests upon the substitution of clean for dirty in the idiom to wash one’s dirty linen in public. As usual in Wilde, this involves a reversal of the audience’s expectations, as it is implied that the kind of linen to be 278 Josep Marco washed in public is dirty, not clean, linen. The Catalan idiom manipulated in the target text is identical both in form and meaning. However, not all translators take advantage of the opportunity offered by isomorphism. The following is a case in point, as the result is pun → non-pun: (14) PDG / Tasis Marca Like all people who try to exhaust a subject, he exhausted his listeners. Com tota la gent que vol treure el suc d’un tema, començava per esgotar els oients. (Back translation: Like all people who want to squeeze out all the juice in a subject, he began by exhausting his listeners.) The Catalan verb esgotar (‘to exhaust’) collocates both with tema (‘subject’) and oients (‘listeners’), so a similar effect could have been easily achieved. When the isomorphism condition does not apply, one of the possible results is neutralisation (pun → non-pun). Sometimes this technique is chosen because of the intrinsic difficulty offered by the ST pun, as in the following instance: (37) IBE / Melendres What between the duties expected of one during one’s lifetime, and the duties exacted from one after one’s death, land has ceased to be either a profit or a pleasure. Val més fer inversions que ens puguin proporcionar beneficis mentre encara vivim, que no pas invertir en terres pensant en els nostres hereus. (Back translation: It’s better to make investments that can give us benefits while we are still alive than to invest in land for the sake of our heirs.) The other possible technique for those cases where there is no isomorphism is direct copy, which is particularly frequent when the ST pun is idiom-based. It is a prototypical manifestation of what Leppihalme (1997) calls the least-amountof-change approach, as it ignores the presence of pre-formed linguistic material which is easily accessible for the ST reader but absolutely irretrievable for the target reader. This loss can be partly made up for by the insertion of additional information, of course; but additional information (i.e. editorial techniques), though avoiding incoherence and providing the reader with the key to comprehension, denies them the pleasure of relating the two meanings of the pun with their own resources. Here is an example: The translation of wordplay in literary texts 279 (7) PDG / Larios He was always late on principle, his principle being that punctuality is the thief of time. Sempre feia tard per una qüestió de principis, i el principi era que la puntualitat és el lladre del temps.3 3 El refrany anglès—«procrastination is the thief of time»—assegura el contrari. (N. del T.) (Back translation: He was always late as a matter of principle, and the principle was that punctuality is the thief of time. 3 3 The English proverb — “procrastination is the thief of time” — claims the opposite. (Translator’s note) ) On the other hand, it is worth noting that omission is relatively frequent in the corpus but not evenly distributed, as most cases of omission are found in two particular translations. Leppihalme (1997) claims with regard to allusions that translators only turn to omission as a last resort, when all other roads to a satisfactory solution are blocked. This tendency is confirmed by the translators themselves, interviewed by the author for the purposes of her research, and also by many of the data in my corpus, which show that omission never takes place in fiction for adult readers and is strictly limited to fiction for children / young adults and drama. The most eloquent case is that of one of the three translations of The Picture of Dorian Gray, published in a series of translations for teenagers, in which 9 out of the 10 puns identified in the source text are plainly omitted in the target text. This translation is an abridged version of the original intended for educational use, as witnessed by the fact that the translation is supplemented with teaching material and activities. As regards The Importance of Being Earnest, one of the two translations is intended for performance and omits 7 out of the 19 puns identified in the source text, whereas the other is intended for reading and only shows 3 omissions. What all this suggests is that translation techniques and, more particularly, omission, are clearly sensitive to such factors as target readership and textual genre. In order to formulate firmly grounded hypotheses in this respect we would need access to such important factors as the translators’ skills and attitudes towards the task in hand; however, it may be tentatively hypothesised that the translator of fiction for teenagers tends to omit those puns which they regard as too cognitively demanding for their readers, and that translators for the stage are almost bound to suppress those puns which cannot be adequately rendered or which seem irrelevant, since the theatre, unlike the printed page, does not allow for editorial techniques. 280 Josep Marco The technique pun → related rhetorical device, as we saw above, implies using some kind of rhetorical compensation for the loss of the pun proper — even though the borderline between the pun proper and such devices as rhyme or alliteration is far from clear-cut. Even if it is placed on the negative side of the punning balance continuum, it may involve a relatively high degree of creativity on the translator’s part. Instances of this technique are found in Last Orders. In the following example the translators render the ST alliteration through another alliteration in the TT, and the ST rhyme through assonance. Even though there is not even a remote equivalent in Catalan for Cockney rhyming slang, the target text displays some musicality thanks to alliteration and assonance: (104) LO / Geronès and Urritz He said, ‘Smithfield Market, love. All Va dir: meat and mouth, all beef and grief. –El mercat d’Smithfield, bonica. Tot (…)’ carn i crits, tot bou i dol. (Back translation: He said, “Smithfield market, beautiful. All meat and shouts, all ox and mourning.) Finally, it must be stressed that the technique involving the highest degree of creativity in the corpus (pun → different pun) only accounts for 5.46% of the cases. The use of this technique demands an additional creative effort from translators, as it implies the creation of a pun which is different from the original one but capable of fitting effectively and coherently into the original context and co-text. The choice of this creative technique may stem from the translator’s perception of the functional relevance of a particular pun, or of punning in general. That might be the case of one of the translations of the pun on earnest / Ernest in Wilde’s play, as that pun, apart from the very prominent fact that it features in the title itself, makes an important contribution to the theme and to aspects of characterisation and plot: (32) IBE / Melendres Algernon: You have always told me Algernon: O sigui que no eres franc it was Ernest. I have introduced you i ens has enganyat. to every one as Ernest. You answer to the name of Ernest. You look as if your name was Ernest. You are the most earnest-looking person I ever saw in my life. (Back translation: Algernon: So you’re not frank and you have deceived us.) Even though the printed version has to (graphically) reflect one of the two possible meanings of the pun, the text when orally delivered upon the stage would fulfil the The translation of wordplay in literary texts 281 condition of playing on a person’s name (Frank) which may at the same time be interpreted as a common lexical item (franc), an adjective denoting some kind of personal quality which, even if it is not the same as the one presented in the ST, fits into the context created by the plot and the characters. But it is not always functional relevance on a global textual scale that conditions the translator’s creative effort. In the following example from Last Orders the pun’s scope is local and, even if it contributes a touch of humour to Lenny’s characterisation and to the (secondary) theme of the comparison between the army (where some of the characters served) and the navy (where only one of them served), such a contribution cannot be said to be central to the novel. Even so, the Catalan translators manage to create a parallel pun in the target text: (93) LO / Geronès and Urritz There’s buds on the trees. Sunlight’s trickling through the branches. Lenny says, ‘Wavy Navy. Frigging frigates.’ Als arbres hi ha brots. La llum del sol es filtra entre les branques. En Lenny diu: –L’Armada l’ha armada. Quins sabates a les fragates. (Back translation: There are sprouts on the trees. Sunlight filters through the branches. Lenny says: “The Navy have really stirred things up now / have really done it now. Such thickheads on the frigates.”) 3.2 Factors Techniques and factors are inextricably intertwined, as discussion of the above examples has shown. So far we have started from techniques and tried to relate them to underlying factors; let us now look more systematically at those factors at work. The most recurrent ones in my corpus are the following: stylistic function, kind of linguistic structure on which wordplay operates, cultural specificity, domain of experience and skopos (which would include textual genre and target readership). In what follows each of them will be considered in turn. An instance of wordplay is most significant when it is seen to contribute to the work’s plot, characterisation or theme. Puns often fulfil a characterising function. In The Picture of Dorian Gray, for instance, most puns (and certainly the wittiest) are put in the mouth of Lord Henry, the unconventional character who is used by Wilde to convey his social criticism. Likewise, in Last Orders Lenny is put forward as somebody who is fond of making provocative remarks and teasing people, as shown in the following example: 282 Josep Marco (76) LO / Geronès and Urritz Lenny knows she isn’t, and Lenny knows Vince doesn’t like ‘garage’. It’s ‘showroom’ these days. It was Lenny who said one night in the Coach, ‘Showroom, he calls it, well we all know what’s on show.’ En Lenny sap que no, i en Lenny sap que a en Vince no li agrada això de «garatge». Avui dia se’n diu «exposició». Va ser en Lenny qui ho va dir una nit allà al Carruatge: «En diuen exposició i tots sabem què s’hi exposa». (Back translation: Lenny knows she isn’t, and Lenny knows that Vince does not like that ‘garage’ stuff. Nowadays it’s called ‘exhibition’. It was Lenny who said it one night there in the Coach: “They call it exhibition and we all know what is exhibited there.”) The innuendo here is that Vince has his own daughter “on show” at the “showroom”, as a bait for customers. The Catalan translators use the pun → similar pun technique by playing on “exposició” / “exposar (‘exhibition’ / ‘to exhibit’). More numerous in the corpus are those examples in which wordplay links with a thematic concern of the work. That was the case with “earnest” / “Ernest” in Wilde’s play, as we saw above. Another case in point is that of the vein of black humour running through Last Orders, often conveyed through punning, which perfectly suits the funereal errand which makes up the main part of the plot (the characters are on their way to Margate to scatter Jack’s ashes on the sea): (77) LO / Geronès and Urritz Lenny looks at me juggling with the box. He says, ‘Jack in a box, eh Raysy?’ En Lenny mira com grapejo el pot. Em diu: –Que en Jack és al pot, eh, Raysy? (Back translation: Lenny looks at me fingering the pot. He says to me, “Jack’s in the pot, eh, Raysy?”) The TT pun is similar to the ST one in some respects (both of them play with some kind of container) but different in others, as the particular object referred to in English as jack-in-a-box is lost in the translation and the Catalan idiom ser al pot has implications (something or somebody is in our power, it is safely stowed away, there is no danger of its / their running away) which are wholly absent from the original. As to the kind of linguistic structure on which wordplay operates, it would be difficult to set forth a closed list. Most (though not all) instances of wordplay can be located at the lexical level. Sometimes they are based on pure homophony, as in The translation of wordplay in literary texts 283 (39) IBE / Melendres Miss Prism: (…) I am not in favour of this modern mania for turning bad people into good people at a moment’s notice. As a man sows, so let him reap. Cecily: But men don’t sew, Miss Prism. … And if they did, I don’t see why they should be punished for it. Miss Prism: (…) Jo no aprovo la mania moderna de voler convertir en bones les persones dolentes. Cadascú ha de recollir els fruits que ha sembrat. (Back translation: Miss Prism: (…) I do not approve of the modern mania of wanting to turn bad people into good. Each person must harvest the fruits they have sown.) (58) IBE / Pérez i Sancho Miss Prism: (…) I am not in favour of this modern mania for turning bad people into good people at a moment’s notice. As a man sows, so let him reap. Cecily: But men don’t sew, Miss Prism. … And if they did, I don’t see why they should be punished for it. Senyoreta Prism: (…) No sóc pas del parer d’aqueixa dèria moderna de tornar bones dolentes persones en un tres i no res. Que cadascú reculla allò que ha sembrat. (Back translation: Miss Prism: (…) I do not agree with this modern obsession of turning bad people into good in no time. Let each person harvest what they have sown.) This case was very demanding for the Catalan translators, and both of them have omitted the pun on “sew” / “sow” in their target texts. Lack of fit across languages makes it particularly difficult to find a satisfactory solution, especially in the first translation, which is intended for the stage. The second could have resorted to a footnote. On other occasions, lexically-based puns rely on polysemy, not homonymy, as in the following example: (37) IBE / Melendres What between the duties expected of one during one’s lifetime, and the duties exacted from one after one’s death, land has ceased to be either a profit or a pleasure. Val més fer inversions que ens puguin proporcionar beneficis mentre encara vivim, que no pas invertir en terres pensant en els nostres hereus. 284 Josep Marco (Back translation: It’s better to make investments that can give us benefits while we are still alive than to invest in land for the sake of our heirs.) (56) IBE / Pérez i Sancho Lady Bracknell: (…) What between the duties expected of one during one’s lifetime, and the duties exacted from one after one’s death, land has ceased to be either a profit or a pleasure. Lady Bracknell: (…) Perquè entre els impostos que s’exigeixen d’una persona en vida i els que se n’obtenen després de la seua mort, la terra ha deixat de ser benefici o plaer. (Back translation: (…) Because what between the taxes exacted from a living person and those levied after their death, land has ceased to be a profit or a pleasure.) Both Catalan translators use the technique pun → non-pun. Another vehicle for lexically-based puns is so-called portmanteau words, where two words blend to form a new unit which may have new connotations and may even be potentially ambiguous. A case in point would be the following, from Last Orders: (81) LO / Geronès and Urritz And I always say it aint the motor by itself, it’s the combination of man and motor, it’s the intercombustion. A motor aint nothing without a man to tweak its buttons. And sometimes a man aint nothing without a motor, I see that. Motorvation, I call it. I jo sempre dic que no és el cotxe en si, que és la combinació de l’home i el cotxe, la intercombustió. Un cotxe no es res sense un home que li grapegi els botons. I de vegades un home tampoc no és res sense un cotxe, això ja ho veig. Autoinanició, en dic jo. (Back translation: And I always say that it’s not the car itself, that it is the combination of man and car, the intercombustion. A car is nothing without a man that fingers its buttons. And sometimes a man is nothing without a car either, I see that. Autostarvation, I call it.) “Motorvation” could be interpreted as motor + motivation, and that is perhaps the most obvious reading — in fact, the Spanish translation of the novel reads “motorvación”; however, the Catalan translation just reproduced allows for an alternative interpretation, motor + starvation, which, it must be said, makes perfect sense in context. And finally, the last possibility offered by the corpus within the purely lexical level is that of wordplay on a proper noun. We saw above the instance involving “earnest” / “Ernest”; here is another case, from Last Orders again: The translation of wordplay in literary texts 285 (103) LO / Geronès and Urritz Cockney. Cockneys. Cock. Knees. Why do men from London get stiff in the legs? El cockney, els cockneys. Cock (cigala) i knees (genolls). Per què als homes de Londres se’ls endureixi l’entrecuix? (Back translation: Cockney, cockneys. Cock (cigala, Catalan word for cock) and knees (genolls, Catalan word for knees). Why do London men’s crotches harden?) In cases like this, one of the additional constraints operating on the translation of the pun is that the proper noun cannot be altered, which makes it necessary to introduce some kind of paraphrase either in the body of the text (as in the example just quoted) or in a footnote, or to resort to direct copy, an option which might easily bring in some degree of incoherence. Beyond the purely lexical level there is the kind of wordplay which is based on the manipulation of an idiom, as in example (7) above or as in the following, from The Picture of Dorian Gray: (1) PDG / Larios He was a hero to his valet, who bullied him, and a terror to most of his relations, whom he bullied in turn. Era un heroi pel seu ajudant de cambra, que el tenia subjugat, i el terror de la majoria dels parents, a qui ell tenia subjugats. (Back translation: He was a hero for his valet, who had subjugated him, and a terror for most of his relations, whom he had subjugated.) (11) PDG / Tasis Marca He was a hero to his valet, who bullied him, and a terror to most of his relations, whom he bullied in turn. Era un heroi per al seu ajuda de cambra, que l’esclavitzava, i el terror de la majoria dels seus parents, els quals esclavitzava, al seu torn. (Back translation: He was a hero for his valet, who had enslaved him, and a terror for most of his relations, whom he had enslaved in turn.) (21) PDG / Quílez Knowles He was a hero to his valet, who bullied him, and a terror to most of his relations, whom he bullied in turn. Ø Punning here revolves around the proverb No man is a hero to his valet, and, interestingly enough, none of the three Catalan translators above has been able to 286 Josep Marco render it as a pun in their target texts. This kind of wordplay is relatively frequent in our corpus, and it might be frequent in general, as witnessed by the fact that several scholars have drawn attention to it (e.g. Leppihalme 1996, Veisbergs 1997). In the case of Wilde’s works, it might be argued that its relationship with thematic content is close, as idiom manipulation implies a reversal of the reader’s expectations which is quite in accordance with the author’s intention to criticise the moral assumptions of the society he lives in. Another relevant factor is cultural specificity. This is a key factor, as the more culturally specific a pun, the more difficult it will be to translate it by means of a similar pun, and therefore the more creative the translator will have to be to provide a satisfactory solution. The corpus offers examples which differ widely in cultural specificity — they may even be placed at opposite ends of the cline. Here is a couple of cases in point: (2) PDG / Larios “Why can’t these American women stay in their own country? They are always telling us that it is the Paradise for women.” “It is. That is the reason why, like Eve, they are so excessively anxious to get out of it,” said Lord Henry. —¿Per què no es poden quedar al seu país, aquestes americanes? Sempre ens estan dient que per les dones és el paradís. —Ho és. És per això que, com Eva, tenen unes ganes excessives de sortir-ne—va dir Lord Henry—. (Back translation: “Why can’t they stay in their country, these American women? They are always telling us that for women it’s the paradise.” “It is. That is why, like Eve, they are excessively anxious to get out of it,” said Lord Henry.) (12) PDG / Tasis Marca “Why can’t these American women stay in their own country? They are always telling us that it is the Paradise for women.” “It is. That is the reason why, like Eve, they are so excessively anxious to get out of it,” said Lord Henry. —Per què aquestes dones americanes no es queden a casa seva? Sempre ens estan dient que és el paradís de les dones. —I és així. Aquesta és la raó per la qual, com Eva, tenen tants desigs de sortir-ne—digué Lord Henry—. (Back translation: “Why don’t these American women stay in their country? They are always telling us that it is the paradise of women.” “And so it is. That is the reason why, like Eve, they are so keen to get out of it.”) The translation of wordplay in literary texts 287 (22) PDG / Quílez Knowles “Why can’t these American women stay in their own country? They are always telling us that it is the Paradise for women.” “It is. That is the reason why, like Eve, they are so excessively anxious to get out of it,” said Lord Henry. (70) LO / Geronès and Urritz ‘Have you ever wondered how he knows it’s his birthday? Jack and Amy weren’t ever a witness, were they? They never got no certificate. My Joan thinks Amy just picked March the third out the air. April the first might’ve been a better bet, mightn’t it?’ –No has pensat mai com sap que és el seu aniversari? Eh que el Jack i l’Amy no hi eren? No ha tingut mai la partida de naixement. La Joan diu que l’Amy va triar el mes de març a la babalà. No trobes que hauria estat millor el primer d’abril? Ø (Back translation: “Haven’t you ever wondered how he knows it’s his birthday? Jack and Amy weren’t there, were they? He has never had the birthday certificate. Joan says that Amy chose the month of March at random. Don’t you think April the first would have been a better choice?”) In (2), (12) and (22), the cultural item “Paradise”, together with the reference to Eve, signals an isotopy, we might say, that is shared by both cultures in contact and therefore posits no translation problem. The pun is retained in the first two translations, but in spite of the very apparent cultural isomorphism, it is omitted in the third. This example offers a marked contrast to (70), where “April the first” is obviously not a random day. In the target culture there is also a Fools’ Day, though it is not April 1, but even so the translators retain the date in their target text, thus engaging in the direct copy technique. Domain of experience also features largely in the corpus as a factor conditioning translatability. In fact, the corpus abundantly illustrates the fact (noted, for instance, by Alexieva 1997 or Lladó 2002) that a pun’s comic effect is in direct proportion to the distance separating the two domains, or isotopies. Most puns in Last Orders which pivot around sex are examples of experience domains which become associated in a predictable way, as there are many objects, situations, etc. in daily life which can be made to acquire sexual overtones if the right conditions apply. Here is an example which needs little comment (the Catalan translation retains the essential elements of the ST pun): 288 Josep Marco (71) LO / Geronès and Urritz Jack said, ‘Well, you should put that right, Raysy. You’re the one for the horses. You ought to tell old Bernie there to crack his whip.’ Vince said, ‘She can crack my whip any day.’ Jack said, ‘I’ll crack your head. If Mandy don’t.’ En Jack va dir: –Doncs tu hi podries posar remei, Raysy. Els cavalls són el teu fort. Li hauries d’ensenyar a fer petar el fuet a en Bernie. En Vince va dir: –A mi, ella me’l pot fer petar qualsevol dia. En Jack va dir: –El que et petaré jo és el cap. Si no ho fa la Mandy. (Back translation: Jack said, “Well, you could put that right, Raysy. Horses are your strength. You should teach Bernie how to crack a whip.” Vince said, “She can crack my whip any day”. Jack said, “What I’ll crack is your head. If Mandy doesn’t.”) By contrast, the following pun from The Picture of Dorian Gray (which, as usual, is put in the mouth of witty Lord Henry) owes its comedy, as well as its satirical power, to the distance between the two domains involved, which makes their association highly unlikely and challenging: (3) PDG / Larios “I am told, on excellent authority, that her father keeps an American dry-goods store,” said Sir Thomas Burdon, looking supercilious. (…) “Dry goods! What are American dry goods?” asked the Duchess, raising her large hands in wonder, and accentuating the verb. “American novels,” answered Lord Henry, helping himself to some quail. —Sé de molt bona font que el pare d’ella té un magatzem de roba2—va dir Sir Thomas Burdon, amb un aire desdenyós. (…) —Un magatzem de roba! ¿Què venen els americans en un lloc així?—va preguntar la duquessa, aixecant les mans grosses en un gest de sorpresa, i recalcant el verb. —Novel·les americanes—va contestar Lord Henry, servint-se una mica de guatlla. 2 «an American dry-goods store», a l’original. El dry (sec, àrid) de dry-goods origina la ironia posterior de Lord Henry en referir-se a les novel·les americanes. (N. del T.) The translation of wordplay in literary texts 289 (Back translation: “I know on good authority that her father has a clothes store,”2 said Sir Thomas Burdon with a contemptuous attitude. (…) “A clothes store! What do Americans have on sale in a place like that?”, asked the Duchess, raising her large hands in surprise and emphasising the verb. “American novels,” answered Lord Henry, helping himself to some quail. 2 “an American dry-goods store”, in the original. The dry (sec, àrid; paraphrase in Catalan) in dry-goods gives rise to Lord Henry’s subsequent irony when he mentions American novels. (Translator’s note) ) (13) PDG / Tasis Marca “I am told, on excellent authority, that her father keeps an American dry-goods store,” said Sir Thomas Burdon, looking supercilious. (…) “Dry goods! What are American dry goods?” asked the Duchess, raising her large hands in wonder, and accentuating the verb. “American novels,” answered Lord Henry, helping himself to some quail. —M’han dit, de bona tinta, que el pare d’ella té un magatzem de novetats americanes—digué sir Thomas Burdon, mirant amb aires superiors. (…) —Novetats! Què són novetats americanes?—demanà la duquessa, alçant esverada les seves enormes mans i accentuant el verb. —Novel·les americanes—digué lord Henry, servint-se una mica de perdiu. (Back translation: “I know on good authority that her father has a store where American novelties are sold,” said Sir Thomas Burdon with an air of superiority. (…) “Novelties! What are American novelties?”, asked the Duchess, raising her huge hands in wonder and accentuating the verb. “American novels,” answered Lord Henry, helping himself to some partridge.) (23) PDG / Quílez Knowles Ø “I am told, on excellent authority, that her father keeps an American dry-goods store,” said Sir Thomas Burdon, looking supercilious. (…) “Dry goods! What are American dry goods?” asked the Duchess, raising her large hands in wonder, and accentuating the verb. “American novels,” answered Lord Henry, helping himself to some quail. The domains of “dry goods” and “literature” are brought together through the idea of “dryness”, which is absent from the figurative meaning of “dry goods” but 290 Josep Marco becomes activated by virtue of its presence in the literal meaning of the expression. Only the second Catalan translation manages to render the pun as a pun, albeit a different one which plays on “novelty” / “novel”. The first translation resorts to direct copy in the body of the text and insertion of a footnote to make up for it, whereas the third translation just omits the pun, as in so many other cases. As to the last factor mentioned above, skopos, we have already seen several examples of how translation solutions are sensitive to textual genre and target audience constraints. In fact, some particular techniques would just not be possible in certain environments (e.g. editorial techniques in translation for the stage), whereas others would not be advisable (e.g. puns requiring great processing effort in translations for children or teenagers). Finally, it must be said that the data yielded by my corpus fail to lend support to Offord’s claim, reproduced above, that vertical and horizontal puns tend to be translated by means of different techniques. The frequency distribution of techniques across the two types of pun does not differ significantly, except for omission, which is more frequently used for vertical than for horizontal puns. These comparative data are shown in Table 4. Table 4. Frequency distribution of techniques for vertical and horizontal puns Translation technique pun → similar pun pun → different pun pun → non-pun pun → related rhetorical device pun → direct copy pun → Ø (omission) editorial techniques non-pun → pun Ø → pun TOTAL Vertical puns Absolute frequency 13 3 14 2 9 14 4 0 0 59 Relative frequency 22.04% 5.08% 23.73% 3.39% 15.25% 23.73% 6.78% 0% 0% 100 % Horizontal puns Absolute frequency 16 3 16 2 7 5 2 0 0 51 Relative frequency 31.37% 5.89% 31.37% 3.92% 13.73% 9.80% 3.92% 0% 0% 100% The translation of wordplay in literary texts 291 4. Beyond description and explanation: Assessing wordplay translation solutions The main drive of this study, as I hope has become obvious by now, is descriptive and, to a lesser extent, explanatory. The two main questions it has aimed to answer concern the frequency distribution of pairs of ST + TT segments across the translation techniques and the possible correlation between those techniques and the factors underlying, or conditioning, translation solutions. The different translation techniques have all been placed on an equal footing, as, from a purely descriptive viewpoint, there are no ‘good’ or ‘bad’ techniques, but just techniques, i.e. translation possibilities realised in actual practice and classified according to a number of categories. However, from a more evaluative perspective it cannot be said that all techniques are equally effective, i.e. equally well suited to render the effect of the ST pun. But before determining which techniques are better suited for that purpose, we need to look more closely at the kinds of effects that puns may and do create. Several authors have remarked that recognising and satisfactorily interpreting a pun requires the reader’s imaginative involvement (Terrence Gordon, 1986: 146) and gives them pleasure (Toury 1997, Leppihalme 1997), thus creating a bond of solidarity between author and reader (Alexieva 1997). A second inherent effect is what Lladó (2002: 32) calls “relative subversion of the code”. Earlier on in his book we find what might be regarded as a possible paraphrase of this expression, when he claims (2002: 20) that instances of wordplay, “though not independent utterances, are not fully embedded in the logic of the narrative sequence either. They may be said to create perfectly integrated narrative discontinuities”. This is a happy formulation, I think, of the effect just mentioned. What it ultimately amounts to is not wholly dissimilar from Jakobson’s classic poetic function of language, whereby a particular linguistic sequence calls attention to itself beyond its value in informative or referential terms. In this respect, it is interesting to note that Lladó (2002: 50), after reporting Guiraud’s (1953) claim that “wordplay de-functionalises linguistic activity”, goes on to add that this author, in an apparently incongruous fashion, later reintroduces the notion of function and distinguishes between ludic and sub-ludic functions of wordplay. Symptomatically, the latter refer to “language subversion”, “linked to a breach in coherence and verbal logic” (Lladó 2002: 52). Another effect that is often associated with wordplay (and that we have seen illustrated by the corpus, especially when the factor of experience domain was being considered) is surprise. Wordplay surprises the reader, and the wider apart the two domains, or isotopies, are placed from each other, the sharper the effect of surprise. According to Lladó (2002: 67), surprise results in pragmatic indeterminacy, which (it might be added) certainly involves greater processing effort. 292 Josep Marco According to Freudean theory as interpreted by authors such as Todorov (1977) (see Lladó 2002: 76 and ff.), the roots of most of these effects must be sought in the unconscious: “In this respect, psychoanalytical theory seems to prove that the linguistic mechanism of wordplay is analogous to the mechanism of dream production”. The analogy lies in the claim that “the joke (jeu d’esprit) actualises unconscious material which is inhibited”. The joke’s return is based on the recognition of something already known and is in direct proportion to the degree of variation introduced. We find delight in discovering similarities among dissimilar realities, and, as suggested above, the more dissimilar the realities brought together by the pun, or joke, the more pleasure will be derived. This seems to be the ultimate source of the pleasure derived from wordplay. To sum up, wordplay is just a kind of play, and we humans delight in playing for reasons that appear to be deeply embedded in our psychology. Now, when a pun is translated as a pun, i.e. by means of one of those techniques which imply a neutral or a positive balance, the reader is enabled to engage in play and to derive pleasure from it. On the other hand, when techniques that imply a negative balance are used, the reader is denied that possibility and the effect of the target text upon them differs widely from the one experienced by the ST reader. Neutralisation offers a flat rendering of the original; omission covers all textual traces of the pun; direct copy does not do even that, as it preserves some signals of the original punning activity but they are disfigured by their occurrence in a new setting. Among the techniques involving a negative punning activity, pun → related rhetorical device is the only one which does not lose sight altogether of the original playful spirit that delights in verbal play for its own sake, over and above the functional role it may fulfil in the fictional world. 5. Conclusions In the first section of this study the relevant variables of the phenomenon of wordplay (typology, techniques, factors) were identified and classifications or lists were provided for each one of them, on the basis of the literature reviewed. In the second section, the aims and methods of the study were specified, and the research questions which emerged were the following: a. what is the frequency distribution of pairs of ST + TT segments across the translation techniques identified? b. is there any discernible correlation between translation techniques and factors influencing decision-making? The translation of wordplay in literary texts 293 Then, in the third section the analytical framework set up in the first section was applied to a corpus of three literary works originally written in English and a number of translations of these works into Catalan. Analysis of this corpus yields the following conclusions: 1. The translators tend to use techniques resulting in some degree of loss of punning activity. The four techniques whose use yields a negative punning balance (i.e. pun → Ø, direct copy, pun → non-pun and related rhetorical device), taken together, account for 62.72% of cases, whereas the two techniques implying a neutral punning balance (neither gain nor loss, i.e. pun → similar pun and pun → different pun) cover 31.82% of occurrences. There are no cases in the corpus of a positive punning balance, as non-pun → pun and Ø → pun are never employed. This is the answer to question a above. 2. The most recurrent factors in the corpus are the following: stylistic function, kind of linguistic structure on which wordplay operates, cultural specificity, domain of experience and skopos (which includes textual genre and target readership). Apart from those, degree of overlap (or isomorphism) between language systems is a permeating factor which conditions translation to a large extent. 3. When there is isomorphism with regard to a given instance of wordplay, pun → similar pun might be regarded as the default solution. However, it is not always adopted by translators, and isomorphous conditions sometimes result in pun → non-pun. 4. When there is no isomorphism, omission (pun → Ø), neutralisation (pun → non-pun) or direct copy may occur. But translators can also choose more creative techniques, such as pun → related rhetorical device (which is still on the negative side of the punning balance) or pun → different pun (which is neutral with regard to punning balance). 5. Direct copy is often used with idiom-based puns, and is often accompanied by a footnote. 6. Omission is particularly sensitive to textual genre and target readership, as it is almost exclusively used with drama translation for the stage and the abridged version of a fictional work for teenagers. It is hardly ever used in fiction translated for the general reading public. 7. A high degree of cultural specificity makes it more difficult for the translator to render the pun as a pun, i.e. by means of a technique involving a neutral punning balance. 8. The distance between the two (or more) domains of experience at play in the pun is closely related to the effect of surprise the pun may have on the reader. Conclusions 3–8 answer question b above. 294 Josep Marco Finally, the fourth section goes beyond description and explanation in that it tries to assess wordplay translation techniques in terms of their suitability as translation solutions. Wordplay disrupts the narrative continuity of a text, calls attention to itself and thus activates the poetic function of language; it also takes the reader by surprise, insofar as it brings together two apparently dissimilar realities (or isotopies), and the reader is therefore challenged to find the similarity between them, pleasure being associated with the discovery. Therefore, wordplay translation techniques involving either a neutral or even a positive punning balance (by way of compensation, perhaps) will be preferable to those entailing a negative balance, as the latter will never afford the reader the possibility to engage in the discovery process and experience its rewarding effects. After all these considerations, the question of the (un)translatability of wordplay reveals itself as a banal one. Translatability is a matter of degree, and is intimately connected with a constellation of factors that must be identified and analysed in larger corpora if conclusions are to hold any general validity. The present study has been but one small step in that direction. Notes * Research funds for this article have been provided by two research projects: FFI2009–09544, funded by the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation, and P1·1B2008–59, funded by the Caixa Castelló — Bancaixa Foundation, within the framework of an agreement with the Universitat Jaume I. 1. Translations from languages other than English are my own. 2. Each example is headed by an identification number indicating its position in the corpus, the initials of the source text title and the translator’s surname(s). References Swift, Graham. 1996. Last Orders. London: Picador. Swift, Graham. 1999. Les últimes voluntats (translated by Carme Geronès and Carles Urritz). Barcelona: Destino. Wilde, Oscar. 1966 (first published 1891). “The Picture of Dorian Gray”. Complete Works of Oscar Wilde. London and Glasgow: Collins. 17–167. Wilde, Oscar. 2000 (translation first published 1930). El retrat de Dorian Gray (translated by Rafael Tasis Marca). Barcelona: Ediciones B/Proa. Wilde, Oscar. 1992. El retrat de Dorian Gray (translated and adapted by Carolina Quílez Knowles). Valencia: Tres i Quatre. A. Primary literature (works making up the corpus) The translation of wordplay in literary texts 295 Wilde, Oscar. 1998. El retrat de Dorian Gray (translated by Jordi Larios). Barcelona: Quaderns Crema. Wilde, Oscar. 1966 (first published 1895). “The Importance of Being Earnest”. Complete Works of Oscar Wilde. London and Glasgow: Collins. 321–384. Wilde, Oscar. 1994. La importància d’ésser seriós (translated by Antoni V. Pérez i Sancho). Valencia: Rotgle Edicions. Wilde, Oscar. 1998. La importància de ser Frank (translated by Jaume Melendres). Barcelona: Institut del Teatre. Alexieva, Bistra. 1997. “There Must Be Some System in This Madness. Metaphor, Polysemy and Wordplay in a Cognitive Linguistics Framework”. Dirk Delabastita, ed. Traductio. Essays on Punning and Translation. Manchester and Namur: St. Jerome and Presses Universitaires de Namur, 1997. 137–154. Delabastita, Dirk. 1987. “Translating Puns. Possibilities and Restraints”. New Comparison 3. 142–159. Delabastita, Dirk. 1994. “Focus on the Pun: Wordplay as a Special Problem in Translation Studies”. Target 6:2. 223–243. Delabastita, Dirk. 1996. “Introduction”. The Translator 2:2. 127–139. Delabastita, Dirk. 1997. “Introduction”. Dirk Delabastita, ed. Traductio. Essays on Punning and Translation. Manchester and Namur: St. Jerome and Presses Universitaires de Namur, 1997. 1–22. Delabastita, Dirk, ed. 1996. Wordplay and Translation. Special issue of The Translator 2:2. Manchester and Namur: St. Jerome and Facultés Universitaires Notre-Dame de la Paix. Delabastita, Dirk, ed. 1997. Traductio. Essays on Punning and Translation. Manchester and Namur: St. Jerome and Presses Universitaires de Namur. Díaz Pérez, Javier Francisco. 2008. “Wordplay in film titles. Translating English puns into Spanish”. Babel 54:1. 36–58. Greimas, A.J. 1966. Sémantique structurale. Paris: Le Seuil. Guiraud, Pierre. 1953. Index du vocabulaire du symbolisme. Paris: Klincksieck. Hurtado Albir, Amparo. 2001. Traducción y Traductología. Introducción a la traductología. Madrid: Cátedra. Klitgård, Ida. 2005. “Taking the pun by the horns. The translation of wordplay in James Joyce’s Ulysses”. Target 17:1. 71–92. Leech, Geoffrey. 1969. A Linguistic Guide to English Poetry. London: Longman. Leppihalme, Ritva. 1996. “Caught in the Frame. A Target-Culture Viewpoint on Allusive Wordplay”. The Translator 2:2. 199–218. Leppihalme, Ritva. 1997. Culture Bumps. An Empirical Approach to the Translation of Allusions. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Lladó, Ramon. 2002. La paraula revessa. Estudi sobre la traducció dels jocs de mots. Bellaterra: Servei de Publicacions de la Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. Mallafrè, Joaquim. 1991. Llengua de tribu i llengua de polis. Barcelona: Quaderns Crema. Manini, Luca. 1996. “Meaningful Literary Names. Their Forms and Functions, and Their Translation”. The Translator 2:2. 161–178. Marco, Josep. 2004. “Les tècniques de traducció (dels referents culturals): retorn per a quedarnos-hi”. Quaderns. Revista de traducció 11. 129–149. B. Secondary literature 296 Josep Marco Marco, Josep. 2007. “The terminology of translation: Epistemological, conceptual and intercultural problems and their social consequences”. Target 19:2. 255–269. Mateo Martínez-Bartolomé, Marta. 1995. La traducción del humor: las comedias inglesas en español. Oviedo: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Oviedo. McKerras, Ross. 1994. “How to Translate Wordplays”. Notes on Translation 8:1. 7–18. Offord, Malcolm. 1997. “Mapping Shakespeare’s Puns in French Translations”. Dirk Delabastita, ed. Traductio. Essays on Punning and Translation. Manchester and Namur: St. Jerome and Presses Universitaires de Namur, 1997. 233–260. Rabadán Álvarez, Rosa. 1991. Equivalencia y traducción. León: Universidad de León. Terrence Gordon, W. 1986. “Translating Word-Play: French-English, English- French”. Babel 32:3. 146–150. Todorov, Tzvetan. 1977. Théories du symbole. Paris: Le Seuil. Toury, Gideon. 1997. “What Is It that Renders a Spoonerism (Un)translatable?”. Dirk Delabastita, ed. Traductio. Essays on Punning and Translation. Manchester and Namur: St. Jerome and Presses Universitaires de Namur, 1997. 271–291. Veisbergs, Andrejs. 1997. “The Contextual Use of Idioms, Wordplay, and Translation”. Dirk Delabastita, ed. Traductio. Essays on Punning and Translation. Manchester and Namur: St. Jerome and Presses Universitaires de Namur, 1997. 155–176. Weissbrod, Rachel. 1996. “ ’Curiouser and Curiouser’: Hebrew Translation of Wordplay in ‘Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland’ ”. The Translator 2:2. 219–234. Zabalbeascoa, Patrick. 1996. “Translating Jokes for Dubbed Television Situation Comedies”. The Translator 2:2. 235–257. Zabalbeascoa, Patrick. 2004. “Translating non-segmental features of textual communication: The case of metaphor within a binary-branch analysis”. Daniel Gile, Gyde Hansen and Kirsten Malmkjær, eds. Claims, Changes and Challenges in Translation Studies. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 2004. 99–111. Résumé La présente analyse est consacrée au jeu de mots, — sur la base de trois aspects indiqués dans notre titre: typologie des jeux de mots, techniques de traduction et facteurs pertinents. Le cadre théorique est éclectique; il renvoie principalement à Delabastita (1996, 1997) et à Lladó (2002). L’analyse empirique se fonde sur trois textes anglais et sur six traductions catalanes. Les deux questions à résoudre étant: la distribution des fréquences dans des segments parallèles (Textes Source + Textes Cible) en termes de techniques de traduction, puis la possible corrélation entre les techniques de traduction et les facteurs orientant les priorités. L’on peut observer que les traductions tendent à recourir à des techniques qui impliquent une balance négative dans la pointe, c’est-à-dire qui impliquent dans une certaine mesure une perte de la pointe. En outre, certains facteurs identifiés dans la littérature sur la question semblent aller de pair avec l’usage de certaines techniques de traduction particulières. — Dans la section finale, nous essayons d’aller au delà de la description comme de l’explication dans une tentative de définir les techniques du jeu de mots en traduction selon leur pertinence en tant que solutions de traduction. The translation of wordplay in literary texts 297 Author’s address Josep Marco Universitat Jaume I Dept. de Traducció i Comunicació Facultat de Ciències Humanes i Socials Avgda. Sos Baynat, s/n 12071 CASTELLó Spain [email protected]