The deliberate non-subtitling of L3s in Breaking Bad:A Reception Study

Cet article présente les résultats des premières recherches empiriques sur la réceptivité du public de la non-traduction délibérée de L3 dans la série télévisée multilingue Breaking Bad. Les films et séries multilingues connaissent un succès grandissant et touchent des publics de plus en plus larges sur le marché mondial. Ceci permet de mettre l’accent sur la façon dont le multilinguisme est transmis au public et la réaction de celui-ci. Alors qu’il existe quelques études sur l’utilisation de stratégies de traduction dans les productions multilingues, les réactions du public relativement à ces stratégies ont seulement été observées par l’analyse de commentaires postés sur un forum de discussion cinéphile en ligne. L’étude qui suit présente les résultats d’un sondage sur la perception de la non-traduction de passages en L3 dans une série télévisée multilingue de prestige auprès des spectateurs de même que la réponse qui lui est faite. Elle montre que le public est non seulement conscient de ces non-traductions délibérées, mais qu’il cherche aussi activement à en identifier les motivations, qui sont contextuelles, et coïncident en grande partie avec les motivations des réalisateurs. D’un point de vue théorique, cet article laisse supposer qu’étendre le modèle de Corrius et Zabalbeascoa (2011) pour la traduction des L3 dans le doublage à d’autres modes de traduction serait bénéfique. Du point de vue de l’application, les résultats de ces recherches empiriques sur la réceptivité du public permettent d’informer les agents de l’industrie cinématographique et télévisuelle internationale des préférences des spectateurs, et de potentiellement changer les pratiques de TAV.This paper presents the results of the first empirical reception study on the deliberate non-subtitling of L3s in the multilingual TV series Breaking Bad. Multilingual films and TV series are on the increase both in terms of success and penetrating wider audiences in a global market. This puts the focus on how multilingualism is conveyed to the audience and how audiences respond to it. While the translation strategies used in multilingual productions have received some attention, audiences’ reactions to them have only been investigated through an analysis of comments posted on an online movie message board. This study presents the results of a survey on the perception of and response to non-translation of L3 segments in a multilingual prestige TV series among hearing viewers. It shows that audiences are not only acutely aware of deliberate non-translation but also actively seek to identify motivations for it, which are context-sensitive and largely coincide with the filmmakers’ motivations for this practice. On the translation-theoretical side, this paper suggests that Corrius and Zabalbeascoa’s (2011) framework for the translation of L3s in dubbing would benefit from a supplement for other translation modes. On the applied side, the findings of this empirical reception study can inform agents in the international film and TV industry about audiences’ viewing preferences and potentially change AVT practices.Este artículo presenta los resultados del primer estudio de recepción empírico sobre la no subtitulación de L3 en la serie de televisión multilingüe Breaking Bad. Las películas y series de televisión multilingües tienen cada vez más éxito y están llegando a un público cada vez mayor en el mercado mundial. Esto permite centrar la atención en cómo el multilingüismo se transmite al público y cómo el público reacciona frente a él. Mientras que existen algunos estudios sobre las estrategias de traducción utilizadas en las producciones multilingües, las reacciones del público frente a estas estrategias se han estudiado únicamente a través de un análisis de comentarios publicados en un foro de discusión cinematográfico en línea. El estudio presentado en este artículo analiza los resultados de una encuesta sobre la percepción de y la respuesta frente a la no traducción de partes en L3 en una serie de televisión multilingüe de prestigio por parte de espectadores oyentes. El estudio muestra que el público no solamente es consciente de estas no traducciones intencionadas, sino que también trata de identificar activamente las razones, las cuales generalmente dependen del contexto y coinciden con la decisión de los cineastas. En cuanto a la teoría de traducción, este artículo sugiere que sería beneficioso que el modelo de Corrius y Zabalbeascoa (2011) de la traducción de L3 en el doblaje se hiciera extensivo a otros modos de traducción. Con respecto a la aplicación práctica, los resultados de este estudio empírico permiten informar a los agentes de la industria cinematográfica y televisiva sobre las preferencias de los espectadores, y potencialmente cambiar las prácticas de TAV

A perceptual dialectological approach to linguistic variation and spatial analysis of Kurdish Varieties

This paper presents the results of the first investigation into Kurdish linguistic varieties and their spatial distribution. Kurdish dialects are used across five nation states in the Middle East and only one dialect, Sorani, has official status in one of these nation states. The study employs the “draw-a-map” task established in Perceptual Dialectology; the analysis is supported by Geographical Information Systems (GIS). The results show that, despite the geolinguistic and geopolitical situation, Kurdish respondents have good knowledge of the main varieties of their language (Kurmanji, Sorani, and the related variety Zazaki) and where to localize them. Awareness of the more diverse Southern Kurdish varieties is less definitive. This indicates that the Kurdish language plays a role in identity formation, but also that smaller isolated varieties are not only endangered in terms of speakers, but also in terms of their representations in Kurds’ mental maps of the linguistic landscape they live in.</jats:p

"The daily grunt": middle class bias and vested interests in the 'Getting in Early' and 'Why Can't They Read?' reports.

It is a long-standing and commonly held belief in the UK and elsewhere that the use of elite forms of language reflects superior intellect and education. Expert opinion from sociolinguistics, however, contends that such a view is the result of middle-class bias and cannot be scientifically justified. In the 1960s and 1970s,such luminaries as Labov (1969) and Trudgill (1975) were at pains to point out to educationalists, with some success, that this 'deficit 'view of working-class children's communicative competence is not a helpful one. However, a close reading of recent think-tank reports and policy papers on language and literacy teaching in schools reveals that the linguistic deficit hypothesis has resurfaced and is likely to influence present-day educational policy and practice. In this paper I examine in detail the findings, claims and recommendations of the reports and I argue that they are biased, poorly researched and reflect the vested interests of certain specialist groups, such as speech and language therapists and companies who sell literacy materials to schools. I further argue that we need to, once again, inject the debate with the social dimensions of educational failure, and we need to move away from the pathologisation of working-class children's language patterns