Characterization - Nomen est Omen : reception of translated and non-translated descriptive name

Characterization is the act of describing or characterizing a person or a thing, and the act of an author creating a representation of a fictitious character to function as a literary tool within the narrative. An author has many ways of facilitating characterization, which will be explored next.

In her master’s thesis Suvi Nordenswan (2014) explains that characterization can be divided into two categories; direct and indirect characterization based on the observations of Maria Nikolaveja (2002, 2005).

Direct characterization encompasses the things we as readers know, more specifically the things that the author will explicitly spell out for us, or that we can objectively see in illustrations. These include attributes such as sex, attire, actions and reactions or thoughts that are given to the reader by the authoritative author. Although these attributes may be incomplete or even unreliable (say, when a character describes another or when a character describes themselves and we cannot trust the description to be accurate), the reader will often have to accept what is offered to them by the narrator.

Unless the author has established that the narration cannot be trusted either by directly telling the reader the narrator or character is lying or coloring the story (much like Tom Sawyer who tells tall tales in The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn), there is little room for personal interpretation or doubt. Characterization that relies on external factors that can be perceived (such as clothing, hair or general cleanliness) are often used in children’s literature, however implicit attributes can be a powerful characterization tool (Nikolajeva 2002: 268-277). In audiovisual media such as animation, the marriage of the text (such as plot and narration, as well as dialogue) and the visual content is all the more apparent and the reader (or, viewer) is all the more likely to use visuals to make their characterization, as they can see and interpret what is happening and what the characters look like. Visuals and text is often also supported by other auditory cues, such as music or sound effects.

Indirect characterization consists of more implicit attributes, such as age, preferences and indeed, personal names. Implicit attributes can be directly addressed (Joe did not like broccoli) or implicitly addressed (Joe looked at the broccoli in disgust), where the reader is allowed to infer the purported meaning the author is conveying about the character. From the previous examples we can deduce that Joe is male, he does not enjoy broccoli and maybe he does not enjoy greens in general, he reacts rudely, perhaps he is young. However these are subjective rather than objective interpretations and their

correctness is entirely dependent on the author and whether or not the author will expand on the subject (Nikolajeva 2005: 161). For all we know, it could turn out that Joe is in fact a female character. As such, it can be argued that indirect characterizations in translated literature rely on the interpretation of the translator and the ensuing translation (unless the translator has the privilege of contacting the author directly or vice versa to correct misunderstandings). Furthermore, it should also be mentioned that it has been argued that all translation is an adaptation because it always relies on translator interpretation (Kapari 2005).

In My Little Pony, as an animated series where illustration is equally prominent as the text (dialogue and narration), both indirect and direct characterizations are employed. The characters have both externally determined attributes such as color, body type, mane style, and cutie marks. A cutie mark is an image portraying special talent or affinity which can also be considered an implicit characterization tool, as it does not explicitly state anything about the character but the viewer is able to infer qualities about the character based on its image. The ponies are also assigned other determining characteristics, such as professions (nurse, teacher, janitor, ballet instructor) and nationality implied by accents or a particular tone (Madame Percheron’s and Chevalier’s French accent). The children can, and likely will use some or all of these when asked to describe the characters. The results will be discussed in later chapters.

Figure 2. Bulk Biceps (My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic 2014) is named in accordance to his physique.

He is not very bright, which is a stereotypical brawn over brain bodybuilder trope. Screen capture.

Moreover, though personal names fall within the category of implicit attributes (Nikolajeva 2005), in the case of the Ponyverse names could be seen as direct characterizations; they can allude to external, explicit and apparent factors such as coloration or physique. As such, it could also be interpreted that personal names function as determinants to what is relevant or unique about the character (Bertills 2003 :88, 102), like one’s ability to fly or being heavily built, thus setting them apart from other characters who cannot or are not. Personal names also make explicit what otherwise would be implicit, such as by alluding to character’s profession or age (Mr. Cake, Granny Smith). Nordenswan (2014), much like Nikolajeva (2005) and Bertills (2003), argues that in literature, no personal name is left to chance and that all personal names can act as a powerful characterization tool for authors. The next chapter will explore this further.

Figure 3. Clover (pictured behind Sweetheart) is an exhibition of a personal name’s humorous function.

Her cutie mark is a four leaf clover which is a symbol of good luck, but she is insufferably unlucky. Screen capture from My Little Pony Tales 1992.

15 2.3 Personal names and characterization

In the previous chapter I suggested that there are two types of characterization as defined by Nikolajeva (2005). Personal names fall in the category of indirect characterization. However I also suggested that in the case of My Little Pony, wherein the names also contain semantics elements or are directly and transparently descriptive, personal names could also be seen as a direct characterization tool.

Although scholars agree that the primary tools for assigning traits to a fictional character is through direct actions, speech, description or narration (see Nikolajeva 2002 quoted in Bertills 2003: 51), personal names can be used as devices of giving a character substance. This is particularly true for personal names with semantic elements that are transparent and as such, tangible to the reader. According to Docherty (1986: 45, quoted in Bertills 2003: 48), if a character is assigned a semantically loaded name (term in correspondence with descriptive name), the name clearly defines the name-bearer and renders the character somewhat limited in their possible interpretations. Even when the name is not in correspondence with the character (for example a character of enormous proportions being called Tiny), it still draws attention to a specific character trait (Tiny’s relevant character trait is its size).

Bertills draws attention to the notion that both conventional and semantically loaded names are carriers of connotative value, although their power and target of allusion, denotation and connotation are different (2003: 52). If you were to look at conventional names such as George and Tatyana, you are very likely to have already drawn conclusions of the character’s attributes (possible interpretations including age, sex and ethnicity). If you are then given names Logan and Sweetheart, your perception of these characters may be very different because of the differences in their names, and perhaps the interpretation will include presumed personality attributes (such as kindness for Sweetheart) due to the connotation of the semantic element in the name. Although in My Little Pony both conventional names as well as descriptive names are used, I would suggest that descriptive names serve a larger role as being directly affective to characterization. The justification for this statement lies in the naming conventions of the Ponyverse, which was discussed in the previous chapter 2.2, and will be discussed further in chapter 3

3 Translating for children with reference to translating personal names

This chapter will briefly discuss some general ideas regarding translating for children, or alternatively, translating children’s literature. Some key ideas involve the author-audience dichotomy where an adult author and child audience is involved, as well as notions on fidelity and translator ethics and functional equivalence. Although most of these theories revolve around works of literature, they can be applied to audiovisual content. Children’s literature often incorporates the multimodality of text and illustration, where imagery is intended to support the text or provide more information than what can be interpreted from text alone.

The definition of children, children’s culture, literature and childhood in general is not clear, but rather something that has remained fluid throughout time periods. Riitta Oittinen (2000) approaches childhood as an indefinite, subjective experience that all adults have had and is different for each individual. Thus, it cannot be defined in a strictly prescriptive way. She also discusses whether children’s culture is culture intended for children (as chosen, produced and censored by adults), or if it means a culture children create among themselves, or perhaps a collaboration where both adults and children create a culture together (Oittinen 2000: 84).

A similar divide could be made for children’s literature: is it literature that is intended for children (as appropriated by adult authors and readers), or literature children read. Examples of children’s literature that was originally intended for adult audiences but was adopted by child readers includes but is not limited to Kipling’s Tarzan, Defoe’s Robinson Crusoe and Swift’s Gulliver’s Travels. Shavit (1986 quoted in Oittinen 2000: 64) also supports the argument that children’s literature can have a dual audience, where the content can be enjoyed by both child and adult readers on their separate levels. Examples of such literary ambivalence include Milne’s Winnie the Pooh, Carroll’s Alice in Wonderland and Jansson’s Moomin books.

Children’s literature has its own uniqueness that stems from the duality of audiences. It has to be appropriate to the audience in terms of language and syntax, as children’s reading abilities are not like those of an adult. Similarly the language must be recitable, as children’s literature is often read aloud by adults: this also applies to dubbing, where the lines must be recitable in order for the dub to be successful. Adults are the secondary audience to children’s literature, as the literature has to appeal to

both adults who choose what books to buy and read to children (or what movies or television shows they are allowed to watch), as well as the child audience that chooses to listen (or consume independently) (Oittinen 2000: 69).

According to Gillian Lathey (2006), children’s literature is considered to be in the periphery of the literary polysystem. Furthermore, Lathey argues that it is not without sacrifice, as translating for children has been regarded to be a low skill profession, which can hurt a translator’s reputation. Lathey is not alone in these assertions, which mirror Riitta Oittinen’s (2000) observation that the apparent lack of acknowledgement may be the symptom of patriarchy; where the work of women (writing and translating for children has been, at least in Finland, dominated by women since 20^th century) and subsequently children’s culture is not as highly regarded as the work of men or adult culture. Appreciation is low in the public eye, and within the discipline translating for children is apparently regarded with, if not quite equal, considerable apathy. According to Oittinen (2000: 68), there are few universities with departments for children’s literature and it is a subject most often found as an elective in other disciplines such as psychology or pedagogy.

Perhaps this peripheral position and low appreciation also bring positives in terms of the act of translating? Translators are permitted greater creativity and freedom when it comes to employing strategies to the text, and strategies ranging from aggressive adaptation and omission to minor simplification of subject matter are all available when translating for children (Oittinen 2000, Bertills 2003). These strategies and freedom can also be extended to personal name translations. Jaana Kapari-Jatta (2008) argues in favor of the translator’s freedom to choose strategies on a case by case basis, rather than having to decide on any single strategy and commit to it with disregard to the translation needs and problems that may arise later.

Translating children’s literature is often not a task of preserving formal equivalence, but rather to translate an idea. In this regard, functional equivalence (formerly dynamic equivalence, Nida 1964: 129) could be considered to be a theoretical cornerstone when translating for children. For the purposes of this study Hans Vermeer’s skopos theory (Reiss and Vermeer 1984) felt the most appropriate basis of functional translation theory from the perspective of children’s literature (and audiovisual material) translation. Vermeer suggested that fidelity to the source text was not a priority, but rather that a text should be translated in accordance to its purpose. Moreover, he argued that the purpose of the translation could result in different translations of the same source text (Vermeer 2004: 234). This could

be seen as complimentary to general ideas about translating for children where a translator is considered to have more freedom in terms of fidelity, and a moral responsibility towards their audience more so than the original author (Shavit 1986: 26). Children’s literature can have multiple purposes as discussed by Van Coillie (2006: 123), such as to educate, or to amuse. Anthony Pym has argued that a translator can have a different purpose than the original author. The original text could aim to amuse, but the translator could decide that this purpose is not as important, and translate (adapt) the text to make it more educational (2010: 48).

Skopos theory intends to shift the focus from source text equivalence to a more dynamic, functional equivalence. Vermeer (as well as Holtz-Mänttäri 1984 and Nord 1997) argues that the intended purpose of the text should be the determining factor for the translation. The audience (reader, end user) becomes the master. However, Vermeer also argued that although the purpose may be the end that justifies the means, a translator is also bound by their commissioner; who may or may not be the end user. Consider this in the context of animation dubbing script translation. The commissioner will be the publishing company that has bought rights to the animation script. However the end user will not be the publishing company (though they will use the translation and ensuing dub), the end user will be the audience;

children. However, it should also be noted that children’s literature (and its translations) is affected by the adult author child reader dichotomy (Bertills 2003, Nikolajeva 2002), where the author (and subsequently translator) acts as an agent with more experience and knowledge and has to pre-determine not only what the child reader will be able to understand, but also what is appropriate for a child audience; thus writing (and translating) for children.

It is seldom possible to discuss children’s literature without discussing the special relationship between illustration and the text. Children’s literature is often illustrated (and in the case of animation, the imagery is the text), and it is the translator’s duty to ensure that the resulting translation does not conflict or detract from the illustrations (Oittinen 2000: 4). A disruption between text and illustration and the resulting dissonance can affect the reading/viewing experience negatively (Van Coillie 2006). This is all very relevant also in the realm of audiovisual translation and translating both script and dialogue for children’s animated television series and movies, where disruption and a dissonance between the text and the audiovisual content (for example an error in script writing assigning a line in dialogue to the wrong character, so the character seen speaking has the wrong voice) can detract from the viewing experience and break the illusion of the story. Audiovisual translation will be discussed in further detail in chapter 4. Oittinen (2000: 6, 76) argues that all translation is adaptation, and that adapting a text for a

target audience is an essential part of translating for children. This is a much more liberal stance on adaptation, for example Ritva Leppihalme (2007) argues to use caution when adapting and domesticating children’s literature, as authoritative adults should not determine so strictly what content and language is appropriate for children and should not risk censoring the original, but to respect the author’s intended purposes (such as to amuse or to educate) when translating.

3.1 Translating personal names

In Kapari et al. (2002), Jaana Kapari mentions that the trend in Finland in the 1990s was to translate all personal names in literature aimed at child and teen audiences to make them easier to read by an audience only fluent in one language, Finnish. In her master’s thesis Terhi Leskinen (1995) notes that there has been a shift from the 90’s trend of translating personal names from English to Finnish to a more modern practice of leaving personal names intact (quoted in Oittinen 2000). Kapari-Jatta (2008: 71–72) also supports this idea and argues that not all names require translation and that children are nowadays more accustomed to foreign languages, making systematic translation of all personal names a strategy more befitting of literature aimed at ever younger audiences (Kapari et al. 2002: 4). This shift in translation conventions and attitude could be considered a display of potential freedom of choice, but also a development stemming from the complexity of the definition of children’s literature.

If the personal names in My Little Pony were intended to be meaningful characterization tools (as they appear to be in the original to the source language users), translating the names so that they serve this function could be one skopos. In short it could be described as follows; the names should allude to qualities physical or psychological as intended by the original. If this were an assigned skopos, would a translation where the names failed their purpose be a correct, or at the very least, a good enough (or adequate (Toury 1995 quoted in Venuti 2004: 216) or instrumental (Nord 1997: 47–52)) translation at all?

Ultimately, the skopos of the translation determines what the parameters of an acceptable, adequate or good enough translation are.

Although it is not without warranted criticism (Vermeer 2004: 230–234, Pym 2010: 56–59), skopos theory provides particularly useful tools for determining whether translated and non-translated personal names serve their intended purpose for the intended audience in this particular study. Translation strategies for personal names are discussed in more detail in chapter 3.2.

Understanding the function of a fictive personal name is key to preserving the desired effect, however subtle the reference or function may be. Because personal names have a dynamic role in the narrative, Yvonne Bertills (2003: 194) argues that when translating personal names, especially when they carry semantic value and allusions, the function of the name should remain faithful to the original and the translator should be aware of the cultural context the original name has. For example, translator Alice Martin retained British names in her translation of Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland when the characters belonged to the real world to indicate the mundane, but changed or translated the names of characters originating from Wonderland to highlight the curious (Oittinen 1997: 54), which could be seen as a translator choosing a strategy to achieve a desired effect (functional equivalence, Vermeer 2004) and is in keeping with Nord’s observation that translators can utilize many strategies within a single text (Nord 2003: 182–183, see also Kapari 2008).

Bertills (2003: 207) suggested the following categorization for translation strategies for the translation of personal names, and continues that a translator can, or in fact must employ multiple strategies when translating personal names with connotative value. Bertills’s categorizations are based on the categories provided by Hermans (1988), which she expanded upon and are as follows:

1) copying: name is transferred completely unchanged from source text to target text, so that it appears exactly as it was in the original

2) transcription: name is transliterated and adapted on different levels, such as spelling or phonology

3) substitution: name is changed to a point where it no longer represents the original in form 4) translation: if name has semantic content, it can be translated to match source language meaning

In document Nomen est Omen : reception of translated and non-translated descriptive names in My Little Pony Tales (sivua 17-0)