UNIVERSITY OF EASTERN FINLAND PHILOSOPHICAL FACULTY
SCHOOL OF HUMANITIES English Language and Translation
Ponkala Maaret Juuli Anneli
QUALITY OF SUBTITLING IN ONLINE STREAMING SUBSCRIPTION SERVICES A comparative study on subtitling quality between Netflix Original episodes and previously
aired episodes of Gilmore Girls on Netflix
MA Thesis June 2018
ITÄ-SUOMEN YLIOPISTO – UNIVERSITY OF EASTERN FINLAND
Tiedekunta – Faculty Philosophical Faculty
Osasto – School School of Humanities Tekijät – Author
Ponkala, Maaret Juuli Anneli Työn nimi – Title
Quality of subtitling in online streaming subscription services: A comparative study on subtitling quality between Netflix Original episodes and previously aired episodes of Gilmore Girls on Netflix Pääaine – Main subject Työn laji – Level Päivämäärä
– Date
Sivumäärä – Number of pages English language and translation
Pro gradu -tutkielma X
June 2018 97
Sivuainetutkielma Kandidaatin tutkielma Aineopintojen
tutkielma
Tiivistelmä – Abstract
This MA Thesis discusses the subtitling quality on online streaming services. The quality is examined through translation errors discovered from the subtitling. The aim of this study is to evaluate if the subtitling quality is at an acceptable level by examining the quantity and severity of the translation errors. In addition, this thesis will discuss how the subtitling production processes have been studied to affect the subtitling quality, and what roles different actors, such as networks, subtitling production companies, translators and viewers, play in the process, and how they can possibly affect the quality.
Streaming subscription services have increased their popularity in the past few years, strengthening their position on the market as providers of entertainment. As the popularity increases, multiple streaming subscription services have been developed. However, the most popular service remains Netflix. One of the ways Netflix has attempted to retain its status with the increasing number of streaming services, has been the introduction of Netflix Originals, i.e. movies and shows that are mainly produced by Netflix and viewable for its subscribers.
In addition to the service‟s popularity, Netflix provides an example of a company that has listened to the critique it has received and aimed to improve its services accordingly. For that reason, this thesis will evaluate the quality of subtitling by examining both the subtitling of Netflix Originals and previously aired non-Original content. The aim is to examine if the producer of the content is in relation to the quality of subtitling, and further examine the network‟s role in the subtitling production process, as it could be assumed that Netflix‟s vast investment on Original content would extend to the quality of subtitling in order to ensure the service‟s global success.
For the scope of this study, Netflix provides an interesting example on the evaluation of subtitling quality by producing new seasons for some of the non-Original content. An example of this is the American television show Gilmore Girls, which was originally produced from 2000 to 2007, and was continued as a four episode Netflix Original miniseries in 2016. Therefore, episodes from both the Original and non-Original seasons have been selected as the material of this study.
In this study, the subtitling quality is examined through translation errors discovered from the material. The discovered translation errors are examined in the three-part analysis of this thesis. The first part will examine the quantity and category of the errors, the second part will examine the quantity and severity of the errors through error analysis to examine the subtitling‟s overall quality, and the third part will examine, if the possible differences and statistical significance can be used to discover, if the added investment on Original content is extended to subtitling quality.
From the analysis, it was discovered that none of the episodes would have passed O‟Brien‟s (2012) threshold test, and the quality of subtitling was not in relation to the producer.
Therefore, it can be argued that the improvements Netflix has made in order to improve the subtitling quality do not extend to the problems linked with subtitling production processes.
Avainsanat – Keywords
AV translation, subtitling, subtitling quality, translation errors, Netflix, streaming service, Netflix Originals, error analysis
ITÄ-SUOMEN YLIOPISTO – UNIVERSITY OF EASTERN FINLAND
Tiedekunta – Faculty
Filosofinen tiedekunta Osasto – School
Humanistinen osasto Tekijät – Author
Ponkala, Maaret Juuli Anneli Työn nimi – Title
Quality of subtitling in online streaming subscription services: A comparative study on subtitling quality between Netflix Original episodes and previously aired episodes of Gilmore Girls on Netflix Pääaine – Main subject Työn laji – Level Päivämäärä – Date Sivumäärä –
Number of pages Englannin kieli ja kääntäminen
Pro gradu -tutkielma X
Kesäkuu 2018 97
Sivuainetutkielma Kandidaatin tutkielma Aineopintojen tutkielma
Tiivistelmä – Abstract
Tämä pro gradu -tutkielma käsittelee suoratoistopalveluiden tekstitysten laatua. Laatua käsitellään tekstityksestä havaittujen käännösvirheiden kautta, ja tutkimuksen tavoitteena on selvittää, onko suoratoistopalveluiden laatu hyväksyttävällä tasolla käännösvirheiden määrää ja vakavuusastetta tarkastelemalla. Lisäksi tarkastellaan, miten tekstitysten tuotantoprosessien on tutkittu vaikuttavan laatuun, ja minkälainen rooli prosessin eri osatekijöillä, kuten suoratoistopalvelulla, käännösyhtiöllä, kääntäjällä ja katsojalla, mahdollisesti on tekstityksen laatuun.
Suoratoistopalvelut ovat viime vuosien aikana kasvattaneet suosiotaan entisestään, saavuttaen yhä suuremman jalansijan viihteentarjoajina. Suosion kasvaessa palveluita on kehitetty useita, mutta suosituimpana suoratoistopalveluntarjoajana jatkaa Netflix. Palveluntarjoajien lisääntyessä yksi tavoista, joilla Netflix on pyrkinyt säilyttämään asemansa on ollut Netflix Originals -sisältö, toisin sanoen sarjat ja elokuvat jotka ovat yleensä Netflixin tuottamia ja joiden katselumahdollisuus rajoittuu lähinnä palvelun tilaajille.
Suuren suosionsa lisäksi Netflix on esimerkki yhtiöstä, joka on kuunnellut saamaansa kritiikkiä ja pyrkinyt kehittämään palveluaan sen mukaisesti. Sen vuoksi tässä tutkimuksessa laatua tarkastellaan tutkimalla sekä Netflix Originals -sisällön tekstitystä että aiemmin muuta kautta tuotetun sisällön tekstitystä.
Tarkoituksena on selvittää, onko sisällön tuottajalla merkitystä tekstitysten laatuun, jonka kautta voidaan pohtia palveluntarjoajan merkitystä tekstitysten tuotantoprosessissa, sillä voitaisiin olettaa, että Netflixin valtava investointi Originals-sisältöön uloittuisi tekstityslaatuun, siten taaten investoinnin kannattavuuden myös maailmanlaajuisen menestyksen kannalta.
Tämän tutkimuksen kannalta Netflix tarjoaa mielenkiintoisen näkökulman tekstityslaadun tutkimisella tuottamalla uutta sisältöä muille palveluntarjoajille aiemmin tuotettuun sisältöön. Esimerkkinä tällaisesta sisällöstä on amerikkalainen televisiosarja Gilmoren tytöt, jota tuotettiin alun perin vuosina 2000 – 2007, ja joka sai jatkoa Netflixin tuottamana neliosaisena minisarjana vuonna 2016. Sen vuoksi tähän tutkimukseen on valittu jaksoja sekä sarjan aiemmin esitetyiltä kausilta että uudelta, Netflixin tuottamalta kaudelta.
Tutkimuksessa tekstityksen laatua tarkkaillaan käännösvirheiden kautta. Löydettyjä käännösvirheitä tutkitaan kolmeosaisessa analyysissä, jonka ensimmäisessä osassa käännösvirheiden määrä ja kategoria selvitetään, toisessa osassa käännösvirheiden määrää tarkastellaan virheanalyysin kautta laadun selvittämiseksi, ja kolmannessa osassa tutkitaan, voidaanko käännösvirheiden mahdollisten erojen ja tilastollisen merkitsevyyden kautta päätellä, että Netflixin lisäpanostus Originals -sisältöön ulottuisi myös tekstitykseen.
Analyysin perusteella selvisi, että valitun materiaalin yksikään jakso ei olisi läpäissyt O‟Brienin (2012) esittämiä raja-arvoja hyväksyttävälle tekstityslaadulle, eikä tekstityksen laatu ollut yhteydessä sisällön tuotantotapaan. Tämän vuoksi voidaan päätellä, että parannukset, joita Netflix on pyrkinyt tekemään käännöslaadun parantamiseksi eivät poista tekstitysprosessiin liittyviä ongelmia.
Avainsanat – Keywords
av-kääntäminen, tekstitys, tekstityslaatu, käännösvirheet, Netflix, suoratoistopalvelu, Netflix Originals, virheanalyysi
1. Introduction ... 1
2. Theoretical framework ... 5
2.1. Audiovisual Translation ... 7
2.1.1. Subtitling ... 9
2.1.2. Finnish subtitling conventions compared to Netflix‟s subtitling conventions ... 13
2.1.3. Production process of audiovisual translation and its relation to quality ... 18
2.1.4. Viewers‟ quality expectations and reception ... 22
2.2. Translation errors ... 27
2.2.1. Translation error categorization ... 30
2.2.2. O‟Brien‟s quality evaluation model ... 35
2.3. The quality of subtitling in AV translators‟ and laymen‟s perspective ... 37
3. Research material ... 41
3.1. Netflix ... 41
3.2. Gilmore Girls ... 43
3.3. Research material in this study and its validity ... 44
4. Research methods ... 46
4.1. Translation error assessment ... 47
4.2. Quality evaluation ... 50
4.3. Quality difference evaluation through statistical significance ... 51
5. Analysis ... 54
5.1. Translation error analysis ... 54
5.1.1. Overt errors ... 56
5.1.1.1. Semantic errors ... 56
5.1.1.2. Omission errors ... 59
5.1.1.3. Cohesion errors ... 62
5.1.1.4. Stylistic errors ... 65
5.1.2. Covert errors ... 66
5.1.2.1. Idiomatic errors ... 66
5.1.2.2. Connotation errors ... 69
5.1.2.3. Continuity errors ... 71
5.1.2.4. Convention errors ... 74
5.2. Translation error severity analysis ... 76
5.2.1. Severity error categories ... 77
5.3. Quality difference analysis through statistical significance ... 82
6. Discussion ... 85
7. Conclusion ... 88
8. References ... 91
1
1. Introduction
Online streaming continues to increase their popularity, as more and more viewers watch their favorite shows and movies on the services, instead of depending on the supply of entertainment on traditional television channels. In the past few years, streaming service providers have strengthen their position on the market, providing viewers with a vast amount of readily available content, often originally in a foreign language to the viewer. From the service providers, Netflix remains to maintain its status as the world‟s leading streaming subscription service. Since launching its streaming subscription services in the United States in 2007, both the number of Netflix‟s subscribers and operating countries have been steadily growing, reaching the number of 100 million subscribers in 190 countries in 2017 (Statista1, Netflix). Although Netflix has a number of competitors, both Finnish and international, it has accomplished to attain the status of the most popular streaming subscription service among Finnish viewers with over 500,000 subscribers (Karkimo 2015, Heyman 2015). As an increasing number of viewers use and subscribe to online streaming services, the quality of subtitling in the services becomes an increasingly pertinent issue. Due to service‟s status and global spread, this MA Thesis aims to study the subtitling quality of online streaming subscription services by executing a case study on Netflix.
Since the competition for streaming services grows with the popularity, one of Netflix‟s means to maintain its status and gain competitive edge is the launch of Netflix Originals, i.e. shows and movies that are produced for Netflix and mostly available on the subscription service. The investment on content has been estimated to be 6 billion US dollars for the year 2017 (Castillo 2017), rising up to 8 billion US dollars in the year 2018 (Koblin 2017). From the total content budget, Netflix has reported that 25 per cent has been spent towards Original programming, and the portion is expected to grow even larger in 2018 (Koblin 2017).
Finland has a long tradition in subtitling foreign content for Finnish viewers.
The start of Finnish subtitling began at Suomen Televisio (now known as Yleisradio, from here on referred to as Yle) in the late 50s and late 60s (Luova 2010). Nowadays subtitles are among the most read texts (Mäkisalo 2006), and for years broadcasting companies such as Yle and MTV had their own in-house translators providing translations of high quality, and the subtitling conventions of those networks, especially Yle, have been studied to further examine the construction of a high-quality subtitling (Vertanen 2007b, Lång 2013). However, the practice of broadcasting networks using in-house translators has decreased in recent years,
2 as many networks have outsourced their translation services to multinational translation companies (Palosaari 2016).
With the changing practices, the decreasing quality of subtitling has not gone unnoticed (see, for example, Palosaari 2016). The differences in quality have often been examined through the structure of the subtitling production processes (Abdallah 2012), and contributed to the increased competition between translation companies resulting in lower compensation for audiovisual translators (from here on, audiovisual translators will be referred to simply as „AV translators‟) (Lång 2013). The production processes and their effect on subtitling quality will be discussed in subsection 2.1.3.
Poor quality subtitling can have a notable effect on the viewing experience of a television show or a movie. Noticeable translation errors in subtitling can cause the viewer‟s attention to be drawn to the subtitling itself, instead of focusing on following the plot (Vertanen 2007b). Furthermore, as mentioned in the blog maintained by an anonymous audiovisual translator (Pseudonym U 2012), idiomatic errors in the sentence structure and other anomalies in subtitling, which the viewer might not even notice, can have a negative effect on the viewing experience. This negative effect can leave the viewer with the impression that the fault is in the content instead of the subtitling (Heikkilä 2014, discussed in subsection 2.3.).
Subtitling quality on Netflix has not always been a priority for the service. The Finnish subtitling on Netflix have been criticized on its quality, production practices and the compensation AV translators receive from the work since the Finnish version was launched in 2012 (Jansson 2012). After the critique Netflix received, the service has attempted to upgrade its subtitling quality by acquiring subtitling services from acceptable providers, and controlling the level of the translators‟ professional abilities by implementing the HERMES test in 2017 (Netflix5). However, as the test is only aimed to ascertain the translators‟
abilities, instead of aiming to enhance the entire subtitling production process, it is worthwhile to continuously study Netflix‟s subtitling to monitor how the quality and production evolves with the added developments. Furthermore, as this study began before the implementation of HERMES, it should provide some insight if the developments have been a necessary addition.
In my BA Thesis (Ponkala 2016), I analyzed the quality of subtitling on Netflix using Buffy the Vampire Slayer as an example. In the study, the total number of translation errors was as high as 669 in three episodes. Most of the translation errors discovered from the material fell into the categories that would indicate visibility to the viewer (see, for example, Vehmas-Lehto 2005, Heikkilä 2014 on translation errors viewers are more prone to notice,
3 discussed in subsections 2.2.2. and 2.3.). Furthermore, Vertanen (2007b) points out that the main function of subtitling is to work as an aid, so that the viewer is able to follow the plot of the show, and not draw unnecessary attention to the subtitling itself. For that reason, both the number and quality of the translation errors discovered from the material indicated that the quality of subtitling was not at the level one would expect from chargeable streaming subscription service.
As the quality of subtitling in online streaming services was examined using Netflix as an example in my BA Thesis (Ponkala 2016), and the high number of translation errors was discovered, I wanted to study if the quality would improve when Netflix Originals, shows that were produced by and for Netflix, were concerned. Since Netflix Originals are a major investment for the streaming service, aiming to gain leverage among other streaming services and to ensure that subscribers stay with Netflix, it could be imagined that the investment would reach all aspects of the content, including subtitling. Furthermore, Netflix is an example of a service listening to the critique it receives from its customers and making active attempts to improve on quality, therefore examining if the service has reached an acceptable level of subtitling quality is an interesting subject to study.
Netflix provides an interesting example for the purposes of this study by producing new seasons for popular shows that have been previously produced and aired in other networks, therefore the decision to study a show that had both Original and non-Original content was an obvious choice. One of the shows featuring both Original and non-Original episodes, Gilmore Girls, was selected as the research material of the study. The show had seven seasons that were originally aired between 2000 and 2007 (Internet Movie Database1, from here on IMDb1), and a newer season, produced as a Netflix Original in 2016 (IMDb2).
From the show, three episodes were randomly selected from the non-Original seasons and two from the Original season produced by Netflix for this study. The subtitling quality of the selected episodes is studied by using the same methods that were used in the BA thesis (Ponkala 2016) to find out the number of translation errors. A new aspect used in this study to further examine the subtitling quality will be provided by studying the number and severity of the translation errors by using O‟Brien‟s (2012) translation quality evaluation model to examine if the subtitling quality can be deemed acceptable. Once the quality has been examined, the translation quality of the Netflix Original episodes will be compared to the non- Original episodes to determine through statistical significance whether the subtitling quality on Netflix is higher on the Original episodes, and if the large investment on Original content follows through to an integral aspect for Finnish viewers, subtitling. Furthermore, as the
4 subtitled non-Original episodes were added to Netflix‟s content library prior to the release of the Original episodes, the statistical significance test could indicate if the quality is evolving in the right direction.
This MA Thesis will proceed as follows. Section 2 will present the theoretical background of this study, discussing the existing conventions of subtitling, how subtitling has been examined before, and what could be assumed from the previous studies and how the studies can be applied in this thesis. Section 3 will then present the research material of this thesis: Netflix and Gilmore Girls, and what needs to be understood from them to be able to discuss the quality and execute this study. Section 4 will present the research methods applied in this study and how the analysis will be conducted. The material will then be analyzed in section 5, divided into three parts of analysis. In the analysis, the first part will examine the number and type of translation errors found from the material, the second part will apply O‟Brien‟s (2012) translation quality evaluation model to determine if the translation quality can be deemed acceptable, and finally in the third part, the numerical data on the Original and non-Original episodes discovered from the first two parts of the analysis will be compared to each other in order to investigate whether the added investment to Original content on Netflix extends to subtitling. After the analysis, section 6 will compile the results from the three-part analysis and discuss what can be assumed from it. Finally, section 7 will then conclude the research by discussing how the situation can be connected to the previous research on subtitling quality and subtitle production processes, and if the situation could be improved.
5
2. Theoretical framework
This section will present the theoretical background of this study. The section is divided into three main subsections that will present and explain the main aspects that propel this thesis listed below.
Audiovisual translation and especially subtitling, and the conventions that are associated with a good-quality subtitling in Finland.
Translation errors and how they affect the viewing experience.
Viewers tendencies to evaluate subtitling.
Díaz Cintas (2010: 344) explains that audiovisual translation is an umbrella term that covers all areas of translating that combine an audiovisual element with a linguistic element that is in the need of translating. By combining auditory elements, such as music and other non-linguistic sounds, and visual elements with a linguistic element, an audiovisual translation is always in a transparent context, as nothing of the original elements are omitted when subtitles are added to the material, in contrast with the „traditional translations‟ (ibid.).
In other words, the original content of the show is always visible and audible with the translated content, and therefore the translation can be constantly compared to the original content (ibid.). For that reason, subtitled shows and movies provide an incredibly lucrative source of study and therefore critique for not only academic research but also for the consumers of those shows, as the consumers are constantly able to compare the subtitling to the original utterance within their individual language skills (ibid.). Therefore, it is not surprising that the translation errors found in subtitling are discussed and collected on web sites, and in Finland, even compiled into books (such as Paakkinen 2003 & 2005, discussed in Vertanen 2007a: 322).
Finland has a long tradition of subtitling foreign content for television (Luova 2010), and for that reason, the Finnish viewers undoubtedly have certain expectations regarding the quality and of subtitling. When a relative newcomer, such as Netflix, arrives on the market and the subtitling in the service possibly breaks some of the well-established conventions and the quality does not meet the expectations, it inevitably raises a question of whether or not the quality of subtitling is, indeed, acceptable. Therefore it should be examined, if the subtitling quality is the result of Netflix‟s own subtitling conventions or if the reason could be discovered from the subtitling production processes. Furthermore, as Netflix has made active attempts to improve its quality of subtitling, examining an aspect outside of
6 the service‟s attempts, production processes, could provide some further explanation on the remaining issues in subtitling quality.
Even though a translator is usually considered the sole culprit of a translation error, in reality, they are only a cog in the wheel of subtitle production (Lång 2013: 52). In addition to the translator, production companies and networks have a significant role in the production, yet the role of the viewer may often stay overlooked, as it can arguably seem less obvious. However, as a subtitled program can be considered a product, where an AV translator is one of the providers, the final customer of the product is the viewer (James 2001:
152, discussed in Tuominen 2013). Therefore, the customers‟ comments on the quality of a product should not stay overlooked, but be taken into consideration in order to improve the product and its production.
Because the consumer of the show, or a „layman‟ from the point of view of Translation Studies, is able to constantly compare the original content with its translation (Díaz Cintas 2010: 344), it is certainly understandable that the translation is then mainly publicly evaluated by the number and quality of translation errors the consumer would be able to notice in the subtitling of a show. However, streaming subscription services, such as Netflix, are still businesses offering services in exchange for a monthly payment. Whether the money is made through selling commercials or direct payment from customers, the networks can still be simplified as businesses (channel, streaming subscription service) selling a product (movie, show, documentary) for their customers (viewer). An important aspect in evaluating a product‟s quality is obviously customer satisfaction. For that reason, in this thesis, the quality of subtitling will be examined through translation errors found in the subtitling Netflix provides for its content.
Of course, different types of translation errors have a different type of effect on the viewing experience of a show. Some errors can have a more profound effect on following the plot of a show, whereas some errors may not affect the understanding per se, but rather annoy the viewer or draw unnecessary attention to the subtitling (Vehmas-Lehto 2005: 53).
However, each type of translation error can have an effect, regardless of their significance to the viewer‟s ability to follow the plot of the show or the error‟s level of annoyance (ibid.). If the translation error continuously appears in the subtitling, it raises a question whether the translation quality can be considered acceptable.
The terms used in this thesis to refer to various aspects of subtitles are subtitling, caption, and translation. In this thesis, the word subtitling is used as a large-scale term, when the subtitling of a movie or show is discussed in general. The term caption, in turn, is used
7 when the subtitling is discussed in detail, referring to a section of translated text that is visible on screen at one time. This is done to separate the issues, so that they can be discussed more comprehensively without the risk of accidental transposing. In the analysis part of this study, the subtitling will then be discussed by the relation of translation errors to individual translations, where an individual translation is considered to include only the translated caption of a single character‟s utterance visible on screen at one time. A more detailed explanation of how the translations are calculated in this thesis is provided in subsection 4.1.
where it is introduced as one mean in calculating erroneous translations.
Having now described the basis of this study, the following subsections will present a more detailed theoretical background for the claims made above. Subsection 2.1.
will explain the theoretical background of audiovisual translation and subtitling and their special characteristics compared to the „traditional‟ translation methods. Subsection 2.2. will then further explain the background of subtitling in Finland and the established conventions and quality expectations behind them, as well as Netflix‟s own guidelines and how the subtitling quality of Netflix has been discussed in media since the subscription service first launched its services in Finland. The following subsection 2.2.1. will then discuss the distinct roles AV translators, laymen, and broadcasting networks play in the production process of subtitled content. As subtitling and its conventions in Finland and on Netflix have then been established, subsection 2.3. will then explain how laymen and AV translators discuss translation quality and translation errors, using Maija Heikkilä‟s MA thesis (2014) as an example. Subsection 2.4. will then explain what constitutes as a translation error and the translation error categories used in this study to further analyze subtitling quality and the effect the errors can have on the Finnish consumer‟s viewing experience, using Gyde Hansen‟s (2010) and Inkeri Vehmas-Lehto‟s (2005) studies on translation errors and explaining how the categorization used in this study is comprised on the basis of the articles and how they are applied to subtitling.
2.1. Audiovisual Translation
As mentioned above, audiovisual translation is an umbrella term that covers all areas of translating that combine an audiovisual element with a linguistic element that is in the need of translating, such as opera translating, dubbing, voice-over and subtitling. An audiovisual translation always appears in a multimodal context (Remael 2010), in other words in a context that has more than one mode in a single medium (Merriam-Webster). As the name
8 would suggest, the multimodal context of an audiovisual translation comes through two modes; auditory and visual. The auditory mode in an audiovisual translation includes not only the spoken words of the characters, but also any non-linguistic auditory elements, such as music and background noises (Díaz Cintas 2010: 344), as well as verbal fillers or smaller expressions, such as the „umms‟, „ahs‟ and „huhs‟. Similarly, the visual mode do not only include the written text on screen, such as signs or text messages, but also gestures and images (ibid.).
The appearance of an audiovisual element with the linguistic element, or multimodality, is what separates audiovisual translation from „traditional‟ translations, as an audiovisual translation has to take into account the surrounding elements instead of exclusively translating a written text in a source language into a written text in a target language (Remael 2010). Therefore, as Remael (2010) mentions, in studying audiovisual translation, researching only the verbal elements of the content is not sufficient. The context of the linguistic element must be considered, whether it is inaudible, such as gestures or facial expressions, or audible, such as grunts or other non-linguistic sounds, as they can have an inevitable effect on the translation decision. In other words, the visual elements on screen designate, for example, what linguistic elements are represented clearly enough on screen that they can be omitted from the subtitling (Vertanen 2007b).
Although still considered as a relatively new field of research in Translation Studies, the beginning of audiovisual translation can, in fact, be dated back over a hundred years. The earliest audiovisual translations can be considered to be the translations of intertitles in silent movies (Remael 2010: 12–17). Remael (ibid.) further explains that as silent movies were eventually superseded by „talking movies‟, i.e. movies with auditory dialogue, the practice of audiovisual translation became a necessity for securing the export of films, especially in the United States. As the United States remains at the top three of the world‟s leading film industries by country, superseded by only China and India (Statista2), and considered as the country‟s second largest export (Webb 2009), it could be argued that the rise of audiovisual translation assisted the global success of the industry by securing the global export regardless of language differences.
Remael (2010) further mentions that a number of different types of audiovisual translation methods were tried and adapted to secure the export of films, even multiple language versions of one film. With the development of the field of audiovisual translation and the needs of movie industries, two main methods of translating a foreign film and foreign content for export have carried through to this day: dubbing and subtitling (Remael 2010).
9 Although both methods pursue the same result, i.e. ensuring that a movie or a show originally in a foreign language to the viewer translates to the viewer‟s preferred language, the methods differ in execution. Dubbing refers to replacing the original dialogue with a translated recording in the target language that is synchronized with the actor‟s lip movements, therefore creating an illusion that the actor is actually speaking in the target language (Díaz Cintas &
Orero 2010), whereas subtitling is executed by adding a written translation of the dialogue and other necessary linguistic elements on screen while preserving all of the original elements (Díaz Cintas 2010). Although dubbing is commonly used to translate content in a foreign language in many countries, such as Germany and Italy (Díaz Cintas & Orero 2010), in Finland, dubbing is mostly used translating content targeted for children, while the commonly established method of translating foreign language in an audiovisual context is subtitling (Vertanen 2007b: 149–150). Díaz Cintas (2010: 344) rightly argues that the most popular audiovisual translation method used is subtitling, because compared to the other methods, such as dubbing, it is „cheap and fast‟. A similar reason is presented by Vertanen (2007b:
149–150), explaining that the cost-effectiveness of audiovisual translating is preserved in smaller countries and language areas by subtitling, whereas in more populous countries, such as Germany and Italy, the added costs of dubbing content are smaller in relation to the number or potential viewers.
2.1.1. Subtitling
According to the definition by Díaz Cintas (2010: 344), subtitling consists of translating into target language both the utterances of the original dialogue and any other linguistic information that is either visually (written information in letters, text messages etc.) or aurally (songs, voices off) present in a show. In other words, this means that any information in a foreign language that is necessary for the viewers is translated, so that they are able to follow the plot of the show, in order to ensure that the viewer watching the subtitled version is able to have a viewing experience as similar as possible to someone viewing the show in its original language (Vertanen 2007b). This creates certain special characteristics for subtitling as a translation method, as there are restrictions that are an integral requirement to the formation of high-quality subtitling.
As mentioned above and by Díaz Cintas (2010), subtitling is a form of audiovisual translation that consists of translating all source language information on screen (dialogue and text) that is necessary for the viewer to follow the show. Therefore, the function of subtitling is to work as an aid for the viewer instead of a separate linguistic unit that could
10 be read and understood on its own (Vertanen 2007b: 150), but Vertanen further explains that the information conveyed through subtitling is incomplete on its own, and understandable only when it is displayed on screen at the moment it is needed. The reason behind the allowed incompleteness could be divided into two; the aforementioned multimodal context and the limitations set for subtitling by time and space.
The spatial and temporal limitations of subtitling mean that for the viewer to be able to read and understand the subtitling while simultaneously focusing on what is happening on screen, the subtitling needs to follow certain guidelines (Díaz Cintas 2010: 344). Among other things, these guidelines dictate caption lengths and how long those captions of a certain length should be visible on screen based on the speed of the original utterance as well as the assumed reading speed of the viewer (Díaz Cintas 2010: 345, Vertanen 2007b: 152). In other words, this means that not only does the caption need to be on screen the required time for the viewer to read it, the caption must be on screen the same time as the original is uttered and it must be of suitable length when compared to the original utterance or visibility of written linguistic element (Vertanen 2007b: 152). This, of course, causes the need to condense and reduce the information received from the linguistic elements on screen and soundtrack (Díaz Cintas 2010: 344, Vertanen 2007b: 152). Since everything that is said on screen or possibly shown in signs or other visual elements cannot always fit in the caption, the translator must find a way to single out the information that is necessary for the viewer to be able to follow the plot of the show (Vertanen 2007b: 152), or as similarly explained by Díaz Cintas (2010:
345), the subtitling “must provide a semantically adequate account of the original dialogue”.
In other words, the condensed caption should be able to separate the plot pertinent issue from the original utterance and include it in the translation. Díaz Cintas (2010: 345) further explains that for the subtitling to provide that adequate account, each of the captions should be a “coherent, logical and syntactical unit” in its context. In other words, this means that each of the captions should form a unit that contains all the necessary information given in the dialogue same time on screen and be semantically and syntactically correct (Vertanen 2007b:
154). In this context means that in a single caption, the idea and essence of the original should be presented as a whole, instead of dividing the idea into two captions that are not visible on screen at the same time (ibid.). The reason behind this, as Díaz Cintas (2010: 345) explains, is that the viewer typically does not have the possibility to go back and retrieve the necessary information presented earlier in the subtitling, but rather the show is habitually watched from start to finish without stopping and going back. Therefore the subtitling should be understood
11 and placed in context by the viewer at once, so that the viewer is able to understand what is being said on screen and by which character (Vertanen 2007b: 151).
In addition to the temporal and spatial limitations, there are certainly limitations regarding the linguistic and grammatical aspect of subtitling. Díaz Cintas (2010: 346) expresses that translating oral dialogue into written form creates a question whether certain aspects of speech, such as accents, can be appropriately rendered into writing. However, Immonen (2005:166) mentions that the subtitling should represent the style of the speaker, i.e.
create an impression of how the person speaks. Vertanen (2007b: 153) similarly points out that a caption always represents a character, and if left too neutral, it could be argued that the subtitling loses its representation. However, as Vertanen (ibid.) reminds, a caption should convey the original message simultaneously with the original utterance and be understood instantly, therefore translating a character‟s line by standing too loyal to the amount of slang or colloquialisms to the original can cause problems with readability. In other words, if the subtitling uses too much slang or colloquialism to convey the character‟s personal style, the subtitling can become too complicated to quickly understand, and consequently cause the viewer to require more time to comprehend the unfamiliar, unexpected or ambiguous terminology of the subtitling. In result, the subtitling can thereby lose its purpose of working as an aid for the viewer. For that reason, Vertanen (2007b: 153) explains that when creating an illusion of a character‟s style in the subtitling, instead of using exclusively slang or colloquialisms, a more suitable way to express style would be to use language that merely suggests the presence of style, as to not disturb the readability. In other words, adding a small amount of colloquial language in words that are already easily understood to create an illusion of style should be sufficient. In Finnish, an example of this illusion would be replacing the word „minä‟ with more colloquial versions „mä‟ or „mie‟ to indicate that the character speech is not standard language.
In addition to slang and colloquialisms, another way of creating style in both the original dialogue and in subtitling is the use of profanities. Vertanen (2007b: 153) reminds that profanities have a tendency to be more offensive when written down than when expressed orally. An addition to the challenges of translating profanities is brought by the use and origins of different swear words in different cultures, which can cause the translation of the profanity to be excessively emphasized in a confined translation, where time and space are limited and foreign language context is constantly present, such as subtitling (Vertanen ibid.).
This certainly means that when a character‟s lines are full of profanities and swear words, it is not necessary to convey each one of the profanities, yet the presence of them should not be
12 completely omitted. However, as Vertanen (ibid.) further expresses, this does not mean that all profanities should be completely excluded from the subtitling, instead used when necessary to convey a character‟s style and when used, used in a suitable way. To exemplify this, Vertanen (ibid.) suggests that men fighting in the trenches of World War I would probably not use light profanities such as „simpskatti‟, implying that the profanity used in the translation or subtitling should be chosen with the character‟s style and context in mind.
Therefore, the level of offensiveness should be taken into consideration when translating profanities. Vertanen (2007b) further reminds that with subtitling, the viewer has a picture aiding the viewing, and is often able to conclude the vulgarity from the speaker‟s facial expression and tone without necessarily understanding the original language.
Even though there is still no universal consensus regarding subtitling quality and what it should entail, rather the convention are closely related to context and culture, Vertanen (2007b:151) suggest that by following these general guidelines, the subtitling should be as invisible to the viewer as possible, i.e. the viewer is left with an illusion that they understand the original dialogue and language of the show, and preferably the viewer would not even notice that they are actually reading a translation on screen, thus, the subtitling fulfills its purpose of working as an aid for the viewer. In brief, one the most important things when it comes to translating audiovisual content with subtitles is that the viewing experience of a viewer that needs the subtitles is as similar as possible to that of someone watching the same show without the need of subtitling.
Despite the restrictions presented above for subtitling, the grammar, linguistic conventions and idiomaticity of subtitling should not be forgotten, or as Immonen (2005: 166) reminds in her article, subtitling should still be grammatically and idiomatically adequate Finnish. As the main aspect of preserving this type of „invisibility‟ in subtitling is to not draw unnecessary attention to the subtitling itself, the grammar of the subtitling should certainly follow some guidelines, too. According to Immonen (ibid.), subtitling should follow the linguistic conventions of the target language, established patterns in speaking and writing, as well as grammar. In other words, in addition to being able to preserve the essence of the original dialogue and style while condensing them to suit the limitations set by time and space, the subtitling should still be idiomatic and grammatically correct in the target language.
This will be more thoroughly discussed in subsection 2.2. discussing translation errors.
In addition to these special characteristics regarding the actual practice of subtitling, the end result of the practice, i.e. a subtitled show, differs in nature from many other forms of translating (Remael 2010: 13). Possibly the most obvious main difference is
13 that the subtitling is an addition to the content instead of a replacement, as the original content remains in its original state in the translated version (Díaz Cintas 2010: 346). In other words, subtitling is only added to the content without omitting any of the original content. Díaz Cintas (ibid.) explains that the presence of the original sounds, dialogue and other linguistic elements with the subtitling, leaves subtitling in a „particularly vulnerable situation‟, as it can be evaluated, commented and scrutinized by anyone with „the slightest knowledge‟ of the source language. Therefore, as other forms of translation are typically analyzed and criticized in academic research, subtitling can be, and certainly is, under constant scrutiny by the viewer, who can be considered as the final customer for the translation (Chiaro 2008), and a
„layman‟ from the viewpoint of Translation Studies (as mentioned in Heikkilä 2014, discussed in subsection 2.3.). An example of this are the Finnish books by Jouni Paakkinen (2003 &
2005, mentioned in Vertanen 2007a: 322), where subtitling errors are collected. With the technology of today, the laymen are also able to share their viewing experiences and thoughts on translation quality with others online (Vertanen 2007a: 322, Heikkilä 2014), gaining a larger platform than ever before. Understandably, translation quality is mostly defined and discussed by laymen through the errors made in the subtitling as discussed in Heikkilä (2014).
Heikkilä‟s findings on how laymen‟s thoughts on translation quality and especially translation errors found in subtitling compared to the thoughts of AV translators will be more thoroughly discussed in subsection 2.3.
2.1.2. Finnish subtitling conventions compared to Netflix’s subtitling conventions As discussed in the previous subsection, the requirements of subtitling as a form of audiovisual translation set certain necessities in regards of timing, space and readability.
Many of those requirements, such as the need to compress, can be regarded as globally universal in subtitling. However, as Finland has a long tradition of translating foreign content for television (Luova 2010), some of these conventions can be more accurately specified in the Finnish context. Additionally, due to the long traditions and studies showing that subtitling constitutes of a large portion of the texts Finns read daily (Mäkisalo 2006: 254), it could be argued that Finns definitely have certain expectations when it comes to subtitling.
For that reason, the observance and reactions of laymen when it comes to the quality of subtitling come as no surprise when the expectations are not met, especially with relative newcomers such as Netflix. Therefore, it is important to study whether the critique is caused by Netflix‟s own, revised instructions, or if the problem lies deeper in the subtitling production process. To study this, it must first be examined what guidelines Netflix adheres to
14 or sets for the subtitling of its content and if they differ from the guidelines and conventions traditionally adhered to when subtitling content for Finnish viewers. If the guidelines differ on important aspects set to ensure the readability of subtitling and their general purpose, it could be assumed that the problem would lie in Netflix. However, if the answer is not found in Netflix‟s guidelines, further scrutiny should be focused on the overall process of audiovisual translation production to examine, if the problem can be discovered from there. This subsection discusses how the Finnish conventions and traditions are linked to the expectations Finnish viewers might have regarding subtitling quality, and the conventions commonly adhered to in Yle‟s subtitling and how and if Netflix‟s own subtitling guidelines differ from them.
As mentioned, the practice of translating foreign content has been long used in Finland, starting as early as the end of 1950s (Luova 2010). Finland being officially a bilingual country, the need of subtitling is not only limited to translating foreign content into Finnish, but translating content to both Finnish and Swedish, especially in Yle‟s channels that are publicly funded. Nowadays, the need for audiovisual translation seems to be continuously growing, as subtitling is not only restricted to translating foreign content to another language, but also taking into account the viewer‟s other restrictions, with audio description (verbal narration for the visually impaired), and closed captioning and sign language interpretation for the hearing impaired (Yle 2015).
The most commonly used practice for audiovisual translation in Finland still remains subtitling (Tuominen 2007: 295, Vertanen 2007b: 149–150). Subtitles also constitute a large portion of both the translations as well as other texts Finns read daily, as discussed by Mäkisalo (2006: 254) and further studied by Salmi (2010: 7), and as the average Finn spends triple the time watching television as they do reading books or newspapers, Lång (2013: 52) further argues that subtitling may well be one of the most commonly read forms of Finnish.
Therefore, as Jääskeläinen (2007: 117) argues, the quality of subtitling is not indifferent, and as Vertanen (2007b: 149) further explains that as Finnish children are internationally successful in studies testing reading comprehension, the quality of subtitling should be set to a high standard. Therefore, the conventions of Finnish subtitling as well as the production process are important to study, in order to ensure that instead of deteriorating the Finnish language, subtitling restores it – and evolves with it.
Due to the long traditions and prevalence of subtitling, it is a well-established practice in Finland. In his article, Vertanen (2007b) introduces Yle‟s conventions that are commonly adhered to in Finland. The universally applicable main guideline appears to be the
15 idea that captions are not meant to form a coherent text that can be understood on its own, but instead, the subtitling is supposed to operate as an aid, so that the viewer is able to follow the plot of the show without paying too much attention to the subtitling. Therefore it is important that the caption appears on screen at exactly the right time, and stays there long enough that the viewer has time to read it and is able to take in its context, i.e. can compare the caption to what is happening on the screen (Vertanen 2007b: 150–151). In other words, the caption should appear on screen at the same time the original line is being uttered. Nevertheless, as explained above and further supported by Immonen (2005: 166), subtitling should still be adequate Finnish that follows the linguistic conventions, established patterns in speaking, writing and grammar. In addition, as Immonen (ibid.) mentions, the subtitling should represent the style of the speaker, i.e. create an impression of how the person speaks.
Vertanen (2007b: 150) explains that subtitling should stay true to the original and aim to convey the style and tone as well as possible. In brief, as mentioned before, the most important thing when it comes to translating subtitles is that the viewing experience of a viewer using subtitles is as similar as possible to that of someone watching the same show without them. In addition to these general guidelines, Vertanen‟s report of Yle‟s conventions include more specified instructions on what should and should not be included in the subtitling. The more specified instructions collected from Vertanen‟s (2007b: 149–170) article are listed in Table 1.
Netflix already has a vast number of movies and shows in its service, and new content is being constantly added, and thus, the need for subtitling is constant. Therefore, it is understandable that as an enormous client for companies providing audiovisual translations, Netflix has its own set of guidelines to try and regulate the quality of subtitling on its content (Netflix2). The guidelines Netflix provides are divided into two: a general requirements guide (Netflix2) and a style guide specified for Finnish subtitling (Netflix3). The general requirements guide consists of 14 sections of general instructions for universal use and the guide specified for Finnish subtitling consists of 22 sections. Many of the guidelines follow the general rules of subtitling discussed in Vertanen (2007b) and Díaz Cintas (2010), but there are also some that are specific to Netflix. The Table 1 below will present the Netflix subtitling guidelines that are linked to Vertanen‟s (2007b) guidelines.
16 Table 1. Yle’s subtitling conventions presented by Vertanen compared to Netflix’s subtitling
guidelines
Yle’s guidelines Netflix’s guidelines
Screen time should be related to the length of a caption.
A caption that is full two lines should stay on screen for 4 to 5 seconds.
A caption that is the length of a full one line should stay on screen for 2 to 3 seconds.
The minimum time a caption should stay on screen is 1 second while the maximum time is 30 seconds.
Over 10 seconds is normally too long for a caption to stay on screen.
Screen time is related to the length of a caption.
The reading speed for adults is estimated at 17 characters per second
The character limitation is 42 on one line. With two lines, the character limit rises to 84 characters in a caption
o A full caption of two lines should be on screen for about 5 seconds. The minimum time for a caption to be on screen is 5/6 of a second, the maximum 7 seconds.
The length of a caption should be in a correct relation to the original line.
Short expressions should not be translated as long explanatory captions and longer lines should not be reduced to short expressions in the subtitling.
There is no mention of caption length in relation to the original line.
Names are not necessary to be repeated in the subtitling as often as they are mentioned in original speech.
American conversations they are constantly repeated in a way that is culturally appropriate in that context, yet in the Finnish the repetition is not common or idiomatic. However, a name should be included in the subtitling when it is first mentioned in the program.
Character names should be left out once they have been clearly established.
Every caption should be understood as a coherent unit, containing a single idea.
No mention of the caption being considered a coherent unit.
If a sentence must be divided into two captions, certain guidelines should be followed.
If multiple sentences uttered by the same speaker must be divided into multiple captions, each caption should include full sentence. If a sentence must be divided into multiple captions, those captions should not include sections of other sentences.
If a sentence is divided into two or more captions, a hyphen is included at the end
If a sentence is divided into two or more captions, certain instructions should be followed.
No mention how the sentence should be divided into two separate captions.
However, there are instructions on how to divide a sentence into two lines of a same caption. It could be assumed that these instructions (never separate names, noun phrases, verb from subject, negation etc.) would be applied to separating a sentence
17 of the continuing caption to indicate that
it will continue in the next caption.
between captions.
If a sentence is divided into two or more captions, a hyphen is included at the end of the on-going sentence, unless another punctuation, such as a comma, is present.
If a caption includes two separate speakers, the changing of speakers is indicated with a hyphen and a space before the translation.
A caption should never include the end of a speaker‟s line and the beginning of another speaker‟s line if those lines are divided into two or more captions.
If a caption includes two separate speakers, the changing of speakers is indicated with a hyphen without a space before the translation.
No mention on how on-going sentences should be divided between captions.
A sentence always ends in a period. Never omit punctuation.
Italics should be used in moderation.
Italics should be used when the speaker is not on screen.
Italics should be used with foreign words.
Italics should be used in moderation.
Italics should be used when the speaker is not on screen.
Italics should be used with foreign words.
Positioning subtitling.
When translating non-verbal elements (signs, text messages etc.) visible on screen, the caption should be centralized. If the element is short, capitalizing it can also be advised.
Subtitling should not overlap with anything important happening on screen.
Positioning subtitling.
When translating non-verbal elements (signs, text messages etc.) visible on screen, the caption should be centralized and capitalized, except for long passages (epilogues, dialogues).
Captions should be positioned in a way to avoid overlap with onscreen text.
As can been seen from the guidelines above, both sets of guidelines mostly focus on the layout of the subtitling, aiming to improve the readability and clarity, thus ensuring that the subtitling is easy and fast to understand. Thereby the subtitling in Netflix would appear to follow and adhere to similar conventions as Yle, attempting to improve the viewing experience and ensure that the subtitling fulfills its purpose of working as an aid for the viewer and not drawing unnecessary attention to the subtitling itself. When Yle‟s guidelines are compared to Netflix‟s guidelines it is apparent that they discuss similar aspects of the layout in very similar ways. However, there are some differences in minor technical aspects, such as whether or not there should be a space between a line and a hyphen, when the speaker changes in a single caption, yet overall the guidelines appear very similar to each other. This would suggest that at least in terms of general conventions, Netflix‟s subtitling would adhere to the Finnish conventions relatively well.
18 In addition to the general subtitling guidelines, Netflix also provides some further guidelines in the Finnish context. Many of those guidelines, such as on abbreviating titles, adhere to the Finnish grammatical rules, and in guideline number 22 it is even mentioned that any language-related issue not covered by the guide should be verified from the Institute for the Languages in Finland (Netflix3). Therefore, it could be concluded that Immonen‟s (2005: 166) call for grammatical correctness and linguistic conventions are required from subtitling in Netflix. How the guidelines set by Netflix are adhered to or enforced in the subtitling production process, however, remains unclear.
2.1.3. Production process of audiovisual translation and its relation to quality As discussed in the previous subsection, the subtitling conventions of Yle and Netflix do not greatly differ from each other. Comparable results on subtitling guideline differences were discovered by Lång (2013), as he studied the guidelines set by the most prominent subtitling suppliers operating in Finland, such as Yle, SDI Media, Pre-Text and MTV Media. Despite the similarities in the guidelines, the subtitling quality of those suppliers is considered very different: for example, Lång (2013: 51) presents Yle as the supplier that is “known for the quality of the subtitling it broadcasts”, whereas Netflix‟s subtitling has been under scrutiny since it launched its services in Finland (Jansson 2012, Pseudonym U 2012). However, Netflix has made continuous efforts to improve the quality of subtitling on its content, by implementing internal guidelines to ensure quality (Netflix2, Netflix3) and tests, such as HERMES, to ensure the translators‟ language skills are at a professional level (Netflix5).
Therefore, it is important to discuss other differences between subtitling suppliers to examine which of those differences could possibly affect the quality of subtitling. Abdallah (2012) has studied the production processes of AV translations from the translator‟s viewpoint. In Abdallah‟s (ibid.) study, it was concluded that the way a translator is assessed as a part of the process can be linked to the subtitling quality, especially when evaluated through subtitling errors. This subsection discusses the subtitling production processes and how they have been studied in relation to subtitling quality.
As mentioned earlier and expressed by Lång (2013: 52), translators are still usually considered as the sole culprit of translations errors found in subtitling. However, producing subtitled programs involves many other actors in the process than solely a translator; the most prominent being considered as the commissioner (broadcasting network), the translation company, and the translator (Abdallah 2007).
19 In Finland, the subtitling industry is primarily divided into two sectors: public and private (Abdallah 2007: 272). In the public sector, represented nowadays mostly by Yle, the broadcasting network has their own in-house translators with the addition on freelancers, whereas in the private sector, a broadcasting network outsources their translation needs to a detached translation company. One of the often discussed differences in public and private sectors (see Abdallah 2012, Lång 2013), is the compensation translators receive from their work and expertise. For example, on the public sector Yle has agreed to adhere to the Yhtyneet agreement, which guarantees adequate compensation for AV translators and sets other guidelines to ensure the translators‟ working conditions are reasonable (av-kääntäjät.fi 2012). However, on the private sector, it is argued that as broadcasting networks provide an increasing number of content that requires subtitling, the competition between translation companies for clients and the amount of production increases with it, which in turn is causing the decreasing of compensations freelance translators receive of their work (Lång 2013: 51, Abdallah 2012). Lång (ibid.) further argues that this causes the decline of subtitling quality, as decreasing compensation causes the professionals to abandon the field, and the remaining translators are left with the intensive pressure to try and handle the increased work load while being underpaid. Another difference between the public and private sectors is how the translators are employed. Generally speaking, the Finnish public sector, Yle, has its own in- house translators (150 in-house translators in 2013) with the addition of freelance translators, whereas on the private sector, the translators work mostly as independent freelancers (Lång 2013). Lång (ibid.) explains that this means that on the public sector, the translators are able to interact with each other, yet on the private sector, the translators work mainly independently. Understandably, the in-house translators working under the Yhtyneet agreement can be considered more involved in the production process compared to the freelancers, as the in-house translators are a constant part of the production with less intermediate actors between them and the commission. Abdallah (2007: 273) further expresses that the translators working for Yle have a solid position in Yle‟s organization and are therefore able to influence the processes and deadlines more and negotiate an adequate compensation for their work. However, the freelance translators working in the private sector have more intermediate actors between them and the commission, which consequently causes there to be more opinions on the quality requirements, thus complicating the quality criteria standardization when quantity is valued over quality (Abdallah 2007: 273). The subtitle production processes were further studied in Abdallah‟s (2012) doctoral dissertation, where the conclusion was that the translators‟ poor working conditions, i.e. long production chains
