Quantitative translation strategy results

In this study the collected idioms were categorized based on the used translation strategy. This was done by using Baker’s (2011) categorization of translation strategies for idioms, which was introduced in section 2.3.

Figure 2: Translation strategies for idioms in this study.

Here figure 2 shows the statistical distribution of the translation strategies. With 53% the most used strategy is paraphrase, and the least used one is borrowing with only 1%. Similar form idiom (11%), literal meaning (9%) and omission (9%) have all been used roughly the same amount, about tenth of the time. Lastly, similar meaning idiom is the second most used strategy with 17%. It is interesting to see that nearly all of the strategies were used quite a lot. The only strategy that was not really used is borrowing, and I was surprised it was used at all, since leaving source language text into the target language text is not very common, especially in subtitling. Paraphrase being by far the most used strategy on the other hand did not surprise me, as it is the most approachable strategy. It is easy to use when an idiomatic translation cannot be found, but it can also be used even though translating with an idiom is possible. Combining the strategies similar form idiom and similar meaning idiom, source language idiom was translated with a target language idiom 28% of the time. As translating idiom with an idiom seems to be the most ideal situation, but at the same time quite challenging, 28% seems like a great result.

Categorizing the data based on the used translation strategy was at times challenging. While most of the idioms were quite simple to categorize, there were some borderline cases. Few of those will now be discussed. First off, in cases like example 10, none of the translation strategies quite fit with the translation.

Example 10:

Dean: I mean, he really took one for the team.

Translation: Hän otti takkiinsa puolestamme.

In example 10, the idiom take one for the team is used, which means ‘to sacrifice one’s own welfare in the interest of others’. In the Finnish subtitles this is translated partly with an idiom, ottaa takkiinsa, which means ‘to lose at something’. These two idioms therefore do not carry the same meaning, but with the addition of the word puolestamme in the subtitles, the phrase transform to mean ‘to lose at something in the interest of others’. At first, I was going to

categorize this example as a similar meaning idiom as the translation does include an idiom, but as I have pointed out the idiom does not carry a similar meaning. The word puolestamme could change the idiom to have a similar meaning, but alas that word is not part of the idiom. This example could in fact need a completely new strategy, like idiom + addition. However, as my data did not exhibit any more of these cases, I decided not to add any of my own strategies to Baker’s (2011) classification. Therefore, out of all of Baker’s categories I decided to place the idiom in example 10 into paraphrase, as it seems the most suitable out of the options.

My data also exhibited cases, where many of the translation strategies were a viable option, like in example 11.

Example 11:

Chuck: Guess that’s as far as it goes, Sammy. The end of the line.

Translation: Tuon pidemmälle se ei mene. Päätepysäkki.

Example 11 uses the idiom the end of the line which is defined as ‘the conclusion or final step of something’. In the Finnish subtitles the word päätepysäkki is used, which just translates to the final/end stop. This example was tricky, because päätepysäkki seems like it could be also an idiom and therefore fit into the similar meaning idiom category, but at first, I could not find confirmation for that being the case. However, the word does not really make sense in the context with its literal meaning either, so paraphrase also does not fit. Then again, päätepysäkki does also translate to end of line, meaning that this example could also belong into the literal meaning - category. After doing some more research, I did find the word päätepysäkki being used

idiomatically, so in the end I chose to categorize example 11 as similar form idiom. They seem to have the same basic definition, and like mentioned before, päätepysäkki also translates into end of line.

Most of the borderline cases I encountered were quite different, meaning that I did not

continuously run into the same kind of problems. Usually, the problem stemmed from the fact that multiple strategies could explain the translation, rather than none of them. That is to say that often the data was quite ambiguous, but in many different ways.

Now that results on idiom compositionality and translation strategies have been shown

separately, looking at them together is in order. Next, we will see how the idiom compositionality divided within each translation strategy.

Table 3: Idiom compositionality within translation strategies.

Strategy

Fully non- compositional

Partially non-

compositional Total

1. Similar form idiom 17 / 12.5% 1 / 3.2% 18 / 10.8%

2. Similar meaning idiom 18 / 13.2% 10 / 32.3% 28 / 16.8%

3. Borrowing 1 / 0.7% 0 / 0.0% 1 / 0.6%

4. Paraphrase 73 / 53.7% 16 / 51.6% 89 / 53.3%

5. Literal translation 14 / 10.3% 2 / 6.5% 16 / 9.6%

6. Omission 13 / 9.6% 2 / 6.5% 15 / 9.0%

Total 136 / 100% 31 / 100% 167 / 100%

As we saw in figure 1 in section 5.1, there are overwhelmingly more fully non-compositional idioms than partially non-compositional idiom. That is why it is no wonder, that within every strategy, there were more fully non-compositional idioms. Within fully non-compositional idioms all strategies were used roughly the same amount, excluding the biggest category of paraphrase (53.7%) and the smallest category of borrowing (0.7%). Within most of the strategies, there were just one or two partially non-compositional idioms, but at the same time those strategies also were also used about 10% of the time each in total. Thus, the categories were not very large in the first place. However, two strategy categories, similar meaning idiom and paraphrase, had clearly more partially non-compositional idioms than the other strategy categories. Within the

paraphrase category the larger amount is not that surprising, as it is also clearly the biggest category with 89 idioms (53.3%) in total. Just over 50% of the partially non-compositional idioms were translated with the paraphrase strategy. Thus, the category of similar meaning idiom is the most interesting one, since it was used 16.8% in total which is closer to the other strategy

categories, while its amount of partially non-compositional idioms is high with 32.3%. It is hard to say why specifically this category shows more partially non-compositional idioms. Perhaps idioms that have at least one element that carries its literal meaning are easier to understand and thus to find a comparable source language idiom. More research into this topic would be in order before any definite statements can be made.