Adaptational types

1. In this diasemiotic type, the human agent operates between two different, monosemiotic types of expression (= texts), e.g. when converting a visual expression to a musical one.
2. A striking example of this ultrasemiotic type, in which the semantic texture becomes more complex in translation, is the animated Disney cartoon Fantasia (1940), which presents the musical works of Bach, Tchaikovsky, Stravinsky and others while at the same time reflecting the musical score in moving images.
3. A case of the opposite movement, that of semiotic simplification, is found when, for instance, a person draws a sketch of the way bees communicate to give directions to an attractive flowerbed. While the original text produced by the bee is spatial and includes sound signals, the drawing – meant for an encyclopedia, for example – is two-dimensional and mute.

1. When making a written manual useful to illiterates by replacing the written signs with nonverbal illustrations, the translator will produce a text of similar semiotic complexity as that of the original, i.e. a monosemiotic text.
2. One of the few non-interlingual examples often discussed in Translation Studies belongs in this ultrasemiotic category: screen adaptation – in which a monosemiotic work (typically, a novel) is semiotically “dissected” and recreated using the underlying (poly)semiotic structure of the dramatic work.
3. When, for instance, a play is turned into mime, vocal language is lost, and movements matter more than when they are counterbalanced by words. With this type of translation, there are fewer channels to carry the semantic load that was shared by a larger number of channels in the original. A documented example of this infrasemiotic type is Max Ernst’s painting Oedipus Rex, a conversion of the Greek drama by the same name (Stathi 2015, 324).

1. Verbalised texts in this diasemiotic category include phenomena that are relayed to an audience bereft of the ability to comprehend the original text, i.e. a radio-transmitted baseball match, in which the natural sound effects are kept in the background, while the visual action on the field is substituted by verbal narration.
2. Representing the same ballgame on TV constitutes a different type of translation. Here, the verbal layer added by the commentator supplements what the viewer already sees on the TV screen. In this way, apart from the missing ambience of the stadium, TV viewers get “more” information than the spectators at the stadium.
3. Perhaps the best-known example of infrasemiotic translation is novelisation – screen adaptation reversed, so to speak, as relevant nonverbal filmic elements are verbalised and – together with the spoken lines – published in book format. A further example of the complexities of polysemiotic translation is audio description on TV. In this procedure, the translator transfers the content of two channels – nonverbal image (pictorial content) and verbal image (existing captions and displays; sometimes even interlingual subtitles) – into one: a verbal depiction, presented (optionally) as an integral part of the film soundtrack, whether original or dubbed. Audio description is thus a modern-day version of the classic tradition of ekphrasis, in which “a verbal text describes a work of visual art” (Eco 2004, 110). The reason for considering this type (which might be considered additive) infrasemiotic is that although some of the visual information of a film is represented through audio description, the fact remains that the entire film is now communicated to the intended audience through two channels only: the verbal oral and the nonverbal oral channels. The verbal visual and nonverbal visual channels remain inaccessible to the Blind, who are the very raison d’être of audio description – a type of translation that has gained much scholarly attention (see, for instance, Benecke 2004; Kruger and Orero 2010; and Szarkowska 2011).

Conventional types

1. A classic example of this diasemiotic type is written music, in which each note in a sequence denotes pitch as well as duration. As with other types of conventional translation, there is some leeway of interpretation – not only when working from written to performed music, but also when trying to translate (notate) live music to paper.
2. Instead of merely switching between channels of representation – as in the previous example – we are concerned here with adding new semiotic layers to the original text, in casu statistical information. Dealing with numbers, which – although part of the alphanumerical reality of written communication – can hardly be termed verbal, illustrating numerical relations by means of bar or pie charts while keeping the actual figures as part of the graphic whole is an example of this ultrasemiotic type of translation.
3. In contrast to the previous two types, we are talking here about translations that use fewer semiotic channels than those present in the original – a case in point being ballet notation, in which choreography, i.e. complex three-dimensional movements in real time, is represented on paper.

1. Pictograms, road signs and nonverbal logos are examples of conventional translation of verbal messages. Interestingly, certain speech communities use these nonverbal messages much more than others. As regards traffic signs, for instance, the Anglo-American tradition is heavily verbal, with messages like “No entry” (Figure 3.1) commonly seen on roads, while elsewhere, the international nonverbal sign (Figure 3.3) is favoured.
2. Translating stage directions into theatrical performance is a key example of ultrasemiotic translation, in which an all-verbal message is “fleshed out” into spoken lines plus body language and movements on stage.
3. An example of infrasemiotic deverbalisation is found when the Anglophone “combined” no entry sign (Figure 3.2) is replaced by the international (nonverbal) traffic sign with the same message (Figure 3.3) – a reversal of the process exemplified in type 13.

Figure 3.1   Monosemiotic verbal visual text

Figure 3.2   Polysemiotic verbal and nonverbal visual text

Figure 3.3   Monosemiotic nonverbal visual text

1. The encryption and decryption of Morse code is a perfect example of diasemiotic translation, with the unique feature that a 1:1 relationship is found between original and translation, meaning that translating the same message back and forth will not in any way alter the semantic content. Morse code is an extreme exponent of conventional translation, with no “artistic license” granted to the translator.
2. When perceived by target-language audiences other than those intended, certain semiotic channels may yield little or no information. As a case in point, hearing conference participants (who do not understand sign language) for whom a sign language user is being interpreted into a vocal language will experience two semiotic layers in the message addressed to them: the almost entirely incomprehensible (soundless) sign language and the spoken language. So although this is a case of “more channels” perceived by the user – providing that s/he is not blind or visually impaired – the original text (signing) remains almost void of information. Here, the hearing target user possesses the sensory capabilities for comprehension, but lacks the skills for encryption of the sign language code.
3. A typical source text for this infrasemiotic type of translation, a “conventional” parallel to type 9, is graphics (3-D pie charts including numbers), the target text of type 11. When communicating the content of such charts to blind audiences, the information from two semiotic channels is condensed into one: oral communication.

Adaptational types

Certain intrasemiotic adaptational translations, e.g. a stage play turned into a film (with both texts using the same semiotic channels) may strictly speaking be a result of two intersemiotic processes: that of turning the “live” play into a written screenplay, followed by the process of unfolding that monosemiotic text and creating the final movie. Still, by comparing the resulting text with the original, the total process may fairly be labelled intrasemiotic translation.

1. A well-known exponent of this type is re-interpretation in the form of a new musical arrangement of an existing work, for instance a jazz standard. The result is a different textual expression within the semiotic confines of performed music. (In contradistinction to this, transposing a piece of music is conventional and thus a type 22 translation.)

1. In the interlingual subcategory falls the remaking of films. A remake transplants the entire film, setting and all, into the target culture. The resulting film may appear to be an original work, but as it is based on an existing storyline etc., it is indeed a translation (Evans 2014).

1. Remaining within the realm of film, an intralingual example of adaptational translation is the remake of a domestic film classic. With the exception of screen adaptations of plays by authors like Shakespeare, such new versions of old films either alter outdated elements of the script, or base themselves on an entirely new dialogue list.

Synchronic translation

1. To most non-experts, of the 34 types offered in this taxonomy, only this and types 24 and 27 qualify as translation. In traditional terms, interlingual, conventional and isomesic translation is translation. And, to be fair, cell 23 in the matrix of translation is packed with a number of translational sub-types and genres. Apart from printed translations, community interpreting and dubbing are also examples of this dominant type of translation. What is common to all these interlingual sub-types is that they retain the semiotic composition of the original while recreating the semantic content in another (vocal) language.

Diachronic translation

1. When studying translation, a striking paradox lies in the fact that translations often come closer to a meaningful representation of the original than the original itself. This is not only true of carefully edited translations of sloppy originals, but especially relevant when the time dimension is involved. Old texts in any language are more difficult to read than new translations in the same language.

Dialectal translation

1. More often than not, dialectal elements in a foreign text are standardised as part of “normal” (type 23 or 24) interlingual translation. However, some texts are written entirely in dialect, a fairly recent example being the 1993 novel Trainspotting, written (by Irvine Welsh) in what is best described as a near-phonetic spelling of modern Scots’ junkie lingo. The Norwegian version was a clear-cut example of interlingual dialectal translation; the localised version reading (almost) like a standard Norwegian novel.

Diaphasic translation

1. One much-cited example of this interlingual type is the foreign versions of Hans Christian Andersen’s fairy tales. These were – and still are – typically retold for children, rather than translated in extenso, with both children and adults in mind, as the author originally intended (Pedersen 2004).

Transliteration

1. This type of interlingual translation is found whenever verbal messages in one writing system are translated to verbal messages in another language and another writing system. This means that a very high proportion of the world’s language combinations yield this type of translation, for example whenever translating between Chinese and Western languages. Even in the European Union, now with three writing systems (Latin, Greek and Cyrillic), interlingual transliteration is a common occurrence.

Diamesic translation

1. It has been pointed out that “[f]ilm adaptations are visible remains of an invisible process” (Stathi 2015, 336). This is true of most types of translation, but subtitling, with the original still audible and visible onscreen, is a different story. Subtitling is an additive type of translation, in which intersemiotic feedback and redundancy play a major role (Gottlieb 2013). Although “crossing over” from the oral to the written mode, and thus deserving the term “diagonal translation” (Gottlieb 1994), subtitling is considered intrasemiotic in this taxonomy. It could be argued that as part of the diamesic shift (from speech to writing) subtitling – as well as its semiotic twin, opera surtitling (Dewolf 2001) – would qualify as intersemiotic (cf. Chuang 2006). However, as what is verbal in the source text remains verbal, this movement from spoken lines to written text is considered intralingual, while the transfer from language 1 to language 2 – whenever foreign-language productions are subtitled – is what places “normal” subtitling firmly in the interlingual category. Another argument in favour of considering subtitling intersemiotic, namely that the written subtitles are an added semiotic channel only found in the translated film, must be refuted as well. The reason for this is that as (original-language) film and television make use of written signs – in the form of captions and displays – the semiotic composition as such is not changed through subtitling, although the semiotic balance is undeniably shifted from largely aural to predominantly visual-language reception. However, with time – and depending on national educational systems, etc. – the communicative power of the written subtitles may decrease as audiences pick up not only intonational cues, but also substantial semantic and stylistic elements in the original dialogue.

Intralingual translation: L1 text → new L1 text

Synchronic translation

1. Synchronic translation includes cases where a target text is presented as an alternative to the source text, while aimed at the same audience and written in the same language and register. Target texts may range from abridged print versions of manuals to expanded online versions of magazine articles.

Diachronic translation

1. As mentioned above (see type 24), intralingual “updating” of texts is not always well received in literary circles; although the Dano-Norwegian playwright Holberg may be difficult to understand for modern Scandinavians, modernised versions of his plays are rarely offered. However, few protest if non-literary texts, e.g. technical instructions, are brought up to date. The dialogue in dubbed film classics, especially in animated Disney-style pictures, is also often exposed to diachronic translation – normally an intralingual procedure, as the original dialogue need not be consulted.

Dialectal translation

1. It is not always considered politically correct to translate sociolectal features or utterances by dialect speakers into standard language. However, it often happens in subtitling countries whenever immigrants or people speaking with a “heavy” local accent are interviewed on TV. Equally relevant is the reverse phenomenon, where messages in standard language are translated into the local dialect, often for political rather than communicative reasons.

Diaphasic translation

1. This type of translation is commonly seen in situations where public authorities wish to communicate more effectively with clients or voters by making syntactically complex and expert-sounding texts easier to read for the non-expert. The focal point here is adapting the message to a different – yet still domestic – audience.

Transliteration

1. In communicating speech sounds in Arabic to Western readers, for instance, it may be necessary to transliterate the Arabic letters into Latin letters; an indisputable case of transliteration. A borderline case is found when, for example, aged German texts written in Fraktur (Gothic letters) are reset in a modern font in order for young Germans to be able to read them.

Diamesic translation

1. The simplest example of this intralingual type is transcription (taking speech down in writing), as when the spoken slogan in a TV commercial is reinforced by simultaneously presenting it in writing. The same diamesic duplication is found when hearing audiences watch domestic-language TV programmes with subtitles intended for non-hearing viewers. Although aimed at deaf people, domestic productions with optional (teletext or digital) subtitles are enjoyed by many elderly people and others with a hearing deficiency (Neves 2005; Matamala and Orero 2010; Romero-Fresco 2015). Most of these subtitles are simply diamesic – albeit sometimes condensed – versions of the lines spoken onscreen; hence this categorisation as “intralingual”. Still, seen in isolation, the instances where sound effects are rendered in the subtitles – as for instance “Doorbell rings” or “Waves washing ashore” – would qualify for membership of the intersemiotic type 18: infrasemiotic verbalisation. A reverse example of intralingual diamesic translation is the production of audiobooks, which – as pointed out earlier – are listened to not only by visually impaired or dyslexic audiences, but also by normally sighted persons.