Investigating the Use of Superordinates to Solve the Problem of Non-equivalence in the Arabic Subtitles of the Documentary David Attenborough: A Life On Our Planet (2020)

1. Introduction

Words are but dots that interlink with a larger network of other dots. This interlink stands as a solid proof to the existence of a world that includes universal principles of language (Storjohann, 2016). One of the aspects that connects lexemes or lexical units together is meaning relations; a field concerned with pragmatic relation as hyponymy, antonymy, synonymy etc. (Storjohann, 2016).  These categories enable linguists to identify the semantic relations between words. For instance, one relation that connects words is antonymy or the relation of binary opposition (love and hate). There is no doubt that these semantic relations help translators in overcoming the problems of non-equivalence between source and target texts. It helped scholars in the field of TS, such as Baker (2018), in constructing strategies based on the very foundational methodologies of these relations. Another type of semantic relations is the relation between superordinates and hyponyms, where the hyponym is a word or phrase that is more specific than its superordinate, as in the relation between the word tree and apple orchards, where apple orchards are a type of trees, making the apple orchard the hyponym and tree the superordinate. This type of semantic relation is the focus of this study, which is to investigate how superordinates are used to overcome the problem of non-equivalence on the word level in the subtitles of the documentary A Life on Our Planet (Fothergill et al., 2020) from English to Arabic.

This study aims to examine how translators use semantic relations to overcome the problem of non-equivalence on the word level.  It aims to investigate how Baker’s (2018) strategy of ‘translation by a more general word (superordinate)’ can be adopted in subtitles to overcome the problem of nonequivalence on the word level. Consequently, this study aims to answer the following questions: How do semantic relations contribute in solving the problem of non-equivalence? How is the strategy of ‘translating by using the superordinate’ is utilized in the Arabic subtitles?

2. Key concepts

Before starting the process of analysis, the study will touch upon important key concepts. The four main concepts discussed in this section are: semantic relations with a special focus on the relation of superordinates and hyponyms, the equivalence theory in translation, subtitling as a form of audiovisual translation and the genre of documentaries as media outlets.

• Semantic Relations

Semantic relationships have to do with associations that exist between the meaning of words, phrases, and sentences (Murphy, 2003). This study focuses on associations of meaning on the word level. There are different types of semantic relations such as synonymy, antonymy, polysemy, hyponymy, and metonymy. The first type of semantic relations is synonymy. According to Murphy (2003), synonymy is the semantic equivalence between lexical items. An example of synonymous words is big and large. The second type of semantic relations is antonymy, where the relation between two words exists in the fact that they contain opposite meanings, such as, the relation between the words big and small. There are three types of antonymy: complementary or contradictory antonyms, relation antonyms, and gradable or scalar antonyms. In complementary or contradictory antonyms, the relation between words is concerned with the fact that a word holds the properties that the other word does not include as in the words complete and incomplete. As for relation antonyms, in the relation between words, the presence of a semantic property in one member implies the presence of another semantic property in the other member, like buy/sell, taller/shorter, and teacher/student. The final type of antonyms is gradable or scalar antonyms, where the word pair contrast in the degree of possession or certain semantic property. For example, note the words, hot and cold, big and small, and strong and weak. The third semantic relation is homonymy, which is the relation that exists between two or more words which belong to the same grammatical, category. They may have the same spelling and may or may not have the same pronunciation. An example of such relation exists in the word lie (to rest or to not tell the truth), and in the verb bear where it could be (give birth or tolerate). The fourth relation is hyponymy, which is the focus of this study, where a hyponym is a word includes the meaning of the other words. The term that includes in its meaning the meaning of the other terms is called the general term or superordinate or hypernym. The superordinate includes in its meaning other terms that are more specific or hyponyms. An example of such relation exists between the word vehicle and the words bus, car, lorry and van, where all these terms are specific terms or a type of the general term vehicle. The fifth type is polysemy, where a semantic relation exists between a word and its multiple conceptually and historically related meanings. For instance, the word foot is a polysymus, where it could refer to the foot of a human being, chair, or table. The final type is metonymy, where a relation exists between two words where one word is used as a metaphor for the other like using the word cops in place of policemen.

• Equivalence

Theoreticians in the 1950s and 1960s started to develop a more systematic analysis to translation which is more descriptive; their discussion of translation revolved around key linguistic issues, such as, meaning and equivalence. Jakobson (1959) sets the corner stone for equivalence in meaning, stating that there is no full equivalence between code-units. According to Jakobson (1959), translation between languages includes substituting messages in one language with separate codes for entire messages in another language. These code units are different because they belong to different sign systems or languages that perceive reality in a different way. This discussion focuses on the differences between structures and terminologies of source and target languages. However, it does not put into the frame the problem of non-equivalence between languages, which has been later discussed and developed by various scholars in the field of translation. This includes Eugene Nida’s formal and dynamic equivalence (1964), Peter Newmark’s semantic and communicative translation (1981) and Baker’s Equivalence (2018).

            2.2.1 Nida’s (1964) Equivalence

When it comes Nida (1964), he introduces two types of equivalence: formal equivalence and dynamic equivalence. These two orientations were used by Nida (1964) as a replacement to the old notions of ‘literal’, ‘free’ and ‘faithful translations. First, Nida (1964) defines formal equivalence as a type of equivalence that focuses on the message itself in both form and content. It is most applicable when the receptor’s language closely matches the elements of the source language. It is thus a type of equivalence that is more oriented towards the source text’s structures. It is also a type of translation that includes a lot of scholarly footnotes and gloss translations and it is mostly used in the translation of academic and legal texts. Second is dynamic equivalence, which is later referred to as functional equivalence. In this type of equivalence, the effect of the translated message on the target text receptor should be the same as that of the source text’s receptor. It is where the message has to be tailored to the linguistic needs of the target audience and aims to sound as a natural in the target language and text. This receptor oriented approach avoids any type of foreignness in the target text.

2.2.2 Newmark’s (2001) Semantic and Communicative Translation 

On the other hand, Newmark (2001) states that the effect of Nida’s equivalence is an illusion and that the gap between source and target languages will remain to be the focus of translation studies. Therefore, he suggests narrowing the gap by using other terms as a replacement to the old terms. These terms are semantic and communicative translations. First, communicative translation attempts to provide the target audience with the same effect of the source text and it is similar to Nida’s dynamic equivalence. Second type of translation is semantic translation, which is a translation that attempts to render as closely as possible the semantic and syntactic structures of the source language, and of course, as far as the target language allows. In this type of translation, the exact contextual meaning of the original is provided in the target text. Newmark’s semantic translation also holds similarities to Nida’s formal equivalence. The differences between Nida’s and Newmark’s concepts is that Newmark believes that no translator is capable of producing the same effect on the target readers and asks the question of what type of readers is Nida’s dynamic equivalence is directed at? And whether they should be handed everything on a silver plate? This brings up the argument supported by Newmark (2001), which signifies literal translation as the best approach as long as the same effect is achieved in the target text.

• Baker’s (2018) Equivalence

Like Nida (1964) and Newmark (2001), Baker (2018) discusses the concept of equivalence thoroughly in her book “In Other Words.” Baker (2018) argues that equivalence is relevant because it is influenced by various linguistic and cultural factors. Her approach is structured around the different levels of equivalence: equivalence on the word level, equivalence above the word level, grammatical equivalence, textual equivalence, pragmatic equivalence, and semiotic equivalence. This brings to light the importance of other levels of equivalence that were not mentioned in the previous theories of equivalence; levels that pass beyond words and structures. At the word level equivalence, Baker starts by highlighting that there are some problems of non-equivalence translators face in the translation of terms. She lists them into eleven problems. Furthermore, she lists common strategies that translators use in order to overcome the previous eleven problems. Moving on to grammatical equivalence, Baker highlights the diversity of grammatical categories across languages and the difficulty of finding an equivalent in the target text. She further stresses that the change of grammatical structures affects the way information is perceived. Therefore, the translator must use strategies that would help them overcome this problem like addition and omission. As for the textual level of equivalence, Baker (2018) refers to the equivalence that has to be achieved between source and target texts on the level of cohesion and information and how the choice of the translator to maintain or remove cohesive ties affects the understanding of the text. Finally, pragmatic equivalence deals with the idea of implicature, which is based on Grice’s pragmatic theory of implicature, where Baker highlights that the term refers to the implied meaning and not the literal one. Therefore, the job of the translator is to find the implied meaning that the text has, if it includes one, and not the surface meaning. She emphasizes that the role of the translator is to deliver this implied meaning across languages to make it accessible to the target audience.

• Documentaries

Documentaries differ in their form and content than various genres of fiction such as science fiction films, horror films, adventure films and others. Documentaries are defined as representations of the world humans live in (Nichols, 2001). They provide, in fact, a particular perspective of the world that a person did not encounter before despite the concept being familiar. Therefore, in the judgement of a documentary, aspects, like fidelity to the original and sameness of the purpose of the original, are always taken into view. In addition, a documentary includes pictures or interviews with people involved in real events to report factual information concerning a subject and they include six different types: poetic, expository, participatory, observational, reflexive, and performative.

 First, a poetic documentary focuses on the mood, tone, and juxtaposition of imagery and usually have little to no explicit narrative content. In a poetic documentary, the director composes visually striking images that tell a story without the need for verbal context. The second type of documentaries is expository documentaries, where it sets a specific point of view or argument about a subject and it often includes the ‘voice of god’ voiceover. In this type of documentary, the footage mainly asserts the information being said; these images and footage are usually archival footage, b-rolls, and enactments of events. Third are participatory documentaries, where the documentary is considered an interaction between filmmakers and their subject or speaker. In this kind of documentary, the cinematographers and the interviewees are of equal importance. For this reason, participatory documentaries are considered interactive ones because they allow the engagement of subjects and the capturing of real emotions or responses on camera. Another type of documentaries is observational documentaries. In observational documentaries, the maker of the documentary acts as a fly on the wall; it is where the subject is observed in real life without an interruption. The documentary filmmaker in this type of documentary does not interrupt the flow or order of the subject’s life, but instead captures it in its raw form. As for reflexive documentaries, they focus on the relation between the filmmaker and the audience. In this type of documentary, the filmmaker will shoot the behind-the-scene style footage and present the entire film in this style. Finally, performative documentaries are usually about how the filmmaker is involved with their subject. It is where the personal experience of the subject leads to discovering larger perspectives related to politics, history, or a group of people (Nichols, 2001).

• Subtitles

Generally speaking, subtitling is a form of audiovisual translation where an oral output is transformed into written output on screen (Diaz Cintas, 2009). It is one of the most common forms of audiovisual translation along with dubbing and voiceover. The process of subtitling involves presenting written text at the bottom of the screen. According to (Díaz Cintas & Remael, 2007, p.5) it “gives an account of the original dialogue exchanges of the speakers as well as other linguistic elements which form part of the visual image (inserts, letters, grafiti, banners and the like) or of the soundtrack (songs, narration, voiceover).” In addition, there are certain guidelines that govern subtitling as a form of translation (Díaz Cintas & Remael, 2007). These guidelines vary according to the genre and customers. However, there are some guidelines to subtitling that are considered universal like using simplified grammatical and lexical items and omission of interactional speech features and intonation to avoid long subtitles (Díaz Cintas & Remael, 2007). In addition to the guidelines, there are strategies that are used by translators in the process of subtitling like Gottlieb’s (1992) subtitling strategies: expansion, paraphrase, transfer, imitation, transcription, dislocation, condensation, decimation, deletion, and resignation. These strategies show the various methods that translators adopt while trying to translate the oral output into a written one at the bottom or side of the screen.

Despite the clear guidelines and strategies that govern the mainstream subtitling practice, still other forms of subtitling exist such as fansubbing, which emerged in an attempt to localize Japanese anime into other languages and cultures (Gonzalez, 2009). It is also a form of subtitling adopted by fans who objected to the professionally subtitled anime that followed mainstream subtitling conventions in the translation of these Japanese genres (Gonzalez, 2009). The cause of this objection is that mainstream subtitling neglects the cultural references in these animations. Therefore, fansubbers started to adopt other strategies in their process of subtitling; for instance, the use of different fonts to match the visual aesthetics, the use of colored pale white instead of snow bright white, the use of translator’s footnotes and glosses, and the use of different layout and positioning of subtitles (Gonzalez, 2009).

3. Methodology and data
   • Data description

The data chosen for this study is the documentary David Attenborough: A Life On Our Planet (Fothergill et al., 2020), which is a feature documentary that is an hour and 23 minutes long. This documentary takes the life of the 93-year-old biologist Attenborough as a testimony to the natural changes that undertook planet Earth due to global warming. Since global warming is the main focus of nearly all nations around the world, it becomes a necessity to raise awareness about its dangers. Therefore, the Arabic subtitles of the film help equip Arab viewers with the right terms in Arabic to also be able to raise awareness about this matter. Therefore, the documentary is an ideal corpus to investigate how nature and biology related terms (hyponyms) are translated into Arabic through the usage of the strategy ‘translating by using the superordinate’.

• Methodology

As mentioned earlier, this study aims to investigate how the semantic relation of ‘superordinates and hyponyms’ could be used to overcome the problem of non-equivalence on the word level in translation studies (TS). Therefore, this study uses Baker’s (2018) Equivalence and specifically the strategy of ‘translating by using the superordinate’ to further analyze how this semantic relation is further adopted in solving the problem of non-equivalence in the translation process. According to Baker (2018),

 “translating by using the superordinate’ is one of the common strategies that translators use while “dealing with many types of non-equivalence, particularly in the area of propositional meaning. It works equally well in most, if not all, languages, since the hierarchical structure of semantic fields is not language-specific.”

(p. 26)

It is the strategy where the superordinate completely replaces the hyponym in the TT. The terms that do not have an equivalent in the Arabic language and their context are displayed in a table along with their translation to allow an easier follow up of the analysis and comparison process. The timing of the occurrences of these terms in the documentary is provided in the table to allow an easier process of locating these terms in the documentary for readers. Then, the study investigates how the superordinate is used in the translation process: observe whether the hyponym is replaced with a superordinate in the TT or the superordinate is added to the source’s transliterated or literally translated hyponym in the TT.

4. Analysis

4.1 Superordinate Added to the Transliterated or Literally Translated Hyponym

            This part of the analysis, includes all the instances where the superordinate was added by the translator to the literally translated or transliterated hyponym in the target text. Each word, and the sentence it was mentioned in, is provided in the table. The analysis includes a description of the general context within which the term appeared.

 Table 1

In this part of the documentary, Attenborough describes how the fossil of the Tiltonicerus got its name, saying that it got the name because it was found in the village of Tilton, which is located in the middle of England. If the translator maintained the word or the name of the creature ‘Tiltonicerus’, without mentioning that it is an actual creature, Arab viewers might think that the reference here is to the shell of the creature and not the existence of the actual creature 180 million years ago. Especially that in this part of the documentary, Attenborough was holding the shell of the creature while talking about its history. Therefore, the translator opted for adding the superordinate ‘الكائن’ to the transliterated hyponym in the sentence to highlight that Attenborough is talking about an actual creature that use to live on earth and its origin.

Table 2

            In this example, ‘Humpbacks’ refers to a type of whales that own a long pectoral fin and a knobbly head, giving them the appearance of a humpbacked animal. If the translator resorts to only using the word ‘الحدباء’, the Arab viewer might only get the reference of the appearance, but not the actual reference to the animal. Especially that in this part of the documentary, there was not yet a clear visual reference to the animal. Therefore, the superordinate ‘الحيتان’ is added to identify that ‘الحدباء’, which is a hyponym to the superordinate whales, is a type of whales and not just a description of appearance. Therefore, in this part, the superordinate ‘whales’ is added to the literally translated hyponym in the target text in order to help Arab viewers identify this type of whales.

 Table 3

      In this part of the documentary, Attenborough describes the importance of plants and reefs in harboring homes for different types of fish species, further emphasizing the natural balance that planet Earth falls into in order to maintain the wheel of land and sea life. In the ST, the narrator does not use the word ‘trees’ to describe that ‘Mangroves’ are a type of trees. Instead, he just directly calls them ‘Mangroves’. However, if the same method is adopted with Arab viewers and readers of the subtitles, where the translator would just simply say ‘ووفرت المانغروف,’ it might not give the viewer a clear distinction that what the narrator is mentioning is a type of tree, which grows between the highest tidal level and the same level or higher than sea level, and not just another type of reefs. Therefore, in order not to confuse the Arab viewer with this unfamiliar type of tree, the translator of the documentary opted to further identify the word ‘Mangroves’ by adding the word (superordinate) ‘tree’ in Arabic ‘أشجار المانغروف’ to help Arab viewers recognize its function.

Here, the superordinate is added to the transliterated hyponym ‘Mangroves’ in the process of translation to help Arab viewers identify that the plant that the narrator is talking about is a type of tree that exists and has a function in maintaining a stable sea life. 

Table 4

In this part of the documentary, Attenborough describes that with the increase of heat levels on earth, frozen soils will melt and start releasing methane, which is a type of greenhouse gas that is stronger than carbon dioxide. Even though Attenborough does not say the ‘methane gas’ to describe that methane is a type of gas in this mentioned instant, the translator, however, opted for adding the superordinate ‘غاز’ to the transliterated hyponym ‘الميثايين’ to help Arab viewers identify that methane is a type of gas.

Table 5

Both terms, ‘pangolins’ and ‘sloths’, occur in the same instant, where Attenborough was describing the revolutionary invention of the TV and how it helped displaying the life of the wilderness to people who have not experienced it before. He is saying that people were allowed to see animals that they have not seen before and appreciate the beauty of the wilderness, all thanks to this invention. In the translation of the first word ‘pangolins’, the translator, like the previous examples, adds the superordinate ‘آكل النمل’ to the hyponym ‘الحرشفي’ to help Arab viewers identify that the mentioned animal is a type of an ant eater animal and not just another animal. By opting for this structure, the translator allowed a more of an accurate description of the animal and its type. As for the translation of the word ‘sloth’, even though it already has an equivalent in the Arabic language, which is ‘الكسلان’, the translator still went for adding the superordinate ‘حيوان’ to avoid viewers confusing the term ‘الكسلان’ with the quality of being lazy. Again, the superordinate is added to the literally translated hyponym in the target text.

 Table 6

Here, Attenborough starts talking about the ‘Serengeti’ plains and what the word actually means in the ‘Maasai’ language. In the original utterance, Attenborough does not use the word ‘language’ to identify that Maasai is a language, because in English it is common to just say that someone is saying something in Arabic or in English without having to refer that they are languages and the inference process would not be affected for English listeners. However, this pattern is rarely used in the Arabic language and instead it should be identified that what the speaker is talking about is a language. Therefore, the translator added the

superordinate ‘لغة’ to the transliterated hyponym ‘الماساي’.

4.2 Same Structure of the ST Superordinate + Hyponym is maintained in the TT

This section of the analysis shows that even when the pattern of superordinate + hyponym was found in the source text, the translator also opted for mimicking the same structure into the target text. Out of the 12 instances, this was done twice in the translation of the terms ‘ammonite’ and ‘Serengeti’.

 Table 7

            In this part of the documentary, Attenborough takes a piece of fossil and starts talking about its history. He starts to mention its name, how it eats, and where its fossils commonly found. In order to highlight that ‘ammonite’ use to be a living creature, Attenborough adds the superordinate ‘creature’ in his speech to help viewers understand that it uses to be a living thing. Therefore, the same pattern is mimicked in the translation process by translating this pattern literally and adding the superordinate ‘كائن’ to the transliterated hyponym ‘الآمونية’ to help Arab viewers understand that the fossil they are seeing on screen use to be the shell of a living creature.

 Table 8

            In this part of the documentary, Attenborough explains what does the word ‘Serengeti’ mean in Maasai, which means ‘endless plains,’ and thus highlighting through this that ‘Serengeti’ is a type of plains, making ‘plains’ the superordinate and ‘Serengeti’ the hyponym. The same pattern is also used in the process of translation, where the superordinate word ‘الحقول’ is added as a description to the hyponym ‘Serengeti’ in the target text.

4.3 The ST hyponym is Paraphrased into the TT

 This section of the analysis analyzes the three instances where the translator uses the strategy of paraphrasing in the translation of the source text’s hyponyms. This strategy occurred in the translation of the terms ‘Holocene’, ‘monoculture’, and ‘greenhouse gas’.

 Table 9

            Towards the beginning of the documentary, Attenborough describes the different life stages and extinction that planet earth went through before reaching the current life stage, which is called by scientists the ‘Holocene’. In fact, the word ‘Holocene’ has two commonly used translations in Arabic, which are ‘العصر الهولوسيني’ and ‘العصر الحديث’. Despite the first translation ‘العصر الهولوسيني’ falls under the pattern of superordinate being added to the transliterated hyponym that the translator often used in the translation process throughout the film. Instead, the translator opts for using the paraphrased version of translation, which is ‘العصر الحديث’, and this could have been done by the translator to identify that the stage humans are living in on earth is the latest after the last extinction planet earth went though. This is because the word ‘الحديث’ indicate that it is the latest, which helps the Arab viewers relate with the meaning faster and easier.

            As for the second term ‘monoculture’, towards the middle of the documentary, Attenborough starts warning viewers that humans endangered biodiversity and other important types of trees for the sake of monoculturing certain type of trees like palm trees. Here, the word ‘monoculture’ is generally translated into Arabic as ‘زراعة أحادية’. The translator opted for paraphrasing the term ‘monoculture’ within the sentence and described areas which held different types of plants as areas that turned into ‘complete areas’ of palm trees or ‘أجزاء كاملة’ from planted palm trees to extract palm oil for human consumption. The translator paraphrases this to further emphasize the vastness of the areas that have been monocultured into areas for planting palm trees for human consumption.

When it comes to the final term ‘greenhouse gasses’, it actually is translated into Arabic as ‘غازات الاحتباس الحراري’, but maybe due to the little space for characters that subtitles provide, the translator opted for the shorter paraphrased version of the translation of the term, which is ‘غازات دفيئة’. Through opting for this translation, the translator does not only use a fewer number of characters in the subtitles, but also delivers the message and meaning in an easier and quick way.

5. Conclusion

In her description of the strategy ‘translating by using the superordinate’, Baker (2018) states that the superordinate is used in the TT to solve the problem of non-equivalence by replacing the hyponym of the ST with the superordinate in the TT. However, in the case of this documentary, after analyzing the 12 nature and biology related terms, instances of translation in the subtitles show that the superordinate does not frequently completely replace the hyponym in the TT. Instead, it can be added to the transliterated or literally translated hyponym in the TT to help Arab viewers identify and relate to new terms. As discussed, in the translation of the 12 nature and biology related terminology, 7 instances occurred where the superordinate was added to the literally translated or transliterated hyponym in the TT, 2 instances occurred were the pattern of superordinate added to the hyponym was maintained into the TT when found in the ST, and three instances occurred where the translator paraphrased those instances. This means that the superordinate was added to the hyponym 9 times out of the 12 instances. In addition, and as results revealed, there were not any instances where the superordinate completely replaced the hyponym in the TT. The above results indicate the following findings: First, the superordinate was used in the subtitles as a form of explanation to help Arab viewers identify with the nature and biology related terms. Second, this form was created and maintained in the TT when found in the ST because it acts as a short form of in text explanation and thus goes along with the idea of having to avoid long explanations in subtitles; because according to the universal subtitling guidelines, long subtitles are to be avoided (Díaz Cintas & Remael, 2007). Third, the idea of adding the superordinate to the hyponym in the TT further emphasizes the nature of the Arabic language, which is a language that prefers explicating. Finally, the translator opted for paraphrasing in the remaining instances also to abide by the subtitling guidelines of avoiding long subtitles, therefore, the terms were paraphrased into the form of short translations in the TT and sometimes when provided with two equivalences for the same term, the translator would opt for the shorter version, like in the translation of the term ‘greenhouse gasses’ where the translator opted for the shorter version of  ‘غازات دفيئة’  instead of ‘غازات الاحتباس الحراري’, even though the second translation is the one most commonly found in Arabic.