Dubbese

Translation of video content has very specific limitations, all connected to synchronisation. In simple words, if the translation is in the form of subtitles, these need to appear at the same time as the spoken word, and should be readable in about the same time as it takes the actors to recite their lines, and if it’s in the form of dubbing, the dubbed lines should have a similar duration to the original. In addition to length or duration, dubbing poses the issue of trying to mimic the same shape the actors’ mouth assumes when pronouncing certain words: for instance, if an actor is saying “WOW”, it would be unwise to have the Italian dubber say “Accipicchia” or “Caspita”, as correct as these translations would otherwise be.

In addition to the linguistic compromises due to syncing needs, dubbing or subtitling translations tend to be underpaid and rushed, further affecting the quality of the work.

In Italy, where most English language video content distribted is dubbed, all of this has led to a number of idiosyncrasies that have proven to slowly affect the way language is used or understood. Some of these include plain mistranslations, such as “realizzare” (meaning “to create”), which in recent years has come to merge with the English “realise” (to un”.derstand or recognise), akward expressions or turns of phrase, such as “hey amico” or “quello che sto cercando di dirti e’..”, coming from a cursory, word-for-word translation that ignores specialist notions such as adaptation and transcreation.

In a paper titled “Dubbing - ‘Doppiaggese’ and its influence on Italian”, Angela Sileo, of the University of Rome “Tor Vergata”, defines “doppiaggese” as a “pseudo-colloquial variety of Italian produced by a preference for calques rather than Italian terms in the dubbing process”, and provides numerous examples of how dubbing-derived expressions made their way into the lingo of Italian TV and film productions, stating that “Italian fiction often unintentionally uses scripts full of calques”, and goes on to describe “the extent to which Italian is influenced by English phraseology through careless or unskilled dubbing”. Her paper focuses on how original video content conceived in Italian, with an Italian crew, produced in Italy, and written by Italian writers (and thus not the direct product of translation) has ended up mimicking the angled, lumbering Italian phraseology that appears in the vast majority of the audiovisual content consumed in Italy, i.e., English movies and TV shows dubbed in Italian. One is left to wonder whether the reason these linguistic choices abund is because screenwriters opt for phrases and expressions they heard in translated content, and emoulate the language they unconsciously associate with this specific medium, or whether dubbese has fully penetrated the Italian language, to the point of materialising across any form of media - and not just audiovisual content.

In the end, however, these considerations will matter only marginally, as we all know that a healthy language is a changing language. We may dislike the turns it takes, we may fight against its swerves and its slow drifts, but change is irrepressible, as language is alive, and it will continue to transform.