A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
BA Thesis
6th semester, English & Spanish
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
- An empirical study of Unit One (Rejseholdet)
Aarhus School of Business, University of Aarhus
May 2009
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
Supervisor: Carmen Heine
1
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
LIST OF CONTENTS
1 ∙ INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................ 5
2 ∙ TRANSLATION ANALYSIS ...................................................................................................... 7
2.1 Source text ................................................................................................................................. 7
2.2 Target text.................................................................................................................................. 8
3 ∙ SUBTITLING AS TRANSLATION .......................................................................................... 10
3.1 Media-specific aspects ............................................................................................................ 10
3.1.1 Condensation .................................................................................................................... 11
3.3 Creativity in translation ........................................................................................................... 11
4 ∙ TRANSLATION STRATEGIES ................................................................................................ 12
4.1 Macrostrategies ....................................................................................................................... 12
4.2 Microstrategies ........................................................................................................................ 12
4.3 Subtitling strategies ................................................................................................................. 13
4.4 Vinay and Darbelnet’s transposition procedure ...................................................................... 14
4.5 Discussion of the translation strategies ................................................................................... 14
5 ∙ ADAPTATION OF STRATEGIES FOR THE MODEL ........................................................... 16
5.1 Reference framework of the model ......................................................................................... 16
5.2 My methods ............................................................................................................................. 17
5.3 Macro level methods ............................................................................................................... 17
5.3.1 Neutral translation ............................................................................................................ 18
5.3.2 Modification ..................................................................................................................... 18
5.3.3 Equivalence....................................................................................................................... 18
5.4 Micro level methods ................................................................................................................ 19
5.4.1 Direct Translation ............................................................................................................. 19
5.4.2 Transposition .................................................................................................................... 20
5.4.3 Condensed Paraphrase ...................................................................................................... 20
5.4.4 Oblique translation............................................................................................................ 21
5.4.5 Substitution ....................................................................................................................... 21
2
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
6 ∙ PRESENTATION OF THE ANALYSIS MODEL FOR SUBTITLING ................................... 22
6.1 Layer 1: Culture-bound elements in source-text ..................................................................... 23
6.2 Layer 2: Implicit or Explicit .................................................................................................... 24
6.2.1 Implicit .............................................................................................................................. 24
6.2.2 Explicit.............................................................................................................................. 24
6.3 Layer 3: Neutral translation ..................................................................................................... 25
6.4 Layer 4: Macro level and micro level ..................................................................................... 25
6.4.1 Macro level ....................................................................................................................... 25
6.4.1.1 Specific modification ................................................................................................. 26
6.4.1.2 Specific equivalence .................................................................................................. 26
6.4.1.3 General equivalence ................................................................................................... 26
6.4.1.4 General modification.................................................................................................. 26
6.4.2 Micro level ........................................................................................................................ 26
6.5 Layer 5: The approaches ......................................................................................................... 27
6.5.1 Specialising approach ....................................................................................................... 27
6.5.2 Generalising approach ...................................................................................................... 28
6.6 Layer 6: Language level in target text ..................................................................................... 28
7 ∙ SELECT DATA FROM UNIT ONE .......................................................................................... 30
7.1 General modification ............................................................................................................... 30
7.2 Specific modification .............................................................................................................. 33
7.3 General equivalence ................................................................................................................ 35
7.4 Specific equivalence ................................................................................................................ 37
8 ∙ DATA JUDGEMENT................................................................................................................. 39
9 ∙ CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................................... 41
REFERENCES................................................................................................................................... 42
APPENDICES ................................................................................................................................... 43
Appendix 1: Glossary of concepts.................................................................................................. 44
Appendix 2: Table of microstrategies ............................................................................................ 45
Appendix 3: Table of subtitling strategies ..................................................................................... 47
3
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
Appendix 4: Table of select data .................................................................................................... 49
Appendix 5: Transcription of Unit One, episode 15 ...................................................................... 53
SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................................... 86
4
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
1 ∙ INTRODUCTION
My motivation for carrying out this project is first of all that I am quite dedicated to crime fiction
and the Danish TV drama series “Rejseholdet” is one of my favourites. Therefore, it was to my
astonishment that I realised the series was aired on Australian primetime TV Friday night with English subtitles.
I find subtitling interesting as there are both the translation specific problems and the media specific
aspect to consider when translating, which require a rather creative translator. It is quite untypical
that the translation is from Danish into English to a worldwide audience, and taking into account
that the series won an International Emmy Award, I assume that the subtitling has been successful,
which is why I want to look deeper into the culture-bound problems that the translator must have
encountered.
With a starting point in the translation of the title of the series, I want to analyse and discuss how
the culture-bound translation problems of the specialised discourse are carried out.

Is the terminology translated at the same level? Colloquial language vs. specialised language.

How is police-jargon hidden in the colloquial language used?

Account for translation strategies – how are they applied and to what extent are they
achieved?
Furthermore I want to investigate how the effect of the source language is kept in the subtitles of the
target language.

Does the target audience get the same experience as the source audience?

Why are sentences in many cases translated to just single words?
To carry out my research I will do an empirical study by comparing the legal aspects of the source
and target texts; here the transcriptions of the dialogue and the subtitles in episode 15.
I intend to make use of several theories. First, Anne Schjoldager’s macrostrategies and microstrategies and second, Henrik Gottlieb’s subtitling strategies. On the basis of these sets of strategies I
shall construct my own model and methods for comparison and analysis of the source text and the
target text, noting that I shall only be dealing with data of legal aspects in the analysis.
5
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
First, a short translation analysis, mainly of the source text, will be given for the further analysis of
the subtitles of Unit One. Then in chapter 3 I shall shortly account for subtitling theory in general
before moving on to a discussion, in chapter 4, of the specific theory on tranalation strategies that I
intend to use for the construction of my model. These translation strategies are to be compared and
adapted into my own approach to subtitling analysis. Chapter 6 will present the Analysis Model for
Subtitling, which is based on the adapted methods. Next, select data will be analysed according to
the model, and thereafter judged in chapter 8.
In Appendix 1, a glossary of the concepts, used in the thesis, is to be found.
6
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
2 ∙ TRANSLATION ANALYSIS
Having introduced and defined my research questions of the subtitling problems in the TV drama
series Unit One, this chapter is to provide a short translation analysis of the series.
2.1 Source text
As just mentioned, the overall genre of the source text is TV drama. More specifically it can be defined as crime fiction or even detective fiction, where crime, especially murders, are investigated by
either professionals or amateurs. What is special about Unit One is that it is not only a crimesolving series, but it also tells personal stories, which is characteristic of a TV drama. A TV drama
portrays the everyday life; it is filled with conflicts between the characters, which might make us
feel better about ourselves, or we try to live up to the ideals that the producers create.
Unit One is produced for DR (Danmarks Radio), the Danish national channel, by Sven Clausen, and
is directed by Niels Arden Oplev. It contains 32 episodes – 20 of them are of 60 minutes, whereas
the last two episodes, which round up the series, take up 90 minutes each. All episodes spanned four
seasons and were aired on DR television from 2000-2004.
The original title is Rejseholdet, which translates roughly into “The Travelling Team”. The series is
named after the department of the Danish National Police (in Danish; Rigspolitiet) of the same
name and is based on authentic crime cases, such as murders, kidnappings and child pornography.
Each episode is dedicated to one specific case and the solving of this. The series revolves around an
elite mobile police task force, which travels around Denmark to assist local police solving crime
cases.
The series is not only about solving crimes, but it also tells the story of the members of Unit One.
Each character has a unique story to tell, which makes it a balance between the forensic process and
a back story that intrigues the relationship between the team members, their families and those outside the team:
“The series regularly touches on social issues including the insularity of police work, the social and
emotional impact of brutal crime, as well as political and press involvement in the justice process”
(Wikipedia: Rejseholdet; Themes. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unit_One).
7
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
During the series the observer learns what is required for a task force member of qualifications and
spirits and how the characters struggle with their personal lives, while they have no choice but to do
their work in remote areas of the country.
Unit One a television-produced series to be aired Sunday night primetime, in order to target as
many viewers as possible, which means that it does not target any specific social class. The intended receivers are overall the “entire” Danish population. According to the Internet Movie Database
one of the episodes in the second season, which was aired in the beginning of 2002 had more than
2.5 million Danish viewers, which is half the entire Danish population. This means that “73% of
Danes who had their TV turned on at the time were watching the episode (Imdb: Trivia for Rejseholdet. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0220261/trivia).
It is characteristic of the series, even though it is based on police work, that colloquial language is
the main discourse of the series. However, terminology and specialised language are hidden in the
discourse. No words or speech are used that the common viewer does not understand - one will not
be lost if there are a few words not to be understood. This point relates to the wide target audience
mentioned above. However, terminology and specialised language is hidden as colloquialisms for
the common viewer to being able to understand.
What is particularly interesting about this TV series as a source text for translation is first of all that
it was subtitled into English in the first place. It is not very common for subtitled Danish TV series
and films to gain success in a foreign country, mainly because the target audience will not have any
knowledge of the source language and that the subtitles will suffer from constraints of the dialogue1.
2.2 Target text
First of all, the title of the series is translated into Unit One. The subtitled series won an International Emmy Award for best Drama Series in 2002. And after that the series was subtitled by SBS Australia for an Australian audience. Therefore it is a professional translation, as a subtitling company
carried it out (Schjoldager 2008: 29).
It is a mixed-media translation (Schjoldager 2008: 28), as it is a subtitled TV series, which makes it
a supplementary mode of translation, because the subtitles can be seen as an extra layer of informa-
1
Please also refer to section 3.2.1
8
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
tion added to the original2.
Unlike the language mode of the source text, the language of the subtitles appears to be more specialised. The shift of language mode is reflected in the clarification of the hidden terminological
elements to be more precise in the subtitles. Moreover, the dialogue is translated with constraints,
which is, however, typical for subtitling. This element of condensation only makes the intensity of
the terminological subtitles stronger.
As the thesis is an analysis of Unit One, this section is only an introductory presentation of the further analysis of the target text. The next chapter will present subtitling as a translation type before
the thesis moves on to discuss translation strategies for the further analysis.
2
Please refer to section 3.1
9
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
3 ∙ SUBTITLING AS TRANSLATION
According to Gottlieb (1997: 70) subtitling is a unique form of translation. General translation stays
within the same channel of communication, whereas subtitling changes the channel from speech to
written communication. This is what Gottlieb (1997: 111) labels diagonal translation:
“Subtitling (...) can be either vertical or diagonal. Vertical subtitling takes speech down in writing,
whereas diagonal subtitling being two-dimensional, ‘jay-walks’ (crosses over) from sourcelanguage speech to target-language writing” (Gottlieb 1997: 111).
Furthermore, Gottlieb defines subtitling as written, additive, immediate, synchronous and
polymedial translation (Gottlieb 1997: 70):
Subtitling differs from other types of screen translation3. It is written opposed to spoken and an extra layer is added to the original (Schjoldager 2008: 235) keeping the source text discourse, which
makes it a supplementary mode of translation (Schjoldager 2008: 236). Moreover, Gottlieb defines
subtitling as immediate because “all discourse is presented in a flowing manner, beyond the control” (Gottlieb 1997: 70) of the audience, and synchronous because the dialogue and the subtitles
are presented simultaneously using two parallel channels to communicate the total message of the
original – this is what he entitles as polymedial translation.
The fact that subtitles are an additional layer of information to the original makes it a challenge for
the translator to do render the source-text item. It is normal that the translator tends to think that the
audience should be able to follow as much of the original dialogue as possible. But, the more familiar the target audience is with the source language the harder it will be for the translator to render
the items satisfactory, because the target audience will be more critical towards the subtitles. So the
fact that the target audience has access to both source text and target text leaves the translator in a
dilemma, because he will have to decide whether to stay as close to the original as possible or to be
creative.
3.1 Media-specific aspects
As abovementioned, subtitling is met with media-specific aspects, which are characteristic for subtitling in particular. As just seen, the shift in communication channels is one aspect of it, and another
is condensation.
3
Types of screen translation: Subtitling, dubbing, revoicing.
10
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
3.1.1 Condensation
Vestergaard (2002) points out that the viewers criticise the translators for not including all of the
spoken dialogue in the subtitles, but this is limited by media-specific aspects – for instance time and
space constraints. These constraints make it impossible to include everything, especially if the
speech tempo is high, in relation to the reading tempo that varies among the viewers. However, the
translator must also consider the target audience’s knowledge of the source language, as viewers
often are likely to overestimate their abilities to understand a foreign language, because they instinctively rely on the subtitles:
“Nogle gange kan elementer måske udelades, fordi billedsiden er forklarende, men teksteren må
heller ikke overvurdere publikums evner. (… ) det har nemlig vist sig, at publikum ofte overvurderer
deres egne evner til at forstå fremmedsprog, men at grunden til, at de tror, at de forstår mere, end
de reelt gør, er, at de henter støtte i underteksterne” (Vestergaard 2002: 31).
Source-text redundancy, corrections, self-contradictory sentences and unfinished sentences are just
a few examples of constraints in subtitling, which typically is seen if the visuals are very expressive.
The visuals are to make up for what is lost in the subtitles (Vestergaard 2002: 26), because neither
the time nor space elements allow full translation.
3.3 Creativity in translation
It is a tendency when “subtitling upstream against the current” (Gottlieb 2005: 195), that the translator will be more creative than he would have been if it was a downstream translation, because it is
most likely that the target audience is not familiar with the source language. On the other hand, they
are likely to judge the translator’s job if they are familiar with both languages. This means that condensation is seen to a greater extent in upstream translation, because the target audience is not able
to compare. Previously, this was the case with English-Danish translations, and therefore it is to be
assumed that it is the reason why Danish-English translations are condensed to such an extent.
As a result, it is often seen in subtitling that localisms are generalised, or even deleted. However,
some translators may take pride in maintaining these localisms to present an ‘exotic’ culture and
language, whereas if such localisms are directly translated it might result in an unnatural flow losing
the credibility in the target text. The aspect of creativity makes it a balancing act for the translator to
approach the translation with fidelity towards the source text (Gottlieb 1997: 197).
11
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
4 ∙ TRANSLATION STRATEGIES
In the following I shall account for different approaches to translation strategies by Anne
Schjoldager (2008) and Henrik Gottlieb (1997). And additionally, I shall shortly introduce Vinay
and Darbelnet (reference). These approaches to translation strategies can help analyse either general
translation or subtitling. This chapter will account for and discuss microstrategies and subtitling
strategies and hereafter the strategies that I shall employ in my own taxonomy in chapter 5 will be
clarified.
4.1 Macrostrategies
Schjoldager (2008) operates with two sets of strategies; macrostrategies and microstrategies. In this
section I am to account shortly for the use of the macrostrategies. In addition, the microstrategies
will be accounted for further down.
The choice of a macrostrategy is an overall method for carrying out a translation. Schjoldager’s
model of macrostrategies contains the source-text oriented macrostrategy and the target-text oriented macrostrategy. The source-text oriented one has the focus on the source-text form and content,
and it is a communication of somebody else’s communication, which makes it an overt translation.
Alternatively, the target-text oriented macrostrategy focuses on the target-text effect, it is a mediation between primary parties in a communication and is a covert translation (Schjoldager 2008: 7172).
4.2 Microstrategies
In addition, Schjoldager works with a set of strategies, to which she refers as microstrategies. Her
taxonomy of microstrategies can be used when encountering problems in a translation or when one
wishes to understand and analyse other translators’ choices (Schjoldager 2008: 89). The microstrategies are to be used when a translator has to make a specific choice on how to translate a sourcetext item. They “deal with specific problems at the micro level, i.e. mainly in connection with
words, phrases and sentences” (Schjoldager 2008: 89).
12
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
All microstrategies are presented in Appendix 2, in the order in which Schjoldager presents them.
However, I shall only employ some of the microstrategies, as inspiration for the Analysis Model for
Subtitling4, which are the following:

Calque

Direct translation

Oblique translation

Paraphrase

Condensation

Adaptation

Substitution
As later to be seen these strategies are to be compared with Gottlieb’s subtitling strategies, and will
not be valid on their own – they are to be adapted into my own methods suitable for my model5.
4.3 Subtitling strategies
According to Gottlieb (1997: 75) a set of strategies must be taken into consideration when evaluating the quality of specific subtitling. One must analyse how each item is rendered “with regard to
stylistic and semantic value” (Gottlieb 1997: 75).
Therefore, Gottlieb has drawn up a model of strategies for translation based on his experience as a
subtitler himself. Yet, these strategies are intended for subtitling in particular, the taxonomy also
aims at translation in general, however, types 5-9 are media-specific. He operates with ten subtitling
strategies (Gottlieb 1997: 74), which Vestergaard (2002: 35-38) gives a more detailed description of
in her thesis6.
I shall employ the following in my work:

Paraphrase

Transfer

Dislocation

Condensation

Decimation
4
The Analysis Model for Subtitling will be presented in chapter 6
Please refer to chapter 5
6 Please refer to Appendix 3
5
13
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
4.4 Vinay and Darbelnet’s transposition procedure
Additionally, I shall introduce a strategy from Vinay and Darbelnet’s (2004) model of translation
procedures. Their model has been very influential in other scholars’ work, including Schjoldager’s
taxonomy. However, I shall only introduce the one strategy that I intend to apply in my taxonomy.
The transposition procedure originates from Vinay and Darbelnet’s taxonomy of translation procedures, but also Chesterman (1997) employs it as a strategy in his work.
The procedure deals with the replacing of word classes. The word class in the source text might be
replaced with another word class in the target text without the message being changed. The change
of word class might be from a verb to a noun or an adjective to an adverb or vice versa. It is important to note that there will be no change of message. Normally, this strategy obviously involves
structural changes as well, but it is often useful to isolate the word-class change as being of interest
in itself (Chesterman 1997: 95).
In the following section I shall compare and discuss the explained translation strategies for afterwards to adapt them into my own methods.
4.5 Discussion of the translation strategies
I have now introduced the translation strategies that I intend to use for my own approach. Several
researchers suggest different approaches to translation strategies. However, Schjoldager’s microstrategies and Gottlieb’s subtitling strategies are very closely related, yet different, which is why
I compare theirs.
In the working process with the model I was inspired by Schjoldager’s microstrategies for being the
general approach to analyse specific items. However, Gottlieb’s subtitling strategies have a specific
purpose, even though he argues that they also are suitable for any kind of translation. It is interesting to see both the differences and the similarities between these two sets of strategies.
Schjoldager’s suggested taxonomy seems to be appropriate for my approach to analysis of the subtitles, because her approach is a general one and intended for translation in general. This was an inspiration to the generalising approach of the Analysis Model for Subtitling. In contrast, Gottlieb is
more specific in his approach as he aims his strategies at subtitling in particular.
14
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
Even though Gottlieb’s strategies are for subtitling, which is the aspect I am dealing with as well, I
have chosen to adapt them according to the Analysis Model for Subtitling, because this model is to
distinguish between what is specific and what is general7.
Moreover, Gottlieb’s subtitling strategies are for the translation itself, meaning that they are to help
the translator in how to render the specific source-text items. But I am to set up a model and methods for analysis of what has already been translated to see if there is a pattern in the translation.
Further discussion and comparison is provided in the next chapter, where I am to adapt the strategies into my own approach to subtitling analysis.
7
For an explanation of ‘general’ and ‘specific’, please refer to section 6.4
15
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
5 ∙ ADAPTATION OF STRATEGIES FOR THE MODEL
Schjoldager and Gottlieb’s sets of strategies inspired me to build a model with focus on generalisation and specialisation.
In the light of the strategies accounted for in the previous chapter I am to limit the number of methods by comparing and tying several of the strategies into one.
The methods provide the foundation of the Analysis Model for Subtitling, which will be presented
in chapter 6.
5.1 Reference framework of the model
The strategies adaptation and condensation are a reference framework of the model. Adaptation is
used by Schjoldager, and both Schjoldager and Gottlieb make use of condensation.
I presume that these two strategies will always be seen in subtitling. The working with two different
cultures with each its different discourse, and the fact that the target-language culture is to gain as
much of the effect as the source-language culture did, the subtitles necessitate adaptation. However,
it is up to the translator how much to adapt8. Moreover, I adopt Gottlieb’s view of condensation;
that it is the prototype of subtitling. In subtitling there will always be constraints and in some way
or another, the source text will be adapted to the target audience.
Adaptation can both be linguistically and culturally, meaning that an item might be adapted according to grammatical conventions in the target language, or that a source-text item is a culture-bound
expression or element that does not exist in the target language, which requires the translator to find
a similar expression in the target language to obtain the source-text effect9.
Accordingly, the following methods, which basis derives from other researchers’ taxonomies, will
have to be seen in connection with the reference framework. In other words, neither adaptation nor
condensation functions on their own in this context.
8
9
Please also refer to chapter 3 about creativity in subtitling
For a definition of ‘effect’, please refer to Appendix 1
16
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
5.2 My methods
First of all, Schjoldager and Gottlieb work with strategies, but I prefer to work with methods. My
methods derive, as mentioned several times, from their taxonomies.
A method can be defined as “a way of doing something” (Mayor 2002: 896) in a systematic procedure. Or as the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary defines it; “a procedure or process for attaining an object as a systematic plan followed in presenting material for instruction... (it) implies an
orderly logical arrangement usually in steps”. (Morse 2009: http://www.merriam-webster.
com/dictionary/method)
Schjoldager points out that a strategy stresses “the goal-oriented (functional) nature of translation”
(2008: 67). However, I shall stress the importance that the methods are only steps in the analysis to
determine the approach.
Therefore, the purpose of the methods, that will be introduced below, is to help decide on the language level in the target text, whether a generalising approach or a specialising approach has been
applied in the translation.
5.3 Macro level methods
A macro level method is an overall step in the process to approach the translation of the source text.
When the method at macro level is decided the translator will be able to choose a micro level method, which is to be presented further down, to achieve the right approach to the translation and thereby the intended language level.
Here, an overview of the three macro level methods is given, and below they will be defined in detail:
Neutral translation
Translated word-for-word
Modification
Specifically or generally modified to achieve
-
Specific
-
General
Equivalence
-
Specific
-
General
the right approach/language level
Specifically or generally matched to achieve the
right approach/language level
Figure 1: A taxonomy of macro level methods
17
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
5.3.1 Neutral translation
Even though this method is presented as a macro level method, it is more likely to function as a
method in between the macro and micro levels.
The neutral translation method functions at macro level, but a micro level method cannot be applied to it. It is only to translate neutrally in a word-for-word procedure. Also, with this method
there is meant to be no level change between source and target language.
5.3.2 Modification
Modification is “the process of changing something slightly, especially in order to improve it”
(Mayor 2002: 916).
If choosing this macro level method the source-text item is to be modified – this means that the language level will change from the source text to the target text. Modification can either be specific or
general according to the specialising/generalising approach, meaning that the macro level method is
a pre-decision on how to approach the translation.
5.3.3 Equivalence
Equivalence is “the condition of two things having the same size, value, importance, or meaning”
(Mayor 2002: 465).
This macro level method is to find an equivalent in the target language to match the source-text
item. That is, equivalence is to be chosen when the language level is to be kept in the target-text
item.
Having decided on a macro level method, either modification or equivalence, the items can be analysed in further detail at micro level:
18
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
5.4 Micro level methods
This section presents a taxonomy of the micro level methods. The methods are defined according to
those presented in chapter 4 by Schjoldager and Gottlieb. These methods are to improve the quality
and depth of the analysis.
Direct translation
Non-reduced contextual meaning
Transposition
Paraphrased with change of word classes or sentence types
Condensed paraphrase
Translated rather freely with constraints
Oblique translation
Translated sense-for-sense
Substitution
Changed meaning to achieve a well-translated item
Figure 2: A taxonomy of micro level methods
5.4.1 Direct Translation
This method derives from direct translation and calque by Schjoldager and Gottlieb’s subtitling
strategy transfer. According to Gottlieb a source-text item is transferred when the speech is slow
enough to render the whole source-text item without reducing it. Schjoldager operates with two
microstrategies for this same kind of rendering – she suggests direct translation, which does the
same as transfer in a word-for-word procedure, whereas calque is a little more free, as it “only”
“transfers the structure or makes a very close translation” (Schjoldager 2008: 92). I have chosen to
modify these three strategies into one method, as the aspects, of these three, are linked in a way that
works well for my approach.
What is important in this method is that the contextual meaning is not reduced. Whether the sourcetext item is translated in a word-for-word procedure, which is the main characteristic of
Schjoldager’s direct translation, or if it is the same structure and “only” a very close translation
(calque) is not the essential part of the method. But it is to be the whole contextual meaning transferred without constraints and reduction. This means that it is closer to Gottlieb’s subtitling strategy, but it still has elements of both direct translation and calque, as the source-text item does not
necessarily need to be translated word-for-word to obtain an adequate non-reduced rendering.
7.29
Er det et sexmord?
Is it a sex crime?
Thus, with the reference framework in mind this method is most likely to adapt linguistically. And
19
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
by doing so, constraints will also be seen, as grammatical conventions are not the same between two
languages.
5.4.2 Transposition
The basis of this method is taken directly from Vinay and Darbelnet’s procedure transposition. I am
adding this procedure to own taxonomy of micro level methods, because none of the strategies by
neither Schjoldager nor Gottlieb contain this element of translation. However, it could be seen as a
form of paraphrasing, yet I want to stress the fact that this type of translation is frequently seen in
the data set10.
This method deals with the shift of word classes. It can be any change - e.g. from verbs to nouns
and from adjectives to adverbs.
10.2
Her der en til, der har set det
samme.
A matching report
It is mainly used to achieve a higher language level in the target-text item. Nonetheless, the method
can also lower the language level of the target-text item. This reflects the aspect of adaptation to the
target language, whereas the change of word classes will be likely to cause constraints, but not necessarily for the bad.
Moreover, this method is to analyse shifts in sentence types. According to Andersen (2006) sentences are classified according to four major types; declaratives, interrogatives, imperatives and
exclamatives (Andersen 2006: 24).
5.4.3 Condensed Paraphrase
Even though condensation is to be seen as the reference framework of the methods and the model, it
is also to be used as part of this particular method. The main aspect of this strategy is condensation.
However, not to be confused with the reference framework I shall name the method condensed paraphrase. The method will automatically have aspects of paraphrasing when condensing, as it will
“translate rather freely” (Schjoldager 2008: 92).
10
Please refer to Appendix 4
20
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
Condensed paraphrase is to be used if the source-text item might be too specific to obtain an adequate rendering in the target text. Therefore, it might be necessary to rewrite the item and there
might be constraints to it as well. It is a mixture of paraphrase and condensation, which are suggested by both Schjoldager and Gottlieb.
3.4
Men det er nok en sag for vores
kolleger derovre.
But it’s not our case...
5.4.4 Oblique translation
This method is to translate in a sense-for-sense procedure, just as Schjoldager suggests in her microstrategy oblique translation. However, she works with functional equivalence, which keeps the
contextual meaning of the source text in the target text only with few linguistical changes. I am inspired by Schjoldager’s sense-for-sense procedure in a combination with Gottlieb’s dislocation,
where the translator is to find a parallel expression. This parallel expression to be found might differ
and adjust the content. So, what I am aiming for with this method is to develop a new method that
translates sense-for-sense using a parallel expression, which however, adjusts the content for the
target audience.
0.0
Rejseholdet
Unit One
5.4.5 Substitution
This method is similar to Schjoldager’s microstrategy of the same name; substitution. She suggests
a strategy that changes the meaning of source text whilst maintaining it as a translation, not rewriting (Schjoldager 2008: 106). However, there will be some kind of rewriting of the source-text item
to achieve a well-translated target-text item, but it will relate to the reference framework of adaptation and condensation. The target-text item will cover the contextual meaning of the the source-text
item, but the back-translation will be different, as the original meaning has been replaced with a
slightly different element.
14.8
Teknikerne har stadigvæk ikke
fundet noget ude i skoven.
Forensics have found nothing in
the woods.
Having presented the methods that I am to employ in the Analysis Model for Subtitling, this model
will now be presented in the next chapter.
21
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
6 ∙ PRESENTATION OF THE ANALYSIS MODEL FOR SUBTITLING
I shall now introduce my model, the Analysis Model of Subtitling that the methods are aimed for. It
emerges from the name of the model that it is a model for analysis of what have already been translated. It works as a comparison of the source-text items and the target-text items, and whether the
translation has been approached generally or specifically, which will determine the language level
in the target text.
CULTURE-BOUND ELEMENTS
IN SOURCE TEXT
Implicit
Absolutely
Implicit <------------------
Explicit
Very
----------------- Explicit
HIGH
Specific modification
Specific equivalence
Specialising
approach
LANGUAGE
LEVEL IN
TARGET TEXT
Neutral translation
General equivalence
General modification
Generalising
approach
LOW
Figure 3: Analysis Model for Subtitling – a methodical approach
The model aims at the empirical study of Unit One with focus on the rendered legal aspects. It is
meant to provide an overview of the differences in rendering culture-bound elements with reference
to the Danish National Police and terminology used within police investigation.
The model will take its starting point in a data set selected from episode 15. The select data 11 illustrates the change in the approach to translating the items, which is the main focus of the model.
In the following, the elements of my model constructed to match my research questions will be explained. I shall introduce the model in layers by explaining each element step by step to prove my
points.
11
For an overview of the select data, please refer to Appendix 4
22
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
6.1 Layer 1: Culture-bound elements in source-text
The general foundation of the model is the culture-bound elements to be translated and the aim is to
determine the degree of generalisation/specialisation and the language level in the target text.
Nedergaard-Larsen (1993) discusses “culture-bound problems” as elements that exist in the source
language culture in relation to translation (Nedergaard-Larsen 1993: 209):
“They may be grammatical categories that exist only in this one language, vocative forms
(tu/vous), the use of certain rhetoric, metaphors and idioms. In spoken language they may be dialectal or sociolectal speech variants, or the problem may be spoken language characterised by an
intonation that indicates anger, interrogation, irony etc” (Nedergaard-Larsen 1993: 210).
By this, she argues that “culture-bound problems may occur in any translation” (Nedergaard-Larsen
1993: 211).
In the context of my work with the model and the strategies I shall presume, as Nedergaard-Larsen
suggests, that any translation will have culture-bound problems. However, I shall not refer to them
as problems, but as elements. Something that is defined as culture-bound is not meant to be a problem, but “just” another element of the source language that is to be translated.
CULTURE-BOUND ELEMENTS
IN SOURCE TEXT
In this context of my model, culture-bound elements only deal with what is related to police work,
departments and terminology. Moreover, the concept will mainly focus on the cultural differences
between Danish and Australian terminology with a few references to the linguistic elements of the
same.
23
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
6.2 Layer 2: Implicit or Explicit
The two vertical columns at the right hand side are to distinguish between what is implicit and what
is explicit in the source text. It is to be distinguished if the data to be analysed is culture-bound in an
implicit way or an explicit way. It has to be assumed that practically there will be a range between
absolutely implicit and very explicit. It is to help determine the level of the source-text item, whether police jargon is hidden in colloquial language or if it is specialised discourse.
CULTURE-BOUND ELEMENTS
IN SOURCE TEXT
Implicit
Absolutely
Implicit <------------------
Explicit
Very
----------------- Explicit
6.2.1 Implicit
According to the MacMillan English Dictionary implicit means that something is “not stated directly, but expressed in the way someone behaves, or understood from what they are saying” (Mayor
2002: 718). In this context implicit refers to the way the police jargon is hidden in the colloquial
language – it is not stated directly that the context of what is said is police terminology and broadly
speaking it could just as well be from another context. It is implicit that it is police jargon.
6.2.2 Explicit
In addition, the MacMillan English Dictionary explains that explicit means that something is “said
or explained in an extremely clear way, so that you cannot doubt what is meant” (Mayor 2002:
485). Here, explicit is what is specific terminology and where there is no doubt that the choice of
words is highly and clearly related to terminology and specialised language within police investigation and such.
24
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
6.3 Layer 3: Neutral translation
Neutral translation is presented in the taxonomy as a macro level method, however, it is a method
in between macro and micro level. This means that it functions as the zero on the scale of the language level in the target text, meaning that this method evens out the level of the item, whereas
modification and equivalence either go up or down.
CULTURE-BOUND ELEMENTS
IN SOURCE TEXT
Implicit
Absolutely
Implicit <------------------
Explicit
Very
----------------- Explicit
Neutral translation
6.4 Layer 4: Macro level and micro level
The central part of the model will show that the model works at two levels – the macro level and the
micro level. I am here to explain how these two levels differ and how the methods at macro level
are bound to the model, whereas the methods at micro level are not.
First of all I am dealing with the two adjectives, specific and general, to differentiate between the
degrees of modification and equivalence. The use of ‘specific’ limits the translation to be very particular, exact and detailed, and restricted to terminology, as opposed to the use of ‘general’, which is
used more commonly with the meaning of being universal and it widens the translation.
6.4.1 Macro level
So, these adjectives reflect the degree of equivalence and modification, which constitute the macro
level. I shall refer to these as macro level methods12. The macro level methods oppose diagonally.
Moreover, the macro level methods are closely related to the specialising/generalising approaches,
which will be introduced further down.
12
Please refer to section 5.3
25
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
CULTURE-BOUND ELEMENTS
IN SOURCE TEXT
Implicit
Absolutely
Implicit <------------------
Explicit
Very
----------------- Explicit
Specific modification
Specific equivalence
General equivalence
General modification
6.4.1.1 Specific modification
The specific modification macro level method deals with implicit culture-bound elements, which are
translated with a specialising approach. It is especially this macro level method that illustrates how
police jargon and terminology is hidden in colloquial language.
6.4.1.2 Specific equivalence
This macro level method translates explicit source-text items with a specialising approach. The item
is kept specific, meaning that terminological equivalents are found in the target text.
6.4.1.3 General equivalence
General equivalence maintains the implicitness in the target text when translating the source-text
item using the generalising approach. The colloquialism is kept the same in the target-text item.
6.4.1.4 General modification
General modification deals with explicit culture-bound elements that are translated with a generalising approach. It is for instance names of departments, titles etc. that can be seen as ‘untranslatable’
elements, which are translated according to this approach.
6.4.2 Micro level
After deciding on an overall method at macro level, one will have to decide on a method to analyse
the item in detail, which is realized at micro level.
The following micro level methods, which are defined in section 5.4, are to help determine how the
translation was approached:
26
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles

Direct translation

Transposition

Condensed paraphrase

Oblique translation

Substitution
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
6.5 Layer 5: The approaches
The decision of which method to employ is to determine how to approach the translation – whether
to generalise or to specialise. As mentioned in section 5.3.2 the macro level method is a predecision of the approach.
The two approaches are the vital part of the model. Both methods at macro level and at micro level are chosen to determine on which approach to employ.
CULTURE-BOUND ELEMENTS
IN SOURCE TEXT
Implicit
Explicit
Absolutely
Implicit <------------------
Specific modification
Very
----------------- Explicit
Specific equivalence
Specialising
approach
Neutral translation
General equivalence
General modification
Generalising
approach
6.5.1 Specialising approach
The specialising approach determines that the source-text items are rendered more specifically in
the target text than in the source text.
The approach is used either to keep, or adapt to, specialised language. Thus, it is police terminology
and specialised language and that the context is within police investigation.
27
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
6.5.2 Generalising approach
The generalising approach determines that the translated item is general and non-specific, meaning
that the language has been normalised. Opposed to terminology and specialised discourse, ‘normalised’ corresponds to colloquial language.
Whether the source-text item is implicit or explicit, a generalising approach might be used to clarify
the meaning of the source-text item for the target audience. It might be items that are nontranslatable into another culture, because an exact equivalent does not exist in this target culture or
it could be that implicit information should just be kept in general terms.
6.6 Layer 6: Language level in target text
As a result, the decision of how to approach the translation by either a specialisation or generalisation can help to determine the language level of the target-text items. There is a range of the language level to be considered, which ranges from low to high. Or, ‘neutral translation’ also works as
a line that distinguishes between high and low – either the language level goes up or down from
there. That is, when deciding the macro level method, one should be aware of the level to achieve in
the translation. Therefore, one must assume, as a starting point that one is dealing with a neutral
translation. Or, it must be clarified if the source-text item is implicit or explicit to determine, whether the language level is high, low or neutral.
CULTURE-BOUND ELEMENTS
IN SOURCE TEXT
Implicit
Explicit
Absolutely
Implicit <------------------
Specific modification
Very
----------------- Explicit
Specific equivalence
Specialising
approach
Neutral translation
General equivalence
General modification
Generalising
approach
HIGH
LANGUAGE
LEVEL IN
TARGET TEXT
LOW
The “language level in target text” can be matched to level of formality. This concept refers to the
potential difference in the language levels. Albrecht (2005) presents the scale of five degrees of
formality in language, which derives from Joos Joos (Albrecht 2005: 91):
-
Frozen
28
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
-
Formal
-
Consultative (neutral)
-
Casual
-
Intimate (jargon)
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
This scale goes hand in hand with “the language level in target text”, which ranges from high to
low. Terminology and specialised discourse are formal elements, which I shall refer to as “high
level”, whereas the jargon hidden in colloquial language will be referred to as “low level”. However, whether the level is high or low is not what is important. What is important is which approach
that was chosen to achieve this level. The level “just” adds an extra layer to the approach and elaborates the choice for the clarity of the analysis.
By having presented both methods and the Analysis Model for Subtitling, I shall now, in the next
chapter, analyse the select data according to the model and its methods.
29
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
7 ∙ SELECT DATA FROM UNIT ONE
This chapter is to provide an analysis of select data from episode 15 of Unit One. The analysis will
prove the methodical approaches of the Analysis Model for Subtitling. I shall show how the methods are to determine on which approach the translator applied in the translation – and I shall
demonstrate that the language level differ according to these approaches (generalisation and specialisation).
The select data13 is meant to illustrate the terminology and police jargon either reflecting the specialised discourse or that the colloquial language hides it. The chapter will discuss how the translation of culture-bound elements of the specialised discourse and colloquial language are carried out.
I am to prove how the Analysis Model for Subtitling works by accounting for the methods and to
what extent the methods are achieved. This I shall do according to the boxes of the macro level
methods in the model, which have been used to divide the data set in Appendix 4.
I shall now apply examples to each macro level method and analyse them according to micro level
methods, which will complete the overview of the model.
However, I shall note that the chapter will not discuss examples of neutral translation for the reason
that it is a method in between macro and micro level and does not “allow” a choice of micro level
methods. Even so, examples of neutral translated items can be seen in Appendix 4.
7.1 General modification
With a starting point in the translation of the title of the series I am to analyse how the translation of
terminology and specialised discourse is carried out with a generalising approach. The source-text
items in this macro level method refer to the Danish National Police where no exact equivalents are
to be found in the target culture.
Example 1:
0.0
Rejseholdet
Unit One
Oblique translation
This source-text item shows very clearly, that it is a culture-bound element. The Danish term Rejse-
13
Please refer to Appendix 4 for a full overview of the select data
30
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
holdet is the name of the actual department within the Danish National Police. But more importantly it is the name of the series.
The example provides the basis for the generalising approach. The item is very explicit in the
source text, because it associates with the name of the department that the series is named after and
that the series is built on real cases. However, this explicitness does not come through in the translation. ‘Unit One’ is a simplification of the source-text item but alternatively it gives the target audience an idea of the importance of this department and group of people that constitutes what this
concept represents.
For this source-text item an oblique translation method was applied. It is a sense-for-sense translation with an adjusted content for the target audience, as the target-text item does not cover the contextual meaning of Rejseholdet and the contents of this term. The target-text item is a parallel expression that is meant to achieve associations to the most excellent department within the police
force. Though it does not reach the same effect in the target text than in the source text, it has been
well adapted to cover something that was ‘untranslatable’ from source text to target text as the item
is title:
“The best course with titles is obviously to translate them into the nearest ‘function equivalent’ in
your own language, regardless of what the dictionary says” (Ivarsson 1992: 123).
Having established the translation of ‘Rejseholdet’ to be ‘Unit One’, I shall assume in the further
analysis that it is neutrally translated, as it is to be anticipated that the target-text term Unit One first
and foremost refers to the source-text item Rejseholdet, however, as we shall see in the next example the target-text item Unit One is also used to generalise further:
Example 2:
7.3
6.2
a) Jeg overlader ordet til
drabschef Ingrid Dahl fra
Rejseholdet.
b) Ingrid Dahl, Rigspolitiet, tak.
I’ll hand over to Ingrid Dahl, Unit
One
Direct translation
Ingrid Dahl, Unit One
Substitution
In spite that the source-text items are different, these two examples are linked, because the targettext items are exactly the same. Example 2a is neutrally translated, even though it is condensed,
according to the abovementioned establishment of the equality between Rejseholdet and Unit One,
whereas example 2b illustrates an even more explicit culture-bound source-text element.
31
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
These two items only proves stronger that Unit One is a generalised target-text item. The two examples demonstrate a generalisation within a generalisation, meaning that the task force name already is a generalisation, but as abovementioned, is used to generalise even further. That is especially seen in 2b where the source-text item Rigspolitiet has been translated into Unit One. Rigspolitiet
is the highest ranking department within the Danish National Police and is as the abovementioned
example a name of a department, which is ‘untranslatable’.
So, to come across this very explicit culture-bound source-text item in translation the micro level
method substitution can be applied. The cultural semantic meaning is lost and instead the overall
task force name is used, which in this context makes the language level of this target-text item very
low in relation to the source-text item.
However, these two items show the generalisation to a greater extent by the “rewriting” of the
source-text items. That is, example 2a illustrates condensation as the framework by leaving out the
very explicit word drabschef in the target-text item. It is interesting to see that the source-text items
are very different, both regarding the length and also the culture-bound elements, but the target-text
items are translated into exactly the same. This shows that the use of Unit One generalises to a
greater extent. It is also noteworthy that Rejseholdet is a department under Rigspolitiet in the Danish
National Police, which does not come through either.
At the same time, whilst argued that Unit One is the neutral translation of Rejseholdet, example 3
will show another generalised translation of the source-text item:
Example 3:
24.3
Thomas LaCour, Rigspolitiets
Rejsehold.
Thomas LaCour, Homicide
Substitution
As seen in example 2a and 2b the two source-text items ‘Rigspolitiet’ and ‘Rejseholdet’ are translated equally into “Unit One”, however, example 3 is another generalisation. Homicide refers to the
crime of killing someone (Mayor 2002: 687), however, it is obvious that it is a condensed expression of ‘the homicide department’, which one should be aware of if back-translating.
As a result, this source-text item has been substituted in order to approach the translation generally.
It is meant to be a translation but there is a slight change of meaning when analysing the relationship between the source-text item and the target-text item. However, one might assume that this
32
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
difference is not further remarkable for the viewer. And, what is important in subtitling is most importantly the viewers’ understanding of what is going on, especially if they have no knowledge of
the source language14.
This also shows that the translator has been creative in his translation by adapting it for the target
audience to be something that could be taken out of any police drama context.
In fact, it could be argued that a specialising approach has been used instead, because it would seem
that ‘homicide’ is more specific than ‘Unit One’. However, I shall analyse it as general modification
as it already has been established that the name of both the series and the task force is in fact Unit
One, and therefore it is more explicit than a term for a department.
In addition, a more “correct” use of homicide as a translation is demonstrated with the following
example:
Example 4:
3.2
Nå godmorgen. Til dem af jer der
ikke kender mig, jeg hedder
Thomas LaCour,
og jeg arbejder i Rejseholdets
drabssektion med ansvar for
gerningsstedet.
For those who don’t know, I’m
Thomas LaCour, Homicide.
I work the crime scene
Direct translation
However, the source-text item is condensed in the target-text item, that is, Rejseholdets is left out of
the target-text item, which only contains Homicide. This means that the source-text item has been
directly translated with constraints. But according to section 5.1 condensation (and adaptation) is
the overall basis for the Analysis Model for Subtitling and its methods.
7.2 Specific modification
The previous section showed the macro level method modification in a perspective of a generalising
approach. Likewise, this section will show the same method, but in a specialising approach.
As explained in section 6.4, ‘specific’ makes the translation very particular and restricts the targettext item to terminology, which is to be exemplified with the following examples:
14
Please refer to chapter 3 about subtitling
33
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
Example 5:
13.6
Hvad sagde obduktionen?
Han er kvalt og seksuelt
misbrugt,
men der er bevaret sæd, så vi kan
lave en DNA.
What did the autopsy reveal?
Suffocation and sexual assault.
With traces of semen for a DNA
profile.
Transposition
This example is to be regarded as a classic of the micro level method transposition, which I mainly
am to use with a specialising approach. The source-text items (both a and b) are verb phrases, that at
first seems very colloquial, whereas the target-text items have been translated to noun phrases. This
type of noun phrase and the choice of words make the target-text item sound more professional and
as specialised discourse.
Example 6 illustrates another type of a rendered target-text item with a higher language level.
Again, the source-text item is very implicit and could be seen in any other context, whereas the target-text item is restricted to police terminology:
Example 6:
19.15 Jamen det er jo slet ikke samme
mønster.
It’s not the same MO
Direct translation
‘Mønster’, which is used in Danish police terminology as well, can be seen as ambiguous to other
contexts, whereas MO is much more specific. MO is the abbreviated form of modus operandi, a
Latin expression for the description of a criminal’s characteristic patterns and style of committing
crime (http://www.uslaw.com/us_law_dictionary/m/Modus+Operandi).
This source-text item has been directly translated, however rendered more specifically in the targettext item with the use of the formal abbreviation of the described Latin expression. The contextual
meaning of this item has not been reduced in the translation. However, it has been narrowed by altering the noun into a specialised term, as also seen in the previous example.
Additionally, the next example shows a narrowed contextual meaning as well. The source-text item
of example 7 is quite vague and could also be taken out of any other context.
Example 7:
13.27 Nej, det tror jeg ikke. Jeg venter
I don’t think so. I’m waiting on
Substitution
34
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
på at høre fra teknikerne når som
helst
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
Forensics
The target-text item is rendered specifically; there is no doubt that the source-text item is police
jargon or specialised discourse hidden in colloquial language. However, the target-text item is a
substitution of the source-text item. ‘Teknikerne’ is rendered as ‘Forensics’, which is the same contextual meaning but when back-translating there will be a slight difference in the wording.
There are two sides to the specialising approach in this case. First, it is specific in the way that Forensics is a specialised discourse term that has replaced the less specialised source-text word. And
second, ‘teknikerne’ is plural, referring to the people within the forensic department, whereas Forensics in the target text is singular, referring to the actual department, which is dealing with forensic evidence.
The macro level method modification has now been illustrated, both in a general and a specific perspective, to verify its validity in the Analysis Model for Subtitling. In the same way, examples of
equivalence will be introduced in the following:
7.3 General equivalence
Just as specific modification deals with implicit culture-bound elements in the source text, so too
does this macro level method, however with a generalising approach.
For the following examples three different micro level methods have been applied, as the sourcetext items differ from each other. However, it is common that they are all kept in the same language
level. According to Albrecht’s presentation of the scale of formality, which was presented in section
6.6, the level of formality of these examples corresponds to what would be regarded as either casual
or intimate, which is jargon. And seen from the analysis model point of view, the language level in
the target text is low, which means the translation has been approached generally.
As to be seen in example 8, the source-text item has been translated directly, almost word-for-word,
however it is the noun phrase of the sentence that classifies this item as general equivalence. The
example is taken out of a context where the task that is referred to is to tell the relatives that their
son is dead:
35
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
Example 8:
19.13 Hvem har du givet det muntre
job?
Who’s got that cheerful task?
Direct translation
“The intimate level of formality is used among people who are very close and have a maximum of
shared background information. Intimacy in this connection may be personal as well as professional” (Albrecht 2005: 93).
Example 8 shows intimacy by the fact that it is jargon hidden in colloquial language. It shows that
the detectives know each other and are close – otherwise the irony of the sentence could be offensive, because there is nothing cheerful about the performed task.
Example 9 is analysed according to two micro level methods; the oblique translation and transposition. In addition, in this case Schjoldager’s microstrategy deletion15 can be applied as well, as a
third method – it is not included in my own taxonomy of micro level methods, as it is not that
common in the chosen episode for the subtitles to have source-text items completely deleted. And in
cases where it happens, it is typically to be regarded as condensation, as it is not whole parts of the
items that are deleted.
Example 9:
19.27 a) Hold kæft, hvor har vi fået
mange henvendelser,
efter at tv avisen fortalte,
b) at både Martin og Lasses
morder var den samme,
c) og de måske begge har mødt
deres drabsmand i toget.
Telefonerne har ikke stået stille.
Damn! The phone’s been running hot
since it was announced on TV
that both Martin and Lasse were
killed by the same man.
Oblique translation
Transposition
Deletion
First, 9a is an oblique translation as the source-text item has been translated sense-for-sense with a
parallel expression. This target-text expression makes the language level correspond to Albrecht’s
scale as the casual level of formality – in other words the language level is in the low end, because
the source-text item has been approached generally. The contextual meaning is the same between
the source-text item and the target-text item, but if one is to back-translate there would be a slight
15
Please refer to Appendix 2
36
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
difference, mostly because the target-text item may be considered as a metaphor – and this metaphorical language makes the language level low.
Second, the shift in word classes (transposition) is seen in 9b where the source-text item is a noun
phrase but is translated into a verb phrase.
Third, the last part of the example, 9c, is completely left out of the target-text item – it has been
deleted, however it would normally be regarded as a constraint according to the reference framework for the Analysis Model16.
On the other side, these three methods could also been seen in relation to each other. The micro
level methods oblique translation and transposition both have elements of paraphrasing. In connection with Schjoldager’s microstrategy deletion, this example could also be seen as condensed paraphrase as an overall micro level method for the translation of the whole, which is possible to subdivide into the three methods mentioned above.
From having dealt with general equivalence in this section, the next section will deal with equivalence as well, but the specific method.
7.4 Specific equivalence
What is characteristic of this macro level method is that the explicit source-text item is translated
equally with a specialising approach, meaning that the language level of the target-text item is to
level with the source-text item in the upper end of the scale.
Example 10:
28.3
a) Dette er en afhøring af Klaus
Munk Andersen.
b) Det er søndag den 22. oktober
og kl. er 20.19.
c) Tilstede er KA Thomas LaCour
og undertegnede KK Ingrid Dahl.
Interrogation of Klaus Munk Andersen.
Sunday, October 22. The time is
20.19.
DI Thomas LaCour
and chief of Homicide Ingrid
Dahl present
Direct translation
Direct translation
Oblique translation
Example 10 illustrates how the explicitness is kept in the target text. It is terminological standard
16
Please refer to section 5.1
37
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
for an interrogation to open with these lines, which leaves the translator to find a specific equivalent
to the source-text item. Therefore, a and b are translated directly at micro level.
However, 10c is a little more complex, as the two bolded abbreviations are not translated equally.
‘KA’, which is the abbreviation of ‘kriminalassistent’ has been translated directly into the English
equivalent ‘DI’, which is the abbreviated form of ‘detective inspector’. But ‘KK’, which is the abbreviated form of ‘kriminalkommisær’, is translated to ‘chief of Homicide’.
The complexness lies in the difference of the presentation of the two in the target-text item, where
only one of them is abbreviated, which is why I shall regard this sub-item to be translated in an
oblique way.
I am not to determine whether this sub-item is translated as a correct equivalent or not, but I shall
point out that it could be seen as general modification as well. The fact that ‘Homicide’ spells with
a capital letter it could refer to ‘Unit One’ as a modified name for the department. Because as seen
above in section 7.1 ‘Homicide’ was used to generalise Unit One even further.
The next example expands the idea of the terminological standards:
Example 11:
28.48 Klokken er 20.23, og afhøring
afbrydes
30.1 Klokken er 20.23, og afhøring
fortsættes
It’s 20.23. Interrogation suspended.
It’s 20.23. Interrogation resumed.
30.47 Klokken er 20.29, og afhøringen
afsluttes.
It’s 20.29. Interrogation terminated.
Direct translation
These are phrases that are commonly seen in police investigation. They are very explicit source-text
items translated directly in a specialising approach to keep the high language level.
I have now analysed select data according to the Analysis Model for Subtitling, and in the following
chapter I shall judge the data by establishing patterns, if any, of the translation of the items.
38
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
8 ∙ DATA JUDGEMENT
This chapter will judge the select data and determine whether patterns in the translation of the items
are to be found.
The data is selected for the legal aspects, meaning that all items in the data set are related to terminology and specialised discourse. In some cases, the legal aspects are implicit and hidden in colloquial language, whereas in other cases the terminology and specialised discourse are clearly indicated. The examples are chosen from a source text point of view and then divided into groups with the
translation in mind17.
The division is made according to the macro level methods of the Analysis Model for Subtitling to
ease the understanding of the distinction and with an attempt to prove patterns of the translations of
the items. And most importantly, to prove the effect of the model.
This division is a pattern in itself, but as I am to verify in the following there is no supplementary
connection between the macro level methods and which micro level methods that have been applied.
In general modification almost all examples refer to the Danish National Police. The source-text
items are very explicit as they are titles and names of departments and positions within the police.
These items are generalised in the target text and one is to assume that it is because such terms are
difficult to render in another language and culture, where there is a different system. Normally in a
general or technical translation it would be possible to render these culture-bound elements to match
the equivalent elements in the target culture, because they could be explained, e.g. in footnotes.
However, subtitles do not allow this kind of elaboration due to the fact that condensation frequently
happens and more importantly; the lack of space.
The target-text item Unit One is both the translation of Rejseholdet and used to generalise even further. Within general modification there is no connection between how this item is used. It is used
randomly with homicide – the only relation is that they are generally modified target-text items.
On the other hand, the macro level method specific modification approaches the translation specifically. That is, the Danish dialogue is colloquial, whereas the subtitles are much more specific and
refer to the terminology within police investigation. Many of the source-text items could just as well
have been taken out of any other context – there are no obvious signs that it is a police investigation, whereas the target-text items are terminological modified in translation.
17
A full overview of the division can be seen in Appendix 4
39
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
Having established a pattern of modified generalisation and modified specialisation, one is also to
see the source-text items have been rendered more or less equally; that implicit culture-bound elements are approached generally, but what is more rare, is the equivalence between explicit culturebound elements and the specialising approach. This fact relates to the target audience of the source
text, which has been stated in chapter 2, to be the common person.
40
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
9 ∙ CONCLUSION
The starting point of this thesis was to analyse the subtitling of Unit One with the purpose to determine the difference in the language level of the source text and the target text. When looking into
the difference, one will see a mainly colloquial source text, which has been translated terminologically.
Therefore, to establish a connection between the differences, it was necessary to construct an analysis model, as there was no sufficient theory to cover this hypothesis. As the foundation of the model
I employ two different approaches to translation strategies, namely Schjoldager’s microstrategies
and Gottlieb’s subtitling strategies, which are discussed in chapter 4. In addition, the select data
provides a basis for the model composition as it is grouped according to the macro level methods to
decide on either a specialising approach or a generalising approach.
By the construction of the Analysis Model for Subtitling I achieved a methodical approach to analyse my data according to the final language level of the subtitles.
The Analysis Model for Subtitling is constructed with the purpose to analyse the select data from
Unit One. The concepts of the model are constructed for a general purpose, however exemplified
with data from Unit One. Therefore it would be possible to apply other data set with the aim to differentiate the language level in the target text from the source text. If there is no such differentiation
the Analysis Model for Subtitling will not be valid, as the aim of the model is to determine whether
a specialising or a generalising approach was applied.
Naturally, there is no guarantee that this model is actually valid. It is constructed in an attempt to
make a classification of the subtitles of Unit One, which did come through. My investigation of the
legal aspects proved that the Analysis Model for Subtitling lives up to its purpose of determining
that the source-text items have been approached differently in the translation. It is to be seen that the
explicit culture-bound elements are generalised, such as police departments and titles/positions,
whereas source-text colloquialisms hide police jargon and specialised discourse. However, they are
specialised in the target text.
Even though the practical testing of my model has been successful, it is with reservations that it is
applicable to other data set. My investigation has only showed that the model lived up to the analysis of the select data, which it is built on. If one is to say something about the general validity, it is
necessary to test it with other data set in a more comprehensive empirical study.
41
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
REFERENCES
Albrecht, Lone (2005). Textual analysis and the production of text, 2. edition. Frederiksberg:
Forlaget Samfundslitteratur.
Andersen, Birger (2006). Basic English Grammar, 2. Edition. Frederiksberg: Forlaget
Samfundslitteratur.
Catford, J.C. (1965). A Linguistic Theory of Translation. London: Oxford University Press.
Chesterman, Andrew (1997). Memes of translation: the spread of ideas in translation theory. Amsterdam: J. Benjamins.
Gottlieb, Henrik (2005). Screen translation: eight studies in subtitling, dubbing and voice-over, 5.
Edition. Copenhagen: Centre for Translation Studies, Department of English, Germanic &
Romance Studies, University of Copenhagen.
Gottlieb, Henrik (1997). Subtitles, translation & idioms. Copenhagen: Center for Translation Studies and Lexicography, Department of English.
Ivarsson, Jan (1992). Subtitling for the media. A handbook of an art. Stockholm: Transedit HB.
Mayor, Michael and Rundell, Michael (2002). MacMillan English Dictionary for advanced learners. Oxford: Bloomsbury Publishing Plc.
Morse John (2009). Merriam-Webster. Merriam-Webster Online Search. Available from:
http://www.merriam-webster.com. Last accessed 1 May 2009.
Nedergaard-Larsen, Birgit (1993). Culture-bound problems in subtitling. Perspectives: Studies in
Translatology, vol. 2, pp. 207-241.
Schjoldager, Anne, Gottlieb, Henrik and Klitgård, Ida (2008). Understanding translation. Århus:
Academica.
The Internet Movie Database. Trivia for ”Rejseholdet”. Available from:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0220261/trivia. Last accessed 2 May 2009.
Vestergaard, Carina Britorn (2002). Tv-tekstning: funktionsbaseret oversættelse: beskåret pr.
automatik? Århus: Handelshøjskolen i Århus, Engelsk Institut.
Vinay Jean-Paul and Darbelnet, Jean (2004). A Methodology for Translation, In: Lawrence Venuti
ed., The Translation Studies Reader. London: Routledge, pp. 84-93.
Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Rejseholdet. Available from:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unit_One. Last accessed 2 May 2009.
42
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
APPENDICES
Appendix 1
Glossary of concepts
Appendix 2
Table of microstrategies
Appendix 3
Table of subtitling strategies
Appendix 4
Table of select data
Appendix 5
Transcription of Unit One, episode 15
43
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
Appendix 1: Glossary of concepts
This appendix provides definitions of main concepts used throughout the thesis:
Source language (SL)
The language of the dialogue (Danish).
Target language (TT)
The language of the subtitles (English).
Source text (ST)
The dialogue.
Target text (TT
The subtitles.
Item
A selected part of the transcription, where both the source text and
the target text is included, that is subject to exemplification or discussion.
Source-text item
Referring only to the transcription of the dialogue of the item.
Target-text item
Referring only to the transcription of the subtitles of the item.
Effect
Reference to how the audience perceives either the dialogue or the
subtitles. Mainly the difference in the perception of the subtitles
and the dialogue.
Legal aspects
A main expression for the concepts below:
Terminology
Words and phrases used within a particular field, in this case the
police.
Specialised discourse
Formal speech or writing using the terminology for the field or
subject.
Jargon (police)
Informal words, phrases, expressions that are “only” understood by
the people within the police. In the context of this thesis it refers to
metaphorical language and the fact that terminology and specialized discourse is hidden in colloquial language.
44
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
Appendix 2: Table of microstrategies
Schjoldager’s (2008) microstrategies will be presented in this appendix. All microstrategies are to
be explained in the order in which Schjoldager presents them herself (Schjoldager 2008: 92):
1
Direct transfer
The source-text item is unchanged in the target text.
2
Calque
“Transfers the structure or makes a very close translation”
(Schjoldager 2008: 92).
3
Direct translation
Direct translation translates word-for-word. However, the items
are still to be regarded as idiomatic and correct sentences. When
translating directly, linguistic equivalents are used to cover all
meaning from the source-text item and most often the source-text
item will be translated as closely as possible to obtain the exact
same meaning without losing any information.
4
Oblique translation
Opposed to direct translation, which translates word-for-word,
oblique translation translates sense-for-sense. It is regarded as
functional equivalence, meaning that the contextual meaning of
the source-text item is kept, but there might be a few linguistical
changes.
5
Explicitation
This microstrategy makes implicit information in the source text
explicit in the target text.
6
Paraphrase
Translates rather freely and might rewrite parts of the source-text
item to transfer the contextual meaning.
7
Condensation
When using this strategy, the translator keeps the contextual
meaning of the source-text item. However, the source-text item is
rendered in a shorter way and the constraints of this strategy might
entail implicitation in the target text. Condensed language is very
common in subtitling.
8
Adaptation
This microstrategy is more creative than the others, as it leaves the
translator to render the contextual meaning of the source-text item
according to the author’s thinking process. It is therefore similar to
paraphrase and oblique translation as it is a sense-for-sense procedure. When adapting, the translator might just focus on one aspect
of the source-text item, while ignoring others. Therefore, it will
often mean that the translator will need a sense of creativity.
45
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
9
Addition
10 Substitution
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
A new unit of meaning is added in the target text.
The meaning of the source-text item is changed. It is still dealing
with a translation, but the semantic meanings of the content differ.
The target-text item is to have the same meaning as the source-text
item, but when back-translating it might be different.
11 Deletion
A unit of meaning from the source text is omitted in the target
text.
12 Permutation
The effect of the source-text item is placed elsewhere in the target
text, because the effect will not be perceived in the original place
for linguistic or stylistic reasons.
46
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
Appendix 3: Table of subtitling strategies
This appendix provides definitions of Gottlieb’s (1997: 75) subtitling strategies, which Vestergaard
(2002), however, gives a more detailed description of in her thesis (Vestergaard 2002: 35-38).
1
Expansion
This strategy is typically used when translating culture-specific
references by expanding the source-text item to make it more understandable and explicit for the target audience, as it might be the
case that they are not that familiar with the topic. Therefore this
strategy might function as expanding the source-text item with
background information.
2
Paraphrase
Paraphrase is used to alter source-text items, which cannot be
translated directly or are non-translatable. The translator uses an
expression that is different from that of the dialogue, but still covers the whole content.
3
Transfer
The strategy transfer is used, if the translator is able to transfer the
full source-text item to the target text with an adequate rendering,
without reducing it, because the speech is slow enough to do so.
4
Imitation
This strategy is used when it is possible to translate the source-text
item with an identical expression in the target-text item, which
naturally has the same meaning. For instance translation of names
of people and places employs this strategy.
5
Transcription
If the translator wishes to render an anomalous expression show-
(media-specific)
ing the dialectal differences, he will typically employ transcription. It is to reproduce the effect of non-standard speech in the
target text.
6
Dislocation
Dislocation is especially employed in translations of musicals or
(media-specific)
visualised language. The translator is to find a parallel expression,
which might differ or the content will be adjusted. However, it is
used to maintain the effect of the source-text item in the target
text, even though the result would be an “incorrect” solution.
7
Condensation
Condensation is often used in translation and especially in subti-
(media-specific)
tling. It is a consequence of the reading speed of the target audience. It means that source-text items very often will be shortened
yet still cover the contents. Gottlieb refers to this strategy as the
47
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
prototype of subtitling. When condensing, the subtitle will still
cover “the meaning and most of the stylistic content of the original” (Gottlieb 1997: 76) – the constraints will “only” be superfluous oral language features not important for understanding the
context.
8
Decimation
Decimation is also a type of condensation, but unlike condensa-
(media-specific)
tion, decimation reduces the content of the dialogue. It is a condensed expression with a reduced content. The strategy is used
when the speed of the dialogue is so fast that it is impossible to
render everything. So according to the reading speed of the target
audience, the dialogue is to be condensed, and reduced when employing this strategy.
9
Deletion
This strategy also deals with the speed of the dialogue. That is,
(media-specific)
less important content can be omitted from the target text if the
speech of the dialogue is too fast to render it all.
10
Resignation
Resignation is used when the translator faces wordplays or “untranslatable” elements, which will be unknown to the target audience. It means that a parallel expression that might differ from the
meaning of the source text, will replace the “untranslatable” element.
48
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
Appendix 4: Table of select data
The data set, which provides the general foundation of the Analysis Model for Subtitling and the
macro level and micro level methods, are here presented in a table for a full overview.
All the items are grouped according to the macro level methods and they are numbered according to
Appendix 5 (the full transcription of the episode). The right hand-side column indicates the applied
micro level method.
GENERAL MODIFICATION
Unit One
Oblique translation
0.0
Rejseholdet
3.2
Nå godmorgen. Til dem af jer der For those who don’t know, I’m Direct translation
ikke kender mig, jeg hedder Thomas LaCour, Homicide.
Thomas LaCour,
I work the crime scene
og jeg arbejder i Rejseholdets
drabssektion
med
ansvar
for
gerningsstedet.
4.4
Vi har lige fået en melding, at der A body was found in the woods. Condensed
er fundet et lig ude i skoven. De They want me to join them.
para-
phrase
vil godt have, jeg tager med
derud.
Ingrid Dahl, Rigspolitiet, tak.
7.3
Jeg overlader ordet til drabschef I’ll hand over to Ingrid Dahl, Unit Direct translation
Ingrid Dahl fra Rejseholdet.
24.3
Thomas
LaCour,
Ingrid Dahl, Unit One
Substitution
6.2
One
Rigspolitiets Thomas LaCour, Homicide
Substitution
Rejsehold.
SPECIFIC MODIFICATION
This is your case.
Direct translation
5.1
Det her er jeres.
9.6
Jeg fik teknikernes fotografier af I’ve got Forensics’ photos of the Substitution
drengen. Vi kan lige lade dem gå boy. Pass them around.
Transposition
rundt.
49
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
10.2
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
Her der en til, der har set det A matching report
Transposition
samme.
13.6
Hvad sagde obduktionen?
What did the autopsy reveal?
Han er kvalt og seksuelt misbrugt,
Suffocation and sexual assault.
Transposition
men der er bevaret sæd, så vi kan With traces of semen for a DNA
lave en DNA.
13.27
profile.
Nej, det tror jeg ikke. Jeg venter I don’t think so. I’m waiting on Substitution
på at høre fra teknikerne når som Forensics
helst
14.8
Teknikerne har stadigvæk ikke Forensics have found nothing in Substitution
fundet noget ude i skoven.
19.15
the woods.
Jamen det er jo slet ikke samme It’s not the same MO
Direct translation
mønster.
29.6
Vi fandt ham i Lasse-sagen, som He was questioned in the Lasse Condensed
togfører blev han rutinemæssigt case
afhørt dengang.
para-
phrase
because he was a train driver.
GENERAL EQUIVALENCE
3.4
13.5
Men det er nok en sag for vores But it’s not our case...
Condensed
kolleger derovre.
phrase
para-
Ulf, jeg ved godt, hvor meget det Ulf, I know it haunted you, not Direct translation
plagede jer, at I ikke fik knækket solving...
den sag.
19.13
Hvem har du givet det muntre Who’s got that cheerful task?
Direct translation
job?
19.27
Hold kæft, hvor har vi fået mange Damn! The phone’s been running Oblique translation
henvendelser,
hot
efter at tv avisen fortalte,
since it was announced on TV
Transpostition
at både Martin og Lasses morder that both Martin and Lasse were Deletion
var den samme, og de måske killed by the same man.
begge har mødt deres drabsmand
i toget. Telefonerne har ikke stået
50
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
stille.
31.1
Vi
har
ikke
fået
en
eneste Not one call suggested the boy Transposition
henvendelse om, at drengen rent made it to Helsingør.
faktisk er nået til Helsingør
31.10
Vi tager hans dna, og så lader vi Get his DNA and release him
Transposition
ham gå.
SPECIFIC EQUIVALENCE
28.3
Dette er en afhøring af Klaus Interrogation of Klaus Munk An- Direct translation
Munk Andersen.
dersen.
Det er søndag den 22. oktober og Sunday, October 22. The time is
kl. er 20.19.
20.19.
Tilstede er KA Thomas LaCour
DI Thomas LaCour
og undertegnede KK Ingrid Dahl.
and chief of Homicide Ingrid Dahl
Oblique translation
present
28.48
Klokken er 20.23, og afhøring It’s 20.23. Interrogation suspend- Direct translation
afbrydes
30.1
ed.
Klokken er 20.23, og afhøring It’s 20.23. Interrogation resumed.
Direct translation
fortsættes
30.47
33.13
Klokken er 20.29, og afhøringen It’s 20.29. Interrogation terminat- Direct translation
afsluttes.
ed.
Dna’en er positiv, det er Klaus
The DNA confirms it’s Klaus.
Transposition
NEUTRAL TRANSLATION
It’s a boy… about ten years old.
5.4
Det er en dreng, ca. 10 år
7.13
I det stykke papir I har fået, er der There’s a description of him in
en beskrivelse af ham,
your notes
og så er der et foto af tøj svarende and a photo of clothes identical to
7.29
til det han havde på.
those he had on.
Er det et sexmord?
Is it a sex crime?
51
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
11.3
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
LaCour og Fischer er i gang med We’re checking if any belong to a
at tjekke, om en af dem tilhører en 35-year-old with a crew cut.
35- årig mand med meget kort
hår.
13.11
Og hvad med vores dreng?
What about our kid?
13.12
21 henvendelser.
21 calls
13.22
Der
er
ingen
brombær
på There are no blackberries there.
findestedet.
13.25
Det understøtter din teori, om at Supporting your theory he wasn’t
han ikke er dræbt på findestedet.
18.8
Jeg er i København, ude på No, I’m in Copenhagen. At FoTeknisk Afdeling.
19.7
killed there.
rensics.
Vi har identificeret drengen. Det We’ve ID’d the boy... Martin Sier Martin Simonsen.
monsen.
19.10
Lasse-sagen
The Lasse case
19.18
De
blev
begge
to
seksuelt Both were sexually assaulted.
misbrugt.
19.23
Nå ja, vi har taget dna tester i We’ve done DNA tests in both
begge tilfælde.
20.25
34.19
cases.
Jeg er meget ked af at måtte I’m very sorry to tell you that
fortælle dig, at Martin er død
Martin is dead.
Dine fingeraftryk er derude.
Your fingerprints are there
52
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
Appendix 5: Transcription of Unit One, episode 15
This appendix contains the entire transcription of episode 15, from which the data set has been selected.
The items are divided into scenes and numbered accordingly. In addition, these numbers are stated
next to the examples used in the thesis and in the table of all the examples, for easy reference.
0
0.0
REJSEHOLDET
UNIT ONE
1
1.1
Jamen vi kan bare mødes på hotellet. Hvornår
tager du af sted?
We’ll meet at the hotel, then. When are you leaving?
1.2
Du sidder i toget? Nå, okay.
You’re on the train? Okay
1.3
Jamen kan du så ikke bare komme herhen? Så
kører vi sammen.
Why not come here? We can go together.
1.4
Ja, har du fundet ud af, hvad du har lyst til at
lave, mens vi er her?
Do you know what you’ll do while you’re here?
1.5
Nå, men jeg tænkte på udstillinger og den slags
ikke.
What about exhibitions and so on?
1.6
Jamen vi snakker bare sammen, når du kommer,
ikke - hej hej
We’ll talk when you arrive. Yes, bye
2.1
Ja?
Yes?
2.2
Vi er klar, når du er klar.
Ready when you are
2.3
Jamen, det er jeg faktisk nu.
I’m ready now.
2.4
Din kone?
Your wife?
2.5
Min kæreste
My girlfriend.
2.6
God ide at kombinere arbejde med lidt fornøjelse.
Good idea to mix work with pleasure.
2.7
Ja, det er sjældent, man har mulighed for det.
It’s rarely possible.
2.8
De vil elske Helsingør.
You’ll love Helsingør.
2.9
Jeg skal huske at give dig navnene på nogle gode
restauranter.
I’ll suggest some good restaurants.
2.10
Skal jeg indlede, eller?
Should I start…
2.11
Nej nej, det gør jeg.
No, let me.
3.1
Godmorgen
Godmorgen
Morning
Good morning
3.2
Nå, godmorgen. Til dem af jer der ikke kender
mig; jeg hedder Thomas LaCour,
For those who don’t know, I’m Thomas LaCour,
Homicide.
3.3
og jeg arbejder i Rejseholdets drabssektion med
I work the crime scene
2
3
53
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
ansvar for gerningsstedet.
4
3.4
Og jeg skal have fornøjelsen en times tid i dag og
igen i morgen at fortælle jer om de muntre sager,
vi arbejder med.
It will be my pleasure today and again tomorrow to
recount some of the jolly cases we’ve had
3.5
Den der bekæmper et uhyre skal passe på han
ikke selv bliver til et uhyre
“He, who fights monsters, beware lest he becomes
one.”
3.6
Det er Nietzsche,
Nietzsche.
3.7
og det har sjovt nok ført til en af de hårdnakkede
myter inden for vores branche; nemlig den at
man faktisk er nødt til at blive lige så uhyrlig.
som drabsmanden, han er, at vi simpelthen bliver
nødt til at ligne ham så meget at så meget at vi
kan fange ham.
This has led to a persistent myth in our profession
that we need to become as monstrous as the killer,
that we have to be exactly like him in order to capture
him.
3.8
Og jeg har en nyhed til jer - vi ligner ham
allerede
And I have news for you… we’re already like him.
3.9
Ni ud ti drabsmænd i det her land, de er lige som
os, der sidder her i det her rum.
Nine out of ten killers in this country are like us in
this room.
3.10
Den eneste forskel er bare, at de af den ene eller
anden grund er blevet presset helt ud til grænsen.
The only difference is
that they, for some reason, were pushed to the limit.
3.11
Og fordi de ligner os så meget, så begår de
elementære menneskelige fejl,
And because they’re like us, they make basic human
mistakes.
3.12
for der er ingen, der begår et drab uden at
efterlade sig spor.
Nobody commits murder without leaving a trace.
3.13
Og vores opgave er så at finde de spor.
Our task is to find those traces.
3.14
Og hvordan det som regel lykkes, er det, jeg vil
prøve at fortælle jer lidt om.
How we do that is what I want to tell you about.
3.15
Og så skal jeg i øvrigt lige fortælle jer, at den
sidste tiendedel er psykopater,
By the way, the last 10 per cent are the psychopaths.
3.16
og dem ved vi aldrig, hvor vi har; de har deres
egen logik.
They’re hard to read. They have their own logic.
3.17
Og lad mig give jer et godt råd.
But here’s some advice…
3.18
Prøv at undgå de sager, det er som regel kun
frustration
Try to avoid such cases, they’re baffling.
4.1
Hej heej, er i allerede færdige?
Hi, are you finished already?
4.2
Ved du hvad, jeg kører selv.
You know what? I’ll make my own way.
4.3
Hvad sker der?
What’s up?
4.4
Vi har lige fået en melding, at der er fundet et lig
ude i skoven. De vil godt have, jeg tager med
derud.
A body was found in the woods. They want me to
join them.
4.5
Hvad, skal jeg skal jeg bare tage hen på hotellet,
eller?
Well… should I just go to the hotel?
54
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
5
6
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
4.6
Hvad? Nej nej, du kommer med, så kører vi bare
sammen senere, ikke?
No. You can come along. We’ll both go there later,
right?
5.1
Det her er jeres.
This is your case.
5.2
Hvem er det?
Who is it?
5.3
Det er et barn.
A child.
5.4
Det er en dreng, ca. 10 år
It’s a boy… about ten years old.
6.1
Findestedet
13.30 lørdag 21. oktober
Crime scene
13.30, Saturday October 21
6.2
Ingrid Dahl. Rigspolitiet. Tak.
Ingrid Dahl, Unit One
6.3
Hej.
Ved vi, hvem han er?
Do we know who he is?
6.4
Nej
No.
6.5
Der er ikke noget navn nogen steder ... i hans
lommer.
No name and empty pockets.
6.6
Hvem er hun?
Who’s that?
6.7
Det er Boysens assistent.
Boysen’s assistant.
6.8
Nå, jeg vidste ikke, han havde en assistent.
I didn’t know he had an assistant.
6.9
Hej Jan.
Hi, Jan.
6.10
Dav Ingrid. Det er Dorthe Finsen
hej
hej
Hi. This is Dorthe Finsen.
6.11
Nå, hvad siger du?
What do you think?
6.12
Jeg tror, han er kvalt. Det ved vi mere om i aften.
I think he was strangled. We’ll know more by tonight.
6.13
Til gengæld er jeg sikker på, at han har ligget her
i et par dage, jeg vil faktisk sige, at han kan have
ligget her i op til en uge.
But I’m sure he’s been here a few days, even a week.
6.14
Hvad ellers?
What else?
6.15
Fuldt påklædt.
Fully dressed.
6.16
Der er en del rifter og skrammer at se nærmere
på.
Quite a few scratches. We’ll have a closer look at
those.
6.17
Mere tolv end ti, vil jeg sige.
Closer to twelve that ten, I’d say.
6.18
Det er Ingrid. Ja hej Gammelgaard.
Ingrid here. Hi, Gammelgård.
6.19
Jeg vil altså mere sige ti end tolv.
I’d say more ten than twelve.
6.20
Hun har selv en søn på tolv.
She has a son who’s twelve.
6.21
Jamen, hvad så med Sverige, Norge, Tyskland?
Sweden, Norway, Germany?
55
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
7
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
6.22
Jamen, jeg er helt enig.
Yes, I fully agree.
7.1
Pressemøde, Helsingør Politigård
15.10 lørdag 21. oktober
Press conference,
Helsingør Police Station
15.10, Saturday October 21
7.2
Tak fordi I kunne komme så hurtigt.
Thanks for coming so soon.
7.3
Jeg overlader ordet til drabschef Ingrid Dahl fra
Rejseholdet
I’ll hand over to Ingrid Dahl, Unit One.
7.4
Tak
Thanks.
7.5
For 4 timer siden, blev der i Teglstrup Hegn, her,
Four hours ago in Teglstrup Hegn, here,
7.6
fundet liget af en ti til tolvårig dreng.
the body of a young boy was found.
7.7
Og det ser ud til, at han har ligget i skoven i ca.
en uge.
It looks like he’s been there for about a week.
7.8
Og vores problem er, at vi ikke ved, hvem
drengen er.
We don’t know who he is
7.9
Og der er heller ingen, der har efterlyst en dreng
i den alder.
and nobody’s reported him missing.
7.10
Kan det være en udenlandsk dreng?
Could he be foreign?
7.11
Altså, vi har tjekket nabolandene,
We’ve checked.
7.12
og der foreligger heller ingen efterlysninger i
Sverige, Norge, Finland eller Tyskland svarende
til en dreng på det, vi har fundet.
No neighbouring countries report a missing boy
matching his description.
7.13
I det stykke papir I har fået, er der en beskrivelse
af ham,
There’s a description of him in your notes
7.14
og så er der et foto af tøj, svarende til det han
havde på.
and a photo of clothes identical to those he had on.
7.15
Og trøjen er lavet her i landet, så indtil videre
går vi ud fra at drengen er dansk.
The shirt was made here, so we’ll assume he’s Danish
7.16
Hvem fandt ham?
Who found him?
7.17
En løber i skoven.
A jogger.
7.18
Men personen er temmelig chokeret, så vi har
lovet, at vedkommende bliver fredet
She’s in shock so we’ve promised her anonymity.
7.19
Men vi er naturligvis meget interesseret i at høre
fra folk, der har færdes i skoven
We’d like to hear from people who’ve been in the
woods
7.20
inden for de sidste ti dage.
in the last ten days.
7.21
Og eftersom det er efterårsferie, må der være tale
om en del.
It’s a school holiday so there’ll be lots.
7.22
Og så er vi ikke mindst interesserede i at høre fra
personer,
We’re especially interested in anyone
56
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
8
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
7.23
der kan hjælpe os med at finde frem til, hvem
drengen er.
who can help to identify him.
7.24
Kan det virkelig tænkes, at en dansk dreng i den
alder kan være forsvundet i en uge
A Danish boy of that age is gone for a week
7.25
uden nogen savner ham
without anyone missing him?
7.26
Du kan nå det interview med TV Avisen …
You’ll be late for the TV interview…
7.27
Det var alt, hvad vi havde nu. Tak fordi I kom.
That’s all for now. Thanks for coming.
7.28
Hvad tror du, den egentlige dødsårsag er?
What was the cause of death?
7.29
Er det et sexmord?
Is it a sex crime?
7.30
Var han begravet?
Was he buried?
7.31
Det er alt, hvad vi har for nu. Tak skal I have.
That’s all for now. Thank you.
8.1
Drengen er 148 cm høj, han er spinkel i bygning,
og har lyst hår.
The boy’s 148 centimetres tall, of slim build, with
blond hair.
8.2
Han har ligget i skoven i ca. en uge.
He’s been in the woods...
8.3
Det er IP – Ja dav
IP here... Yes, hi
8.4
Og der foreligger ikke nogen efterlysninger, og
derfor er vi meget interesserede i at finde frem til
folk, der kan hjælpe os med at finde frem til, hvem
han er. Han blev fundet ude i…
8.5
Altså Kirsten, det er en lille smule ubelejligt.
Kirsten, it’s a bit inconvenient...
8.6
Jens, hvis jeg skulle vente på, det var belejligt, så
talte vi jo aldrig sammen.
If I wait till it’s convenient, we’d never talk.
8.7
Hvad, skal du ikke på teatret?
You’re going to the theatre?
8.8
Jo, jeg er helt sikker på, at det bliver fantastisk i
aften. Hvor ville jeg ønske, du var her.
Yes, I’m sure it will be fantastic. I wish you were
here.
8.9
Ja, det ville jeg også ønske.
Me too.
8.10
Ved du hvad, jeg ligger bare en billet til dig. Du
kan bare komme i pausen.
I’ll leave you a ticket, you can come at interval.
8.11
Jamen Kirsten, jeg kan jo ikke.
Kirsten, I can’t!
8.12
Det kan jo godt være, I bliver færdige.
You may be done.
8.13
Vi er jo lige startet.
We’ve just started.
8.14
Du når lige at komme hjem fra Odense, og så er
du væk igen.
You just came back and you’re off again.
8.15
Jeg skal stå på scenen foran en fuld sal, og jeg er
bare så skide nervøs.
I’m on stage to a full house and I’m so damn nervous!
8.16
Men hvem bekymrer sig om det?
But who cares?
57
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
9
10
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
9.1
Problemer?
Problems?
9.2
Hvad? Nej nej nej
What? No, no
9.3
Hej
Hej, godt lad os komme i gang
Let’s begin.
9.4
Hvor er det dejligt at se jer alle sammen lørdag
aften, det er så forfærdelig længe siden.
Lovely to see you all on a Saturday night! It’s been
ages.
9.5
LaCour, lægger du ud?
LaCour, would you start?
9.6
Ja
Jeg fik teknikernes fotografier af drengen - vi kan
lige lade dem gå rundt.
Yes.
I’ve got Forensics’ photos of the boy. Pass them
around.
9.7
Hvordan ser der ud derude?
What’s it like out there?
9.8
Der er helt mørkt.
Pitch dark.
9.9
Men jeg har bedt dem om, at fortsætte med
lamper
But they’re using lights.
9.10
Altså, det har jo regnet en del her på det sidste.
Jeg håber stadig, vi finder nogle bilspor på stien
derude.
It’s been raining a lot recently but I hope to find tyre
marks.
9.11
Ja, hvem siger, han har kørt i bil derud?
Who says he came in a car?
9.12
Hvis du skulle transportere et lig, ville du så ikke
bruge en bil?
You’d need one for the body.
9.13
Hvad hvis han er dræbt, der hvor han er fundet?
What if he was killed there?
9.14
Så han selv er gået ud i skoven med
drabsmanden?
He went into the woods with the killer?
9.15
Ja
Yes
9.16
Gaby?
Gaby?
9.17
Hvad?
What?
9.18
Drengens trøje, fandt du ud af noget?
The boy’s shirt? Anything?
9.19
Jeg har tjekket det.
I’ve checked it.
9.20
Det er et mærke, der bliver solgt i hele landet.
Det bliver nærmest umuligt at spore den
It’s a common brand. It will be very hard to trace.
10.1
Tak skal du have.
Thank you
10.2
Her der en til, der har set det samme.
A matching report.
10.3
En ca. 35-årig plysset mand,
A man around 35 with a crew cut.
10.4
der forlader sin bil, og trækker af sted med en ca.
10- årig dreng der græder, og råber, at han
gerne vil hjem til mor.
He left his car dragging a boy who was crying for his
mother.
58
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
11
12
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
10.5
Er det samme sted?
Same location?
10.6
Ja.
Yes.
10.7
Det er p-pladsen ved Julebæk, og det var også i
mandags.
The parking lot at Julebæk.
10.8
Og også en hvid pickup?
A white pick-up?
10.9
Ja.
Yes
10.10
Gaby, kan du se, hvor mange der har en hvid
pickup her i området?
Gaby... Can you check how many there are in this
area?
10.11
Prøver lige.
On it
11.1
Hvor mange siger du?
How many?
11.2
Tre hvide Nissan pickups.
Three white Nissan pick-ups.
11.3
LaCour og Fischer er i gang med at tjekke, om en
af dem tilhører en 35- årig mand med meget kort
hår.
We’re checking if any belong to a 35-year-old with a
crew cut.
11.4
Okay tak.
Thanks.
11.5
Hvad er det for nogen forældre, der ikke savner
deres 12-årige søn i en hel uge?
What kind of parents doesn’t miss their twelve-yearold for a week?
11.6
Godt spørgsmål!
Good question.
11.7
Tager du tilbage bagefter?
Are you going back later?
11.8
Hvad tænkte du på?
What do you mean?
11.9
Ikke noget ikke noget bestemt - bare small talk.
Nothing really. Just small talk.
11.10
Hey Jan.
Hi, Jan
11.11
Hej skat.
Hi, honey
11.12
Jeg har det her.
Here you are.
11.13
Tak skal du have.
Hej
Hej. Hun er fandeme bare så dygtig, den pige.
Thanks
11.14
Hvor gammel er hun?
How old is she?
11.15
Hvad tænker du på?
What do you mean?
11.16
Ikke noget.
Nothing
11.17
Skal vi gå ind?
Ja.
Shall we go in?
12.1
Ja, hej.
Yes, hi.
12.2
Vi er på den sidste adresse nu.
We’re at the last address.
12.3
Der er lukket og slukket, og carporten er tom.
It’s all locked up and the garage is empty.
That girl’s so damn clever.
59
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
12.4
Men kan I ikke finde en mobil telefon på ham her,
så vi kan få fat i ham?
Can you find a mobile number for him?
12.5
Og så ringe tilbage til mig hurtigst muligt?
Yes... Call me back when you’ve got it.
12.6
Godt, hej.
Fine. Bye
12.7
Okay, hvordan er hotellet så?
Okay. How’s the hotel?
12.8
Nå, men det er da altid noget, Helene jeg er nødt
til at løbe nu.
At least that’s something. Helene, I have to go.
12.9
Ja, det er svært at sige. Det bliver squ nok lidt
halv-sent.
Yes, hard to tell. It might be quite late.
12.10
Ja okay, hej hej
Yes, okay. Bye.
12.11
Det tager hun fint.
She’s taking it well.
12.12
Ja, det gør hun.
Yes, she is
12.13
Jamen, hun ved jo det ikke kan være anderledes.
She knows there’s no choice.
12.14
Ja
Yes.
12.15
Man skulle jo have valgt en psykolog eller en
strisser.
One should have chosen a psychologist... or a cop.
12.16
Nå, men Mille har vel efterhånden vænnet sig til,
at du tager af sted hele tiden.
Mille’s getting used to you being away?
12.17
Jo, hun har bare sværere ved at vænne sig til, at
jeg kommer hjem en gang i mellem.
Yes. She just has a hard time with me being home.
12.18
Er der problemer?
Any problems?
12.19
Ja, det må man sige.
Yes, there are.
12.20
Det er vel ikke ved at gå i stykker?
Is it falling apart?
12.21
Ved du hvad, det tror jeg faktisk, det er.
You know what? I think it is.
12.22
Har det noget at gøre med…
Is it because of...
12.23
Ida?
Ida?
12.24
Er det Ida, du mener?
Do you mean Ida?
12.25
Ja
Yes.
12.26
Nej nej hun er jo gift og…
No, no. She’s... married and...
12.27
Det har været sådan i længe.
It’s been like this for ages.
12.28
Det er som om, jeg skal have dårlig samvittighed,
når jeg har været væk,
Like I should feel guilty for being away,
12.29
så skal jeg ha dårlig samvittighed, når jeg er
hjemme,
I should feel guilty when I’m home and then...
60
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
12.30
så skal jeg ha dårlig samvittighed når jeg tager
væk igen
feel guilty when I leave again.
12.31
Ja, det er Fischer
Fisher, here.
12.32
Ja vent lidt, jeg tror han kommer her.
Wait a second. I think he’s coming.
12.33
Jeg kan ikke se frisuren, han har en hue på lige
nu.
I can’t see his hair. He’s got a beanie.
12.34
Ved du hvad, jeg tror vi går ud, og snakker med
ham.
12.35
Hey hey, hvad fanden laver i?
What the hell are you doing?
12.36
Det var da fandens så travlt, du har hvad? Hvad
hedder du?
You’re in a hurry! Your name?
12.37
Sune … Møller
Sune Møller.
12.38
Sune Møller
Sune Møller?
12.39
Hvem er det?
Who’s this?
12.40
Det er Jannik, det er min søn.
Jannik, my son.
12.41
Hvor gammel er han?
How old?
12.42
10
Ten
12.43
Hvor bor han, hos dig?
He lives with you?
12.44
Hos sin mor. En gang i mellem hos mig.
At his mother’s. Sometimes with me.
12.45
Hvad er det her?
What’s this?
12.46
Bare nogle kasser.
Just boxes.
12.47
Bare nogle kasser? Nå.
Just boxes, eh?
12.48
Er der nogen af jer, der ryger?
Do either of you smoke?
13.1
Hvordan går det her?
How are things here?
13.2
Jamen her går det da virkelig godt.
Bloody great!
13.3
Var der held med den hvide pickup?
Any luck with the pick-up?
13.4
Ja, masser
Yes, a lot.
13.5
Men det er nok en sag for vores kolleger derovre,
But it’s not our case...
13.6
Smuglercigaretter, det handler om.
Smuggled cigarettes.
13.7
Men det var ham, der slæbte af sted med drengen,
der ville hjem til sin mor.
It was the guy who was dragging that boy.
13.8
Knægten lever i bedste velgående. Ja, de var
taget i skoven for at lede efter deres hund, der var
løbet væk.
But the kid’s fine. They went to the woods to find
their dog...
We’ll go and talk to him.
13
61
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
14
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
13.9
Rottweiler ved navn Alice.
Alice the Rottweiler...
13.10
Og det gad ungen ikke.
The kid resisted.
13.11
Og hvad med vores dreng?
What about our kid?
13.12
21 henvendelser.
21 calls.
13.13
Ja, det er mest fra folk, der ikke har set naboen
søns i et stykke tid.
Mostly concerning neighbours’ sons.
13.14
Ja vi har tjekket de fleste, alle sammen negative.
We’ve checked most of them, all negative.
13.15
Vi mangler nogen få, der er bortrejst - det er
stadig efterårsferie.
A few people are away. It’s still school holidays.
13.16
Hvad sagde obduktionen?
What did the autopsy reveal?
13.17
Han er kvalt og seksuelt misbrugt.
Suffocation and sexual assault.
13.18
Men der er bevaret sæd, så vi kan lave en DNA.
With traces of semen for a DNA profile.
13.19
Hvad med rifterne?
And the scratches?
13.20
Dem har han fået efter, han var død.
Made after he died.
13.21
Og så havde han en torn i venstre håndled, det
stammer fra en brombærbusk.
He had a thorn in one wrist from a blackberry bush.
13.22
Der er ingen brombær på findestedet.
There are no blackberries there.
13.23
Og det er du sikker på?
Are you sure?
13.24
Jamen, jeg er slet ikke stødt på brombær i
området.
There aren’t any in that area.
13.25
Det understøtter din teori om, at han ikke er
dræbt på findestedet.
Supporting your theory he wasn’t killed there.
13.26
Og vi har heller ikke fundet nogen dækspor, eller
har vi?
We’ve found no tyre marks, or have we?
13.27
Nej, det tror jeg ikke. Jeg venter på at høre fra
teknikerne når som helst.
I don’t think so. I’m waiting on Forensics.
13.28
Okay, hvis der ikke er brugt en bil, hvordan er
dræbte så bragt derud?
Okay. Then how did the victim get there?
13.29
Den er halv tolv; skal vi ikke få noget søvn?
It’s 23.30. Shouldn’t we get some sleep?
14.1
Godmorgen
godmorgen
Good morning.
14.2
Hvad er klokken?
What time is it?
14.3
Den er lidt over otte.
Just after 8.
14.4
Det blev sent i aftes.
Late night?
14.5
Jeg tror, den blev 4 halv fem.
It was about 4 or 4.30.
62
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
15
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
14.6
Der var meget at læse.
There was a lot to read.
14.7
Hvordan går det?
How’s it going?
14.8
Teknikerne har stadigvæk ikke fundet noget ude i
skoven.
Forensics have found nothing in the woods.
14.9
Og drengen er dræbt et andet sted, det er jeg ret
sikker på. Jeg ved bare ikke hvor.
But the boy died somewhere else. I just don’t know
where.
14.10
Har I fundet ud af, hvem han er?
Do you know who he is?
14.11
Hvad er der?
What?
14.12
Jeg drømte om ham.
I dreamt about him.
14.13
Om drengen?
About the boy?
14.14
Han havde et navn.
He had a name.
14.15
Hvad hedder han?
What was it?
14.16
Jeg kan ikke huske det.
I can’t remember.
14.17
Der var os alt muligt andet.
There was... there was also something else...
14.18
Ja.
Yes
14.19
Nå, det er lige meget. Hvorfor er du oppe nu?
It doesn’t matter. Why are you up?
14.20
Jeg havde tænkt mig at tage tilbage til Holbæk,
og ordne alle bunkerne på mit skrivebord
I may go back to Holbæk to sort the piles on my
desk.
14.21
Det var da en hyggelig søndag.
Nice Sunday!
14.22
Har du noget bedre forslag?
Do you have a better idea?
14.23
Ja, det havde jeg jo håbet.
I was hoping to.
14.24
Du må undskylde det her.
Look, I’m sorry about this.
14.25
Det gør ikke noget.
It doesn’t matter.
14.26
Jeg kan i hvert fald køre dig så.
At least I can take you to the station.
14.27
Nej, jeg tager bare en taxa.
No, I’ll take a cab.
14.28
Nej, ved du hvad, jeg skal i gang alligevel.
I must get started anyway.
14.29
Nej, du skal blive liggende. du har kun sovet i 3
timer.
Stay in bed. You’ve hardly slept.
14.30
Jeg gider slet ikke høre på det der, jeg kører dig.
No way, I’ll take you.
15.1
Det kan jeg ikke, ikke på det grundlag.
No, not on that basis.
15.2
Jo, kom nu, du er eksperten.
Come on. You’re the expert.
15.3
Okay, så bliver det med alle forbehold.
Okay, but with every reservation.
63
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
16
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
15.4
Nej, ikke med nogen forbehold.
No, without reservations.
15.5
Jo, Thomas.
Yes, Thomas.
15.6
Okay, jeg vil tro, og jeg mener tro,
Okay... I think, and I mean think,
15.7
at jeres gerningsmand bor alene og formodentlig
er et ret kontrolleret menneske,
That your killer lives alone and probably is quite
controlled
15.8
hvor relæet pludselig kan slå fra.
but with a short fuse.
15.9
Og han har en meget begrænset omgangskreds.
He has a limited circle of friends.
15.10
og…
And...
15.11
og hvad?
And?
15.12
Og, at han har svært ved at få et forhold til en
voksen kvinde.
He finds it hard to relate to a mature woman.
15.13
Jeg er glad for det sidste.
I’m glad about the last part.
15.14
Du var lige ved at tro, at det var dig jeg talte om?
You thought I meant you?
16.1
Hvad sker der?
What’s happening?
16.2
Det var squ derhenne.
Over there.
16.3
Hvad?
What?
16.4
Thomas, hvad fanden sker der?
Thomas, what the hell’s going on?
16.5
Skal jeg selv gå ned til stationen, eller hvad?
Should I walk to the station, or what?
16.6
Hvad? Nej nej, undskyld.
No, no. Sorry.
16.7
Det var fuldstændig livagtigt.
It seemed completely real.
16.8
Den der kran var der, og affaldsposerne.
The crane was there, the garbage bags
16.9
Og papkasserne og det hele.
And the cardboard boxes, all of it.
16.10
Var hvor?
Was where?
16.11
I min drøm.
In my dream.
16.12
Du behøver ikke sige noget.
You don’t have to say anything.
16.13
Jamen, jeg siger heller ikke noget.
I haven’t.
16.14
Hvad fandt du i de der affaldsposer, i din drøm?
What did you find in those bags in your dream?
16.15
Den døde drengs rygsæk.
The dead boy’s backpack.
16.16
Jamen, var der noget i den?
Anything in it?
16.17
Ja
Yes
16.18
Hans sygesikringskort.
His health card
16.19
Thomas, jeg tror, du skal tage tilbage og sove et
Thomas, go back and sleep a bit more.
64
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
par timer mere.
17
16.20
Ja, nej, jeg skal squ på arbejde.
Yes... No, I have to work.
16.21
I de der bukser der?
In those pants?
17.1
Godmorgen
Godmorgen
Good morning.
17.2
Først Marienlyst, så direktørtider.
Luxury hotel, executive hours...
17.3
Hvor lang tid blev du ved i nat?
Work till late?
17.4
Nå, det var ikke så galt, men der er stadig ingen
tegn på en bil i skoven.
No. But still no sign of a car in the woods.
17.5
Hvad sker der her?
What’s up?
17.6
Det er noget vi lige har fået ind, det kan være
noget
Something came in. It could be important.
17.7
Det er en rygsæk
A backpack?
Yes.
17.8
Hvor er den fundet henne?
Where was it?
17.9
Havnen.
The harbour.
17.10
Hvor på havnen?
Whereabouts?
17.11
Det ved jeg da ikke lige præcis.
I’m not sure.
17.12
Hvad har vi i den? Lidt tøj, hvad siger
størrelsen?
What do we have? Some clothes. And what size?
17.13
Det passer meget godt.
It seems to fit.
17.14
En trøje.
A shirt.
17.15
Det er ikke det samme mærke.
Not the same brand.
17.16
Toilet sager
Toiletry...
17.17
En bog
A book...
17.18
Harry Potter, hvor der ikke står navn i.
Harry Potter... without any name in it.
17.19
Og så har vi en mobil telefon.
And we have a mobile phone.
17.20
Indtast pinkode, ja det er klart.
“Enter Pin.” Of course.
17.21
Det var det.
That’s it.
17.22
Det blev vi ikke meget klogere af.
We’re no wiser now.
17.23
Er der ikke et sygesikringskort?
No health card?
17.24
Næh.
Nope.
17.25
Hey, prøv lige at se, der må være et
There must be one somewhere.
65
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
sygesikringsbevis et eller andet sted.
18
17.26
Det var bare en tanke.
Just a thought.
17.27
Martin Simonsen
Martin Simonsen...
17.28
Stockholmsgade 22, Østerbro
22 Stockholm St. sterbro.
17.29
Han er 11½. Det kunne godt være vores dreng.
Eleven and a half. It could be our boy.
17.30
Lad os få det der til København.
Let’s get this to Copenhagen.
17.31
Jeg skal nok klare det.
I’ll do it.
18.1
Teknisk Afdeling, København
10.15 søndag 22. oktober
Forensics, Copenhagen
10.15, Sunday October 22
18.2
LaCour
LaCour.
18.3
Jeg savner dig.
I miss you.
18.4
Jeg skulle ikke være taget hjem. Jeg har lyst til at
tage tilbage.
I shouldn’t have left. I want to come back.
18.5
Jamen, det synes jeg, du skal gøre. Jeg beholder
bare værelset.
You should. I’ll keep the room.
18.6
Forstyrrer jeg?
Am I interrupting?
18.7
Er du midt i noget?
Are you busy?
18.8
Jeg er i København ude på teknisk afdeling.
No, I’m in Copenhagen. At Forensics.
18.9
Ved du, hvad de fandt tidligt i morges nede på
havnen? En barnerygsæk.
Know what they found today? A child’s backpack.
18.10
Det er løgn!
You’re kidding!
18.11
Hvad var der i den?
What was in it?
18.12
Der var det samme, som det jeg drømte.
Exactly what I dreamt.
18.13
Har du oplevet den slags før?
Has that happened before?
18.14
Ja, det har jeg faktisk.
Yes, it has.
18.15
For nylig på Fyn. Hvad tror du, det er?
Recently, on Funen. What could it be?
18.16
Du må have haft et klarsyn, det har psykologien
masser af eksempler på.
Must be a vision. Psychology has lots of examples.
18.17
Thomas, vi fatter jo højst en tiendedel af, hvad
der foregår i vores bevidsthed.
Thomas, we only grasp a tenth of what’s going on in
our minds.
18.18
Du må bare se sådan på det, du har fået en gave.
Look at it this way, you’ve got a gift.
18.19
Du tror ikke, jeg bare er ved at blive tosset?
I’m not going nuts?
18.20
Det sagde jeg ikke noget om.
I didn’t say that.
18.21
Det kan os være, det bare er en tilfældighed.
It could be a coincidence. It may not even be his
66
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
19
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
Måske er det slet ikke hans rygsæk
backpack.
18.22
Vi er i gang med at sammenligne fingeraftryk.
We’re comparing fingerprints.
18.23
Ved du hvad, jeg ringer tilbage, ikke?
I’ll call you back, okay?
19.1
Goddag
Good day.
19.2
Ulf?
Ulf?
19.3
Nåh?
Well?
19.4
Søndagshygge?
A cosy Sunday?
19.5
Nå ja
Right.
19.6
Hvordan går det?
How’s it going?
19.7
Vi har identificeret drengen.
Simonsen.
19.8
Han er 11 år, og kommer fra København.
Eleven years old, from Copenhagen.
19.9
Hvad har du der?
What’s that?
19.10
Det er Lasse-sagen. Jeg synes I skulle tage den
med i jeres overvejelser.
The Lasse case... I suggest you take it into consideration.
19.11
Du mener, det kunne være samme drabsmand?
You think it’s the same killer?
19.12
Det er en mulighed.
It’s a possibility.
19.13
Ulf, jeg ved godt hvor meget det plagede jer, at I
ikke fik knækket den sag.
Ulf, I know it haunted you, not solving...
19.14
Ja, det er to år siden. Forældrene ringer stadig til
mig.
It’s been two years. The parents still call me.
19.15
Jamen, det er jo slet ikke samme mønster.
It’s not the same MO.
19.16
Hvordan?
How so?
19.17
Ja for det første, Lasse blev knivdræbt og Martin
blev kvalt.
Lasse was stabbed and Martin was strangled.
19.18
De blev begge to seksuelt misbrugt
Both were sexually assaulted.
19.19
Lasse blev fundet i Nyborg og Martin i Helsingør
Lasse was found in Nyborg and Martin in Helsingør...
19.20
Jeg vil ikke desto mindre tillade mig at efterlade
den her.
Det er Martin
19.21
Det er også okay.
19.22
Okay, det var sødt af dig, tak.
19.23
Nå ja, vi har taget DNA tester i begge tilfælde.
19.24
Så det varer jo ikke så længe, før vi finder ud af,
om det er den samme.
We’ve ID’ed the boy... Martin Simonsen.
Nevertheless I’ll leave it here.
All right.
Okay, big of you. Thanks.
We’ve done DNA tests in both cases
so we’ll know if it’s the same man.
67
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
19.25
Men vi skal vel os ha underrettet hans forældre.
19.26
Det er sat i gang.
19.27
Hvem har du givet det muntre job?
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
You also have to inform his parents.
It’s happening.
Who’s got that cheerful task?
20
20.1
Ja
Dav mit navn er Thomas LaCour, er det Anne
Mette Simonsen?
Hi. I’m Thomas LaCour. Anne Mette Simonsen?
20.2
Ja
Yes.
20.3
Det er fra politiet.
I’m from the police.
20.4
Må jeg lige tale med dig et øjeblik?
Can I have a word with you?
20.5
Nåh undskyld, nu er jeg med.
Oh! Sorry, now I get it.
20.6
Kom bare indenfor.
Come in.
20.7
Tak.
Thanks.
20.8
Ja, jeg var gået i seng jeg har rejst hele natten,
Yes... I was in bed. I’ve been travelling all night.
20.9
og sovet elendigt i flyet.
I slept terribly on the plane.
20.10
Jeg var heller ikke klar over, I ville være så
hurtige - I har fundet den?
I didn’t know you’d be so quick. Did you find it?
20.11
Undskyld?
Excuse me?
20.12
Ja, min bil.
My car.
20.13
Har du meldt din bil stjålet?
You’ve reported it stolen?
20.14
Ja, den var der ikke, da jeg landede i morges.
Yes, it wasn’t at the airport this morning.
20.15
Ja, er det ikke derfor du er kommet?
Isn’t that why you came?
20.16
Er din mand hjemme?
Is your husband home?
20.17
Næh, jeg bor her alene med min søn.
No. I live alone with my son.
20.18
Lige nu er han hos sin far i Nordsjælland.
Right now he’s with his father up north.
20.19
Din søn hedder Martin?
Is your son’s name Martin?
20.20
Hvad er der sket?
What’s happened?
20.21
Martin har været udsat for en ulykke.
Martin’s been in an accident.
20.22
Hvad for en ulykke?
An accident?
20.23
Han blev fundet i en skov i går formiddags.
He was found in a forest yesterday at noon.
20.24
Hvad er det, du siger?
What are you saying?
20.25
Jeg er meget ked af at måtte fortælle dig, at
Martin er død.
I’m very sorry to tell you that Martin is dead.
68
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
21
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
20.26
Jamen, I har taget fejl. Martin er hos sin far
You must be mistaken. Martin is with his father...
20.27
i Ålsgårde.
In Ålsgårde.
20.28
Så tag dog den telefon.
Pick up the phone!
20.29
Jamen, jeg siger jo I har taget fejl.
I’m telling you, you’re wrong.
20.30
Det ville jeg ønske vi havde, men det har vi
desværre ikke.
I wish we were, but unfortunately we’re not.
21.1
Det kan squ godt være, Ingrid har ret i
Maybe Ingrid’s right
21.2
med sin berømte fornemmelse, at det ikke er den
samme drabsmand.
with her intuition that it’s not the same killer.
21.3
Ja.
Yes
21.4
Det er ellers et dejligt sted det her.
It’s nice here.
21.5
Hvordan går det ellers derhjemme?
How are things at home?
21.6
Det går udmærket.
Fine.
21.7
Hvornår har du sidst talt med Kirsten?
You’ve spoken to Kirsten?
21.8
Nå, har jeg nu os pligt til at meddele det?
You want a report on that too?
21.9
Nej selvfølgelig har du ikke det. Jeg har også
været meget i tvivl om, jeg skulle fortælle dig det
her.
Of course not. I wasn’t sure if I should tell you...
21.10
Hvis det er noget vedrørende min kone, er det
måske en meget god ide.
If it’s about my wife, you should.
21.11
Den forestilling, der blev aflyst i sidste uge.
That cancelled show...
21.12
Nåh, en kollega, der blev syg?
When someone got sick?
21.13
Det var Kirsten, hun var så beruset, at hun ikke
fik lov til at gå på scenen.
It was Kirsten. She was too drunk to perform.
21.14
Hvor har du det fra?
Where did you hear that?
21.15
Hun ringede til mig. Hun bad mig om at hente
hende.
She rang me to pick her up.
21.16
Hun sad på en bodega, hun var så kanon fuld, jeg
aldrig har set hende sådan før.
Pissed in a bar. I’ve never seen her like that.
21.17
Hun ringede til dig, hvorfor det?
She rang you? Why?
21.18
Ja, du var da for helvede i Odense.
You were in bloody Odense!
21.19
Jamen, så var det jo meget heldigt, du var i
nærheden.
Lucky you were close by!
21.20
Hun trænger til hjælp.
She needs help.
21.21
Hvis det her fortsætter,
så får hun sparket, så er det slut med den
If this continues...
She’ll be kicked out and her career finished.
69
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
karriere.
22
21.22
Inden du kommer for godt i gang; jeg har talt
med Kirsten i morges.
Before you start, I spoke to Kirsten this morning.
21.23
Forestillingen i aftes gik glimrende
Last night’s show was great.
21.24
Ikke glimrende. Tåleligt.
Not great. It was so-so.
21.25
Ja, jeg var der. Ja, hun kom igennem, bevares,
når man kender hende, sådan som jeg gør.
I was there. She got through it, but if you know her as
I do...
21.26
Nå, når man kender hende, sådan som du gør,
hvad så?
If I know her like you do, then what?
21.27
Du hjalp mig, da jeg mistede min kone.
You helped me when I lost my wife.
21.28
Jeg vil gøre alt for at hjælpe Kirsten.
I’d do anything to help Kirsten.
21.29
Ja, det er efterhånden gået op for mig.
Yes, I’m starting to realise.
21.30
Forstår du for helvede ikke, at det er dig hun har
brug for?
Don’t you get it? She needs you!
21.31
Forstå det dog.
Wake up!
22.1
Er i sikker på at I er parate til det her
Are you sure you’re ready for this?
22.2
Først og fremmest, så skal vi danne os et billede
First of all... we have to create a scenario
22.3
af, hvad Martin foretog sig op til det tidspunkt,
hvor han mødte manden.
of what Martin was doing before he met the man.
22.4
Forrige fredag, da efterårsferien startede,
The Friday before last when the holidays started...
22.5
der tog Martin til Odense for at besøge Rasmus
og hans familie.
Martin went to Odense to visit Rasmus and his family.
22.6
Martin har gået i klasse med Rasmus, indtil han
flyttede til Fyn
Martin was in the same class as Rasmus... until he
moved.
22.7
Rejste Martin alene?
Did he go by himself?
22.8
Jamen, det havde han jo gjort før.
Yes, he’d done it before.
22.9
Han var jo også vant til at tage op og besøge sin
far.
He used to visit his father.
22.10
Hvor lang tid skulle Martin være i Odense?
How long was he staying in Odense?
22.11
Bare til søndag eftermiddag.
Until Sunday afternoon.
22.12
Rasmus’ forældre har fortalt os at hele familien
satte Martin på toget med afgang med Odense
søndag kl. 17.47.
Rasmus’ parents told us that they put Martin on the
train
which left Odense on Sunday at 17.47.
22.13
Jamen det var også det, vi havde aftalt og så
Yes, that’s what we’d agreed on. And then...
22.14
var det så meningen,
The idea was...
22.15
at vi skulle holde efterårsferie sammen,
to spend the holiday together, but...
70
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
22.16
men så kom der noget i vejen.
then something came up.
22.17
Jeg
I...
22.18
er ansat i Røde Kors,
Work for the Red Cross.
22.19
og vi kan blive kaldt ud med meget kort varsel, så
We can be called on at short notice. Then...
22.20
søndag eftermiddag,
Sunday afternoon...
22.21
spurgte de, om jeg ku flyve til Geneve.
They asked if I could fly to Geneva.
22.22
Så jeg prøvede at ringe til Rasmus’ forældre,
I tried to call Rasmus’s parents
22.23
men de var åbenbart på vej til toget.
but they must have been on the way to the train.
22.24
Så
Then...
22.25
ringede jeg til Martins mobil telefon, men han
havde
I called Martin’s mobile but he had...
22.26
slukket for telefonen, fordi han gerne ville spare
på batteriet.
He’d turned his phone off to save the battery.
Then I...
22.27
Jeg indtalte en besked på hans telefonsvarer, og
sagde, at
left a message on his voice mail to say that I had to...
22.28
jeg blev nødt til at rejse et par dage,
22.29
og at jeg havde snakket med min mor og at han
bare ku tage derud.
22.30
Det var meningen, jeg bare sku være væk i et par
dage.
because I’d only be away for a couple of days.
22.31
Hørte du fra Martin?
Did Martin ring back?
22.32
Ja, han ringede, da jeg var i bad,
Yes, while I was in the shower.
22.33
og så indtalte han så en besked på min svarer,
He left a message on my machine...
22.34
at han havde talt med sin far,
Saying that he’d spoken to his father
22.35
og det netop var så heldigt, at Steen var i
København
and that it was lucky Steen was in Copenhagen
22.36
Så derfor så kunne han tage med ham hjem til
Ålsgårde i stedet.
so he could take him to his place.
22.37
For så sagde han, at jeg bare kunne ringe til min
mor og sige, han ikke kom.
He said to tell my mother he wasn’t coming.
22.38
Jamen, hvorfor ringede du ikke og tjekkede det?
Why didn’t you call to check?
22.39
Fordi jeg troede på ham.
Because I believed him.
22.40
Jeg var på vej til lufthavnen, og taxaen ventede.
I was about to leave, the taxi was waiting...
go away for a couple of days
and that I’d spoken to my mother and he could stay
there
71
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
22.41
Jamen, har du ikke en mobiltelefon?
Don’t you have a mobile?
22.42
Jo, jeg har en mobil telefon.
Yes, I do.
22.43
Jamen, hvorfor ringede du så ikke?
So why didn’t you call me?
22.44
Fordi det altid er til ulejlighed, når man ringer til
dig.
It’s always inconvenient.
22.45
Hvad fanden mener du?
What the hell do you mean?
22.46
Jamen Steen, jeg orker ikke det her, vel?
Steen, I’m not up to this.
22.47
Og Martin hadede, når man pylrede om ham.
And Martin hated being mollycoddled.
22.48
Det gør børn jo i den alder.
All kids that age do.
22.49
Den søndag, var du hjemme den søndag?
Were you home that Sunday?
22.50
Vi var i Sverige fra om lørdagen i vores nye hus,
We were in Sweden from Saturday onwards.
22.51
men jeg havde min mobiltelefon tændt hele tiden.
But my mobile was on all the time.
22.52
Og Martin kendte det nummer?
And Martin knew the number?
22.53
Selvfølgelig.
Of course.
22.54
Men du hørte ikke fra ham?
But he didn’t ring?
22.55
Nej.
No.
22.56
Hvad gjorde du, da du fik beskeden om, at
Martin havde en aftale med sin far?
What did you do when you got Martin’s message?
22.57
Jeg ringede og aflyste min mor.
I cancelled the arrangement with my mother.
22.58
Så ringede jeg fra Geneve, og fik igen fat i
Then I called from Geneva and again I got his...
22.59
hans telefonsvarer.
his voice mail.
22.60
Kan du huske hvornår du ringede?
Do you remember when you rang?
22.61
Søndag…
Sunday...
22.62
Jeg ved det ikke.
I don’t know.
22.63
Er det vigtigt?
Is it important?
22.64
Ja, for Martin har ikke nået at aflytte den besked,
Yes. Martin never heard that message.
22.65
så det kan give os en fornemmelse af, hvornår
han mødte manden.
It could give us an idea of when he met the man.
22.66
Jeg ved det ikke.
I don’t know...
22.67
Ville det hjælpe, hvis du hørte din egen besked?
Would it help to hear your message?
22.68
Ja, måske.
Yes, maybe.
22.69
Har i den?
Have you got it?
72
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
22.70
Ja, for vi har fundet Martins mobil,
Yes, we found Martin’s mobile.
22.71
det er lykkedes os at åbne den.
We managed to access it.
22.72
Ja, skal vi høre det?
Yes... should we hear it?
22.73
Ja.
Yes.
22.74
Hej Martin, det er mor.
Hi, Martin. It’s Mum.
22.75
Jeg håber, du rigtig hygger dig oppe hos din far.
Hope you’re having a nice time with your dad.
22.76
Nu skal du høre; jeg er nødt til at flyve videre til
Somalia, og kommer desværre først hjem på
søndag.
I have to fly to Somalia. I won’t be back before Sunday.
22.77
Men jeg har talt med mormor.
I’ve spoken to Grandma.
22.78
Du skal bare ringe til hende, hvis du ikke kan
blive hos din far.
Call her if you can’t stay with your father.
22.79
Jeg er ked af det, men det er en rigtig dum
verden, vi lever i nogle gange.
I’m sorry, but it’s a stupid world we live in.
22.80
Ha’ det nu rigtig godt min skat. Jeg glæder mig
til at se dig igen.
Take care, sweetie. Can’t wait to see you.
22.81
Kys kys.
Kiss. Kiss.
22.82
Det er fandeme utroligt.
Bloody incredible!
22.83
Du har været væk i en uge, og det eneste du taler
med, er en telefonsvarer.
You go away for a week and only talk to an answering machine.
22.84
Kunne du for helvede ikke have ringet hjem fra
Somalia og tjekket, om han var kommet frem?
Why didn’t you ring to check?
22.85
Tror du ikke også, jeg prøvede det?
Don’t you think I tried?
22.86
Nej, ved du hvad, det tror jeg fandeme ikke du
gjorde. Du har så travlt med at frelse verden.
I don’t bloody think so! You’re too busy saving the
world!
22.87
Skal vi holde en pause nu?
How about a break?
22.88
Hvorfor tror du Martin ikke først ringede til dig?
Why didn’t Martin call you first?
22.89
Hvorfor tror du, han ville overraske dig?
Why did he want to surprise you?
22.90
Jamen, det har jeg da ikke nogen anelse om.
I wouldn’t have a clue.
22.91
Fordi han aldrig kunne lave en aftale med dig du har brændt ham af de sidste tre gange.
The last three times you’ve let him down.
22.92
Han troede, du ikke var interesseret i ham.
He thought you didn’t care about him.
22.93
Det er fandeme løgn
That’s a bloody lie!
22.94
Hvorfor tror du, Martin kunne finde på at gå med
en fremmed mand?
Why do you think he’d go off with a stranger?
22.95
Hvad tror du, en 11 år dreng savner mest i
What does an eleven-year-old miss most in the
73
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
23
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
verden?
world?
23.1
Rigspolitiets Rejseafd.
14.07 søndag 22. oktober
Police Headquarters
14.07, Sunday October 22
23.2
Ja, det er mig
Yes, it’s me.
23.3
Jeg har lige fået svar på DNA’en.
I just got the DNA result.
23.4
Det er samme gerningsmand. Er du der?
Same perpetrator. You there?
23.5
Ja ja, jeg er her - det må jeg sige.
Yes, yes, I’m here. I must say...
23.6
Så havde du ret, jeg tog fejl.
You were right. I was wrong.
23.7
Undskyld, hvad sagde du?
Excuse me... What was that?
23.8
Jeg sagde, jeg tog fejl.
I said I was wrong.
23.9
Jeg tror lige, jeg sætter et kryds i min dagbog.
I’ll put a mark in my diary.
23.10
Jeg har forstået, Martin stod på toget i Odense.
I know Martin got on the train at Odense.
23.11
Jeg ved ikke, om du har haft stunder til at øje
Lasse-sagen?
Have you looked into the Lasse case?
23.12
Nej, det må jeg indrømme.
I must admit, no.
23.13
Så er det nok på tide.
Then it’s about time.
23.14
Ja, det har du nok ret i.
Yes, you’re probably right. Yes, bye.
23.15
Hej.
Bye.
23.16
Okay, så står vi med et dobbeltdrab.
Okay, we have a double murder case.
23.17
DNA-profilen passer også på Lasses morder.
The DNA matches Lasse’s murderer.
23.18
Og så påpegede Ulf et interessant sammenfald,
både Lasse og Martin stod på toget i Odense.
Ulf pointed out that both boys got on the train at
Odense.
23.19
Det er faktisk rigtigt.
That’s actually right.
23.20
Så, Fischer du skal en tur til Fyn.
So... Fischer, you’re going to Funen.
23.21
Tag en snak med togpersonalet. Vi er interesseret
i passagerer, der kører regelmæssigt på ruten.
Ask railway staff about regular travellers on the
route.
23.22
Spørgsmålet er, hvor langt han nåede.
The question is, how far he got.
23.23
Og så sandsynligheden taler for, at han er dræbt
allerede søndag aften før 22.10,
It seems he was dead by 22.10 on Sunday
23.24
da han ikke har aflyttet morens sidste besked.
without hearing his mother’s message.
23.25
Så vi står altså med et interval fra 17.47, da han
står på toget i Odense
So we have an interval from 17.47 when he got on
the train
23.26
til 22.10, da moren ringer forgæves.
to 22.10 when his mother rang in vain.
74
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
24
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
23.27
Og for at komme til sin far i Ålsgårde,
To get to his father’s,
så skal han skifte tog på
Hovedbanegård til Kystbanen,
He had to change trains at Copenhagen
23.28
23.29
og igen i Helsingør.
and again at Helsingør.
23.30
Hvor lang nåede han? Mødte han sin drabsmand
i toget? Eller mødte han ham,
How far did he get? Did he meet his killer on the
train or...
mens han ventede på at skifte? Det skal vi have
fundet ud af.
while he was waiting to change trains?
23.31
23.32
Hold kæft, hvor ser du smadret ud!
You look wasted!
Ja, det er bedst, du tager hen på hotellet og tager
et par timer. Jeg tager det.
Yes. It’s best you get a bit of sleep. I’ll do it.
23.33
23.34
Nej nej, hold op. Det kan jeg sagtens.
No, no. Forget it IP. It’s not a problem.
24.1
Ja?
Klaus Munk Andersen
Klaus Munk Andersen?
24.2
Ja.
Yes.
24.3
Thomas LaCour, Rigspolitiets Rejsehold. Har du
tid et øjeblik?
Thomas LaCour, Homicide. Have you got a minute?
24.4
Ja naturligvis.
Yes, of course.
24.5
Man har fortalt mig, det var dig, der kørte toget
sidste søndag aften.
You were driving the train last Sunday night?
24.6
Ja, det er korrekt.
Yes, that’s correct.
24.7
Ja
Right.
24.8
Kan du så huske, om den her dreng var med?
Do you remember if... this boy was on the train?
24.9
Er det ham, de fandt i skoven?
The one found in the woods?
24.10
Ja, han hedder Martin.
Yes. His name was Martin.
24.11
Nej
No.
24.12
Han steg på toget i Odense kl. 17.47. Han skulle
til Ålsgårde.
He got the 17.47 train to Ålsgårde.
24.13
17.47? Så skal han skifte i København,
17.47? he’d have had to change at Copenhagen.
24.14
og det er på Hovedbanen 19.18,
It gets to Central at 19.18.
24.15
og toget mod Helsingør afgår 3 min senere
The train to Helsingør departs three minutes later
24.16
med ankomst 20.12.
and arrives at 20.12.
24.15
Det vil sige, så skulle han være taget herfra
21.00?
that means he should have left here at 21.00?
24.16
Ja.
Yes.
Københavns
75
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
25
24.17
Og du siger sidste søndag aften 21.00?
You say last Sunday night at 21.00?
24.18
Den her dreng.
This boy.
24.19
Nej, der var ikke nogen med.
No. There was nobody.
24.20
Der var ikke nogen med - slet ikke nogen?
Nobody? No one at all?
24.21
Det er ikke usædvanligt tidligt søndag aften.
It’s not unusual on a Sunday evening.
24.22
Der var nogle unge mennesker, der stod på i
Hellebæk 21.13.
Some young people got on at Hellebæk at 21.13
24.23
Men ja, de var de første.
But they were the first ones.
24.24
Hvad tid kører du?
When do you depart?
24.25
Om søndagen altid klokken hel.
On Sundays, on the hour.
24.26
Hvad med billet?
What about a ticket?
24.27
Den trækker du i toget.
You get it on the train.
24.28
Nå, jamen tak skal du have.
Well, thanks.
25.1
25.2
26
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
Toilet locked for health reasons
Brombær
26.1
Blackberries!
LOCATION OF CORPSE
26.2
Smidt af toget?
Thrown off the train?
26.3
Ja.
Yes.
26.4
Gerningsmanden smider liget af toget. Det
havner i brombærkrattet.
The killer throws the body out. It ends up in the
blackberries.
26.5
Senere går han tilbage, og samler det op,
Later he walks back, picks it up
26.6
og bærer det de 200 meter ned til åen.
and carries it 200 metres to the stream.
Og det besvarer faktisk de tre spørgsmål vi har
haft.
That answers our three questions.
26.7
Hvorfor vi ikke har fundet nogen dækspor,
drengens rifter,
Why there were no tyre marks, the boy’s bruises
26.8
26.7
og brombærtornen
and the blackberry thorn.
26.8
Jamen, hvordan skulle det kunne lade sig gøre
Is that possible?
Jeg mener dørene kan vel slet ikke åbnes, mens
toget kører?
Do the doors even open while the train’s moving?
26.9
26.10
Næh, det tror jeg ikke.
I don’t think so.
26.11
Jamen så skulle det jo have holdt stille.
Unless it had stopped.
26.12
Kan det lade sig gøre?
Is that possible?
76
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
27
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
26.13
Næh..
No...
26.14
Med mindre togføreren selv er involveret.
Unless the driver was involved.
26.15
For øjnene af alle passagererne?
In front of the passengers?
26.16
Han fortalte mig, at der ikke var nogen
passagerer på den afgang før Hellebæk
He told me there were no passengers before Hellebæk.
Men det kan jo godt være, at der har været én
passager, Martin.
But there could have been one... Martin.
26.17
26.18
Hvad hedder den togfører?
What’s the driver’s name?
26.19
Klaus Munk Andersen
Klaus Munk Andersen.
26.20
Næh, vi har ikke noget på ham.
No, there’s nothing on him.
26.21
Jeg synes, den virker lidt tynd.
It seems a bit flimsky
26.22
Jeg synes, vi skal få ham ind og få en snak med
ham.
Let’s get him in for a chat.
27.1
Odense Politigård
15.40 søndag 22. oktober
Odense Police Station
15.40, Sunday October 22
27.2
Hej.
Hi!
27.3
Hej Ida.
Hi, Ida.
27.4
Tak for sidst.
Thanks for the last time.
27.5
Selv tak.
My pleasure.
27.6
Nå, der står en gift kvinde, hvad? Hvordan gik
det?
A married woman! How did it go?
27.7
Uforglemmeligt.
Unforgettable.
27.8
Hvad laver du her? Er i ikke på den sag med ham
drengen i Helsingør?
Aren’t you working on the Helsingør case?
27.9
Jo, men han stod på et tog her i Odense.
Yes, but the boy got on the train here so...
27.10
Så jeg skal ned og snakke med en togdame.
I’m seeing a rail employee
27.11
De har sådan nogle specielle afgange i
weekenden, hvor børnene er under opsyn, hvis de
rejser alene.
about supervised trips for kids travelling alone.
27.12
Børn på skilsmissetoget.
The “divorce train”?
27.13
Ja, nå…
Well...
27.14
Ja.
Yes.
27.15
Hej.
Bye.
27.16
Hej, og så hils Flemming.
Yes, bye. Say hi to Flemming.
77
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
28
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
27.17
Jeg tror ikke, jeg snakker med ham.
I may not see him.
27.18
Den tror jeg lige, jeg skal ha igen, hvad siger du?
Could you run that by me again?
27.19
Da jeg nåede hjem til silkeborg efter, ja..
When I got back to Silkeborg after...
27.20
Flemming havde jo ventet mig dagen før, så han
spurgte selvfølgelig, hvorfor jeg var blevet en nat
til.
He’d been waiting and asked why I’d stayed over.
27.21
Det fortalte du ham ikke.
You told him?
27.22
Jo.
Yes.
27.23
Jeg gider ikke starte mit ægteskab med en løgn.
Can’t start marriage with a lie.
27.24
Det er det dummeste, jeg nogensinde har hørt
Ida.
That’s really stupid, Ida.
27.25
Han tog det faktisk meget pænt.
He took it quite well.
27.26
Men hvad?
But?
27.27
Han dukkede bare ikke op i kirken.
He didn’t turn up at the church.
27.28
Det er løgn!
You’re kidding!
27.29
Så vi stod med 200 gæster og værelser på
forskellige hoteller og kroer i byen
We were stuck with 200 guests and rooms at various
hotels.
27.30
Okay, ej det er jo ikke sjovt.
Okay. Sorry, it’s not funny.
27.31
Det er en god historie.
It’s a good story.
27.32
Jeg er også ret enig med dig - min far er mere
forbeholden.
I agree. My father wouldn’t.
27.33
Han havde lånt 125.000 i banken til at betale
gildet.
He’d borrowed 125,000 for the do.
27.34
Ej, prøv lige at hør’..
No. Listen...
27.35
Jamen, det er jeg ked af, men det var ligesom ikke
mig, der havde fortalt ham det, vel?
I’m sorry... Although I’m not the one who told him.
27.36
Skal du tilbage allerede i aften?
Are you going back tonight?
27.37
Jah, det bliver jeg nok nødt til.
I think I have to.
28.1
Tak, fordi du vil være med til at afklare nogen
ting for os.
Thanks for coming in.
28.2
Min vagt var lige afsluttet, så det er da helt i
orden.
My shift just finished so it’s okay.
28.3
Dette er en afhøring af Klaus Munk Andersen.
Interrogation of Klaus Munk Andersen.
28.4
Det er søndag den 22. oktober og klokken er
20.19.
Sunday, October 22. The time is 20.19.
28.5
Tilstede er KA Thomas LaCour,
DI Thomas LaCour
78
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
28.6
og undertegnede KK Ingrid Dahl.
and chief of Homicide Ingrid Dahl present.
28.7
Vi tror, Martin blev kastet af toget efter, han var
dræbt.
We think Martin was thrown off the train after he was
killed.
28.8
Kastet af toget? Det var dog forfærdeligt!
Thrown off the train? That’s horrible!
28.9
Hvilket tog?
Which train?
28.10
Dit, altså Hornbæk Banen.
Yours... The Hornbæk Line.
28.11
Jamen, det forstår jeg ikke.
I don’t understand.
28.12
Altså den dreng, du viste mig forleden,
The boy you showed me
28.13
han var ikke med fra Helsingør sidste søndag
21.00.
wasn’t on the train last Sunday at 21.00.
28.14
Det er du helt sikker på?
You’re completely sure?
28.15
Ja
Yes.
28.16
Men toget holder jo en pause på Helsingør
station.
But the train stops for a while at Helsingør.
28.17
Hvad laver du der?
What do you do?
28.18
Nå men, jeg plejer at læse lidt avis,
Well, I usually read the paper,
28.19
og spise min madpakke, og sådan.
have a bite to eat and so on.
28.20
Kunne Martin så ikke være steget på, uden du
havde bemærket det?
Could he get on unnoticed?
28.21
Ja for en anden sags skyld kunne en anden
person vel også være steget på?
And if so, could someone else get on too?
28.22
Joh altså, det kan jeg selvfølgelig ikke helt
udelukke.
Yes, I... I can’t rule it out entirely.
28.23
I mener vel ikke at drengen er dræbt i mit tog,
mens jeg selv har kørt det og så kastet ud?
Are you suggesting the boy was killed and thrown off
my train?
28.24
Ej, det var dog forfærdeligt.
That’s horrible.
28.25
Stakkels dreng
Poor boy.
28.26
Har du selv børn?
Do you have kids?
28.27
Nej, desværre.
Sadly, no.
28.28
Er du gift?
Are you married?
28.29
Nej.
No.
28.30
Måske en kæreste?
A girlfriend?
28.31
Ikke lige for tiden.
Not at the moment.
28.32
Men du har haft?
But previously?
79
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
29
30
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
28.33
Ja, selvfølgelig.
Yes, of course.
28.34
Er det en vi kunne få lov til at tale med, tror du?
Can we talk to her?
28.35
Hvorfor det?
Why?
28.36
Undskyld, men kan man overhovedet åbne dørene
i toget under kørslen, uden at du ville bemærke
det?
Can a door open on a moving train without you noticing?
28.37
Nej, det er selvfølgelig rigtigt, det kan man ikke.
No, that’s right. You can’t do that.
28.38
Så du mener altså alligevel ikke, at Martin kan
være smidt af toget?
So Martin couldn’t have been thrown off?
28.39
Nej, det må jeg nok indrømme.
No. I must admit...
28.40
Med mindre selvfølgelig, at du selv har gjort det?
Unless you did it yourself?
28.41
Hvadbehager?
I beg your pardon?
28.42
Ja, jeg siger, hvis der ikke var andre passagerer,
så kunne du jo selv have standset toget og smidt
Martin af.
If there were no other passengers you could have
thrown him off.
28.43
Gjorde du det?
Did you?
28.44
Smed du Martin af toget?
Did you throw him off?
28.45
Altså, hvad er det, du siger?
What?
28.46
Jeg spørger dig, om du dræbte Martin, og smed
ham af toget bagefter?
I’m asking if you killed Martin and threw him off the
train.
28.47
I beder mig om at komme her og hjælpe jer, og så
skal jeg høre på det der?
You ask me to come and help and now I have to
listen to this.
28.48
Klokken er 20.23, og afhøring afbrydes.
It’s 20.23. Interrogation suspended.
29.1
Vi har lige hørt fra Fischer, togdamen kunne godt
huske, at Martin var kørt med fra Odense.
Fischer rang. A train driver saw Martin at Odense.
29.2
Ja okay, var det bare det?
That’s all?
29.3
Nej, Fischer spurgte også, om det var hende, der
havde kørt med Lasse dengang.
No. Fischer asked her if she’d had Lasse on her train.
29.4
Det var det ikke, det var derimod en mandlig
kollega, men hun kunne ikke huske navnet.
She hadn’t. It was a male driver whose name she’s
forgotten.
29.5
Hun kunne derimod godt huske, at han var flyttet
til Nordsjælland.
But she remembered that he’d moved up north.
29.6
Vi fandt ham i Lasse-sagen, som togfører, blev
han rutinemæssigt afhørt dengang.
He was questioned in the Lasse case
because he was a train driver.
29.7
Hans navn er Klaus Munk Andersen.
His name is... Klaus Munk Andersen.
30.1
Klokken er 20.23 og afhøring fortsættes.
It’s 20.23. Interrogation resumed.
80
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
30.2
Du har tidligere kørt på strækningen OdenseKøbenhavn?
You used to work the Odense-Copenhagen line?
30.3
Ja, det er korrekt.
Correct.
30.4
Du var faktisk togfører på det tog Lasse kørte
med.
You drove the train Lasse was on.
30.5
Du kan godt huske den dreng, der blev dræbt for
godt og vel 2 år siden?
Remember the boy who was killed two years ago?
30.6
Ja, selvfølgelig ja.
Yes, of course.
30.7
Og nu har du kørt et tog med en anden lille
dreng, der er blevet dræbt.
Now you’ve driven a train where another boy‘s been
killed.
30.8
Jeg har ikke kørt med Martin, det har jeg jo
allerede sagt.
Martin wasn’t on my train. I’ve already said that.
30.9
Men Klaus i Lasse..
But Klaus, the Lasse...
30.10
Nej vent lige lidt…
Hold on! Hold on!
30.11
Ved du, hvad jeg tror, Klaus?
Know what I think, Klaus?
30.12
Jeg tror Martin sidder og venter, da dit tog kører
ind.
Martin’s waiting when you pull up.
30.13
Jeg har ikke set ham.
I didn’t see him.
30.14
Nej, det er meget godt.
Right.
30.15
Helt nøjagtigt, hvor længe holder toget?
How long is the train there?
30.16
21 min.
21 minutes.
30.17
21 min?
21 minutes?
30.18
Det er sørme lang tid, der kan man godt nå at
komme i snak med en lille dreng.
A long time. Long enough to start chatting with a
young boy.
30.19
Er han nem at komme i kontakt med? Spørger du,
om han vil se styrehuset?
Is it easy? You ask if he wants to see the driver’s
cabin?
30.20
Det plejer at være meget spændende for drenge i
hans alder.
That’s usually exciting for boys that age.
30.21
Skal han så op at sidde på skødet, så han bedre
kan se instrumenterne?
He has to sit on your lap to see the instruments?
30.22
Jeg ved ikke, hvad det er du taler om.
I don’t know what you mean.
30.23
Nå, men så kan jeg hjælpe dig lidt.
I’ll help you.
30.24
Jeg taler om ham her, Martin Simonsen.
I’m talking about this boy... Martin Simonsen.
30.25
Han nåede at blive 11½, det er ham, jeg taler om.
Just eleven and a half. That’s who.
30.26
Skal han så tisse, Klaus?
Does he have to pee, Klaus?
30.27
Hvad, nej?
Well?
81
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
31
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
30.28
Var det ude på toilettet det skete?
It happened in the toilet?
30.29
Jeg har ikke set ham.
I didn’t see him.
30.30
Hvad går der galt? Begynder han at skrige eller
græder han?
What goes wrong? Does he scream of cry?
30.31
Eller hvordan reagerer han?
How does he react?
30.32
Hvad?
Huh?
30.33
Hvad så bagefter, så lader du ham ligge ude på
gulvet ude på toilettet, og låser døren.
And afterwards, you leave him on the floor and lock
the door.
30.34
Hvorfor bliver du ved?
You never quit?
30.35
Og standser toget og smider ham ud, gjorde du
det?
You stop the train, throw him out. Did you do that?
30.36
Hvis han er kommet med toget fra København,
If he’d some from Copenhagen,
30.37
så har han været på stationen i 26 min., før jeg
kører ind.
He’d have been at the station for 26 minutes.
30.38
Han kan jo have mødt hvem som helst der
He could have met...
30.39
Vi stopper.
Let’s stop.
30.40
Nej vent lige lidt, du svarer ikke på det, jeg
spørger dig om.
Wait! You’re not answering...
30.41
Vi stopper.
We’re stopping.
30.42
Vi skal bare lige have en blodprøve.
We just need a blood sample.
30.43
En blodprøve? Hvorfor det?
A blood sample? Why?
30.44
Så behøver vi ikke forstyrre dig mere, men det
har du vel ikke noget imod, eller?
So we don’t bother you again. Do you mind?
30.45
Nej, nej
No.
30.46
Bare vent her, så kommer der en læge.
Okay. Wait here for a doctor.
30.47
Klokken er 20.29, og afhøringen afsluttes
It’s 20.29. Interrogation terminated.
31.1
Hold kæft, hvor har vi fået mange henvendelser
Damn! The phone’s been running hot
31.2
efter at TV Avisen fortalte,
since it was announced on TV
31.3
at både Martin og Lasses morder var den samme,
og de måske begge har mødt deres drabsmand i
toget. Telefonerne har ikke stået stille.
that both Martin and Lasse were killed by the same
man.
31.4
Ej, men vi har vores mand nu.
We’ve got him.
31.5
Nå?
Well?
31.4
Måske.
Maybe.
82
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
32
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
31.5
Togføreren fra Hornbæk Banen.
The driver on the Hornbæk Line.
31.6
Der er ellers adskillige, der har set drengen stå af
kystbanetoget i Espergærde.
Several people saw the boy get off the train at
Espergærde.
31.7
Jah, men vi anholder ham, ikke?
Yes. But we are arresting him?
31.8
Ej, hør nu lige her.
Hang on.
31.9
Vi har ikke fået en eneste henvendelse om, at
drengen rent faktisk er nået til Helsingør.
Not one call suggested the boy made it to Helsingør.
31.10
Nej men vi skal selvfølgelig have tjekket alle
henvendelser først.
We must check the calls first.
31.11
Hvorfor skal vi det? Hvorfor skal vi spilde vores
tid med det?
Why waste time on that?
31.12
Han løber ingen vegne.
He won’t disappear.
31.13
Dav, hvis du kommer med mig.
If you’d follow me.
31.14
Vi tager hans DNA, og så lader vi ham gå.
LaCour, gå nu hjem og sov.
Get his DNA and release him. LaCour, go home and
sleep.
31.15
Ja, skal vi se at komme i gang jeg er nødt til at
køre hjem i aften.
Let’s start. I must get home.
31.16
Godnat.
Good night.
32.1
Hvad er det?
What’s this?
32.2
Ja, det fremgår som alt tydelighed.
It should be obvious.
32.3
Det må være din spøg!
You’re joking!
32.4
Næh
No.
32.5
Antabus det er jo latterligt.
Antabuse is for alcoholics!
32.6
Jeg har talt med Ulf.
I spoke to Ulf.
32.7
Er det mindre ydmygende, hvis du skal tage
pillen oppe på teaterchefens kontor?
You’d rather take it in front of the theatre director?
32.8
Det ville han aldrig gøre mod mig.
He’d never do that to me.
32.9
Jens, jeg kan ikke.
Jens, I can’t.
32.10
Jeg skal spille i aften.
I’m performing tonight.
32.11
Det er kun et lille glas.
It’s... it’s only a small glass.
32.12
Ja, det kalder du det jo.
Yes, that’s what you call it.
32.13
Behøver jeg at jokke rundt i, hvorfor de ikke
ønskede dig længere inde på folketeatret?
We both know why you’re no longer at the People’s
Theatre.
32.14
Det har jo ikke noget med det at gøre.
That has nothing to do with this.
32.15
Jeg har fået nok af alt det rod
I’ve had enough!
83
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
33
34
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
32.16
Vi skulle have gjort det her for længst, det havde
sparet os begge to for meget.
We should have done this a long time ago.
32.17
Jens, Jens.
Jens... Jens...
32.18
Hvis ikke du tager den pille, så går jeg fra dig.
If you don’t take that pill... I’ll leave you.
33.1
Briefing, Helsingør
07.55 mandag 23. oktober
Briefing, Helsingør
07.55, Monday October 23
33.2
Jeg kan ikke forstå, jeg ikke kan få fat i Tobias.
Why can’t I reach Tobias?
33.3
Han lovede at ringe.
He promised he’d call.
33.4
Har du lagt en besked på telefonsvareren?
Did he leave a message?
33.5
Godmorgen.
Good morning.
33.6
Det er Ingrid.
Ingrid here.
33.7
Nå, hun var glad for at se dig?
Was she happy to see you?
33.8
Ja såmen, hvor er LaCour?
Yes, she was. Where’s LaCour?
33.9
Jamen, der er vist også en, der er glad for at se
ham.
Someone’s happy to see him too.
33.10
Nå, for sent igen to dage i træk?
Late again? Two days in a row?
33.11
Ja, men til gengæld har han ikke været syg i 5 år,
så det går nok, tror du ikke?
He hasn’t been sick in five years.
33.12
Tak skal du have, Jan.
Thanks.
33.13
Dna’en er positiv, det er Klaus.
The DNA confirms it’s Klaus.
33.14
Så lad os komme af sted.
Then let’s go.
34.1
Hey, hvorfor ligger du der?
Why are you lying there?
34.2
Hvad er klokken?
What time is it?
34.3
Halv to
1.30.
34.4
Er du syg?
Are you sick?
34.5
Jeg fik det lidt dårligt,
I felt a bit strange...
34.6
der efter jeg havde kørt Helene til toget.
after I took Helene to the train.
34.7
Du havde ret.
You were right.
34.8
Det var Klaus.
It was Klaus.
34.9
Nå okay.
Okay.
34.10
Han er død.
He’s dead.
34.11
Det skulle ligne et selvmord,
It looked like suicide
84
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
34.12
men han var død, da han blev klynget op.
but he was dead when he was strung up.
34.13
Thomas, hvor har du det slag fra?
Thomas... where did you get that bruise?
34.14
Hvad lavede du, efter du kørte Helene til toget?
What did you do after you dropped Helene off?
34.15
Det kan jeg ikke huske - det kan jeg ikke huske.
I can’t remember... I... can’t remember.
34.16
Jeg kan huske, at jeg tænkte, at Klaus måske var
stukket af.
I remember thinking that maybe Klaus had run off.
34.17
Har du nogen sinde været ude i Klaus’ hjem?
Have you ever been to Klaus’s place?
34.18
Nej.
No.
34.19
Dine fingeraftryk er derude.
Your fingerprints are there.
34.20
fortsættes…
to be continued...
85
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
SUMMARY
A feature, which is commonly seen in the subtitling of Unit one, is the change of language level
between source text and target text. The purpose of the thesis was therefore to make a classification
of how legal aspects of the series are rendered according to a methodical approach. The legal aspects, which refer to terminology, specialised discourse and jargon, are illustrated in the data set
selected for the analysis
In order to analyse the select data according to the hypothesis, that the language level differs, while
at the same time providing a detailed analysis of the data, it was necessary to construct the Analysis
Model for Subtitling to match my research questions. I wanted to connect the detailed analysis according to translation strategies with a specialising/generalising approach. Therefore, it was necessary to adapt the already existing translation strategies to match the select data. That is, the study
and the finds are based on the select data from episode 15 of Unit One.
The Analysis Model for Subtitling is constructed to achieve a system to classify data as either specialisation or generalisation of culture-bound elements in the source text. The model is connected
vertically and horizontally, meaning that one is to move from the top down and to the right. It takes
its starting point in culture-bound source-text items, which are either implicit or explicit, and then
they are analysed methodologically with the aim to determine which approach that has been applied. One is to pre-decide the approach by choosing a macro level method, which hereafter is to be
analysed in further detail according to a micro level method. Having established the approach to be
either specialisation or generalisation, the language level has been determined as well to be either
high or low, accordingly.
Furthermore, the model is constructed to also match the scale of level of formality that can be attached to the language level in the target text. However, it is only to be seen as an additional layer
of the analysis.
The methods are mainly based on Schjoldager’s microstrategies and Gottlieb’s subtitling strategies,
but Vinay and Darbelnet have also been an inspiration for the adaptation of the strategies. My taxonomies at macro and micro level deal with methods instead of strategies, as they are steps to
achieve the approach, which is the final element of the model, whereas strategies are goal-oriented.
I have differentiated the micro level methods from the existing strategies by connecting and comparing them into my own approaches. I suggest the following methods at micro level; direct translation, transposition, condensed paraphrase, oblique translation and substitution. The reason why I
86
A methodical approach to analysis of subtitles
Lotte Vendelbo Andersen
do not apply the existing strategies by either Schjoldager or Gottlieb is that some of the microstrategies lack what the subtitling strategies have, and vice versa. And for instance transposition is inspired by Vinay and Darbelnet, because neither Schjoldager nor Gottlieb specifies this kind of
translation. Moreover, their strategies are meant to help the translator in the translation process to
improve the quality of the translation, whereas my methods are to analyse already translated subtitles.
However, the specialising approach and the generalising approach are the vital part of the model
and they support the hypothesis that the language level in the target text differs from the source text.
It is characteristic of the source text that colloquial language, with hidden police jargon, is the main
discourse to match the target audience, which is very wide reaching all social layers. But opposed to
this, the target text is more likely to have a higher language level, meaning that the hidden elements
of jargon have been made explicit in form of specialised discourse. Not claiming that the English
version targets a higher social class.
The main pattern of specialisation versus generalisation to be seen is that very explicit culturebound source-text items that refer to the Danish National Police have been translated according to a
generalising approach. On the contrary, implicit culture-bound source-text items have been specialised in the target text. That is, colloquial source-text items, which are seen as jargon, because they
hide the terminology, are lifted linguistically.
The summary contains 3.654 characters excl. blanks
87