Subtitling the f-word into Arabic in Hollywood films: a corpus-based study

This study explores the translation of taboo language, specifically the f-word, from English into Arabic subtitles in Hollywood films. Taboo words are powerful tools for conveying strong emotions, and their use has increased significantly in American media. However, Arab cultures, guided by strict religious and cultural norms, often censor or tone down such language. This research addresses the gap in understanding how Arab translators navigate the translation of the f-word, considering the cultural and linguistic differences between English and Arabic. Prior research has shown substantial censorship of swear words in Arabic subtitles, highlighting the need for a deeper examination of the strategies employed. The study leverages the framework of Descriptive Translation Studies (DTS) to analyze the relationship between source text (ST) and target text (TT) in the context of Arabic subtitling. The f-word, chosen for its high frequency in the corpus and its versatility in conveying various functions, is categorized using McEnery's (2006) model, allowing for a nuanced understanding of its use and translation.

While numerous studies examine taboo word translation in European and Asian contexts, research on Arabic audiovisual translation of taboo language is limited. Existing studies often analyze small datasets or focus on fan subtitles rather than professional ones. Furthermore, the linguistic functions of taboo words are often neglected or inadequately classified. This study distinguishes itself by focusing solely on the f-word in a large corpus of professionally subtitled Hollywood films, analyzing its various functions and the strategies used to translate it into Arabic. Previous work, such as that by Abu-Rayyash et al. (2023) on Netflix subtitles, provides some insight but lacks the breadth and depth of this study. Other relevant studies, including those by Hawel (2019), Sutrisno and Ibnus (2021), and Pujol (2006), offer valuable perspectives on specific films or languages but do not address the comprehensive scope of this research.

This study employed a quantitative and qualitative corpus-based approach. The corpus consisted of 90 Hollywood films (2000-2018) with English and Arabic subtitles, representing nine genres. The total corpus comprised over 1.4 million words. Data collection involved extracting subtitles from various sources (DVDs, streaming platforms, fansub sites), a process complicated by inconsistencies in Arabic subtitle availability and OCR accuracy. Subtitles were manually checked and corrected, then aligned and uploaded to Sketch Engine for analysis. The f-word and its variations were identified in the English subtitles using the software's concordance feature, and their corresponding Arabic translations were analyzed to determine subtitling strategies using a modified version of Pedersen's (2011) taxonomy. The functions of the f-word were categorized using McEnery's (2006) 16-category model. Two colleagues independently reviewed the categorization to enhance accuracy and reliability. Quantitative analysis involved frequency counts and cross-tabulation to identify correlations between subtitling strategies and the f-word's functions. A qualitative analysis followed to explore the reasons behind specific subtitler choices and identify patterns in the data.

The study identified four main subtitling strategies: omission, cultural substitution, reformulation, and specification (used only once). Omission was the most frequent strategy overall (48.7%), especially for emphatic intensifiers (62.9%) and idiomatic set phrases (28.6%). Cultural substitution was the second most common (40.6%), with 'لعين' (may evil befall) and 'اللعين' (damned) being the most frequent Arabic equivalents. Reformulation was used in 10.6% of cases, primarily for idiomatic phrases. The analysis revealed a strong correlation between the f-word's function and the chosen translation strategy. Emphatic intensifiers were most frequently omitted or culturally substituted, while general expletives and cursing expletives were more often culturally substituted. Literal uses of the f-word were mostly culturally substituted using euphemisms with sexual connotations. The study also found that the formal register of Modern Standard Arabic, commonly used in subtitles, limited the options available to translators and influenced their choices. The use of religious expressions as cultural substitutions was common, reflecting cultural and linguistic constraints in expressing taboo concepts.

The findings demonstrate that the translation of the f-word into Arabic subtitles is not merely a linguistic exercise but a complex process shaped by linguistic, cultural, and technical factors. The dominance of omission highlights the challenges in finding direct equivalents that preserve both the meaning and the offensive nature of the f-word within the constraints of Modern Standard Arabic. The frequent use of religious expressions as cultural substitutions reflects the sensitive nature of taboo language in Arabic culture. The study's findings support the notion that audiovisual context plays a significant role, as subtitlers may choose different strategies depending on the scene's visual and auditory cues. The limitations of the MSA register, which favors formal language, likely influence the translators’ reliance on less contemporary equivalents. These findings contribute to a deeper understanding of the complex interplay between language, culture, and translation practices in the context of audiovisual translation.

This study offers valuable insights into the subtitling strategies employed for the f-word in Hollywood films translated into Arabic. The research highlights the significant impact of linguistic, cultural, and technical constraints on translation choices, with omission and cultural substitution being the most prevalent strategies. The study's findings underscore the need for further research to examine the broader landscape of taboo word translation across different languages and cultural contexts, while also considering the evolving nature of language and audience expectations in the digital age.

The study's reliance on a specific corpus of films might limit the generalizability of findings to other genres or time periods. The subjectivity inherent in classifying the f-word's function and identifying translation strategies, despite efforts to ensure inter-rater reliability, could also introduce some degree of bias. Additionally, the data collection process, involving multiple sources with varied subtitle quality, represents a limitation. Future research could explore a broader range of films and employ more sophisticated methods to minimize potential biases.