Page4
thetargettext,therebynecessitatingsomeformofrecreation.Thiswidely
accepteddefinitionviewsadaptationasalocalratherthanglobalstrategy,
employedtoachieveanequivalenceofsituationswhereverculturalmismatches
areencountered.
Adaptationissometimesregardedasaformoftranslationwhichis
characteristicofparticulargenres,mostnotablyDRAMA.Indeed,itisin
relationtodramatranslationthatadaptationhasbeenmostfrequentlystudied.
Brisset(1986:10)viewsadaptationasa‘reterritorialization’oftheoriginalwork
andan‘annexation’inthenameoftheaudienceofthenewversion.Santoyo
(1989:104)similarlydefinesadaptationasaformof‘naturalizing’theplayfora
newmilieu,theaimbeingtoachievethesameeffectthattheworkoriginallyhad,
butwithanaudiencefromadifferentculturalbackground(seealsoMerino
Àlvarez1992,1994).
AdaptationisalsoassociatedwithADVERTISINGandAUDIOVISUAL
TRANSLATION.Theemphasishereisonpreservingthecharacterand
functionoftheoriginaltext,inpreferencetopreservingtheformoreventhe
semanticmeaning,especiallywhereacousticand/orvisualfactorshavetobe
takenintoaccount.Othergenres,suchasCHILDREN’SLITERATURE,also
requiretherecreationofthemessageaccordingtothesociolinguisticneedsofa
differentreadership(Puurtinen1995).Themainfeaturesofthistypeof
adaptationaretheuseofsummarizingtechniques,paraphraseandomission.
Adaptationis,perhaps,mosteasilyjustifiedwhentheoriginaltextisofa
metalinguisticnature,thatis,whenthesubjectmatterofthetextislanguage
itself.Thisisespeciallysowithdidacticworksonlanguagegenerally,oron
specificlanguages.Newmark(1981)pointsoutthatinthesecasesthe
adaptationhastobebasedonthetranslator’sjudgementabouthisorher
readers’knowledge.Coseriu(1977)arguesthatthiskindofadaptationgives
precedencetothefunctionovertheform,withaviewtoproducingthesame
effectastheoriginaltext.However,whilesuchwritersstartfromtheprinciple
thatnothingisuntranslatable,otherslikeBerman(1985)claimthatthe
adaptationofmetalanguageisanunnecessaryformofexoticism.
Definitionsofadaptationreflectwidelyvaryingviewsvisàvistheissueof
remaining‘faithful’totheoriginaltext.Somearguethatadaptationisnecessary
preciselyinordertokeepthemessageintact(atleastonthegloballevel),while
othersseeitasabetrayaloftheoriginalauthor’sexpression.Fortheformer,the
refusaltoadaptconfinesthereadertoanartificialworldof‘foreignness’;forthe
latter,adaptationistantamounttothedestructionandviolationoftheoriginal
text.Eventhosewhorecognizetheneedforadaptationincertaincircumstances
areobligedtoadmitthat,ifremaining‘faithful’tothetextisasinequanonof
translation,thenthereisapointatwhichadaptationceasestobetranslationat
all.
Modes,conditionsandrestrictions
Bycomparingadaptationswiththetextsonwhichtheyarebased,itispossible
toelaborateaselectivelistoftheways(ormodes)inwhichadaptationsare
carriedout,themotivations(orconditions)forthedecisiontoadapt,andthe
limitations(orrestrictions)ontheworkoftheadapter.
Intermsofmodeofadaptation,theproceduresusedbytheadaptercanbe
classifiedasfollows:
transcriptionoftheoriginal:wordforwordreproductionofpartofthe
textintheoriginallanguage,usuallyaccompaniedbyaliteraltranslation
omission:theeliminationorimplicitationofpartofthetext
expansion:theadditionorEXPLICITATIONofsourceinformation,either
inthemainbodyorinaforeword,footnotesoraglossary
exoticism:thesubstitutionofstretchesofslang,dialect,nonsensewords,etc.
intheoriginaltextbyroughequivalentsinthetargetlanguage(sometimes
markedbyitalicsorunderlining)
updating:thereplacementofoutdatedorobscureinformationbymodern
equivalents
situationalorculturaladequacy:therecreationofacontextthatismore
familiarorculturallyappropriatefromthetargetreader’sperspectivethanthe
oneusedintheoriginal