Strategies Used in Rendering Humor in Translations of “A Man Called Ove" by Fredrick Backman

In the current study, two translations by Farnaz Taimorzuv (2017) and Hossein Tehrani (2016) of the book “A Man Called Ove” by Fredrick Backman, which is abundant in humor, were selected. The transition of humor from the source language to the target language was investigated by the syntactic strategy of Chesterman (2016). During the analysis of humor, the humorous excerpts were identified. Afterwards, the transference of humorous effects was investigated in both Persian translations. The results showed that, in translation of humor at the linguistic level, the translators have not been fully successful. Neither have they effectively rendered malapropism.  Finally, in translation of repetition and parallelism, Taimorzuv applies some strategies to transfer the humoristic effect to the target text, whereas Tehrani seems to have ignored the aesthetic values of the source text. Keywords : Satire, humour, translation strategy, comparative study DOI: 10.7176/JLLL/72-04 Publication date: October 31 st 2020


Fredrick Backman's humor
As stated before, the focus of the present research is "A Man Called Ove" and its two Persian translations. The logic behind choosing this work as the focus of this study is that Backman is a famous satirist and this novel is a rich resource of satire and humor.

Theoretical framework
What translators need is to translate with a theory which makes some sense to them. To translate without perception or understanding and with no self-awareness, no self-criticism it would mean trusting entirely on common sense, one might say (Chesterman, 1993).
According to Chesterman (2000), Strategy memes are the most effective sets of professional translation memes. These memes are, in an especially obvious sense, main conceptual tools of the translator's trade. By "strategy" here his mean any well-established method of solving a translation problem. These strategies are applied and well known in the profession. He believes that the difference between a professional and an amateur is that the professional generally knows at a time, or can decide quite immediately, what kind of strategy to use. Professionals can do this either because they have learned the strategies clearly during training, or because they have found them from their own experiment, or because they have imitated them from colleagues. Chesterman (2016) specifies comprehension strategies and production strategies. Comprehension strategies deal with the analysis of the source text and the type of the translation commission. Production strategies are the results of several comprehension strategies: they deal with how the translator uses the linguistic material in order to create a proper target text. Chesterman (2016) divides production strategies to 3 classes: semantic, syntactic and pragmatic strategies. Each class has 10 techniques. In this paper, the writer focuses on one of the techniques of syntactic strategy.

Syntactic strategies
According to Chesterman (1997, p. 94), these strategies "may be thought of as involving purely syntactic changes of one kind or another. Larger changes may obviously tend to involve smaller ones too. Syntactic strategies primarily manipulate form". Those strategies include: (a) literal translation, (b) loan, claque, (c) transposition, (d) unit shift, (e) phrase structure change, (f)clause structure change, (g) sentence structure change, (h)cohesion change, (i)level shift, and (j) scheme change.
Scheme change: Chesterman (1997, p. 99) said that "this refers to the kinds of changes that translators incorporate in the translation of rhetorical schemes such as parallelism, repetition, alliteration, metrical rhythm, etc." Chesterman (1997, p. 100) stated that the translator may choose between three basic alternatives: 1. ST scheme X → TT scheme X. That is, if the ST scheme is judged to be appropriate to the translation practice, it can be (to some extent) maintained: in fact, no change. 2. ST scheme X → TT scheme Y. That is, the ST scheme can be changed to another scheme that is considered to serve a proper or similar function in the TL. 3. ST scheme X → TT scheme ø. That is, the scheme is abandoned altogether. 4. ST scheme ø → TT scheme X. Here, the translator decides to use a rhetorical scheme of some kind, although not prompted directly to do so by the ST.

Review of literature
The research on humor is a wide field, and many researchers have worked on it. The purpose of this study is to focus on the translation of humor. Salvatore's (1994) general theory of verbal humor concentrated on linguistic methods of humor translation. He presented six parameters for producing humor. Using these six parameters helps translators to recreate the humor in the target language.

Methodology Corpus
As mentioned above, to investigate the extent that the translators had been successful in transferring humor using strategies, a book entitled "A Man Called Ove" written by Swedish columnist Fredrik Backman (2012) was chosen. The target texts that were used were two translated versions of "A Man Called Ove". Farnaz Taimorzuv translated the first target text (TT1). She is an Iranian translator of works from English into Persian. And Hossein Tehrani translated the second target text (TT2).

Data collection
The researcher analyzed different models, approaches as well as quotes and suggestions by the scholars in the field of parallelism, repetition, and wordplay translation in order to come up with a model for the translation of humor. In this study, the unit of investigation was text. The first step in data collection was to recognize and find parallelism and repetition in English text and its translations. Therefore, 337 pages (all pages) of the novel and their translations were studied in order to find 30 examples of repetition and 20 examples of parallelism.

Procedure process
Firstly, the researcher tried to recognize parallelism and repetition in the source text and found their equivalents in the target texts. Then, each translation version was compared and contrasted based on scheme change strategy to see whether it was applied. After specifying the strategy applied by each translator, the tables are drawn as follow.

Data analysis
1 -When Parvaneh, with panic in her eyes, runs right into Ove's hall and continues into the bathroom without even bothering to say "Good morning. "Ove immediately disputes how one can become so acutely in need of a pee in the space of twenty seconds it takes her to walk from her own house to his. But "hell has no fury like a pregnant woman in need," Sonja once informed him. So, he keeps his mouth shut. (Backman,2014, p.  She used the second subclass of hyponymy which is ST hyponomy → TT superordinate because "gas" is more specific than ‫."ﺳﻮﺧﺖ"‬ Tehrani used the syntactic strategy; he used the first subclass of Scheme change which is ST scheme X → TT scheme X because ‫"ﺑﻨﺰﻳﻦ"‬ is the same as "gas".
3 _He hated being late. It ruined the planning. Made everything out of step. His wife had been utterly useless at it, keeping to plans. But it was always like that with women. They couldn't stick to a plan even if you glued them to it, Ove had learned. (Backman,2014, p.  ", that stands for "if you glued them to it". Tehrani used the first subclass which is ST scheme X → TT scheme X.
4-"It's me who's bloody dying!" Ove objects. (Backman,2014, p. 329) TT1 ‫ﮐﻨﺪ:‬ ‫ﻣﯽ‬ ‫ﻣﺨﺎﻟﻔﺖ‬ ‫ﺍﻭﻩ‬ : ‫ﮐﻪ‬ ‫ﻣﻨﻢ‬ ‫"ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﺑﻤﻴﺮﻡ!"‬ ‫ﺑﺎﻳﺪ‬ ‫)ﺹ.‬ 363 ( :TT2 ‫ﮔﻮﻳﺪ"‬ ‫ﻣﯽ‬ ‫ﺍﻭﻩ‬ ‫ﺗﻮ!"‬ ‫ﻧﻪ‬ ‫ﻣﻨﻢ‬ ‫ﻣﻴﺮﻩ,‬ ‫ﻣﯽ‬ ‫ﺩﺍﺭﻩ‬ ‫ﮐﻪ‬ ‫ﺍﻭﻧﯽ‬ ‫)ﺹ.‬ 346 ( _Both translators used the first subclass of scheme change which is ST scheme X → TT scheme because Taimorzuv used " ‫ﺑﻤﻴﺮﻡ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﻳﺪ‬ ‫ﮐﻪ‬ ‫ﻣﻨﻢ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ‬ "for the rendition of "It's me who's bloody dying!" and Tehrani presented "! ‫ﺗﻮ‬ ‫ﻧﻪ‬ ‫ﻣﻨﻢ‬ ‫ﻣﻴﺮﻩ,‬ ‫ﻣﯽ‬ ‫ﺩﺍﺭﻩ‬ ‫ﮐﻪ‬ ‫ﺍﻭﻧﯽ‬ ". 5 -"If you start crying now, you're not having it," warns Ove. (Backman,2014, p.  _Taimorzuw used the second subclass of Scheme change two times which is ST scheme X → TT scheme Y, because of adding the" ‫ﺁﺑﻐﻮﺭﻩ‬ " and " ‫ﺗﺨﺖ‬ ‫ﺑﯽ‬ ‫ﺗﺨﺖ‬ " to the TT. Tehrani used the second subclass which is ST scheme X → TT scheme Y. 6-Ove sighs-"Bloody women" (Backman,2014, p. 300) :TT1 ‫ﮔﻮﻳﺪ:‬ ‫ﻣﯽ‬ ‫ﮐﺸﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﺁﻩ‬ ‫ﻓﻘﻂ‬ ‫ﺍﻭﻩ‬ ‫)ﺹ.‬ ‫ﻫﺎ."‬ ‫ﺯﻥ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ‬ ‫"ﺍﻣﺎﻥ‬ 331 ( :TT2 ‫ﮔﻮﻳﺪ:‬ ‫ﻣﯽ‬ ‫ﮐﺸﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﺁﻩ‬ ‫ﺍﻭﻩ‬ ‫ﻫﺎ."‬ ‫ﺯﻥ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﺩﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ‬ " ‫)ﺹ.‬ 315 ( _Both translators used the first subclass of scheme change which is ST scheme X → TT scheme X. In fact, no change happened. 7-Maybe it was because Tom had put the blame on him for the theft in the carriage. Maybe it was the fire. Maybe it was the bogus insurance agent. Or the white shirts. Or maybe it was just enough now. (Backman,2014, p. 113 -This sentence has a special scheme as Parallelism. As said before, it is the repetition of the same pattern of words or phrases within a sentence or passage to show that two or more ideas have the same level of importance. Backman used it in his novel as a humoristic device. The structure of the five sentences above is repeated and both translators perfectly maintained the repetition based on the grammatical structure of the Persian language. Based on Chesterman's syntactic strategies, they used the scheme change strategies to translate these sentences. Both translators used the first procedure which is ST scheme X → TT scheme X. It means that the parallelism is preserved.
8 -"Rules are rules," the man in the white shirt explained in a monotone voice when Ove protested. (Backman,2014, p. 95 _ The term "Rules" is repeated two times. Taimorzuv translated both of them as " ‫ﻗﺎﻧﻮﻥ‬ " but Tehrani translated them as " ‫ﻣﻘﺮﺭﺍﺕ‬ ٙ ". Therefore, both translators have used the first strategy of the scheme change. Taimorzuv has used ‫ﺳﻔﻴﺪ"‬ ‫"ﭘﻴﺮﺍﻫﻦ‬ for the rendition of "the man in the white shirt" which the proper natural equivalent for the phrase is " ‫ﭘﻮﺵ‬ ‫ﺳﻔﻴﺪ‬ ‫."ﻣﺮﺩ‬

Discussion
As illustrated above, two translators transferred parallelism and repetition in different ways. As it is shown in the Table 1, 30 instances of repetition were identified and investigated. Taimorzuv used the first strategy of Scheme change which is ST scheme X → TT scheme X, in 90% of instances and the third strategy which is ST scheme X → TT scheme ø, in 10% of instances. These results showed that he could transfer the humoristic effect of repetition in most cases. It was also shown that Tehrani used the first strategy in four instances and the third one in 26 instances. It is clear that Taimorzuv is more faithful to the linguistic form of the ST and the first strategy is the best one in conveying the repetition which is a humoristic device in this novel. According to Table 2, 20 examples of parallelism were investigated. Taimorzuv used the first strategy in all 20 instances, but Tehrani used the first strategy in 20% of examples and the second one in 80% of examples. It seems that Taimorzuv created the same effect in the TT in all cases, but Tehrani could not transfer the humoristic effect.

Conclusion
As mentioned above, translation of humor has an important position in the literary translation. The linguistic and cultural features of humor make some problems in translation. Because of the unequal structures of the source and target language, the translator encounters difficulties in translating linguistic features of humor. Therefore, the investigation of the transference of humor is a significant field in comparative literature. In order to produce a version which contained the same humorous effects of the original, the translator should be able to utilize creative strategies. According to the tables, it can be said that the two translators rendered completely different and used different strategies. Generally, Taimorzuv could transfer repetition and parallelism to the target language, but Tehrani was not successful in its transference and could not recreate humor in the target text. The results of this study fostered several points of discussion such as the problems with transferring humor, the amount of creativity a translator can use, and different strategies of scheme change, which can be used in translating parallelism and repetition as two humoristic tools. The findings of this study may be useful for translators entering the area of literary translation and humoristic works. The results can also be used in the evaluation of a translated satirical work.