OK, I'll try to explain my point very briefly. If a film is dubbed, the source language is replaced by the target language, for example Spanish. If a film is subtitled, the audience of the film can still hear the the foreign language or the source language. In other words, dubbing prevents any contact with foreign languages. Subtitling does not, although it does add a translation/adaptation so that the audience can understand. Here's an example: a Spanish person and a Dutch person go to see a Chinese film. Both have never heard any Chinese languages. Both have never seen Chinese people and both have never seen Chinese landscapes. The Spanish person, who saw the dubbed version, will know what Chinese people look like, what the landscapes look like but he won't have the slightest idea what Chinese sounds like. The Dutch person, who saw the subtitled film, however, will know what Chinese sounds like and, just like the Spaniard, he will have seen the landscapes and the people. The subtitled version, in my humble opinion, gives more of the source culture than the dubbed version.
Dubbing conventions in your country
- Thread starter Diaspora
- Start date
OK, I'll try to explain my point very briefly. If a film is dubbed, the source language is replaced by the target language, for example Spanish. If a film is subtitled, the audience of the film can still hear the the foreign language or the source language. In other words, dubbing prevents any contact with foreign languages. Subtitling does not, although it does add a translation/adaptation so that the audience can understand. Here's an example: a Spanish person and a Dutch person go to see a Chinese film. Both have never heard any Chinese languages. Both have never seen Chinese people and both have never seen Chinese landscapes. The Spanish person, who saw the dubbed version, will know what Chinese people look like, what the landscapes look like but he won't have the slightest idea what Chinese sounds like. The Dutch person, who saw the subtitled film, however, will know what Chinese sounds like and, just like the Spaniard, he will have seen the landscapes and the people. The subtitled version, in my humble opinion, gives more of the source culture than the dubbed version.
But this is really different to that "focus is on the target/source culture"!
That is a good point! But even that is not 100% true. Dubbing country citizens also know how other languages sound like, so how is this possible?
Films use to have something else on them, crowds and a soundtrack which are not generally dubbed neither subtitled, and there your dubbed-citizen has contact with that part of the culture that you miss. (Sometimes in a non-Chinese film a part is taking place in Chinatown, where Chinese people are speaking in their language and it is not understood by the film star, and that part remains original in the dubbed version).
I could watch any film dubbed in Chinese and that would do the trick too, and I could chose which film I want to watch, so I can know how some silly joke I listened previously in a film sounds in dubbed Chinese, and that way I could improve my silly Chinese jokes skills. I should apologize for this.
I would appreciate an answer to my (previous post) question: Why do you disagree? It is not so obvious to me yet...
I have to disagree again. One is more open to the foreign culture than the other. The audience is exposed to more of the foreign culture with subtitling i.e. the audience is exposed to the language, which is not the case with dubbing.
You missed my point, I'm afraid. I'm not saying Spanish people, for example, don't know what Chinese sounds like.
I'm sorry I don't really understand your point. Can you rephrase that please?
True, yet my point remains valid. Subtitling exposes viewer to more of the 'original' culture than dubbing.
You lost me here.
Let's go back to the Chinese village. You say my example would only work if people were holding cards or signs with a translation of what is being said. OK, so I'm in this Chinese town and the people are speaking Chinese, next to me is an interpreter, who lost his voice, and he writes down the translation.
In 'your' Chinese town everyone just speaks your native language.
My point here was about the illusion of film. I think dubbing shatters that illusion. I appreciate your disagreement. You are (and please do correct me if I'm mistaken) used to dubbed television. But I think if you grew up with subtitles, it's very hard to accept dubbed films. It sound extremely unnatural and at least for me, it destroys the illusion.
Besides, subtitles have proven economical and educational benefits.
Yes, sure. Sorry for the trouble.I have to disagree again. One is more open to the foreign culture than the other. The audience is exposed to more of the foreign culture with subtitling i.e. the audience is exposed to the language, which is not the case with dubbing.
You missed my point, I'm afraid. I'm not saying Spanish people, for example, don't know what Chinese sounds like. No, I didn't, but nevermind.
I'm sorry I don't really understand your point. Can you rephrase that please?
True, yet my point remains valid. Subtitling exposes viewer to more of the 'original' culture than dubbing. Actually, that is original version, but once again, nevermind.
I mean that films have a soundtrack (songs, music: usually from the culture/country where they set the film) which remains in the dubbed film without dubbing and in the subtitled version without subtitles. There is also ambience, crowds that remains unsubtilted/undubbed. The final result is exposure to the original language (little, yes, but that is relative).
This lead to the second part, I agree there is more contact, but that is quantity, not quality. A citizen from a dubbed country could have more quantity just by watching more films than a citizen from a subtitling country.
Sorry again... not my day.
I don't know if Chinese sub or dub (allow me to put them as dubbers this time). I wanted to say that if I were really interested in how Chinese sound, I could enjoy the latest superb not-Chinese dubbed-in-my-language film in Chinese dubbed version, so I could even understand (if I learnt by heart ot similar) what they are saying without subtitles and without knowing a word in Chinese.
I can't break that tie, that would be for others members of the forum. To me, the same that it is unlikely everyone speaking my language, it is unlikely this aphonic interpreter that writes so fast. I see both at the same level.
I am used to dubbing, other-language-dubbing, subtitling and original version films/series/tv. I like all of them, just not at the same time. One thing may work better than the others for one particular program.
I think that growing up with subtitles, if you accept dubbing, you open a whole new world of enjoyment. Of course the dubbing should be properly done, but the same is of application to subtitling.
Hmmm... not so sure about that. It depends on how you look at it, I guess. It may accept lots of interpretations. If you have any source or want to give an example on this, it will be kindly accepted.
If something remain unclear... it was on purpose
. But do not hesitate to point it out.
Last edited:
I read a study on the pros and cons of subtitling and dubbing. I'll try to find it. Actually, to be honest it was an article that cited the study, but I'm sure I can find the original research somewhere.
Basically, it said that dubbing was fifteen times more expensive than subtitling. Subtitling is relatively cheap. One person can subtitle a film rather quickly, and that's all there is to it. Dubbing a film is more expensive because a translator must be paid (translating for dubbing is more difficult than translating/adapting for subtitling, especially if the translator has to pay attention to lip synchronisation, which is, I think, a crucial factor if you want high standard dubbing). Then the voice actor or actors need to be paid, this drives up the cost substantially.
It is my personal experience (and belief) that the command of the English language is generally better in countries that opt for subtitles (for a possible explanation see Chomsky's Universal Grammar or Principles and Parameters)
I'll comment on the rest of your post later.
Cheers.
I have experience living in Russia where all or most movies we dubbed, rarely a voice-over was used and in Australia where you never see a dubbed movie - all movies are subtitled.
I like foreign movies and I watch them in Australia as well but I see most Australians don't watch foreign movies, simply because they hate reading subtitles.
Neither approach is perfect. To my regret, although I prefer to watch movies with the original soundtrack, the majority is not like that. In English speaking countries English make up 99% of what people watch, if they watch a foreign movie with subtitles, it's an exception, not a rule.
The situation is different with English language movies in other countries - they are still very popular, even if they are subtitled because the knowledge of English is becoming increasingly good and yes, the countries where English/American movies are dubbed speak a better English.
I like foreign movies and I watch them in Australia as well but I see most Australians don't watch foreign movies, simply because they hate reading subtitles.
Neither approach is perfect. To my regret, although I prefer to watch movies with the original soundtrack, the majority is not like that. In English speaking countries English make up 99% of what people watch, if they watch a foreign movie with subtitles, it's an exception, not a rule.
The situation is different with English language movies in other countries - they are still very popular, even if they are subtitled because the knowledge of English is becoming increasingly good and yes, the countries where English/American movies are dubbed speak a better English.
Come again? What are you basing that opinion on? Traveling through all of Europe, what I've experienced is precisely the opposite. People from countries where movies are dubbed, in general, have a lot of trouble speaking proper English, whereas in those where movies are subtitled (again, in general), the majority of people won't have any troubles with it.
That is what I was afraid of.
I can accept that it is x15, so it means what? That there is more people and money moving in the market. Isn't that the essence of our economy? It requieres also a higher level of technology. Isn't that good for society? This should be reflected in the price you pay for a ticket, don't you think so? FACUA has done that for me (if you don't like that source, I will accept almost whichever you want) and the results doesn't reflect it.
The educational part is different, because among the countries that don't dub, you have UK and USA, where the command of English couldn't be better, but what about others languages? (I don't know) There are socioeconomic factors which have a great effect on this subject.
There is no doubt that if you are learning English and keep a constant contact with that language, it will help, but if there is a good educational system that boost/promote language learning, that will help too.
It is no so easy as to blame dubbing or subtitling in this situation.
Regards.
As I said in a previous posts, smaller languages do not dub, because they do not have the resources to do it.
No surprise these are also the same countries where the proficiency in other languages (namely English) is bigger. But the reason is not they do not dub (even when I admit that it helps). The reason is that, since they are smaller, they are exposed to other languages. Dubbing / subtitling is just other example.
A Spaniard (or German or Franch or Italian) can live all their lifetimes without speaking a word in other languages. Our democratic presidents, as an example, have been illiterate in languages.
Meanwhile, a Flemish speaker (no offense intended. I have deliberately chosen a comparatively big language), even assuming Dutch is the same laguage, can not drive for more than 100 km in almost any direction without switching to other language. Foreign books can not be translated at the needed speed.
As a summary, people who can choose (because their economies/population size allow them to dub), use dubbing, even when it is much more expensive than subtitling.
No surprise these are also the same countries where the proficiency in other languages (namely English) is bigger. But the reason is not they do not dub (even when I admit that it helps). The reason is that, since they are smaller, they are exposed to other languages. Dubbing / subtitling is just other example.
A Spaniard (or German or Franch or Italian) can live all their lifetimes without speaking a word in other languages. Our democratic presidents, as an example, have been illiterate in languages.
Meanwhile, a Flemish speaker (no offense intended. I have deliberately chosen a comparatively big language), even assuming Dutch is the same laguage, can not drive for more than 100 km in almost any direction without switching to other language. Foreign books can not be translated at the needed speed.
As a summary, people who can choose (because their economies/population size allow them to dub), use dubbing, even when it is much more expensive than subtitling.
Not quite true. In the Czech republic and Slovakia, in spite of being relatively small countries, most foreign movies and TV series are dubbed, both in public and commercial channels. The only exception to this rule (at least to my knowledge) is the second channel of our public TV, where some films deemed to be "artistic" are subtitled. An interesting exception is the Monty Python's Flying Circus, since this show was broadcast subtitled (unlike in Spain or Italy), although their humor is not excessively intellectual, so sometimes the criteria for what show/movie will be dubbed or not seem to be rather random, but as I said, almost everything is dubbed ...
... which I find really annoying since I simply hate when the original voices (in any language, no matter if I understand it or not) are substituted by some studio Czech ones. To me it feels completely unnatural and horrible and I don't find reading of subtitles to be exceptionally distracting or exhausting, it's just a matter of practice. Thanks to God, in multiplex movie theaters the offer is more diverse and usually it's possible to choose between a subtitled and dubbed version of the same movie.
A good example how dubbing can deprive a movie of its authenticity is the case of the French flick L'auberge espagnole which was dubbed here. Basically, it's a story of a French guy who goes to Barcelona to spend there his Erasmus. Since most of his roommates were Americans, Brits, Germans, Italians and Spanish, their lingua franca was English. But guess what, in the Czech version both French and English were substituted by Czech ... Go figure! But of course, most of the viewers probably didn't notice this little "linguistic mystery", after all how could they? The dubbing gave them no choice, just to suppose that the guy was speaking with his companions in French all the time (not in Spanish, since lines in español were just subtitled, probably to leave "mercifully" some linguistic authenticity in the movie).
But ... a cada uno lo suyo chicos
Last edited:
@Ayazid: First paragraph is informative (thanks for it), but as you have stated, the second is personal opinion. You could turn terms and it would be the same.
The third one is just an example of a bad dubbing... I am sure you have never found a bad subtitling, haven't you? Wouldn't that be an example of how subtitling can deprive a movie of its authenticity?
It is a matter of not being so extremist.
The third one is just an example of a bad dubbing... I am sure you have never found a bad subtitling, haven't you? Wouldn't that be an example of how subtitling can deprive a movie of its authenticity?
It is a matter of not being so extremist.
I think it is misleading to draw a parallel between subtitling/dubbing practises and knowledge of foreign languages in a country.
The first may depend on economic reasonings firstly, meanwhile the second on something that could be summed up as social, linguistic factors. (Difficult to define but a bit like "big nations are not eager to learn foreign languages and small nations have a tendency to be".)
But one may be stronger than the other in spite of it all...
In Hungary dubbing is usual meanwhile we are eager to learn foreign languages...
If there are even more people now who can speak foreign languages quite well it is mainly because they can travel and study abroad more easily - as well as because of new laws about validity of university diplomas provided you have a language exam of fairly good level. (I think one is enough.)
Nothing to do with the practice of dubbing.
Of course, everyone who learns a language would make an effort to watch subtitled films. I remember I did. (And could even in the 80s!)
Of course, we also complained about not having more films with subtitles but now even that is different with the film renting possibilities and that you have the choice of the language on DVDs...
The first may depend on economic reasonings firstly, meanwhile the second on something that could be summed up as social, linguistic factors. (Difficult to define but a bit like "big nations are not eager to learn foreign languages and small nations have a tendency to be".)
But one may be stronger than the other in spite of it all...
In Hungary dubbing is usual meanwhile we are eager to learn foreign languages...
If there are even more people now who can speak foreign languages quite well it is mainly because they can travel and study abroad more easily - as well as because of new laws about validity of university diplomas provided you have a language exam of fairly good level. (I think one is enough.)
Nothing to do with the practice of dubbing.
Of course, everyone who learns a language would make an effort to watch subtitled films. I remember I did. (And could even in the 80s!)
Of course, we also complained about not having more films with subtitles but now even that is different with the film renting possibilities and that you have the choice of the language on DVDs...
Of course other factors are involved as well, but anyone who wants to study a language properly should be confronted with, or even better, immersed in that language.
I've been exposed to the English language ever since I was a kid. When you hear English on a daily basis you pick up quite a bit of vocabulary and grammar even if you're not really interested in learning the language.
You can't underestimate the impact direct contact with a language has on the acquisition of a language. I think every language learner knows this.
Yes, but what kind of language.
"Frak" or "shoot" as surrogates for swear words or phrases like "I don't know nothing." are very common. These are real traps for people without proper knowlegde of the language. And when I watch German movies or - help god - daily soaps, I'm thinking "Who the hell talks like that?" very often.
Juan, I think that all of us are basically discussing our personal opinions about the alleged dis/advantages of dubbing/subtitles in this phase, since how the things work in Netherlands, Spain, Italy, UK, Czech Republic etc. has been already stated
Of course, I have already found a bad subtitling, but it can't deprive a movie of its authenticity, just to create some misunderstandings when it is bad. Ditto for a bad dubbing. In the case of the mentioned movie, bad subtitles would obscure some things, but all the people would still talk in the original language, be it French, English or Spanish with various types of accents. With the dubbing almost all of that linguistic "flavour" was gone and who know how good the translation was, so where are the advantages?
I still fail to see any "objective" advantages of dubbing beyond the fact that it's easier to watch a movie when you are not used to read subtitles and feel disturbed by them, but judging by the posts I read here and in other sites, it doesn't to be a huge problem for many people in Portugal, Sweden, Netherlands, Estonia, Croatia etc. (I don't count in the English speaking countries as UK and USA, since thanks to the exceptional fecundity of Hollywood most people there probably never watch any "foreign" movies).
And whenever it is possible I try to avoid watching dubbed movies, since I profoundly dislike this way of "enhancing" or "making accessible" foreign movies. If I am extremist because of this, ok, no problem. Lo admito y con orgullo
Now let's talk objectively
Last edited:
Ayazid, I am not against personal opinions, I just found naked opinions to be of little help. But you are entitled to write your naked opinion, of course.
I fail to see "objective" advantages of subtitling beyond the fact that it's easier to watch a film when you are not used to dubbing and feel disturbed by it. (As you can see, your naked opinion turned over. Not my own opinion, btw).
You are not an extremist because of disliking something, but because of " I find really annoying since I simply hate [dubbing]". Anyhow, extremists use to have a good reasoning, I just wanted to enjoy yours
You may notice that "I profoundly dislike this way of [...] 'making accesible' foreing moveis" could be used against subtitling in a convincing demagogy extremist way...
I fail to see "objective" advantages of subtitling beyond the fact that it's easier to watch a film when you are not used to dubbing and feel disturbed by it. (As you can see, your naked opinion turned over. Not my own opinion, btw).
You are not an extremist because of disliking something, but because of " I find really annoying since I simply hate [dubbing]". Anyhow, extremists use to have a good reasoning, I just wanted to enjoy yours
You may notice that "I profoundly dislike this way of [...] 'making accesible' foreing moveis" could be used against subtitling in a convincing demagogy extremist way...
Some big advantages for many people (obviously as this thread shows, not for everyone) are the fact that you really are able to admire the actors performance; and the possibility of enjoying the movie as it is originally without "cuts to its integrity".
The one negative aspect I could think about in what concernes subtitling is the space subtitles take in the screen, which obviously makes me prefer the original version without the subtitles (except for languages I don't understand), but subtitles are in the bottom of the screen, not in the middle of it. The way I look at it, when you're used to them, they go barely unnoticed.
You may consider those irrelevant (like someone replied before), and still prefer dubbed movies. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but just because you (plural) feel it's not relevant, it doesn't mean it isn't for others. The "objective" advantages have been presented before.
MOC, the thing is that the argument can be easily reversed, and works, which shows how feeble are the arguments in favor or against any of them:
The conclusion is that original version is THE one, but if you cannot understand the original version language, the others options are fine.
Well, the thing is that both with subtitles and dubbing the viewers will more or less know what is going on and therefore will have a chance to enjoy the movie (in case they would not speak the language of the movie). In that sense both options work just fine and as the saying goes de gustibus non est disputandum. It's really just a matter of personal taste.
In my case, I dislike dubbing because to me it feels very unnatural and unauthentic. I want to hear the original language and the true voice of the actor. I don't care that thanks to some Jaromír Procházka or Kateřina Drtinová I don't have to read subtitles or that they have more "impressive" voices than Antonio Banderas or Zhang Ziyi. I just don't need and don't want to hear them, because I am still aware of the fact that those voices are "false" and recorded in some Czech studio. Subtitles don't bother me nearly as much and I don't mind them even when I understand the language, but have some difficulties to understand the actors (because of their accent or rapidity of speech).
Which leads me to believe that an "objective" advantage of dubbing might be its usefulness for language learning. When people have at least basic knowledge of a language or it is enough similar to their native tongue, then watching of subtitled movies or shows in it might help them to improve their ability to understand its spoken form, to get used to the pronunciation, various accents of the language etc. In the Czech republic, in spite of being a small country, it's not so difficult to live without having the need to use any foreign language. Although nowadays it's compulsory to learn foreign languages in school (minimally English), even most young people know them rather poorly. I am sure that if they had the chance to watch most movies subtitled just as their peers in for example Netherlands or Slovenia, their skills would be better (at least in English, with subtitled films and programmes it would be present in TV all day long).
If your aim is to improve your knoledge of a foreign language it is objectively better subtitling.
If you like cinema and you want to fully evaluate actors, subtitling is also better.
If your aim is just to enjoy a film, dubbing is objectively better. You just sit down in front on TV (or do whatever you want in your home) and watch Avatar without worrying about losing a phrase in the film because you are not watching subtitles.
In Spain we have subtitling theaters ("cines en versión original") and dubbing theaters (90%?). Most people prefer dubbed films.
As mentioned before, the government of Catalonia (strongly pro-Catalan use) is subsidising Catalan dubbing and trying to obligue the theaters to show the films dubbed in Catalan, because they feel that only dubbed films are watched by big audiences. They think that Spanish dubbing is a way to maintain Catalan as a second language.
To me, it is an evidence that people (at least in Spain, where we have a sad record on foreign languages) prefer dubbing.
If you like cinema and you want to fully evaluate actors, subtitling is also better.
If your aim is just to enjoy a film, dubbing is objectively better. You just sit down in front on TV (or do whatever you want in your home) and watch Avatar without worrying about losing a phrase in the film because you are not watching subtitles.
In Spain we have subtitling theaters ("cines en versión original") and dubbing theaters (90%?). Most people prefer dubbed films.
As mentioned before, the government of Catalonia (strongly pro-Catalan use) is subsidising Catalan dubbing and trying to obligue the theaters to show the films dubbed in Catalan, because they feel that only dubbed films are watched by big audiences. They think that Spanish dubbing is a way to maintain Catalan as a second language.
To me, it is an evidence that people (at least in Spain, where we have a sad record on foreign languages) prefer dubbing.
I'm not so sure about this. Most people I know, if not everyone I know here in Flanders (and the Netherlands) would prefer a subtitled film and would not even enjoy a dubbed one.
I'm not worried about missing something because a) I watch DVDs so I can rewind, b) I have digital TV so I can rewind and c) you can grab your popcorn or whatever when there's no talking.
If we had a choice here, I'd say about 90% would go to the subtitled films.
In Moldova all the movies on television are dubbed in Russian,maybe that's how they buy them,however,on torrents sometimes one can find the original movie,but that happens when they get it right after the movie appeared in the US in cinemas
Perhaps it depends on the quality of dubbing. In Spain, dubbing actors are generally very good. If you didn't know the original actors and you don't look directly at their lips, you wouldn't notice that the voices are dubbed.
If you don't understand the original language, a well dubbed film can be enjoyed more than the original version (unless your prejudices prevent you from enjoying it.)
I agree if you are watching something in DVD and you are ONLY doing this. But if you are watching TV or if you are with someone
who can distract you, it is very difficult to read everything, and easy to lose some important key.
Last edited:
I have been trying to figure out in vain what the RTBF news bulletin's dubbing / subbing policy is like. There seemed to be no logic behind it. So I looked it up...
1) Dutch gets subtitled if the footage is more than 1 hour old. (Live stuff can be dubbed)
2) English and German are also often subtitled, but it is not a necessity. (I think as a general rule, Belgians are subtitled as little as possible)
3) Other languages are always dubbed.
4) On the radio, everything is dubbed into French.
VRT subtitles everything on TV and typically paraphrases everything on the radio. For instance, if Putin says something, it will be in Russian on Flemish radio channels, followed or preceded by a paraphrase.
1) Dutch gets subtitled if the footage is more than 1 hour old. (Live stuff can be dubbed)
2) English and German are also often subtitled, but it is not a necessity. (I think as a general rule, Belgians are subtitled as little as possible)
3) Other languages are always dubbed.
4) On the radio, everything is dubbed into French.
VRT subtitles everything on TV and typically paraphrases everything on the radio. For instance, if Putin says something, it will be in Russian on Flemish radio channels, followed or preceded by a paraphrase.
Dubbing in Spain existed alredy before Franco. In fact, both Spanish and Catalan first dubbings took place in 1931, right at the beginning of Second Republic. (Eight years later, Franco would force everything to be in Spanish. No English, no Catalan)
Dubbing in Spanish, Catalan, French and Italian started very early indeed, in between 1929 and 1931, that is, as soon as talkies became a thing.
Regarding Catalan, this one below was the very first dubbed movie, the French 1931 Chatin's Bric-à-brac et compagnie, starring Fernandel, one of the greatest comic actors from France then, famous around Europe. (It's a historical and linguistic document, as it shows how only 90 years ago Barcelonians sounded just as Catalan as the rest of Catalonia.)
Whoa, how interesting. I'm used to hearing Catalan that sounds so much like Spanish that it takes me a while to decide which is which but that is very different indeed.
Yes, it sounds more like continental Portuguese.
Here only children's movies and Disney productions are dubbed (don't know why, but Disney's films require Greek dubbing, with well known Greek actors seriously auditioning for the roles, and two copies of the movie are released, one dubbed, one with subtitles). There were some attempts to release dubbed movies in the '80's but they flopped and they switched to subtitling. We're not used to dubbing. I remember when I was a boy, I used to sit next to my grandma and reading the subtitles for her as she had difficulties with reading small fonts. She liked Hollywood musicals from the 1930's-'40's (with Fred Astaire & Ginger Rogers)
Are they really dubbed or just with voice over translation like they used to do in Russia?