UNIVERSITY OF EASTERN FINLAND
PHILOSOPHICAL FACULTY
SCHOOL OF HUMANITIES
English language and translation
Nina Karoliina Hirvonen
Nomen est Omen
Reception of translated and non-translated descriptive names in My Little Pony Tales
MA Thesis
May 2016
ITÄ-SUOMEN YLIOPISTO – UNIVERSITY OF EASTERN FINLAND
Tiedekunta – Faculty
Philosophical Faculty
Osasto – School
School of Humanities
Tekijät – Author
Nina Karoliina Hirvonen
Työn nimi – Title
Nomen est Omen - Reception of translated and non-translated descriptive names in My Little Pony Tales
Pääaine – Main subject
English Language and
Translation
Työn laji – Level
Pro gradu -tutkielma
Sivuainetutkielma
Kandidaatin tutkielma
Aineopintojen
tutkielma
x
Päivämäärä – Date
Sivumäärä – Number of
pages
17.5.2016
84 pages + Appendix
Tiivistelmä – Abstract
This study focuses on the literary function of descriptive personal names in the animated series My Little Pony
Tales. Although the primary function of personal names is to identify characters from one another, descriptive
names can also serve multiple complex purposes as a dynamic part the narrative. This study aims to explore
how characterization is affected when descriptive names are retained in the source language and whether this
retention can result in diminished character memorability and recognition.
Yvonne Bertills (2003: 48) argues that characters are the most important piece of narrative, as without
characters there would be no story. Personal names function as determinants that set important characters
apart from the non-important, and are often brought to attention of the audience early on (2003: 47).
Descriptive names have narrative functions; they impart knowledge of the character’s attributes such as
appearance, origin or personality, amuse and entertain the reader, evoke emotion, or fulfil an aesthetic
function (Van Coillie 2006: 123). Bertills argues that translation of names with semantic content is necessary to
preserving the desired effect (2003: 194).
What, then, happens if personal names with semantic meaning are retained and transferred unchanged to a
Finnish context target text? As my materials I am using two Finnish dubs of My Little Pony Tales (Pikku Ponit),
where two different translation strategies were used. One dub retains semantic names in English, the other
dub has names translated into Finnish. The dubbed episodes were shown to two classes of students enrolled
in Joensuu Normaalikoulu primary school, and the 24 participants, aged 7 to 9, were asked to answer a
questionnaire after.
The results indicate that language context affects memorability, spelling and cognitive recognition of
characters not previously named. In short, characters appear to be more easily identified when the descriptive
function is fulfilled and the allusion understood. However, characterization appeared to be determined by
character behavior more so than language context and allusive values of personal names. Descriptive names,
however, had some effect on characterization.
Avainsanat – Keywords
children’s literature, personal names, characterization, personal name translation, semantics
ITÄ-SUOMEN YLIOPISTO – UNIVERSITY OF EASTERN FINLAND
Tiedekunta – Faculty
Filosofinen tiedekunta
Osasto – School
Humanistinen osasto
Tekijät – Author
Nina Karoliina Hirvonen
Työn nimi – Title
Nomen est Omen - Reception of translated and non-translated personal names in My Little Pony Tales
Pääaine – Main subject
Englannin kieli ja
kääntäminen
Työn laji – Level
Pro gradu -tutkielma
Sivuainetutkielma
Kandidaatin tutkielma
Aineopintojen
tutkielma
x
Päivämäärä – Date
Sivumäärä – Number of
pages
17.5.2016
84 sivua + liitteet
Tiivistelmä – Abstract
Tutkielmani tarkoituksena on tarkastella kuvaavien erisnimien funktioita animaatiosarjassa My Little Pony Tales
(Pikku Ponit). Erisnimien ensisijainen tehtävä on erottaa henkilöhahmot toisistaan sekä taustastaan, mutta
kuvaavilla erisnimillä on myös muita monitahoisia tarinankerronallisia funktioita. Tässä tutkielmassa tutkin
kuinka kuvaavat nimet vaikuttavat hahmon karakterisaatioon silloin, kun kuvaava nimi on säilytetty
alkukielisenä ja vaikuttaako alkukielinen erisnimi hahmon muistettavuuteen tai tunnistettavuuteen.
Tutkielma pohjautuu pitkälti Yvonne Bertillsin Beyond Identification -väitöskirjassaan esittämiin väittämiin
hahmon roolista kenties tärkeimpänä osana tarinankerrontaa, jonka takia hahmo henkilöidään erisnimellä
yleensä varhaisessa vaiheessa (2003: 48). Kuvaavilla erisnimillä on henkilöinnin lisäksi myös muita funktioita;
niiden tehtävä on kertoa lukijalle jotain kantajastaan kuten viittaukset ulkonäköön tai luonteeseen, huvittaa
lukijaa, herättää tunteita, tai ne täyttävät esteettisen funktion (Van Coillie 2006: 123). Tästä syystä kuvaavien
erisnimien kääntäminen on Bertillsin mukaan tarpeellista, jotta erisnimen tarkoitettu funktio välittyy lukijalle
(2003: 193).
Mitä sitten tapahtuu, mikäli kuvaavaa erisnimeä ei käännetä kohdekielelle vaan se säilytetään alkukielisenä?
Käytin tutkimusmateriaalinani My Little Pony Tales -sarjan kahta dubbausta, joissa ensimmäisen
käännösstrategana on nimen säilyttäminen ja toisen nimen kääntäminen kohdekielelle. Suoritin tutkimukseni
Joensuun Normaalikoulun kahdessa luokassa. Eri luokat katsoivat eri version samasta jaksosta ja täyttivät
katselun jälkeen kyselylomakkeen. Yhteensä 24 oppilasta osallistui tutkimukseen, vastaajien ikähaitari oli 7-9
vuotta.
Tulokset viittaavat siihen, että kuvaavien erisnimien ymmärrettävyydellä on vaikutusta erisnimien
muistettavuuteen sekä tunnistettavuuteen. Kun erisnimen kuvaava funktio täyttyi ja nimen kuvaavuus oli
kielellisesti ymmärrettävissä kohdekielellä, vastaajat tunnistivat hahmoja sekä kirjoittivat nimiä oikein
useammin. Hahmon karakterisaatioon nimen ymmärrettävyydellä ei kuitenkaan ollut oletetun kaltaista
vaikutusta. Hahmon käyttäytymisellä ja toiminnalla on suurempi vaikutus karakterisaatioon kuin kuvaavalla
nimellä. Nimen ymmärrettävyys ei kuitenkaan ollut yhdentekevää.
Avainsanat – Keywords
lastenkirjallisuus, erisnimet, kuvaavat erisnimet, erisnimien kääntäminen, semantiikka
Table of Contents
1 Introduction................................................................................................................................................ 1
2 Personal names in children’s literature ...................................................................................................... 5
2.1 Conventional and descriptive names................................................................................................... 6
2.1.1. Descriptive names in My Little Pony .......................................................................................... 10
2.2 Characterization ................................................................................................................................ 11
2.3 Personal names and characterization ............................................................................................... 15
3 Translating for children with reference to translating personal names ................................................... 16
3.1 Translating personal names............................................................................................................... 19
3.2 Translation strategies for personal names ........................................................................................ 21
1 Retention .......................................................................................................................................... 21
2 Domestication/Adaptation ............................................................................................................... 21
3 Direct translation .............................................................................................................................. 22
4 Substitution ...................................................................................................................................... 22
5 Other ................................................................................................................................................ 23
4 Audiovisual translating and dubbing ........................................................................................................ 26
4.1 Subtitling and dubbing ...................................................................................................................... 26
4.2 Recitability ......................................................................................................................................... 28
5 Material and methods .............................................................................................................................. 31
5.1 The My Little Pony franchise, the Ponyverse and My Little Pony Tales ............................................. 31
5.2 Video Clip .......................................................................................................................................... 33
5.2.1 Plot synopsis ............................................................................................................................... 34
5.3 Questionnaire .................................................................................................................................... 35
5.4 Data collection and processing .......................................................................................................... 36
6 Results and analysis .................................................................................................................................. 39
6.1 Name recognition task: Name this pony ........................................................................................... 39
6.1.1 Naming characters with translated names ..................................................................................... 39
6.1.2. Overall recognition patterns.......................................................................................................... 40
6.1.3. Recognition patterns by character ................................................................................................ 42
Tähti .................................................................................................................................................... 43
Hellä .................................................................................................................................................... 44
Teddy ................................................................................................................................................... 45
6.1.4 Naming characters with non-translated names ............................................................................. 46
6.1.5 Overall recognition patterns........................................................................................................... 46
6.1.6 Recognition patterns by character ................................................................................................. 48
Starlight ............................................................................................................................................... 49
Sweetheart .......................................................................................................................................... 50
Teddy ................................................................................................................................................... 51
6.1.7 Comparisons of recognition patterns between translated and non-translated names.................. 52
6.2 Name Recognition Task: Match Pony and Name............................................................................... 54
6.2.1 Translated names Karkki, Apila and Tilkku .................................................................................. 55
6.2.2 Non-translated names Bon Bon, Clover and Patch ..................................................................... 57
6.2.3 Comparisons of name matching between translated and non-translated names...................... 59
6.3 Name Creation Task: Name this Pony ............................................................................................... 61
7.3.1 Name creation in a Finnish language context............................................................................. 62
7.3.2 Name creation in an English language context........................................................................... 64
6.4 Characterization Task: Describe this pony ......................................................................................... 66
6.4.1 Direct characterization ............................................................................................................... 67
6.4.2 Indirect characterization ............................................................................................................ 70
6.4.3. Effects of name on characterization .......................................................................................... 71
7 Conclusion and Discussion ....................................................................................................................... 73
References:.................................................................................................................................................. 78
1 Introduction
This study endeavors to explore the effect of personal names on characterization and character name
memorability with an emphasis on the possible difference translation and retention might have on the
survey results. I test whether children can remember characters with greater accuracy when names are in
their native language versus when they are in a foreign language the children either do not know or have
a very limited grasp of. In the case of this study the language is English. Firstly, accuracy is primarily tested
by having the children name characters without external help (writing the names under the characters)
and combining names with characters (drawing lines between available names and characters). My
hypothesis is that children will name more characters and have fewer spelling errors when naming
characters in their native language as opposed to foreign language, and will combine characters with
greater accuracy when they understand the names as opposed to when they do not.
Secondly, and perhaps more interestingly, characterization will be tested with free association questions,
where children are asked to describe characters. These characters have semantically loaded names, and
my hypothesis is that children will derive qualities from these names when they can understand them,
and when the names are foreign they will derive qualities from other characterization attributes. I
hypothesize that children will draw clues from translated names resulting in repetition of alluded qualities
(that is to say, a character with a name alluding to niceness will result in characterizations that imply
niceness) whereas non-translated names will result in a more vague characterization that is based on
other cues, such as character appearance and character behavior.
My interest towards the effects of personal names in children’s literature (or in this case, visual media)
stems from a personal recollection from my own childhood. My pastel-colored youth was filled with My
Little Pony, and with translation policies as lax as they were and dubbing budgets so seemingly meager,
my favorite ponies were often entangled in a web of confused identities. Is this pony called Apila or
Clover, or perhaps both? Fast forward circa fifteen years, and I wrote my bachelor’s thesis on the subject
of personal name translation in the 1990s animation series My Little Pony Tales. In my thesis I categorized
and cataloged translation solutions regarding personal names, with a particular emphasis on names that
contained semantically loaded elements. With the concluding chapter of my bachelor’s thesis begins the
1
introductory chapter to this master’s thesis, as I intend to expand on the theories and themes I have
explored previously.
Though children’s literature is considered by many to roost within the periphery of the literal polysystem
(Lathey 2006, Shavit 1986), it by no means should be understood as children’s literature not adhering to
literary conventions or authors not treating their literary pieces with appropriate integrity. As such, in my
thesis I will be treating children’s literature as purposeful a text as any other, regardless of intended
audience. One might criticize the choice of material, but My Little Pony has a long legacy as a franchise
which spans decades as well as generations and is particularly fruitful in terms of its unique personal
name conventions. Characters are primarily named with descriptive names or names containing semantic
elements in the fictional world of My Little Pony, the Ponyverse.
Descriptive names are widely used in literature aimed at child audiences who can either read for
themselves, or who are read aloud to by adults (Bertills 2003, Kapari et al. 2002). If we argue that all texts
have a purpose (Vermeer 2013) and all communication has a meaning (ibid.), it can be assumed that
names which are descriptive also serve a purpose in the realm of literature. They are used to
communicate to the reader implicit or explicit information about the character (Nord 1997, Nikolajeva
2002, 2005, Bertills 2003, Oittinen 2000, Van Coillie 2006). And as such, no name is a coincidence.
Characters, one could argue, are the most meaningful part of a story and because of this it could also be
argued that character names are particularly important to the narrative. Does non-translation affect
characters if the specific intended purpose of a descriptive name is disclosing character attributes, when
the allusion cannot be effectively exploited due to language barrier? Names are naturally not the only
characterization tool, and other tools including age, sex, appearance and behavior are considered (for
example what are we to think of old man Mr. Grumpy or the pirate Captain Tiny, who dwarfs a squadron
of the royal guard with his hulking body?). Names alone, descriptive or otherwise, do not make a
character. But I argue that names are a fundamental part of the narrative that should not be overlooked.
What is a descriptive name, or a semantic element? These terms are explored in chapter 2 and 3, but I
will briefly illuminate the concept. In the context of this study I have chosen descriptive name as my
primary term, but will use semantic name intermittently, which correspond with Yvonne Bertill’s
semantically loaded name (2003: 206). A descriptive name, in short, is a proper noun and a personal
2
name that by itself carries a meaning. Names that qualify as semantic are names that refer to intangible
abstract concepts such as Sweetheart, to tangible real life objects such as Clover or Patch. Semantic
names can be divided to many (if not countless) categories to best suit the purposes of the researcher.
For the purposes of this study I have assigned some general categories, which are further explored in
chapter 3.2. Name with semantic elements is a more precise derivation of a semantic name, implying a
name that by itself is not semantic, but rather parts of it are. These parts are called lexemes and are
better explained in chapter 3.
The study was conducted as a questionnaire survey in two separate classes of students enrolled in
Joensuu Normaalikoulu primary school in Joensuu Finland, among school children aged 7 to 9. The
children were asked to watch a short episode of My Little Pony Tales and then asked to answer a brief
questionnaire on paper. The survey consists of multiple choice and free association questions. Depending
on their age, the children will see either a version where names have been translated or a version where
they have been retained. These versions are official translations by two different translation agencies. The
questionnaire is introduced in detail in chapter 5.
The thesis is structured as follows. Chapter 2 focuses on personal names in children’s literature and
expands on the terms descriptive and semantic name. Translating of personal names and my
categorizations for these translation solutions derived from previous research (Hirvonen 2012) are also
explored in greater detail. Chapter 3 explores translating for children and translating children’s literature,
aiming to expand on ideas of functional equivalence, fidelity, creativity and the position children’s
literature have from a sociocultural perspective. It briefly defines some general linguistic theories which
serve as a fundamental backbone to the vital theories on semantics by Ferdinand de Saussure (2002) and
Hans Vermeer’s functional equivalence (Vermeer and Reiss 1984). Chapter 4 discusses the practices of
audiovisual translating in detail. Although subtitling and dubbing are not at the forefront in this study, it is
important to explore some principles that may affect how a translator might translate a script (time
restrictions, extra-linguistic elements) and the multimodality of translating literary and audiovisual
content for children.
Chapter 5 introduces my material and methods. My research data was collected via a survey
questionnaire from children aged 7 to 9 in Joensuu Normaalikoulu primary school. The materials used
3
include two different dubs of a ten minute episode from the 90s children’s animated television series My
Little Pony Tales.
Results and analysis is discussed in detail in chapter 6 and concluding chapter 7 will critically consider the
validity of this thesis.
In this study I have chosen to purposefully use the gender neutral singular they (Huddleston 2002: 492) as
my preferred pronoun in place of the cumbersome she/he and her/him or the particularly tiresome
generic he. This is a conscious choice to use inclusive language in my part as the author. It is also utilized
for the purpose of blurring the lines between survey respondents to further protect their identities.
4
2 Personal names in children’s literature
"What's the use of their having names," the Gnat said, "if they won't answer to them."
"No use to them," said Alice; "but it's useful to the people that name them, I suppose. If not, why do things
have names at all?"
Gnat and Alice, Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking Glass, page 152
In this chapter I will explore the functions of personal names in literature with a particular focus on names
that appear in My Little Pony, conventional and descriptive names and their utility, as well as personal
name translation. I will also discuss personal names as a characterization tool, and how descriptive names
may affect characterization.
One could argue that characters are a quite-essential building block for any good story and the most
important piece of narrative. Their function is to provide the intended audience a point of reference, an
active participant in the storytelling and someone (something) to relate to (Bertills 2003: 48). A character
only becomes one when they are specifically and explicitly described by the author (Nikolajeva 2002).
Often a character is distinguished from the background humdrum of non-important descriptions of other
people, animals and objects by giving them a distinguishing personal name.
Furthermore, Yvonne Bertills (2003: 48) suggests that personal names also serve the function of signifying
importance or relevance of the characters. In the case of classic fairytales in particular, plot-related key
characters (or main characters, such as the protagonist or hero) are assigned personal names as a sign of
importance (such as Little Red Riding Hood) whereas minor characters are only given simple appellations
such as wolf, grandmother or huntsman despite their important roles in the narrative (there would, after
all, be little story to tell with any of these characters missing).
Personal names in literature serve multiple, complex functions. Most notably the function of a name is to
distinguish the character from their surroundings and other characters, and to allow the reader to orient
themselves within the narrative (Bertills 2003: 48). A name has been purposefully chosen for the
character to draw attention to what is significant about them (for example, female name vs male name, a
prestigious heritage name such as the German nobiliary particle ‘von’, unconventional made up name or
a descriptive name). A lack of a name is a purposeful decision by the author and equally meaningful as far
5
as the narrative and the character is concerned (ibid.). A name serves a dynamic narrative tool, and the
author can choose to impart additional knowledge about the characters personality, origin or appearance
by choosing character names that are transparently descriptive or meaningful (Ainiala et al. 2008: 338).
Furthermore, the functions of personal names according to Jan Van Coillie include: to identify the
character, to provide information about the character, to entertain or even amuse the reader (2006:
123). This is particularly true in children’s literature, where names serve aesthetic purposes through
whimsy and imaginativeness, such as alliteration, poetic rhythm or word play (consider Tweedle Dee and
Tweedle Dum). Understand the functions in the source language and source culture is important for the
translator so that they might stay faithful, as demanded by Bertills (2003: 194), to the purpose of the
author when translating, whether the function is formal, semantic or otherwise. Bertills also notes that
this is what makes translating for children particularly challenging. However, Van Coillie implies that any
purpose or intent of the author is not known to the translator and hangs in the balance of interpretation
of possible function, and any effect on the reader is not in the author’s or the translator’s power to
determine as each reader will have their own interpretation (2006: 123).
2.1 Conventional and descriptive names
Fictive names are bound by the confines of the rules that govern any particular fictive world; where
conventional names are often found in our real world lexicon and serve little purpose besides labeling to
set one person apart from another (Bertills 2003: 17), in the world of fiction names are a textual tool for
explicating innate knowledge about the character (Bertills 2003: 55–56). Conventional names in literature
often carry meaning, and are used to allude to real life bearers of the name, or to other works of fiction
or popular culture (Bertills 2003: 42). Examples of this could include biblical names, which have been
widely adopted into conventional name lexicon, but in fiction are used as an allusive tool for carrying
connotative value; consider a character named Judas, for example. Judas as a name is infused with the
notions of deceit and ultimate betrayal, Maria on the other hand with the essence of purity and piety.
Moreover, even when a conventional name does not appear to have an immediate point of reference, it
gives the reader some information of its bearer; whether the character is a female, old or young, or if
their name ‘exotic’ in the fictive context, etc. (Bertills 2003: 42).
6
In this thesis I frequently use the terms semantic and semantic element when referring to descriptive
names. Semantics, in brief, is the study of meaning. According to Ferdinand Saussure (2002: 48), meaning
can be derived from signifiers, such as words, symbols and signs, and their ideational signified, what they
stand for (and to some degree referent, their real-life signified). Denotation is the apparent meaning, and
connotation a culture-specific meaning (Diaz-Cintas 2009: 78).
By the term semantic I intend to signify that a word has particular meaning and that it refers to an
intangible idea or concept, or a tangible real life referent. Furthermore, a semantic element is used to
isolate words or elements (lexemes) within words that signify a meaningful connection to a referent. In
this study there are semantic names, that is, the name itself refers to a concept (such as the name
Starlight). Alternatively there are also names that only contain semantic elements. That is, the name itself
may not be fully meaningful but parts of it are, or that a word that has a meaning is ingrained within an
otherwise meaningless name (see also Cruse 2004: 86 on word forms and lexemes for further reading). An
example of a meaningful lexeme within a meaningless name is Cheerilee, which can be determined to
have the stem Cheer, with a meaningless suffix particle -ilee.
In My Little Pony, conventional names are sometimes used, although they are not very common. In the
Ponyverse, or the fictive world that the characters inhabit, descriptive names are more common.
Descriptive names (also semantic names and semantically loaded names (Docherty 1986: 45, Bertills
2003: 206)) mean names that have semantic elements or carry connotative meaning to describe the
name bearer. Names like these are the most common in children’s literature (consider the Big Bad Wolf),
as well as fantasy genre literature. The functions descriptive names perform are not limited to identifying
characters. Descriptive names are used to inform the audience to the nature or appearance of the
character, and can be used for comedic effect when there is direct mismatch between the character’s
descriptive name and their actual description, like would be the case with a giant named Tiny or a little
fluffy lapdog named Killer. The functions of these names are to draw attention to what is significant about
these characters, and to amuse the reader with the apparent discrepancy and oxymoron. A descriptive
name can function on multiple levels simultaneously, performing functions as a means of relaying
information, identifying the character, and amusing the reader, or any other combination.
Descriptive as defined by Merriam-Webster Dictionary:
7
de·scrip·tive
adjective
a) : giving information about how something or someone looks, sounds, etc. : using words to
describe what something or someone is like
b) : serving to describe <a descriptive account>
For the purposes of this study, descriptive name is reserved to names that adequately fulfill the task of
descriptiveness as defined in the Merriam-Webster Dictionary.
In his master’s thesis, Joni Rahja (2013) argues that unconventional, or invented names (Bertills 2003:
210) are most common in fantasy and sci-fi genres. This supports Bertills’s argument that sometimes the
fictive world demands a unique name that is outside the ordinary lexicon in order to convey a certain
milieu (2003: 41). An unconventional name is neither a descriptive name, nor a conventional name from
an existing onomasticon (Bertills 2003). Onomasticon refers to names that are accepted in their source
culture and/or language as personal names. An onomasticon is never constant, it evolves with time and
cultural exchange), though it may contain elements of one or both. Invented names often function as
identifiers, and satisfy the aesthetic functions and norms of their fictive context. Unconventional names
are coined without a direct relation to our common reality, but rather in keeping with the fictive world in
which they belong. However, it is not thoroughly impossible for these types of names to eventually
become a conventional name (for example Tolkien’s Bilbo and Legolas have been adopted into
conventional name lexicon in some countries).
I have chosen to use the term descriptive name to refer to personal names that have descriptive
elements such as allusions (or, references) to:
a) appearance,
b) profession,
c) or personality
This term has also been used by Nord (2003: 183). I propose to define this term in more clarity in relation
to this specific study. The definition I am using is my own adaptation refined from terms I have previously
8
used in my bachelor’s thesis, such as the term semantically loaded name, which was also used by Bertills
(2003: 206). It will be used as a replacement for the terms semantically loaded name, semantic name and
name with semantic elements. A semantic element means a part of the name that holds semantic
meaning; a name may not be fully semantic, but it may have semantic lexemes embedded in it (consider
Cheerilee), or as a part of a full name (Pippi Longstocking). However the aforementioned terms are not
without merit and can be used when it is necessary to draw attention to a particular aspect of a name or
its translation. In the next section I will explain what the term descriptive name means in the context of
this particular study.
A descriptive name is personal a name that contains elements that have meaning and/or allude to
something concrete (tangible or intangible) about the character, or imply something about the character,
whether explicitly or implicitly, in a way that can be understood from the semantic meaning or context
derived from the name. In simpler terms, a descriptive name serves a purpose as providing the reader
with information on the nature of the character (Van Coillie 2006: 124).
Descriptive names are an effective characterization tool in literature, as they provide the reader
transparent and direct information about the character. Names that fit the definition of a descriptive
name can be used in the real world (e.g. Hope, Amber, Jay) as identifying labels without inherent meaning
(Bertills 2003). However, in the literary context where they have a distinct purpose besides identification
they are most common in children’s literature and to some extent in fantasy genre (Rahja 2013). Many
are familiar with characters such as the Grimm’s Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, where descriptive
names allude both to physical attributes (Snow White for her ivory skin) as well as personality disposition
(Grumpy for his sour mood). Similar use of descriptive names can be found also in Pierre Curriford’s The
Smurfs, where characters are named either in relation to their
a) occupation (Doctor, Poet),
b) personality (Lazy, Grouchy)
c) color (Black)
d) implicit qualities (Papa as the patriarch, Smurfette as a female smurf).
9
Although these examples are focused on children’s literature, it should be noted that the use of
descriptive names is not strictly limited to this genre, and can be used in practically any other genre of
literature. However they are perhaps the most frequent in fantasy and sci-fi genres.
2.1.1. Descriptive names in My Little Pony
Having explored descriptive names as a relatively common literary tool for authors, I aim to briefly expand
on what descriptive names means as a term, and how descriptive names are used in the Ponyverse.
Much like in The Smurfs, descriptive names are used in the Ponyverse to refer to a character’s
profession, color, age, type (flying Pegasus-pony, magical unicorn-pony, water-dwelling mer-pony),
personality, origin or “cutie mark” (all ponies present an image on their flank in relation to whatever sets
that pony apart from the others, oftentimes referring to a calling, special talent or a primary personality
attribute).
Figure 1. Patch’s cutie mark is a patch of fabric, which directly alludes to the character’s name. Screen
capture of My Little Pony Tales, 1992.
10
Names can be explicitly descriptive, such as single word names Valiant or Sweetheart. They can be
implicitly descriptive, such as multiword names Sky Whirler or Bon Bon. Furthermore, not all personal
names in My Little Pony are descriptive, or the level of transparency in descriptiveness can be varied.
Consider the name Cheerilee, which contains a semantic element (or lexeme, Cruse 2004: 86) cheer with
a suffix particle -lee, but as a whole is neither descriptive nor conventional, or the twin names Ting-a-Ling
and Jing-a-Ling which allude to the onomatopoetic sound of musical jingling, but are not fully transparent
in descriptiveness nor meaningful as standalone words.
It should also be noted that sometimes a reference may also be lost despite a perfectly understandable
descriptive name. As a case in point a My Little Pony character, Chevalier, whose name was retained in
both English original and Finnish dub. English speaking children might make the connection to chivalry
and knighthood, as the character’s French name strongly resonates with its English cousin chivalry, and as
such may be recognized by English speaking audience. Chevalier is assigned a French identity (he has a
French name and speaks in a thick French accent). However Finnish children, with Finnish language being
relatively distant to French, might not pick up on the otherwise fairly obvious allusion to the personality
attributes of chivalry. Furthermore, ballet instructor Madame Percheron’s French accent might not seem
out of place because French ballet teacher seems like an appropriate trope; however the name has a
clever allusion that may not be apparent to an average child viewer; Percheron is a breed of French
horse. Retention of these names, however, could be supported by Christiane Stolt’s (1978) idea of names
as a means of retaining a certain cultural milieu (see chapter 3.2 on translation strategies), in this case the
exoticism of French identity that clearly defines these characters. Madame Percheron is translated in the
Finnish context Nordic Agapio dub as Neiti Ranskanen, to make this allusion more available to the Finnish
audience while still retaining a sense of foreign identity.
2.2 Characterization
11
Characterization is the act of describing or characterizing a person or a thing, and the act of an author
creating a representation of a fictitious character to function as a literary tool within the narrative. An
author has many ways of facilitating characterization, which will be explored next.
In her master’s thesis Suvi Nordenswan (2014) explains that characterization can be divided into two
categories; direct and indirect characterization based on the observations of Maria Nikolaveja (2002,
2005).
Direct characterization encompasses the things we as readers know, more specifically the things that the
author will explicitly spell out for us, or that we can objectively see in illustrations. These include
attributes such as sex, attire, actions and reactions or thoughts that are given to the reader by the
authoritative author. Although these attributes may be incomplete or even unreliable (say, when a
character describes another or when a character describes themselves and we cannot trust the
description to be accurate), the reader will often have to accept what is offered to them by the narrator.
Unless the author has established that the narration cannot be trusted either by directly telling the reader
the narrator or character is lying or coloring the story (much like Tom Sawyer who tells tall tales in The
Adventures of Huckleberry Finn), there is little room for personal interpretation or doubt. Characterization
that relies on external factors that can be perceived (such as clothing, hair or general cleanliness) are
often used in children’s literature, however implicit attributes can be a powerful characterization tool
(Nikolajeva 2002: 268-277). In audiovisual media such as animation, the marriage of the text (such as plot
and narration, as well as dialogue) and the visual content is all the more apparent and the reader (or,
viewer) is all the more likely to use visuals to make their characterization, as they can see and interpret
what is happening and what the characters look like. Visuals and text is often also supported by other
auditory cues, such as music or sound effects.
Indirect characterization consists of more implicit attributes, such as age, preferences and indeed,
personal names. Implicit attributes can be directly addressed (Joe did not like broccoli) or implicitly
addressed (Joe looked at the broccoli in disgust), where the reader is allowed to infer the purported
meaning the author is conveying about the character. From the previous examples we can deduce that
Joe is male, he does not enjoy broccoli and maybe he does not enjoy greens in general, he reacts rudely,
perhaps he is young. However these are subjective rather than objective interpretations and their
12
correctness is entirely dependent on the author and whether or not the author will expand on the subject
(Nikolajeva 2005: 161). For all we know, it could turn out that Joe is in fact a female character. As such, it
can be argued that indirect characterizations in translated literature rely on the interpretation of the
translator and the ensuing translation (unless the translator has the privilege of contacting the author
directly or vice versa to correct misunderstandings). Furthermore, it should also be mentioned that it has
been argued that all translation is an adaptation because it always relies on translator interpretation
(Kapari 2005).
In My Little Pony, as an animated series where illustration is equally prominent as the text (dialogue and
narration), both indirect and direct characterizations are employed. The characters have both externally
determined attributes such as color, body type, mane style, and cutie marks. A cutie mark is an image
portraying special talent or affinity which can also be considered an implicit characterization tool, as it
does not explicitly state anything about the character but the viewer is able to infer qualities about the
character based on its image. The ponies are also assigned other determining characteristics, such as
professions (nurse, teacher, janitor, ballet instructor) and nationality implied by accents or a particular
tone (Madame Percheron’s and Chevalier’s French accent). The children can, and likely will use some or
all of these when asked to describe the characters. The results will be discussed in later chapters.
13
Figure 2. Bulk Biceps (My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic 2014) is named in accordance to his physique.
He is not very bright, which is a stereotypical brawn over brain bodybuilder trope. Screen capture.
Moreover, though personal names fall within the category of implicit attributes (Nikolajeva 2005), in the
case of the Ponyverse names could be seen as direct characterizations; they can allude to external,
explicit and apparent factors such as coloration or physique. As such, it could also be interpreted that
personal names function as determinants to what is relevant or unique about the character (Bertills 2003
:88, 102), like one’s ability to fly or being heavily built, thus setting them apart from other characters who
cannot or are not. Personal names also make explicit what otherwise would be implicit, such as by
alluding to character’s profession or age (Mr. Cake, Granny Smith). Nordenswan (2014), much like
Nikolajeva (2005) and Bertills (2003), argues that in literature, no personal name is left to chance and that
all personal names can act as a powerful characterization tool for authors. The next chapter will explore
this further.
Figure 3. Clover (pictured behind Sweetheart) is an exhibition of a personal name’s humorous function.
Her cutie mark is a four leaf clover which is a symbol of good luck, but she is insufferably unlucky. Screen
capture from My Little Pony Tales 1992.
14
2.3 Personal names and characterization
In the previous chapter I suggested that there are two types of characterization as defined by Nikolajeva
(2005). Personal names fall in the category of indirect characterization. However I also suggested that in
the case of My Little Pony, wherein the names also contain semantics elements or are directly and
transparently descriptive, personal names could also be seen as a direct characterization tool.
Although scholars agree that the primary tools for assigning traits to a fictional character is through direct
actions, speech, description or narration (see Nikolajeva 2002 quoted in Bertills 2003: 51), personal
names can be used as devices of giving a character substance. This is particularly true for personal names
with semantic elements that are transparent and as such, tangible to the reader. According to Docherty
(1986: 45, quoted in Bertills 2003: 48), if a character is assigned a semantically loaded name (term in
correspondence with descriptive name), the name clearly defines the name-bearer and renders the
character somewhat limited in their possible interpretations. Even when the name is not in
correspondence with the character (for example a character of enormous proportions being called Tiny),
it still draws attention to a specific character trait (Tiny’s relevant character trait is its size).
Bertills draws attention to the notion that both conventional and semantically loaded names are carriers
of connotative value, although their power and target of allusion, denotation and connotation are
different (2003: 52). If you were to look at conventional names such as George and Tatyana, you are very
likely to have already drawn conclusions of the character’s attributes (possible interpretations including
age, sex and ethnicity). If you are then given names Logan and Sweetheart, your perception of these
characters may be very different because of the differences in their names, and perhaps the
interpretation will include presumed personality attributes (such as kindness for Sweetheart) due to the
connotation of the semantic element in the name. Although in My Little Pony both conventional names
as well as descriptive names are used, I would suggest that descriptive names serve a larger role as being
directly affective to characterization. The justification for this statement lies in the naming conventions of
the Ponyverse, which was discussed in the previous chapter 2.2, and will be discussed further in chapter 3
15
3 Translating for children with reference to translating personal names
This chapter will briefly discuss some general ideas regarding translating for children, or alternatively,
translating children’s literature. Some key ideas involve the author-audience dichotomy where an adult
author and child audience is involved, as well as notions on fidelity and translator ethics and functional
equivalence. Although most of these theories revolve around works of literature, they can be applied to
audiovisual content. Children’s literature often incorporates the multimodality of text and illustration,
where imagery is intended to support the text or provide more information than what can be interpreted
from text alone.
The definition of children, children’s culture, literature and childhood in general is not clear, but rather
something that has remained fluid throughout time periods. Riitta Oittinen (2000) approaches childhood
as an indefinite, subjective experience that all adults have had and is different for each individual. Thus, it
cannot be defined in a strictly prescriptive way. She also discusses whether children’s culture is culture
intended for children (as chosen, produced and censored by adults), or if it means a culture children
create among themselves, or perhaps a collaboration where both adults and children create a culture
together (Oittinen 2000: 84).
A similar divide could be made for children’s literature: is it literature that is intended for children (as
appropriated by adult authors and readers), or literature children read. Examples of children’s literature
that was originally intended for adult audiences but was adopted by child readers includes but is not
limited to Kipling’s Tarzan, Defoe’s Robinson Crusoe and Swift’s Gulliver’s Travels. Shavit (1986 quoted in
Oittinen 2000: 64) also supports the argument that children’s literature can have a dual audience, where
the content can be enjoyed by both child and adult readers on their separate levels. Examples of such
literary ambivalence include Milne’s Winnie the Pooh, Carroll’s Alice in Wonderland and Jansson’s
Moomin books.
Children’s literature has its own uniqueness that stems from the duality of audiences. It has to be
appropriate to the audience in terms of language and syntax, as children’s reading abilities are not like
those of an adult. Similarly the language must be recitable, as children’s literature is often read aloud by
adults: this also applies to dubbing, where the lines must be recitable in order for the dub to be
successful. Adults are the secondary audience to children’s literature, as the literature has to appeal to
16
both adults who choose what books to buy and read to children (or what movies or television shows they
are allowed to watch), as well as the child audience that chooses to listen (or consume independently)
(Oittinen 2000: 69).
According to Gillian Lathey (2006), children’s literature is considered to be in the periphery of the literary
polysystem. Furthermore, Lathey argues that it is not without sacrifice, as translating for children has
been regarded to be a low skill profession, which can hurt a translator’s reputation. Lathey is not alone in
these assertions, which mirror Riitta Oittinen’s (2000) observation that the apparent lack of
acknowledgement may be the symptom of patriarchy; where the work of women (writing and translating
for children has been, at least in Finland, dominated by women since 20 th century) and subsequently
children’s culture is not as highly regarded as the work of men or adult culture. Appreciation is low in the
public eye, and within the discipline translating for children is apparently regarded with, if not quite
equal, considerable apathy. According to Oittinen (2000: 68), there are few universities with departments
for children’s literature and it is a subject most often found as an elective in other disciplines such as
psychology or pedagogy.
Perhaps this peripheral position and low appreciation also bring positives in terms of the act of
translating? Translators are permitted greater creativity and freedom when it comes to employing
strategies to the text, and strategies ranging from aggressive adaptation and omission to minor
simplification of subject matter are all available when translating for children (Oittinen 2000, Bertills
2003). These strategies and freedom can also be extended to personal name translations. Jaana KapariJatta (2008) argues in favor of the translator’s freedom to choose strategies on a case by case basis,
rather than having to decide on any single strategy and commit to it with disregard to the translation
needs and problems that may arise later.
Translating children’s literature is often not a task of preserving formal equivalence, but rather to
translate an idea. In this regard, functional equivalence (formerly dynamic equivalence, Nida 1964: 129)
could be considered to be a theoretical cornerstone when translating for children. For the purposes of
this study Hans Vermeer’s skopos theory (Reiss and Vermeer 1984) felt the most appropriate basis of
functional translation theory from the perspective of children’s literature (and audiovisual material)
translation. Vermeer suggested that fidelity to the source text was not a priority, but rather that a text
should be translated in accordance to its purpose. Moreover, he argued that the purpose of the
translation could result in different translations of the same source text (Vermeer 2004: 234). This could
17
be seen as complimentary to general ideas about translating for children where a translator is considered
to have more freedom in terms of fidelity, and a moral responsibility towards their audience more so than
the original author (Shavit 1986: 26). Children’s literature can have multiple purposes as discussed by Van
Coillie (2006: 123), such as to educate, or to amuse. Anthony Pym has argued that a translator can have a
different purpose than the original author. The original text could aim to amuse, but the translator could
decide that this purpose is not as important, and translate (adapt) the text to make it more educational
(2010: 48).
Skopos theory intends to shift the focus from source text equivalence to a more dynamic, functional
equivalence. Vermeer (as well as Holtz-Mänttäri 1984 and Nord 1997) argues that the intended purpose
of the text should be the determining factor for the translation. The audience (reader, end user) becomes
the master. However, Vermeer also argued that although the purpose may be the end that justifies the
means, a translator is also bound by their commissioner; who may or may not be the end user. Consider
this in the context of animation dubbing script translation. The commissioner will be the publishing
company that has bought rights to the animation script. However the end user will not be the publishing
company (though they will use the translation and ensuing dub), the end user will be the audience;
children. However, it should also be noted that children’s literature (and its translations) is affected by the
adult author child reader dichotomy (Bertills 2003, Nikolajeva 2002), where the author (and subsequently
translator) acts as an agent with more experience and knowledge and has to pre-determine not only what
the child reader will be able to understand, but also what is appropriate for a child audience; thus writing
(and translating) for children.
It is seldom possible to discuss children’s literature without discussing the special relationship between
illustration and the text. Children’s literature is often illustrated (and in the case of animation, the
imagery is the text), and it is the translator’s duty to ensure that the resulting translation does not conflict
or detract from the illustrations (Oittinen 2000: 4). A disruption between text and illustration and the
resulting dissonance can affect the reading/viewing experience negatively (Van Coillie 2006). This is all
very relevant also in the realm of audiovisual translation and translating both script and dialogue for
children’s animated television series and movies, where disruption and a dissonance between the text
and the audiovisual content (for example an error in script writing assigning a line in dialogue to the
wrong character, so the character seen speaking has the wrong voice) can detract from the viewing
experience and break the illusion of the story. Audiovisual translation will be discussed in further detail in
chapter 4. Oittinen (2000: 6, 76) argues that all translation is adaptation, and that adapting a text for a
18
target audience is an essential part of translating for children. This is a much more liberal stance on
adaptation, for example Ritva Leppihalme (2007) argues to use caution when adapting and domesticating
children’s literature, as authoritative adults should not determine so strictly what content and language is
appropriate for children and should not risk censoring the original, but to respect the author’s intended
purposes (such as to amuse or to educate) when translating.
3.1 Translating personal names
In Kapari et al. (2002), Jaana Kapari mentions that the trend in Finland in the 1990s was to translate all
personal names in literature aimed at child and teen audiences to make them easier to read by an
audience only fluent in one language, Finnish. In her master’s thesis Terhi Leskinen (1995) notes that
there has been a shift from the 90’s trend of translating personal names from English to Finnish to a more
modern practice of leaving personal names intact (quoted in Oittinen 2000). Kapari-Jatta (2008: 71–72)
also supports this idea and argues that not all names require translation and that children are nowadays
more accustomed to foreign languages, making systematic translation of all personal names a strategy
more befitting of literature aimed at ever younger audiences (Kapari et al. 2002: 4). This shift in
translation conventions and attitude could be considered a display of potential freedom of choice, but
also a development stemming from the complexity of the definition of children’s literature.
If the personal names in My Little Pony were intended to be meaningful characterization tools (as they
appear to be in the original to the source language users), translating the names so that they serve this
function could be one skopos. In short it could be described as follows; the names should allude to
qualities physical or psychological as intended by the original. If this were an assigned skopos, would a
translation where the names failed their purpose be a correct, or at the very least, a good enough (or
adequate (Toury 1995 quoted in Venuti 2004: 216) or instrumental (Nord 1997: 47–52)) translation at all?
Ultimately, the skopos of the translation determines what the parameters of an acceptable, adequate or
good enough translation are.
Although it is not without warranted criticism (Vermeer 2004: 230–234, Pym 2010: 56–59), skopos theory
provides particularly useful tools for determining whether translated and non-translated personal names
serve their intended purpose for the intended audience in this particular study. Translation strategies for
personal names are discussed in more detail in chapter 3.2.
19
Understanding the function of a fictive personal name is key to preserving the desired effect, however
subtle the reference or function may be. Because personal names have a dynamic role in the narrative,
Yvonne Bertills (2003: 194) argues that when translating personal names, especially when they carry
semantic value and allusions, the function of the name should remain faithful to the original and the
translator should be aware of the cultural context the original name has. For example, translator Alice
Martin retained British names in her translation of Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland when the characters
belonged to the real world to indicate the mundane, but changed or translated the names of characters
originating from Wonderland to highlight the curious (Oittinen 1997: 54), which could be seen as a
translator choosing a strategy to achieve a desired effect (functional equivalence, Vermeer 2004) and is in
keeping with Nord’s observation that translators can utilize many strategies within a single text (Nord
2003: 182–183, see also Kapari 2008).
Bertills (2003: 207) suggested the following categorization for translation strategies for the translation of
personal names, and continues that a translator can, or in fact must employ multiple strategies when
translating personal names with connotative value. Bertills’s categorizations are based on the categories
provided by Hermans (1988), which she expanded upon and are as follows:
1) copying: name is transferred completely unchanged from source text to target text, so that it
appears exactly as it was in the original
2) transcription: name is transliterated and adapted on different levels, such as spelling or
phonology
3) substitution: name is changed to a point where it no longer represents the original in form
4) translation: if name has semantic content, it can be translated to match source language meaning
in target text
5) non-translation: name is omitted in target text
6) replacement: name is replaced with a proper noun
From the above we can deduce that there are a number of strategies a translator can employ when
translating personal names. Not all translation strategies are actively used in personal name translation. A
translator may choose to use just one or two strategies, such as retention or domestication and direct
translation, or a combination of any number of strategies (Hermans 1988, Nord 2003). The translator may
also choose to change their strategy or solve translation problems on a case by case basis (Kapari 2008:
71-72).
20
3.2 Translation strategies for personal names
When studying what translation strategies were used in the two translations of My Little Pony Tales, I
used a list of strategies I adapted from the works of Nord (2003: 194–195), Hermans (1988 quoted in
Bertills 2003: 207) and Čičelytė and Jaleniauskienė (2009) and used as a categorization tool for my
bachelor’s thesis (Hirvonen 2012). Other terms have been used for these strategies; my choice of terms
has been a matter of personal preference over predetermined terminology (for example Bertills and
Hermans use different terminology and categorization). For the purposes of this study my original
categorization was insufficient, while Hermans’s and Bertills’s categorization seemed too sprawling and
imprecise, I re-adapted my original list of strategies as follows:
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
retention
domestication/Adaptation
direct translation
substitution
other
I will briefly define what each translation strategy means in my categorization.
1 Retention
Also called copying by Hermans, and direct translation by Čičelytė and Jaleniauskienė. The name is
retained and transferred unchanged to the target text. Retention can be utilized when a name is easily
read and understood in the target language. It can also function as a way of introducing the reader to a
foreign culture or creating a culture specific milieu (Stolt 1978: 137), such as the Harry Potter books
(where English milieu is nurtured via retention of personal names but not always proper names, like in
Jaana Kapari-Jatta’s translations of Harry Potter and Hermione Granger, but Likusteritie and Tylyaho).
However sometimes retention does not appear to serve a specific purpose and the reasons for retention
are unclear, with My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic as a case in point. One possible reason for retention
could be that the commissioner of the translation (author, publisher, trademark holder) wishes to
maintain brand integrity; that the names be same in every country. Because of this, Rarity remains Rarity
and Fluttershy is Fluttershy in the Finnish translation of My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic despite there
being no apparent need for retention (no milieu to retain).
2 Domestication/Adaptation
21
Domestication refers to the act of translating a conventional foreign name into target language
equivalent or otherwise. This strategy is most often used in children’s literature (Stolt 1978: 135–136,
Leppihalme 2007: 371), although it could be argued that all translation is in a way adaptation. It is a
common strategy for translating conventional personal names, as well as personal names with titles.
Examples of these include historic names such as Alexander the Great (Aleksanteri Suuri), King Carl Gustaf
(kuningas Kaarle Kustaa), as well as children’s literature characters Pippi Långstrump (Peppi Pitkätossu),
Emil I Lönneberga (Vaahteramäen Eemeli) and Kirsi Kunnas’s translation of Alice to Liisa.
In My Little Pony Tales, domestication is primarily used for conventional names. For example, Mr. Tidwell
(the school janitor) is translated as herra Jokinen, Logan is translated as Jaakko and the Barringtons
translates to Marjaset. These also fit the criteria for adaptation, where the name is not an apparent
equivalent to the original, but does not fit the criteria for substitution. Other domesticating adaptations
include a plural name Peaches adapted to singular Persikka, Meadowlark from bird to a grass Niittyheinä
and Daisy to a different type of flower Kielo.
3 Direct translation
Direct translation means that the elements have been translated word-for-word, or to their target
language equivalent (Bertills 2003: 207). It is utilized primarily for descriptive names or names that
contain descriptive elements (lexemes), and thus abovementioned conventional names do not meet the
criteria for this category. A conventional name can be translated to its perceived equivalent, or assigned
an appropriate conventional name in target language and culture, which by my categorization would fall
in the realm of domestication.
In My Little Pony Tales, many descriptive names are translated word-for-word when a direct translation is
possible. Examples include Amber (Meripihka), Peach Blossom (Persikan Kukka), Sugar (Sokeri) and Spot
(Täplä).
4 Substitution
A translator can choose to forgo the original name altogether and create a new name. When substitution
is used as a strategy, the resulting name can be domestically localized or foreign, ideally in preserving the
method that has been employed throughout. Substitution can also be used when there is no direct
equivalent in the target language or when other types of (such as phonetic) equivalence is preserved.
Substitution can also be used in place of direct translation, where names that would have an equivalent
are instead translated to something other than this perceived equivalent.
22
For this translation category, names can be non-descriptive or descriptive. Conventional names, even
when substituted, could still fall within the category of domestication rather than substitution. To meet
the criteria for substitution, the name must diverge from the original meaning, or not meet a perceivable
target language equivalent. In My Little Pony Tales, the name of a farm animal, Yorkie and its translation
Jörkki, belonged in this category. The translation could not sufficiently fulfill the criteria for translation or
adaptation, but appeared to be an attempt to preserve phonetic equivalence. Similarly, the pony
character name Squire and its translation Kuoro (en. choir) fit the criteria for substitution, where the
translation does not meet its target language equivalent of asemies or aseenkantaja (although on
personal note, this appears to be a translation error and not a conscious translation strategy, as the
English words squire and choir are pronounced similarly and are easily confused if the translator does not
have the original script and is translating from audio alone, see chapter 4.1).
Replacing the personal name with a proper noun or a personal pronoun could also fall in this category,
though there were not many instances of this type of substitution. Most notably in My Little Pony Tales,
Ms. Hackney is substituted with the appellative noun teacher, and Mr. Tidwell with the appellative noun
janitor instead of being referred to by personal names in the episode.
5 Other
Other strategies, such as omission or addition, are sometimes used when the name or character is not
deemed important or relevant to the reader/audience such as when the character is not seen or the
inclusion of the character is not important to the narrative. Omission is used to conserve time and space
especially in audiovisual translating and dubbing.
It should be noted that both omission and addition could be their own non-translation category and
studied separately. This is recommended if omission and/or addition seem to be a strong trend in a
translation, or when omission occurs as a way of substituting personal name with proper nouns or
personal pronouns (though in my categorization, this is included in substitution). In the case of my
materials both omission and addition are uncommon strategies consisting entirely of additions and
omissions, and all other names fit more specific categories, leaving no ambiguity in the other-category. In
My Little Pony Tales, the name Half Note is omitted for no discernable reason. The character is seen on
screen, but the dialogue with the name is omitted. In another instance, the name Riitta is added to a line
in dialogue that did not have a name in the original.
23
As discussed earlier and as suggested by Kapari-Jatta (2008), translators can use different strategies to
achieve an adequate translation, and are not confined to only using one or two strategies when
translating personal names. For example, in the two translations of My Little Pony Tales, all of the five
strategies defined above have been used to create the onomasticon (Bertills 2003) for their respective
Ponyverses.
Table 1 demonstrates how different strategies have been used in My Little Pony Tales, the results in this
table have been collected from two dubs of the same series, one by Nordic Agapio Oy (NA) which used a
domesticating approach and the other by Golden Voice Ab (GV) which employed a retentive strategy. The
numbers
1-5
correspond
with
the
number
of
strategies
listed
above
(retention,
domestication/adaptation, direct translation, substitution and other), the letter D stands for descriptive
name and C for conventional name. Not all names are included in table 1, as it is intended only to
showcase how different strategies can be used within one text (I use the term text loosely here, meaning
a dub translation). For a full list of all names and their categorization, see Hirvonen (2012).
Table 1. Translations of some personal names in Finnish dubs of My Little Pony Tales.
Name in original
Translation
Clover
Clover
Chevalier
Chevalier
Madame Percheron
Dub
D
C
1 2 3 4 5
GV
D
x
GV/NA
D
x
Madame Percheron
GV
D
x
Madame Percheron
Neiti Ranskanen
NA
D
Amber
Meripihka
NA
D
x
Half Note
Puolinuotti
NA
D
x
GV
D
Half Note
-
(omission)
x
x
Logan
Jaakko
NA
C
Yorkie
Jörkki
NA
C
x
Meadowlark
Niittyheinä
NA
D
x
Starlight
Tähti
NA
D
x
Robert (addition)
GV
C
Ms Hackney
Opettaja
GV
C
Ms Hackney
Neiti Simanen
NA
C
-
24
x
x
x
x
Squire
Kuoro
NA
D
In table 1, we see examples of the category 5 (other), strategies. These include an omission: where the
character Half-Note is seen on screen and her name is spoken in the original, but is omitted in the
translation, as well as addition: where the original line does not mention a character name, but the
translation has added a name of a character that is not seen on screen.
As Table 1 indicates, in the Nordic Agapio dub, several complementary translation strategies (adaptation,
direct translation and substitution) are used together to create a Finnish language context and
onomasticon. According to Bertills (2003: 194), when translating personal names in children’s literature,
the function of the name should be carried over to the resulting translation. It could be argued that if
personal names had a distinct function (such as to describe the character), the names should be
translated so that the function can be fulfilled also in the target language. However the translator has the
freedom to choose their translation strategy, and can choose to use retentive rather than adaptive
strategies. Or like Kapari-Jatta (2008) argues, choose a strategy on a case-by-case basis. The
commissioner of the translation can also have an effect on how personal names are translated.
25
x
4 Audiovisual translating and dubbing
In this chapter I will discuss pragmatic approaches to the theories and rules that are closely linked with
my chosen material. Firstly, I will explore the field of audiovisual translation, subtitling and dubbing. Of
these two dubbing is naturally more relevant to this particular study, but subtitling must also be
considered in this regard. Secondly, I will briefly consider the challenges recitability presents in the field of
dubbing.
4.1 Subtitling and dubbing
Worldwide, dubbing and voice-overs have been and still are used to make foreign language audiovisual
available to the audience. Dubbing is more common in some European countries, for example in Spain
and Italy content for all audiences, including adults, can be dubbed. In Finland dubbing is traditionally
used for translating children’s media (namely animations), however there are exceptions (e.g.
documentaries). A European Commission requested study indicates that reasons for subtitling, dubbing
and voice-overs are political (such as nationalistic identity), social (literacy and foreign language
knowledge), economic (level of demand) and cultural (preference or habit) (Media Consulting Group
2011: 23).
Subtitling is commonly used for foreign media aimed at literate (adult) audiences. It is more economical
to produce (Vertanen 2007: 150) and a preferred method for translation in countries with a high literacy
rate as well as high demand (Media Consulting Group 2011). However, in countries that produce a large
volume of content in native language (e.g. The United States and the United Kingdom) consumers may
feel more comfortable with a dub, as they are not accustomed to reading subtitles while watching
television, movies or games and would rather avoid it.
Next I will discuss dubbing in more detail. Tatu Tiihonen defines dubbing as a specific type of audiovisual
translation which incorporates theatrical translation, subtitling and poetry translation. Moreover, dubbing
shares principles with all these special fields of translation and is subject to similar considerations and
restrictions (2007: 171). Texts intended for dubbing require oral recitability much like theatrical scripts,
the timeframe for a speech act is limited and the quality of the mouth animation affects requirements for
26
phonetic equivalence in terms of vowel harmony as well as rhythm of syllables (ibid.). I will look into this
in more detail in the succeeding chapter.
According to Tiihonen, translators have previously had limited access to the content they were
translating, and would often translate directly from script or after only a single viewing of the source
content. The script would then be rehearsed and further post-translation script processing (such as
corrections, omissions and additions) would be fine-tuned during recording. Studio equipment as well as
animation quality have developed in recent years, requiring better quality translations to meet the
demands posed by more accurate mouth animation. Technological advances have made recording and
post-recording processing more efficient for voice actors and audiovisual designers, so fixing errors and
recording re-takes can now be done with relative ease compared to the equipment of yesteryear.
(Tiihonen 2007: 181).
Figure 4. Screen capture from My Little Pony Tales, 1992. Mouth animation makes some vowel sounds
more appropriate than others. Here the exclamation “Aah!” is more likely than “Eek!”
27
Presently advances in animation (not discrediting the hard work of skilled animators in the past) may have
increased the need for phonetic equivalence; disruptions in lip synchronizations due to mismatched
mouth animation and phonetic output (including but not limited to wrong mouth shape for a vowel,
pauses, mouth movement continues or stops out of synch with utterance) can have a negative effect on
the audience experience and illusion of text produced in native language, as well as result in diminished
perceived quality of the translation and/or dub . As such, translators must consider synchronization of
vowel sounds; especially when vowels begin or end a word or an utterance, they create a specific mouth
shape, and replacing it with a disharmonic vowel is likely to cause a disruption in lip synchronization (see
Tiihonen 2007: 179). Similarly, if a word or utterance becomes significantly longer or shorter than the
original, disruptions are likely to occur. Omission and condensation are common tools for translators
working on dubs. Time restrictions can apply even when mouth movement is not a part of the equation;
scene changes or sound effects sometimes determine how long an utterance can be when lip
synchronization is a non-issue. (Tiihonen 2007: 176.)
It may not be instantly apparent how this relates to descriptive names. However, the link is very simple.
Many descriptive words in English have a very disharmonic partner in Finnish due to the different
language families these two languages belong to (Hirvonen 2012). Furthermore, due to the differences in
the use of morphemes, such as stacking suffixes in Finnish, we can determine that Finnish generally has
words with more syllables. Alternatively, very complex multiword sentences can be expressed in a single
word in Finnish. These can become a considerable challenge when lip synchronization and time
restrictions must be considered.
4.2 Recitability
As mentioned in the preceding chapter, dubbing is subject to similar rules as theater scrips, poetry and to
some degree children’s literature (on reading aloud, see chapter 3 on translating for children). When
translating texts intended to be orally performed, it is not only time or vowel sounds that the translator
must consider. Although time and timing restrictions naturally play a large part, it is also the rhythm of
speech and allotted space for syllables that also affect how the text might be translated (Heikkinen 2007).
Children’s literature may often be read aloud and as such, texts for child audiences have to be carefully
formulated so that they might be easier to recite. Similarly, children who read for themselves would likely
28
benefit from text that was not too complex. Recitability in this context is closely linked to Oittinen’s
(1997) idea of readability, as children’s literature is often read aloud.
With recitability in mind, form may become less important than function. Vermeer’s (1984) skopos theory
may be relevant in the regard that if the text is supposed to be orally recited (it is its purpose) the text
should be translated (and arguably originally written) in a way that enables oral recitation. Moreover, for
a text intended for child audiences to read (or hear, or for voice actors to recite), it would be imperative
that the text not be complicated in rhythm or riddled with elaborate syntax, complex verbs or verbose
vocabulary (Oittinen 1997: 103). This is not to discredit the child audience, but rather to consider their
cognitive capacity and possible linguistic limitations (adult author and child reader dichotomy, see Bertills
2003 and Oittinen 2000).
Recitability is especially important for scripts intended for dubbing. Modern dubs for children will often
retain original English names. It must be noted here that the majority of animated content for children
aired in Finland’s commercial channels in 2015 is primarily either American or British, and seldom from
other countries or originating from other languages, which has not always been the case. Examples of
animations from other countries include Japanese Tao Tao Ehonkan (fin. Tao Tao), Spanish La vuelta al
mundo de Willy Fog (fin. Matka maailmanympäri 80 päivässä) and German Die Biene Maja (fin. Maija
Mehiläinen), as well as many others. This modern trend seems to bring challenges to voice actors, as not
all names are easy to pronounce or fit properly in an otherwise Finnish text, which result in multiple
pronunciations of the same name (for example Klou-ver and Clover, Ted-dy and Te-di), or line flubs.
However difficulties in pronunciation does not appear to be of much concern to publishers as the practice
seems to be increasing on commercial channels. This estimate is based on personal observation alone
from observations on series including but not limited to Totally Spies, Pokémon, Beyblade, Monster High
and Kim Possible. Furthermore, it should also be noted that the Finnish public broadcasting network YLE
continues to produce dubs to different age groups where names have been translated, such as Paw
Patrol (fin. Ryhmä hau), Peppa the Pig (fin. Pipsa Possu), and The Wild Soccer Bunch (fin. Villit futarit). An
interesting exception to the rule of dubbing is French animation series Le Ranch (fin. Mistral) broadcast
on YLE, which is subtitled from French rather than dubbed despite perceived intended audience being the
same as for The Wild Soccer Bunch.
In terms of My Little Pony, it could be noted that the characters have names that could potentially be
(and occasionally are) clearly difficult to pronounce. As a language, Finnish does not have an alveolar /r/
29
sound like that in English, and as such names such as Sweetheart and Starlight can pose challenges. Bright
Eyes is frequently mispronounced Brite Eyes (or Braitais) due to a lack of any silent letters in the Finnish
language and the pronounced alveoral trill r instead of the alveoral approximant /r/. Because of minor but
frequent hiccups in pronunciation, recitability of the entire script can be compromised.
30
5 Material and methods
In this chapter I endeavor to introduce my research material as well as discuss the origins of the My Little
Pony franchise in order to shed some light into what may otherwise seem like a very arbitrary subject of
study. Following the introduction of the background material the primary materials for analytical research
(that is, survey questionnaire provided for the children) will be discussed in detail. Following the materials
chapter is the method of data collection and processing, as well as a brief mention of how the data will be
stored.
5.1 The My Little Pony franchise, the Ponyverse and My Little Pony Tales
It is imperative to understand some key elements of the My Little Pony franchise to understand the
foundation of this study. I will discuss the history of the franchise before introducing my chosen research
materials (ie. My Little Pony Tales). The Ponyverse is a term coined by fans and encompasses the fictive
world (or indeed, universe) which the pony franchise stems from.
The My Little Pony franchise was originally developed by illustrator Bonnie Zacherle, sculptor Charles
Muenchinger and manager Steve D'Aguanno and launched by toy company Hasbro in 1983 with a line of
colorful plastic pony toys. To aid sales in the 80s, Hasbro also developed animated series, full length
feature films and animated specials featuring pony characters that could also be purchased as toys. In the
original launch, My Little Pony characters were primarily pastel colored ponies (including flying pegasi,
merpony and unicorn characters), various other fantasy critters and a few human characters. Ponies
would embark on adventures with or without their human friends. Although they could do some humanrelated tasks (such as building with tools), they were primarily confined to their physique as four-legged
equines, thus holding tools in their mouths rather than their hooves.
Altogether the franchise is divided into 4 generations by toy collectors. The first generation (G1) was
intended for child audiences consisting primarily of girls. Perhaps the nobler idea behind the franchise
was to provide girls with an alternative to traditional toys such as dolls or play housewares. The animation
was also aimed primarily at young girls, supporting an idea of perseverance, importance of friendship and
working together, and the power of imagination. Later generations have seen a shift in focus to appeal to
different age groups with adjustments to character design and story thematic.
31
I have chosen the 1992 animated series My Little Pony Tales as my research material. This series belongs
in the first generation of My Little Pony, although it saw a redesign both in character design as well as
thematic content. In this launch of the Ponyverse, as many fans have come to call it, the ponies are
presented as anthropomorphized; they attend school and run businesses, there is an economy where
money is exchanged for goods. In Ponyverse ponies represent people, there are no humans in the relaunch My Little Pony Tales, though humans had been incorporated in the earlier series and re-introduced
in the latest launch, My Little Pony: Equestria Girls (Hasbro 2014).
A very particular feature of the Ponyverse is the use of descriptive personal names (see chapter 2.1).
Ponies are often (but not always) named after colors, occupations, origin, objects or personality
attributes, or combination of these. Furthermore, names can also allude to the ‘cutie mark’, which is an
image on the ponies’ flank representing their unique talents or other attributes (e.g. musical instruments,
weather symbols, nature, etc.), as seen in figure 5. below.
Figure 5. A collection of Generation 1 Cutie Marks with associated pony names showing correlation of
name and cutie mark image.
My Little Pony Tales was produced by Graz Entertainment and Sunbow Creations for Hasbro, and ran for
one season consisting of 26 episodes with a runtime of approximately 10 minutes each (intro and outro
not included). No special episodes or films were made for this launch.
The intended audience, based on my personal observation and evaluation on the animated content,
appears to be primary to children ages 7 to 13, with many themes revolving around doing well in school,
32
being a good friend, honesty, nature conservation, prejudice and the importance of open mindedness, as
well as consumerism and fame; all culturally common themes to school children of the 1990s. The DVD
has an age rating appropriate for ages 7 and up.
The series was first released in Finland for VHS tape in 1992, translated and dubbed in Finnish by Golden
Voice AB. The VHS release omitted a few episodes, and consists of 20 episodes. The series was rereleased for television in 1997 on commercial channel Nelonen, this time translated and dubbed by
Nordic Agapio Oy. This release retained all original 26 episodes. It should also be noted that in the Nordic
Agapio dub, character names occasionally change (Clover is called both Apila and Clover), which could
cause confusion. The series was re-released on DVD in 2006, with DVDs containing four episodes each.
This DVD release was digitized from the 1992 Golden Voice AB translated VHS material, though a single
episode appears to have been re-dubbed by another company. The DVDs do not list information on the
translations, so it is presently unknown why one episode saw a substituted translation and dub and
whose handiwork it is.
5.2 Video Clip
My research is conducted in school classes, where participants are shown either the Nordic Agapio or the
Golden Voice dubbed version of the same episode. After viewing, participants are asked to fill out a
questionnaire based on the video they have just seen. The questionnaires are otherwise identical, with
the exception that the names of the characters correspond with the dub the participants have seen.
Two videos serve as the basis for the comparative questionnaire, which will be explained in greater detail
in chapter 5.3. The audience was be presented with the episode ‘I Stand by You’ (runtime approx. 10
minutes), which features several characters that are referred to by their name. The audience saw a dub of
the same episode by either Nordic Agapio Oy, or Golden Voice AB. By approximation an equal amount of
children were shown each video. The data collected from this sample will be analyzed both qualitatively
and quantitatively in chapter 6.
The video has been appropriately time stamped with name occurrences. The time stamping and name
occurrence statistics were manually extracted from each episode. The number of name occurrences will
likely be a helpful tool in determining whether repetition plays a part in character recognition and name
memorability, which will be explored in chapter 6.
33
Time stamped list of name occurrences from each episode is available in the appendix.
5.2.1 Plot synopsis
In the episode ‘I Stand by You’, Melody brings her new tape recorder to school. However when the
recorder goes missing, accusations quickly turn to the class troublemaker, Teddy. The ponies hold a mock
court in class to determine who took the missing recorder. Sweetheart is forced to make a choice
between doing the right thing and her friends. She defends Teddy in court and solves the mystery of the
lost tape recorder, which was in the lost and found bin the entire time. The episode ends with a recap of
what can be learned from this incident; standing by what you believe in even when no one supports you,
not making hasty accusations, and that everyone deserves and needs a friend.
The episode provides some helpful characterization tools throughout. Melody’s musical inclination is
hinted at by her name, enthusiasm for her new tape recorder and her cutie mark is a star and a
microphone. She acts like a proper diva and is quick to jump to conclusions, which is in keeping with her
dramatic personality. Sweetheart always gives everyone the benefit of the doubt and stays true to herself
even in times of adversity. She is friends with the main cast but also with Teddy and she stands by her
friends despite pressure from others. She is portrayed as kind and friendly, but also firm. Her cutie mark is
a heart. Teddy is portrayed as a rambunctious troublemaker, but Sweetheart’s song in the episode also
sheds light on his compassionate and gentle side. He may appear rough and rude but is not inherently
bad at heart. Teddy’s cutie mark is a comb and does not directly refer to his personality. His name is an
allusion to his secret stuffed teddy bear, and also implies that he has a softer, gentler side. Starlight,
Bright Eyes, Bon Bon, Clover and Patch only have brief lines in the episode. Starlight is assigned the role of
judge in court because she is always fair and does not take sides. Bright Eyes is diligent and detail
oriented, and is assigned the role of prosecutor; she is seen working very hard on a list of reasons why
Teddy may be guilty of theft. Starlight’s cutie mark is a star (refers to her name), Bright Eyes’s cutie mark
is a notebook (refers to her personality). Bon Bon and Clover both speak a couple of lines but not much
can be determined of their character based on their discourse. Their cutie marks correspond with their
names (candy for Bon Bon and a four-leaf clover for Clover), which may help children in character
recognition. Patch is never named during the episode, but she speaks two lines.
Other characters include Miss Hackney (teacher) and Mr. Tidwell (janitor). These characters play minor
parts, and I did not include them in the questionnaire. Another reason for the omission of these
34
characters from the questionnaire was that as adult characters, the children might not identify with them,
and also that their ideas of the characters might be impacted with their preconceived ideas of what it
means to be a teacher or a janitor.
5.3 Questionnaire
The survey questionnaire was conducted in Joensuu Normaalikoulu during the fall semester in
September, 2014. Two classes took part in the questionnaire, with respondents’ ages ranging between 7
to 9 years old.
A questionnaire was handed out to the children in the classroom. The children were asked to fill in their
personal information (age, native language) and complete four questions. The questions should be
answered only after viewing the clip, and the children were instructed not to look at the questions
beforehand. To further enforce this instruction, the children were asked to turn the paper around so that
they can focus on the video. When the video is finished, participants were asked to turn their paper
around or open the survey again to begin answering questions. The main motivation behind this
procedure is that the children would not orient themselves any certain way before viewing the video clip,
so that the answers would reflect a response after a leisurely viewing and not an isolated test situation. If
the children were aware that they would be asked to recognize and write down character names, it might
affect them in a way that they would be more mindful of the characters, which would not reflect a
leisurely real-life viewing situation.
The questionnaire features both open-ended free association questions, where the children will be asked
to describe a character using only a few words or to name their own character (not seen in the episode),
as well as multiple choice questions where the children are asked to name three (3) characters from the
show, and draw lines between characters to match with their names. The questionnaire features only a
limited amount of questions (four separate tasks) to avoid overwhelming the children and to ensure filling
out the questionnaire will not take longer than 30 minutes. Though the primary reason for such a fast
paced questionnaire may be to save the teacher’s time so that the class may resume with regular
curriculum, it is also to ensure that children do not take too long to consider their options. Snap
35
judgments about characters may prove to be more intuitive than if the children are allowed to brainstorm
on characteristics indefinitely.
Teachers were allowed to provide instructions, however they are not allowed to prompt the children in
any way. That is, they are allowed to repeat the instructions (to remind the children what to do if they do
not know the answer or if they cannot think of anything to write, in which case the teacher or parents
would instruct the child to leave the answer blank), but they cannot offer examples (such as instructing
the children to use words like nice or friendly). I am responsible of handing out, collecting and storing
finished questionnaires. In a real life situation I was also personally responsible for instructing the children
and teachers only provided additional support when children were getting carried away or talking during
the questionnaire.
An example of a blank questionnaire is available in the appendix.
5.4 Data collection and processing
The completed questionnaire slips were collected and labelled with the appropriate class identification.
Identification will be used to determine which version of the video clip the children saw, as well as what
grade they represent (NA, representing Nordic Agapio dub with translated names, and GV, representing
Golden Voice dub with non-translated names). The data was transferred to a computer via Excel to
further simplify the analytic processing, with respondent assigned arbitrary identification numbers 1
through 13 for both groups.
The children were also asked to fill out their age and tick the appropriate box for native language. Native
language options are Finnish, English and Other. Finnish and English are explicitly asked because an
English speaking child may understand the allusions in descriptive names that are lost to their non-English
speaking peers. Other is included because being a native speaker of neither Finnish nor English may also
affect the child’s ability to understand alluded qualities as well as provide them with a limited vocabulary
in Finnish.
Personal data that will be utilized contains the respondents’ age and native language. Sex is included in
the personal data, but will only be utilized if a trend can be determined to be affected by respondents’
36
sex. Thusly the responses do not contain any significant personal data and cannot be reliably traced to
any one single child. Further data such as respondents’ names are not included. This is done to protect
the children’s privacy all the while keeping track of essential research data.
For the free association portion of the questionnaire, the data is submitted and explored in Microsoft
Excel to interpret and categorize the answers. Both the quality as well as the frequency of words is looked
at. This data will also be used to make interpretations on how well they resonate with what would be the
assumed allusions of a given name, as well as appropriate characterizations based on character behavior.
Assumed allusions or characterizations will be discussed in the analysis chapter to better maintain a clear
image of the results.
Allusions will be looked at in the form of a free association task where the participants are asked to
describe characters they saw in the video with a few descriptive words. Three response lines have been
assigned so as not to overwhelm the children. I will be looking at the types of words that are used
(whether they are externally descriptive such as color, or implicitly such as temperament). I will also look
at whether descriptive name will result in repetitions in descriptions (i.e. if Sweetheart will result in
answers such as ‘sweet’ or variant of the word).
A free association task is also provided where the participants are requested to give a name to a
previously unnamed character. The purpose of this task is to discover what kind of tools the children
employ in naming the character and if they are in correspondence with My Little Pony personal name
conventions (whether the name is conventional or descriptive, and if it alludes to implicit or explicit
qualities). It is also used to measure whether language context of other names in the episode has effect
on how children choose to name their character.
Multiple choice answers will be looked at separately to determine trends and frequency (or, accuracy) in
character name recall. Data will be submitted through Excel sheets to determine frequency of blanks,
accuracy in terms of correct and incorrect answers, as well as sort through appropriate data to provide
further insight into the quantitative aspects of this survey. It can also be debated whether it is the
character itself or the name that is being recognized and recalled, however that may warrant a very
different type of research not suitable within the confines of this study.
Recognition questions ask the participants to spell out the character name. Blank answers are valid, and
will be explored in the analysis chapter to determine possible causes for lack of answer. The participants
37
are also asked to join a name and a character with an extra name included to determine whether the
children remember and/or can make the connection based on other qualities (character name and cutie
mark are corresponding in both versions of the questionnaire).
The completed questionnaires will likely not be made public to ensure participant anonymity. Partial
questionnaire results are included in no specific respondent order.
38
6 Results and analysis
In this chapter the data collected from the questionnaire responses is presented. This chapter looks at
some of the key elements that arose from the questionnaire as well as provides further qualitative
analysis into results collected from the free association tasks included. Name recall will be subject to both
quantitative and qualitative analyses, and will be the first point of discussion. The results of the analysis
will be discussed in detail at the end of this chapter and revisited briefly in the concluding chapter.
The results are divided between a quantitative portion (name recognition tasks) as well as a qualitative
portion (free association tasks). They will be discussed chronologically in this order for clarity and
coherence with the questionnaire survey construct.
It should be noted that the number of respondents was lower than originally anticipated and as such the
data cannot be used to more than making broad generalizations.
6.1 Name recognition task: Name this pony
In the first task of the questionnaire the participants were asked to name three characters who were the
primary protagonists of the episode they were shown. The characters Teddy, Sweetheart (Hellä) and
Starlight (Tähti) are named in the episode multiple times. My intention was to see whether Finnish names
would be recalled with better frequency than their English counterparts, measured by combined correct
answers, as well as incorrectly spelled answers. I will first discuss the results of each dub separately
beginning with the Nordic Agapio dub (later, NA) with Finnish translated names, second the Golden Voice
dub (later, GV), lastly making comparisons between the two.
6.1.1 Naming characters with translated names
The characters are called Teddy, Hellä and Tähti in this version. It should be noted that in this version, the
spelling of Teddy is the same as in the original, as it appears this way on the DVD cover. Altogether 10
participants were shown the NA dub, with participants’ ages ranging between 8 and 9 years old.
39
The maximum answers in this group is 30 (calculated by number of naming questions (3) times number of
respondents (10)), constituting 100% of answers. Data concerning the recognition of any single character
will be compared against 10 answers, which constitutes 100% for a single question. Each character will be
analyzed separately.
Finnish was listed as the language of the home by 7 respondents, Finnish, English and Other by 2
respondents and Finnish and Other by 1 respondent. Other languages were not explicitly specified in the
survey, but personal survey observation notes list other languages spoken at home as Russian and Syrian.
Group consisted mostly of boys, but sex did not seem to be an indicator when looking for trends in
responses, so it is not taken into consideration for this group. Native language did not appear to have
effect on responses for this task.
6.1.2. Overall recognition patterns
Responses are grouped as either positive identification or negative identification. Positive identification
answers include correctly named characters and incorrectly spelled character names (where the name
and character can be reliably matched despite misspelling, for example Tedi can be matched with Teddy).
Negative identifications include incorrect names (names belonging to other characters or misspelled
without reliable match) and blank answers. Blank answers will also be looked at as a margin of overall
recognition alongside positive and negative identifications. If a response was all blanks, it is excluded from
the responses but still considered for the overall recognition margin.
40
Nordic Agapio
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Correct
Incorrect
spelling
Wrong
character
Incorrect
Responses
Blank
Correct vs
incorrect
Total
Figure 6. Nordic Agapio all survey responses for recognition task.
In this group the divide between positive identifications and negative identifications was a distinctive 50%
versus 50%, with the answers divided to:
a) 14 blank answers,
b) 1 incorrect
c) 0 wrong character (no character match)
d) 8 incorrect spelling (character match)
e) 7 correct answers;
This constitutes a 15/30 in correct and 15/30 in incorrect answers.
I had expected a higher recognition level due to the Finnish origin character names being relatively easy
to spell and identify as words. However it became apparent that language had an effect on overall
recognition as well as ability to provide viable survey answers, as will be evident when the survey data is
compared against the data from the English character name version.
This group yielded one full blank response. The respondent also failed to answer other survey questions,
and their survey could conceivably be excluded from the data. However I chose to keep this particular
respondent as their language of the home was neither Finnish nor English, and it was possible that this
41
language barrier may have affected their performance. If the survey were to be left out it would change
the data to have a higher recognition rating for characters overall.
The character with the highest recognition rating was Teddy (9/10 respondents), however his name was
misspelled by 8 times out of 9 of all positively identifying respondents. This result will be explored in more
detail in the preceding sub-chapter. Tähti was the second most recognized character with a 4/10
recognition rating despite playing a relatively minor role compared to Hellä, who was positively identified
by only 2/10 of respondents. My interpretation of possible reasons for this will be discussed in more
detail in their respective chapters.
There was one incorrect response, in which the respondent had named Tähti with a Finnish conventional
name, Leena. Leena is not a name for any character in the series, and as such constitutes an incorrect
response.
6.1.3. Recognition patterns by character
The previous chapter explored the performance of the NA group as a whole. In this chapter the results of
each individual character are studied in greater detail to further illuminate how each character was
recognized, name was remembered and name was spelled. The names are in the following order; firstly
Tähti, secondly Hellä and finally Teddy. The response data for each character is provided in a table for
further clarity.
42
Table 2a. All responses for identification task for Tähti in NA group.
Tähti
Response
Frequency
Percentage
Correct
4
40%
Incorrect
0
0
Wrong spelling
0
0
Wrong character
0
0
4/10
40%
Total:
As apparent in table 2a, Tähti was positively identified by 4 respondents, corresponding 40% of all
responses and also being identified with most accuracy. The character plays only a minor part in the
episode and is specifically named five times. No other answers were assigned to Tähti, her name was not
misspelled nor was she falsely identified as another character. Six respondents left her name blank.
One possible interpretation for this is that her part is rather minor. She speaks less than ten lines and is
named on five occasions, compared to the main protagonists Hellä and Teddy who are named more often
and speak the majority of lines in the episode. However, her cutie mark corresponds with her name, as
discussed in earlier chapters. This could improve children’s ability to associate the name to the character;
it alludes directly to the character’s appearance and is readily available as a point of reference when
looking at the character, similar to names such as ‘Grumpy Smurf’ or ‘Blackbeard’.
Because ‘tähti’ is a Finnish generic word for ‘star’, it could also explain why she is recognized (her name
spelled correctly) with greater accuracy than Teddy, and more frequently than Hellä, despite having only
a minor part in the episode. However these are simply educated guesses, as due to time restraints I did
not ask the children to explain how they came to the conclusions they did with their answers (whether
extratextual cues were used) and it could be interesting to study character name recognition further by
interviews or open ended questions.
43
Table 2b. All responses for Hellä for identification task in NA group.
Hellä
Response
Frequency
Percentage
Correct
2
20%
Incorrect
1
10%
Wrong spelling
0
0
Wrong character
0
0
3/10
30%
Total:
Hellä is a main protagonist in this episode. She is named on six occasions, speaks in excess of ten lines and
has a brief song towards the end of the episode. She was correctly identified by 2/10 respondents, with
no misspellings, constituting only 20% of all respondents. Curiously, one respondent chose to engage in
creative liberties and renamed Hellä altogether with a conventional Finnish female name, Leena.
Altogether 7 respondents left her name blank.
Although ‘hellä’ is a generic Finnish language word for kind or gentle, the name refers most actively to the
character’s demeanor. Her cutie mark is a large heart surrounded by small hearts, which makes the
original English name Sweetheart resonate with both her personality as well as her external appearance.
This is not as much the case with the Finnish name Hellä, which could attribute to the low recognition
rate, as her name is not as readily recalled from simply perceiving the character’s appearance.
It could also be noted that perhaps the archaic word sydänkäpy could have been substituted for
Sweetheart as it has been in earlier versions of My Little Pony, and the name would have corresponded
with both demeanor and appearance. However, according to Kielitoimiston sanakirja, sydänkäpy is an
affectionate pet name for cherished or toddler, and might not have been an appropriate translation.
It is very difficult to fathom why the wrong response, Leena, manifested. Leena is not a name of any of
the characters, and it is questionable whether Hellä could be misheard as Leena multiple times
throughout the episode. It could be a simple matter of not wanting to leave answers blank and answering
something even when the respondent did not have the correct answer. It is also possible the respondent
substituted the name with Leena from forgetting the correct name but perhaps having interpreted Hellä
44
as an archaic conventional female name and making a guess at the response. The children were advised
to leave responses blank when they could not remember character names.
Table 2c. All responses for Teddy in identification task for NA group.
Teddy
Response
Frequency
Percentage
Correct
1
10%
Incorrect
0
0
Wrong spelling
8
80%
Wrong character
0
0
9/10
90%
Total:
The spelling of Teddy could be argued, but the official Finnish DVD sleeve spelling is considered to be the
correct spelling in this study. However, respondents were not shown how to spell the name, they only
heard it spoken during the episode. Teddy was a primary main protagonist (or perhaps, antagonist?) in
this episode. He is named by most of the characters who speak lines, altogether 25 times. In fact the very
last word spoken in the episode just before the end is ‘Teddy’. The sheer number of repetitions could
partially explain why he is positively identified by 9 out of 10 respondents. However, only one participant
was able to spell his name correctly, with the other responses containing misspellings.
Teddy is misspelled by 8 respondents, which corresponds 89% of all positive identifications. Suggested
spellings which can still be associated with the correct character without surmountable doubt include
1) Tedi (4)
2) Ted (2)
3) Dedi (1)
4) Thed (1)
The numerous misspellings could be an indication that children were unsure of how a seemingly foreign
origin name should be spelled in an otherwise Finnish language text, with 50% of incorrect spellings being
Tedi; very close phonetic resemblance to how most character pronounce the name. The name is also
exaggerated as Ted-di with a distinctive double consonant in some lines, but this spelling did not occur in
the responses.
45
One of the reasons for a high ratio of misspelled answers could hypothetically be that both the letters D
and Y are not typical in conventional Finnish names and can be result of an imported name (such as
Swedish Daniel or Norwegian Ylva), although not always (consider Yrjö). Because the English Y is usually
pronounced akin to the Finnish I, and the Finnish Y as the last letter of a name is often pronounced
differently from English, confusion on the correct letter is almost inevitable in a Finnish language context.
Ted and Thed are possibly result of this language confusion, and children may have assumed the
nominate name to be Ted, and that it conjugates to Ted +i (+llä , +lle) because it ends in a consonant. This
is likely beyond the children’s formal Finnish grammar training, but simply a matter of inherent language
knowledge. These too are understandable mistakes, though the spelling Thed is curious in the sense that
Finnish language does not have a dental fricative sound equivalent to the English ⟨th⟩ (as in this or that),
nor is this spelling native to the Finnish language. A possible reason for this spelling may also lie in the
phonetic sounds the janitor character makes when speaking to or about Teddy.
6.1.4 Naming characters with non-translated names
In the Golden Voice (later GV) group there were 14 participants, with a total of 42 answers constituting
100% of responses (number of respondents (14) times number of naming answers (3) and like in the
previous group, all answers regarding any single character is compared against the total number of
responses, in this group 14. In the GV version dub the characters retain their English names as Teddy,
Starlight and Sweetheart.
Because of a lapse in communication this group was erroneously younger than anticipated, with
participants aged 7 to 8 years old. It should be noted that participants in this age group have likely little or
no prior English language skills, which could have affected the results. However, it is also relevant to study
how children with no English language skills relate to descriptive names they might not understand.
Finnish was the primary language of the home for 11 respondents, Finnish and Other by 3 respondents.
Like in the NA group, languages were not explicitly specified.
6.1.5 Overall recognition patterns
46
As explained in 6.1.2, overall recognition patterns are determined by the combined frequencies of
positive and negative identifications. In the GV group there was a larger discrepancy between positive
and negative identifications, and the group also saw more blank answers than the NA group. The divide
between positive and negative identifications is 12% versus 88%. The answers were divided as follows:
a) 29 blank answers
b) 3 incorrect
c)
5 wrong character (no match),
d) 2 incorrect spelling (character match)
e) 3 correct answers;
Which constitutes 37/42 incorrect and 5/42 correct answers.
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Correct
Incorrect
Spelling
Wrong
character
Incorrect
Responses
Blank
Correct vs
incorrect
Total
Figure 7. Golden Voice all survey responses for recognition task.
I had expected difficulties in the English language version, but expected to also see more misspellings. It
would appear that the respondents chose to leave characters blank rather than attempt to spell names
they may have had difficulty understanding in terms of translating appropriate phonemic content to text.
It is little more than an educated assumption, as I chose not to interview the respondents and did not
acquire a further insight as to why they chose to not respond at all.
47
Another curious observation was the number of character confusions, where a character was assigned
the wrong name. Wrongly named character was recorded a total of 5 times, resulting in 12% of all
responses and 35% of all respondents. The names suggested were Bon Bon (3), Clover (1) and Starlight
(1). A possible explanation for this could be that the respondents tapped into another task that provided
character names (Bon Bon, Patch, Clover and Ace), and chose to use names that they could both read on
the survey paper and had heard in the episode as Bon Bon and Clover are named characters who appear
briefly on screen and speak a few lines. Starlight was assigned to Sweetheart. Incorrectly named
characters will be revisited when analyzing character responses separately.
This group yielded a total of 29 blank answers, with 7 surveys as complete blanks (no response on any of
the three naming questions for the first task). The high number of blanks (69% of all responses) could be
related to the English language names, which were frequently pronounced differently by different voice
actors. With respondents unsure or not knowing how to spell these names and choosing, as instructed, to
not respond when they did not know or remember the character name. Out of the 7 full blank surveys, 6
came from respondents aged 7 years old and 1 from 8 year old respondent. It cannot be established with
enough certainty that age would have played a part in this result, however it could be argued that 7 year
old respondents (having started 1st grade the fall before the survey took place) may have been less
experienced with a test setting and hence felt less confident to attempt answering when they were not
certain of the correct spelling.
The character with the highest recognition in this group was Teddy (5/14 respondents) which constitutes
35% of all respondents. Sweetheart was positively identified by only 7% of respondents. Starlight was not
identified correctly by any respondents; however, Starlight was correctly spelled but misidentified by one
respondent, who wrongly assigned the name to Sweetheart. Possible reasons for this could be a simple
error when writing down the response, or a genuine misidentification.
6.1.6 Recognition patterns by character
Like in chapter 6.1.3, the responses for each character are first explored separately to better illustrate the
data of how each character name was recognized by the respondents. The characters are in the following
order; firstly Starlight, secondly Sweetheart and finally Teddy.
48
Table 3a. All responses for Starlight in identification task for GV group.
Starlight
Response
Frequency
Percentage
Correct
0
0
Incorrect
1
7%
Wrong spelling
0
0
Wrong character
3
21%
4/14
28%
Total:
None of the respondents were able to identify Starlight correctly; however she was named incorrectly in
four surveys. Altogether she was assigned the wrong character name 3 times, with name suggestions
being Bon Bon (2) and Clover (1). She was also given a completely invented name on 1 survey.
Starlight was assigned a conventional Finnish female name Ronja, despite the name not fitting with the
naming conventions in the episode (names are in English). As previously observed, reasons for this are
obscured to me at this time and could be a case of not wanting to leave a blank answer in the event that
the respondent did not know the correct answer despite having been told to do so.
One potential explanation as to why Starlight was not positively identified nor misspelled by any of the
respondents could be that her name contains phonemes that may be difficult to translate into lexical
elements. Finnish language lacks the English alveoral r, and pronunciations of Starlight ranged from silent
r [Sta:lait] to exaggerated trill r [StaR-lait] sound by different characters. This could have surmounted to
confusion as to how the name should be spelled. I had anticipated misspellings but it could be that the
foreign phonemes were intimidating to such degree that respondents preferred to leave the answer
completely blank instead of trying to translate what they could not confidently understand into a written
name.
Furthermore, it appears the allusion to Starlight’s cutie mark, a star, was lost to the respondents and
unlike in the Finnish context episode (Tähti corresponding with the image of a star and the allusion being
understood) they were unable to use this extratextual element in this recognition task. This could be
49
because the respondents do not yet know or understand English enough to make a meaningful
connection between the name Starlight and the image of a star.
As previously argued in chapter 6.1.5, my assumption as to why Starlight was assigned the wrong
character names Bon Bon and Clover could do with children using the questionnaire paper as a guide for
answering this task. Bon Bon and Clover are also named in the episode, which could attribute to children
recognizing the name and spelling, as it was provided for another task further in the survey (see appendix
for reference).
Also worth noticing is the fact that Starlight was spelled correctly on one survey; however her name had
been assigned to Sweetheart instead of the correct character. On one hand this could have been a simple
error when writing the answer down, as the answer could have been accidentally written on the wrong
response line. On the other hand, it could be a case of genuinely mistaken identity. It is difficult to discern
what may be the case, as I cannot identify the respondent or ask them why they have respondent in the
fashion that they did. So it could be argued that Starlight may have been positively identified by one
respondent, with the name correctly spelled.
Table 3b. All responses for Sweetheart in identification task for GV group.
Sweetheart
Response
Frequency
Percentage
Correct
0
0
Incorrect
0
0
Wrong spelling
0
0
Wrong character
2
14%
2/14
14%
Total:
Sweetheart was not positively identified by any respondent, and incorrectly identified as Starlight and
Clover once. Overall, 12 out of 14 respondents chose to leave her name as a blank, resulting in 93%
incorrect or negative identifications. As discussed in the preceding chapter, being wrongly identified as
Starlight could have been a simple error of placement, rather than a genuine misidentification.
Possible reasons for a high level of blanks (85% of all respondents) could be that, much like Starlight,
Sweetheart has phonetic elements that may be difficult for Finnish speaking respondent to transfer into
50
Finnish syllables. Furthermore, in the same vein it can also be argued that much like in the case of
Starlight, Sweetheart’s name saw diverse variation in pronunciation, which might have further hindered
comprehension as to how the name should be spelled.
Because respondents may not have felt comfortable with identifying the phonemes in Sweetheart, they
may have opted to leave the name blank instead of trying to answer to the best of their ability and
understanding. This could have been avoided with more precise instructions to write the name as they
hear it, with disregard to how the name may actually be spelled. This could be the reason for such a high
frequency of blanks.
Table 3c. All responses for Teddy in identification task for GV group.
Teddy
Response
Frequency
Percentage
Correct
3
21%
Incorrect
1
7%
Wrong spelling
2
14%
Wrong character
0
0
6/14
42%
Total:
As with the NA group, Teddy was positively identified most often. Altogether 36% of all respondents
identified Teddy correctly. Teddy’s name was also spelled correctly more often than in the NA group (10%
correct spelling in NA versus 21% correct spelling in GV), and with only two misspellings (14%). As
mentioned in 6.1.3., this could be result of sheer repetition, as Teddy’s name is repeated in excess of 15
times during the episode, thus making it more likely to be remembered than the other names.
Alternative spelling offered in this group of surveys is Ted (2), which manifests in two surveys. Although
the voice acting does not seem to actively promote mishearing Teddy as Ted, it could be a similar
conjugation misunderstanding as I proposed in 6.1.3 with the NA dub. However the characters pronounce
Teddy in many different ways, and seem inconsistent in conjugating the name, for example Sweetheart is
heard referring to Teddy in genitive as both Ted [+i] [+n] as well as Teddy [+n], the teacher also speaks to
Teddy as both Tedi as well as very articulated Ted-dy.
51
One possible explanation for higher accuracy in correct spelling of Teddy could be that characters actively
pronounce the name exactly as it is written as Teddy, exposing all the letters phonetically which was not
the case in the NA dub where characters routinely pronounce the name as Tedi or Teddi. Alternatively,
the children may have also been affected by the English language context, and have recognized the name
as an English origin name. In this case the spelling of Teddy with a double consonant and Y seem
appropriate, whereas in the case of trying to fit the name within a Finnish context, names with a dropped
D and a I substitute for Y were more common.
One respondent named Teddy as Teeri, which I marked as incorrect. Although the name bears some
resemblance to the original, I interpreted the deviation in both spelling and meaning (en. black grouse)
significant enough to warrant it as an incorrect answer.
6.1.7 Comparisons of recognition patterns between translated and non-translated names
Although the results have been analyzed separately, I also intended to explore the aggregate of data
comparatively. In chapter 1 I hypothesized that Finnish language names would see a greater rate of
recognition (as measured by positive identifications) and greater accuracy in spelling (as measured by
correct answers) than their English counterparts. The initial results as proposed in chapters 6.1.1 and
6.1.5 would indicate that this hypothesis may be accurate, with NA group having greater positive
recognition rate than the GV group. However, it should be noted that the body of data for this
questionnaire was very low with only 24 participants in total and should be considered an inconclusive
but potential indication of a possible trend, rather than an assertion of validity of the hypothesis.
52
Nordic Agapio
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Correct
Incorrect spelling Wrong character
% of answers
Incorrect
Blank
Total
Figure 8. All NA group responses by percentage, names translated in Finnish.
Golden Voice
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Correct
Incorrect spelling Wrong character
% of answers
Incorrect
Blank
Total
Figure 9. All GV group responses by percentage, names retained in English.
As apparent in the comparison of figure 8 and figure 9, the hypothesis is supported by the Finnish name
dub NA having a higher rate of recognition (50%) as opposed to the lower recognition rating of the
English name dub GV (12%). Both Starlight and Sweetheart saw greater recognition accuracy when their
53
names were in Finnish, as no respondents were able to identify the characters in the GV dub, versus 6
positive identifications (30% out of all possible identifications) by the NA dub group.
Because of a high rate of choosing to leave answers blank rather than attempt to spell names that were
difficult (GV 69% blanks), it is not particularly fruitful to examine whether spelling accuracy is better when
names are in Finnish as opposed to English. However, as I also hypothesized in chapter 1, it looks
apparent that respondents named more characters (fewer blanks) when names were in Finnish.
Respondents also attempted to name characters more often in Finnish despite being unsure of the
correct spelling, whereas in the English version respondents chose to leave answers blank when they
were uncertain.
Teddy became the most interesting element of this task, as his character with a conventional name rather
than a descriptive name was more easily identified by both groups. He was positively identified more
often by the NA group (90% versus 36%), but spelled correctly with greater accuracy by the GV group
(21% versus 10%). Possible reasons for this were discussed in chapters 6.1.2 and 6.1.5, including different
language context having an effect on perceived spelling, as well as pronunciation differences affecting
perceived spelling.
As discussed in chapter 4, pronunciation may have had an effect on these results. It is not uncommon in
the dubbing industry that voice actors never see each other or practice together, but rather each actor
submits their lines separately. This could be the reason why different characters have different
pronunciation for Teddy, and other characters. Although changing inflection and tone during dubbing can
be used to characterize characters differently, it does not fully explain why the same voice actor would
choose to alter their pronunciation of a character name throughout the dub. Furthermore, it could simply
be a matter of inferior quality control from the production team.
6.2 Name Recognition Task: Match Pony and Name
In this task respondents were asked to choose a name from a predetermined list of names and attach it
to an appropriate pony character. There were four names to choose from (Ace, Patch, Bon Bon and
Clover for GV, Ässä, Tilkku, Karkki and Apila for NA) and three characters (Bon Bon (Karkki), Clover (Apila)
and Patch (Tilkku)). One of these characters (Patch/Tilkku) is not addressed by name in the episode, but is
54
seen on screen and speaks four lines. Ace is a name of a character in the series, but does not appear and
the name is not spoken in the episode. This name serves as the only throwaway answer that is always
wrong for any of the characters. Both Bon Bon and Clover are named once during the episode in both
versions. Characters were picked based on relative unfamiliarity, as all characters appear on screen
(making them recognizable) but play insignificant parts. To further complicate matters, in NA dubbed
version the character Bon Bon is misnamed with the English name instead of the Finnish equivalent,
Karkki. This episode was picked with the dubbing flub in mind to see if children were still able to positively
match the character and the Finnish name despite the name being wrong in the actual dub.
The aim of this task was to see if children were able to use language cues to accurately match names to
characters they were not very familiar with. All the characters have cutie marks (explained in chapter 5.1)
that correspond with their name in both languages, so I intended to discover if being able to identify
these language cues (understanding the allusion) with the external appearance (matching allusion with
extratextual cue) of the ponies would result in more accurate positive identification of the characters.
As in chapter 6.1 I will first look at both versions NA and GV separately, and secondly look at the results
comparatively to determine recognition accuracy in each individual group before comparing the results
against each other.
6.2.1 Translated names Karkki, Apila and Tilkku
Like in the previous task, the total number of responses is 27, which corresponds with 100% of all
responses and excludes a survey with a full blank (3 blanks) response. Answers will be first compared
against the total number of responses, and then individually by character, where the total number of
responses corresponding 100% is 9 per character.
55
30
25
20
Blank
15
Incorrect
Correct
10
5
0
Karkki
Apila
Tilkku
Total
Figure 10. All name matching responses in translated NA group.
Altogether 23/27 responses were positive identifications, corresponding to 85% correct answer ratio,
whereas there were 3 incorrect answers and 1 blank (4/27) translating to 15% incorrect answers. There
was one completely blank answer from a fully blank survey for this task, which has been excluded from
the body of data for a more accurate result of actual responses. The reason for a full blank is unclear, but
could be language related as the survey is from a respondent with a home language different from
Finnish or English.
Karkki was named correctly most often (9/9, discrediting blank survey). This was in fact curious in the
sense that in the episode there is a dubbing flub, and she is erroneously addressed as “Bon Bon” and not
Karkki (this happens only once, only in this episode). It was a conscious decision on my part to see if
children were able to name her correctly despite the fact that she is named incorrectly in the video.
Karkki is a generic Finnish noun and corresponds with the character’s cutie mark, making her recognizable
through her appearance alluding to her name.
The second most often correctly named character was Apila with 8/9 respondents identifying her
correctly. Like with Karkki, Apila’s cutie mark corresponds with her name which assumedly made it easier
to match corresponding name and character. One survey identified her incorrectly as Tilkku. It is difficult
56
to guess why Tilkku was assigned to Apila, but preliminarily it appears to be a case of genuine mistaken
identity as the same respondent also misnames another character.
Finally, Tilkku was recognized by 6/9 respondents, making her the least often identified character. She is
not named in the episode. However, her cutie mark corresponds with her name (although whether the
piece of fabric was recognized as a ‘tilkku’, Finnish for a patch of fabric, can be contested) which could be
utilized as an aid to associate her with the correct name. Altogether 1 respondent left a blank, and further
2 respondents named her Ässä. My interpretation is that this is the result of making guesses, as neither
the name Tilkku nor Ässä are vocalized during the episode. Whether character was vocally named during
the episode seemed to have an effect on how well the character was recognized. It must be asserted that
a 67% recognition rate for a previously unnamed character is not a bad result and would indicate that
children were able to use both language based and external cues by matching previously unheard names
with the character cutie marks and that extratextual elements had a significant part in making these
connections.
6.2.2 Non-translated names Bon Bon, Clover and Patch
The complete number of answers is 33 with 14 respondents, 11 being the total number of answers for an
individual character. There were 3 completely blank surveys, which have been excluded from the results
and result in 11 viable respondents.
57
35
30
25
20
Blank
Incorrect
15
Correct
10
5
0
Bon Bon
Clover
Patch
Total
Figure 11. All name matching responses in non-translated GV group.
As previously hypothesized, the English names version had a compelling result of 18% (6) positive
identifications versus 82% (27) wrong answers, combined wrong name or blank, but excluding full blanks.
The amount of full blanks was also higher at 21% (9/42) compared to that of NA at 10% (3/30). This is in
line with the assumption that characters with English names would be correctly identified less often than
their Finnish counterparts. For the purposes of this quantitative analysis, full blanks are excluded from
responses.
Clover had the highest recognition rate at 3/11 respondents identifying her correctly (27%), with a total
of 8/11 incorrect name identifications. Other names suggested for Clover include Ace (4) and Patch (4).
Interestingly, neither of these names are spoken during the episode and do not have any elements that
would make them particularly attractive alternatives. It would be interesting to conduct interviews with
respondents to explore the reasoning behind these choices, as at this time it can only be suggested that
these choices have been random.
Bon Bon was the second most identified with 2/11 respondents (18%) and 9/11 incorrect names (82%).
The fact that negative responses surmount to 82% of all responses is surprising in the regard that Bon
Bon is phonetically the same in Finnish and in English, so I had assumed her to be more easily recognized.
Wrong names suggested for Bon Bon include Patch (5), Ace (2) and Clover (2). The suggestion of Clover
58
could be considered an understandable mistake, as Bon Bon and Clover are addressed in the same
sentence without a clear distinction which character is which. It is somewhat surprising that Patch occurs
so often (45% of all respondents). Ace served as a throwaway name, as it was the only thoroughly
incorrect name; thus choosing Ace as the name for the character could be considered a true
misidentification or a pure guess. It does not have a distinct reference to any of the characters in any
form (external cues) and is never spoken in the episode.
Patch was identified correctly by 2/11 respondents, and like Bon Bon, was assigned the wrong name most
often (9/11 of respondents). Out of the wrong identifications she was named Clover most often (5/9). She
was named Bon Bon and Ace equally frequently, 2 times each. This is interesting, as Patch is not named
during the episode, leaving Patch and Ace the most likely options for a name. However 55% of wrong
name responses suggested her to be Clover. This could be due to the proximity of the name (Clover is
written right under Patch’s image) to the character on the paper. One respondent who positively
identified Patch also identified Clover, but no other characters were correctly named.
Altogether it would appear that the English language names resulted in more guesswork from the
respondents, as it became evident that there seemed to be little logic behind the wrong responses (and
often little correlation between correct responses), indicating that both positive and negative
identifications could be the result of randomized elimination process.
6.2.3 Comparisons of name matching between translated and non-translated names
Comparatively, the two groups performed as suggested in my hypothesis in chapter 1. Moreover, the
Finnish translated names NA group had a recognition rate that was perhaps a little higher than I originally
anticipated, discrediting the full blank survey, the group performed at a high overall recognition of 85%
positive identifications of all responses. Altogether the results for NA are as follows; 23/27 correct
answers, 1 blank and 3 incorrect answers. In percentages this translates to 85% positive and 15% negative
answers.
59
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
Negative
50%
Positive
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Nordic Agapio
Golden Voice
Figure 12. Comparison of positive and negative identifications by percentage between translated (Nordic
Agapio) and non-translated (Golden Voice) names.
Furthermore, the English names retained GV group indicated difficulties in name and character matching,
as the total frequencies are as follows; 7/33 correct answers, 9 blanks were excluded, and 26/33 incorrect
answers. Thus, in percentages we can see a reversal of the NA results. The group provided 18% positive
and 82% negative answers. In this group there were 3 respondents who chose to leave the task
completely blank, so altogether 11 respondents performed the task. The three respondents who chose to
leave all answers blank provide evidence of uncertainty of correct answers resulting in aversion to answer
at all, but are not included in the final body of data.
Although the body of data was not sufficient to draw any conclusive assertions, I argue with confidence
that the observed reversal in performance indicates that extra-textual cues can be applied to textual
problems when, and only when the problem can be solved using language. This applies to descriptive
names in particular, as the referential material cannot be sufficiently understood if the vocabulary is
foreign and the meaning obscured by insufficient language knowledge. The tasks applied the same
principle in both languages; characters were either vocally named during the episode, or names were
directly referring to the appearance of the character (corresponding cutie marks). In the Finnish language
NA group, respondents seemed better equipped in solving the problem of unnamed characters by
60
matching descriptive name to the character’s appearance. There seemed to be greater confidence in
answering (fewer blanks). When the descriptive name was not understood, it could not be utilized to aide
in solving the problem, resulting in more guesswork and a lower performance overall as seen in the
English language group GV.
For further research it could be fruitful to conduct a similar experiment using a think-aloud method
and/or respondent interviews to shed light on the elimination process and to assess whether correct
responses are the product of luck or logic, and what is the reasoning behind seemingly illogical incorrect
answers.
6.3 Name Creation Task: Name this Pony
The purpose of this task was to determine what types of names the respondents would assign to the
characters independently. It aimed to emphasize whether children picked up on the external cues of the
characters and if they were inclined to name the characters using descriptive names. My original
hypothesis was that the children who were shown the NA Finnish language version of the episode would
be more inclined to use descriptive names or names consisting of nouns. Furthermore it proceeded to
categorize the kinds of names that emerged.
I originally divided the results to two categories and further on to two subcategories; Descriptive and
conventional names, female or male. It emerged during analysis that these categories were insufficient,
and a third category for non-descriptive names (chapter 2.1) was added to the matrix. It should be noted
that non-descriptive and descriptive names might not be placed in either subcategory as they are not
explicitly gendered.
61
Figure 13. Ace, My Little Pony Tales.
I used the character Ace for this task. In the series, Ace is a male pony with a soccer ball cutie mark, his
name refers to him being a stereotypical archetype high school jock; accomplished in sports (the ace) and
popular among his peers, but with an arrogant attitude. The Finnish counterpart Ässä also refers to him
being the best at something (Kielitoimiston sanakirja), in this case presumably soccer as alluded to by his
cutie mark. Because ponies generally do not exhibit sexual dimorphism, it is not explicitly apparent this
character is a male pony.
I will first look at responses from NA and GV dubs individually to determine what types of names each
group assigned to the character in their respective language context (Finnish versus English names). I will
then look at these groups comparatively to see how these trends align in respect to each other, as well as
my hypothesis.
7.3.1 Name creation in a Finnish language context
Altogether 9 respondents took part in this part of the survey. Children were not prompted in any way
during this task besides the initial instruction of naming the character with a name they think befits the
character. This wording was used to avoid steering the respondents astray with more subjective
instructions such as “a name you like” or “a good name” which could have resulted in associations with
conventional names that the respondents find pleasing.
In this group names fell in two categories; conventional names, and descriptive names. I will first look at
the conventional names, which were further divided into subcategories based on gender. Spelling errors
62
are not taken into consideration in this task and names are categorized based on the interpretation of the
name regardless of spelling.
Gendered
Descriptive, 1
Conventional Female, 4
Non-gendered
descriptive , 1
Conventional Male, 3
Figure 14. Personal names by category in NA group, names translated in Finnish.
Conventional Finnish names constituted a majority with 7/9 respondents choosing to name the pony
character with either a conventional female name (4) or a conventional male name (3) as presented in
table x below. Two respondents used descriptive names consisting of nouns and compounded nouns.
Altogether 5 respondents identified the character as a female and 3 as a male, whereas one respondent
chose a name that does not explicitly allude to any gender.
Table 4a. All names by category in NA group.
Conventional male name
Conventional female name
Pekka, Pekka, Perttu
Hanna, Jenni, Maijja, Miina
Non-gendered descriptive name
Gendered descriptive name
Jalkapallo
Jalkapallotyttö
The two names that fall within the parameters of descriptive name (allude to the character) consist of
nouns jalkapallo (‘soccer ball’) and jalkapallo + tyttö (‘girl’), which directly refer to the character’s soccer
63
ball cutie mark. One respondent affixed the gender noun for girl as a suffix for soccer ball, further
denoting the character to be a female rather than male. Jalkapallo by itself is not directly gendered.
It can be argued that the respondent who chose the name Jalkapallotyttö used external cues as a basis
for name creation, having determined the character to be a female possibly based on his long flowy mane
and gender neutral color pattern. The character is not marked with gender specific traits externally, and
could easily be either gender. Only possible giveaway would be the color blue in his exercise equipment,
but since a female character is also seen wearing blue sweatbands earlier in the survey (see appendix Å) it
is not a certain male denominator.
It is interesting how the respondent chose a noun compound as a name for the character, as names with
compound nouns are not used in this episode. I had expected descriptive names to be more common
than 2/9 respondents, and it might have been the case had the children been exposed to more characters
with descriptive names.
7.3.2 Name creation in an English language context
Non-Descriptive, 2
Non-gendered
Descriptive, 2
Conventional Male, 5
Conventional Female, 3
Figure 15. Personal names by category in GV group, names retained in English.
64
The GV group consisted of 11 respondents who participated. Like with the NA group, they were advised
to name the character in a fitting way but not prompted in any other way. This group had more variety in
their naming conventions with non-descriptive names (Cem and Beba, latter to be discussed further) as
well as descriptive names. In this group descriptive names and non-descriptive names could not be
divided further into male and female subcategories.
Table 4b. All names by category in GV group.
Conventional male name
Conventional female name
Arttu, Bart, Luukas, Tauski
Emma, Leena, Stela*
Descriptive name
Non-descriptive name
Vaalea suklaa, Rouski*
Beba*, Cem
Because of ambiguity in spelling, names Stela, Rouski and Beba could be arguably be categorized
differently. In my interpretation Stela is equivalent of the conventional female name Stella, but could also
be categorized as a made up non-descriptive name. Rouski was categorized as a descriptive name due to
an onomatopoetic allusion to the sound or act of crunching (fin. verb rouskua, verb rouskaista,
onomatopoetic rouskis similar to English bling bling or Japanese kira kira which both stem from verbs),
but could also be re-categorized as a non-descriptive name. Similarly the name Beba could be a cheeky
descriptive name derived from colloquial slang for the derriere more commonly spelled peba (eg. Finnish
tabloid Seiska, however spelled beba on internet discussion forum Demi.fi). However because of this
ambiguity in spelling I have decided to place this name in the non-descriptive category.
One instance of uncontested descriptive name was recorded, consisting of two nouns, vaalea (‘light’) and
suklaa (‘chocolate’). This name seems to have originated from external cues, namely the character’s light
beige and brown coloration reminiscent of light milk chocolate. The name cannot be assigned to either
gender. It is in keeping with Ponyverse naming conventions as discussed in chapter 5.1.
Possible reasons for more variation among this group could be the English language context with the nontranslated names the group watched before taking part in the survey. As descriptive names are not
perceived as names which carry meaning, the use of descriptive names might not occur as a potential
naming convention. Furthermore, as names sound foreign it might have inspired the non-descriptive
65
made up names and use of less common letters such as C and B as well as the English conventional male
name Bart (possibly intertextually referring to the animated series The Simpsons).
6.4 Characterization Task: Describe this pony
In this task the respondents are asked to describe in few words (there are only three lines to write on)
two characters who are the main protagonists in the episode; Sweetheart and Melody. These two
characters were picked because of their descriptive names referring to their temperament and interests
(Sweetheart is kind and unassuming, Melody is passionate about music). The purpose of this task was to
determine whether children use these implicit traits to describe the characters derived from the
character name, if the name will appear as a repetition (ie. Sweet for Sweetheart) and what other
qualities are used to describe the characters (appearance, behavior).
I hypothesized that children shown the dub version with Finnish names are more likely to infer something
about these characters based on their names, even if these attributes are implicit. You can determine
Melody enjoys music by her musical note cutie mark and her apparent passion for her new radio, though
this possessiveness could be interpreted as materialistic love. Similarly Sweetheart is called “honest” and
“fair” by other characters, which makes her natural niceness towards others more explicit.
The answers are in the form of free association and participants were given a picture of the two
characters and instructed to write what this character is like. The instructions were the bare minimum to
avoid adult contamination in the results, as the purpose was to see what types of words would be used
for characterization and if character names had an effect on these characterizations. The responses are
divided into implicit and explicit characterizations. Implicit word categories include words referring
indirect characterizations, such as behavior or personality attributes. Explicit word categories include
words referring to color, appearance and gender as appropriated by direct characterization (cf.
Nordenswan 2014 in chapter 2.2). More word categories could be specified, but this division was
sufficient for this task with my research data.
I also looked at characterization words that could be linked to the characters’ names. For Sweetheart,
words that implied sweetness, kindness and caring are included in this category. For Melody, words that
implied music or musicality.
66
6.4.1 Direct characterization
As defined above, direct characterization is the result of attributes that can be perceived by the audience
and/or are made explicit by the author, and in this study includes words referring to character’s gender,
external descriptors referring to appearance, or words referring to active behavior (Nikolajeva 2002: 169).
This group could also include words referring to occupation, but there were no responses for this
category.
For clarity, I will group the results from both NA and GV questionnaires to reveal emergent trends.
Comparatively interesting results are discussed separately to explore differences between the two
groups.
The most numerous of all responses in this category were words that referred to active behavior and
words referring to appearance, most notably color. For the active behavior category words, it should be
noted some results could be considered passive personality attributes instead of active behavior.
However, because of the nature of the episode these words have been marked as active behavior, as the
attributes might not be explicitly related to the character’s passive personality based on a single viewing
of a single episode. Different categorizations could be made, especially if more episodes were shown to
the respondents.
In the Finnish language group NA external descriptors were prominent direct characterization words as
3/9 (33%) respondents used external descriptors and external descriptor words made up 12/30 (40%) of
words used. Three quarters of external descriptors were words pertaining to colors white, pink, blue and
purple which are the primary colors of the two characters. Other external descriptors include: hieno
(‘fine, fancy, nice’), nelijalkainen (‘quadrupled’) and pitkät hiukset (‘long hair’). The English language
context group GV did not use external descriptors to describe the characters. A possible reason for this
could be the respondents’ age difference, with younger respondents being more accustomed to the
utilization of external descriptors in their school work, children’s playbooks (eg. They might be asked to
count all the red cars, find all the yellow balloons, look at the black cat etc.), as well as children’s
literature. Older respondents may already be familiar with making more in-depth assessment when asked
to describe something, especially a personified character.
67
Table 5a. External descriptors used by 9 GV respondents, number in brackets constitutes number of
repetitions for the same answer.
External descriptors in GV
Category
pinkki (2), valkoinen, violetti, sininen häntä, Color
punaiset silmät, punainen (2), sininen
Pitkät hiukset, nelijalkainen, hieno
Appearance
Behavior is also a direct characterization tool, as it is explicitly presented to the audience to interpret. The
distinction here between passive personality attributes (i.e. being nice) and active behavior (i.e. behaving
nicely) were sometimes hard to make, and alternative interpretations of the results are also possible. In
this case the division to active and passive was primarily driven by the contents of the episode. Although
some words were adjectives, but implied an active process, they were placed in direct characterization
category as a behavior descriptor through my interpretation of the implied meaning of the word. I concur
that this is not the only possible interpretation and result.
Behavior descriptors are derived from the episode shown to the respondents, and focus on the
characters’ actions rather than innate personality attributes (though actions can and do reflect
personality). Appropriate characterizations would include words associating Sweetheart with helping and
defending others, and Melody with being quick to jump to conclusions and blame others, as explained in
the plot synopsis in chapter 5.2.1. There were deviations from these characterizations. Melody was
described as auttavainen ‘helpful’ despite the episode showing no indication that it befits her personality.
Table 5b. Behavior descriptors in both groups.
GV Sweetheart
GV Melody
Auttavainen (2), ei jätä
auttavainen, ei satuta
toista, auttaa (2),
ketään*, oppivainen,
lohduttaa, ei jätä toista
syyttäväinen, ei halua
yksin
menettää tavaroitaan
NA Hellä
NA Melodi
Pelaa paljon
tietokoneella*, syö
Ärsyttää*, juo
paljon karkkia*,
limpparia*, hätiköijä,
puolustava, tykkää
vähän vihainen
Tedistä
68
One respondent also took a more creative approach to describing both Sweetheart and Melody, assigning
both characters with active behaviors that were not displayed in the episode. Sweetheart was described
as syö paljon karkkia ‘eating a lot of candy’ and pelaa paljon tietokoneella ‘playing on the computer a lot’,
and Melody ärsyttää ‘annoys’ and juo limpparia ‘drinks soda’. As there was nothing in the episode to
warrant these characterizations, I am confident in discarding these results as an exercise of creativity on
the respondent’s part and not something they were able to perceive or deduce about the characters.
Although on the surface some words look like they should be personality attributes rather than active
behaviors, my interpretation is different. The words auttavainen ‘helpful’, hätiköijä ‘one who rushes’ and
vähän vihainen ‘a little angry’ all as case in point of words that could be interpreted either as active or
passive personality attributes. Although these words are adjectives and could be used to describe
personalities, my interpretation is that these words stem from actions seen in the episode. It is most
pronounced on the negatively implied hätiköijä ‘one who rushes’ and vähän vihainen ‘a little angry’,
whereas helpfulness could be an innate personality attribute that simply manifests in the character
actively helping others (auttavainen ’helpful’). However, in my opinion this characterization emerges
because the audience is explicitly shown Sweetheart helping others during the episode. Helpfulness
requires actualization through action to be recognized as something the character is. Similarly, being a
little angry was an attribute determined by actions; Melody is not characterized as a character who is a
little angry, but as a character who acts a little angry.
Sweetheart is identified by both groups as a character who helps (auttaa), comforts (lohduttaa) and
defends (puolustaa) others. GV group emphasized how she stands by her friends and does not exclude
anyone, and is a caring and nurturing character. Words pertaining to being kind, helpful and reliable are
emergent trends both in GV and NA, though more strongly present in the responses of GV (7 responses vs
2 responses).
Melody’s characterization based on her actions paints her as a rash character who becomes angry (vähän
vihainen), blames others (syyttäväinen) and jumps to conclusions (hätiköijä). As discussed at the beginning
of this chapter, these are all valid characterizations. However responses also highlight that she learns
(oppivainen) (not to make judgments without proof) and does not hurt anyone (ei satuta ketään),
softening an otherwise negative perception of her actions. I interpreted the description does not want to
lose her possessions (ei halua menettää tavaroitaan) as a valid, neutral characterization.
69
Interestingly, language context did not seem to have the assumed effect on characterization. The English
language context group GV performed at a higher level of direct characterization, using a more character
appropriate vocabulary and in-depth analyses of the characters’ actions than the Finnish language group
NA. Another curious observation is that the GV group respondents were also younger, aged 7 to 8 years
old. This difference could be explained by personal differences of the groups and group dynamics, but
could also indicate that language context has less of an effect on direct characterization: behavior and
appearance are extratextual elements rather than being exclusively textual. The audience is able to see
the characters and their actions, leaving less to be deduced and interpreted through textual
interpretation. Also, when foreign names and their allusions are not understood, it can leave more room
for personal interpretation rather than limiting possible interpretations.
6.4.2 Indirect characterization
Indirect characterizations include words that are more implicit and depended on audience interpretation.
These characterizations are not explicitly provided by the author, with the exception of personal names.
Descriptor words referring to passive personality attributes (rather than active behavior as discussed
above) belong in this category. Some words in this category could also be interpreted as active doing, and
a reclassification is possible. It could also be argued that passive personality attributes are determined
through active behavior, but I concluded that it would overcomplicate an otherwise streamlined division
process and will not delve into the subject. Although personal names traditionally fall in this category, I
have determined that descriptive personal names like those in the Ponyverse are direct characterization
tools as they explicitly determine something about the character (see chapters 2.2 and 2.3).
Table 5c. Indirect personality words in both GV and NA groups.
GV Sweetheart
GV Melody
NA Hellä
Kiltti, iloinen,
Rauhallinen, kiltti,
rauhallinen (2),
röyhkeä, iloinen,
Ystävällinen (3), lempeä,
ystävällinen (3), lempeä,
musikaalinen*,
kiva, hellä*, kiltti
kiltti
äkkipikainen
70
NA Melodi
Epäileväinen, hätäinen,
vihainen,
epäystävällinen, tyttö*
Appropriate indirect characterizations here would be that Sweetheart is kind and sweet (and other
synonyms), and that Melody is judgmental and self-important. Although Melody’s musical cutie mark
(microphone, stars and musical notes) is explicit (perceivable), its meaning is implicit and as such,
Melody’s musicality would be the result of indirect characterization. Most descriptor words here followed
appropriate characterization regardless of language context. Surprisingly even, the English language
context seemed to yield more appropriate results than the Finnish counterpart. However, in the Finnish
context group NA Hellä’s name resurfaces as a repetition ‘hellä’ (‘tender, nurturing). This occurrence
supports the original hypothesis that the name could affect characterization in the way that the name
itself is perceived as a character attribute.
Melody is described as musikaalinen (‘musical’) in the GV group, implying the allusion between her name
and cutie mark was utilized by the respondent despite the English language context. The name Melody
sounds very similar both in Finnish and in English, so it cannot be reliably argued that language context
had effect in the result, but there seems to be some indication that it might.
One might question why the word vihainen (angry) is determined as an indirect when the word vähän
vihainen (‘a little angry’) is not, similarly äkkipikainen (‘short-tempered’) could be classified as a behavior
but I chose otherwise. My justification for this division is that the aforementioned refers to the mental
disposition of the character rather than the active behavior of becoming a little angry. Melody is depicted
rather aggressive and irritable throughout the episode, possibly indicating that the character is of an
aggravated disposition, thus short-tempered, in the long term. Other interpretations are of course
possible, but in this case the response appeared to refer to the character’s personality, rather than an
isolated occurrence of annoyance and irritability.
The word tyttö (‘girl’) is included in this category as a point of interest. Although gender is not made
explicit (nobody refers to the character as a girl or makes it apparent the character is a girl, sex cannot be
definitely deduced from external attributes) and as such should belong in the implicit characterization
category (Nikolajeva 2002).
6.4.3. Effects of name on characterization
Although it looks apparent active behavior is a greater driver in characterization, textuality is not without
merit. Indirect characterizations appear to be affected by descriptive names, although due to the limited
71
amount of data it cannot be definitely asserted. However I am confident in hypothesizing that in a larger
body of data a trend may become more apparent, because some indication of emergent trends is already
perceivable from this small sample.
Sweetheart was described with words synonymous with sweet, such as ‘kiltti’, ‘kiva’, ‘lempeä’,
‘ystävällinen’ and ‘hellä’. However language only seemed to have a minor effect in the words used, with
‘hellä’ appearing as a descriptor only in the NA version where the character is named Hellä. Other
synonymous words appeared with equal frequency in both groups, the GV group perhaps placing a
stronger emphasis on calmness and kindness and NA on friendliness and niceness. Altogether the
language context and name appeared to have little effect, which I must stress is still more than no effect.
Melody’s musicality surfaced in the GV results. This does not definitely bar language context from having
an effect, because Melody and Melodi are phonetically identical in both dubs and the connection was, at
least theoretically, equally accessible. It is possible that respondents were not able to make the
connection between the suggestively descriptive name Melodi and the Finnish word ‘melodia’ and thus
did not benefit effectively from the possible allusion in either language. However, it might be indicative
that the allusion can be utilized to some extent. If the questionnaire were to be conducted on a larger
scale I estimate that more respondents would make the connection.
Another point to consider is the vagueness of the descriptive names used in this study. When names have
a more transparent descriptive quality, the name is more likely to affect what the audience deems
memorable about the character. In this study, it would appear that personal name and whether or not its
allusion can be utilized were not as meaningful as I originally hypothesized. AS such, whether a name is
translated or not translated seems to make little or no difference and it appears that character behavior
is the most significant characterization tool employed by the respondents.
72
7 Conclusion and Discussion
The primary aim of this study was to determine whether descriptive personal names can be better
recognized when the names are in audiences’ native language versus when they are not, and to explore if
and how descriptive personal names affect characterization when the descriptive function can be fulfilled
and the allusion understood versus when the allusive properties are obscured by a language barrier. I
hypothesized that a Finnish context would make a name easier to remember and to reproduce, which I
measured by asking respondents to identify characters by spelling their names and matching names to
characters that had not previously been named. To measure the effect of a Finnish descriptive name
versus an English descriptive name, I asked the respondents to describe characters they had seen in a few
words.
The study was conducted in a Finnish primary school with children aged 7 to 9 years old, with a total of 24
respondents. The majority of respondents spoke Finnish as their native language and all respondents
listed Finnish as the language of the home (with ‘other’ as the native language, native languages were not
explicitly asked but research notes include Russian and Syrian). The study was conducted by showing the
respondents an episode of My Little Pony Tales, and asking them to fill out a questionnaire afterwards.
Although the sample size acquired through questionnaires was significantly smaller than originally
intended, some trends were able to emerge even from the collected small sample. I had hypothesized in
the beginning of chapter 1 that Finnish named characters would be recognized (as measured by positive
identifications) and spelled correctly with greater frequency (as measured by total of correct answers)
than their English counterparts. The results gathered from name recognition tasks (naming characters
and matching previously unnamed characters with their descriptive names) indicated that characters
were identified more often in the Finnish translated names group (50% and 85% of responses identified
character correctly) versus the English names retained group group (12% and 18% of responses identified
character). Although the sample size is small this could be indicative of language context having effect on
these results. I am confident in suggesting that the experiment could be repeated with a larger sample
without the result changing fundamentally (though I also trust that both NA and GV groups would
accomplish higher recognition rates as a whole), as the statistical difference became apparent even in a
small sample. And pragmatically, the difference between the two groups seems indicative that the
hypothesis may indeed be legitimate. In terms of results, it also implies that Finnish names may be more
73
relatable in the context of descriptive names, and children are more likely to identify and to repeat them
with greater accuracy. This could be commercially significant, as many children’s animated series also sell
merchandise, which could be more easily identified both by child fans, and their parents. This could be a
topic of an interdisciplinary study in linguistics, consumer markets and brand identity.
The results give indication of language context having some effect in the nature of responses. Names
were written correctly more frequently due to phonological familiarity eliminating guesswork from
spelling. Finnish language context also appeared to improve the quality of associative answers, providing
more implicit characterization descriptors (than explicit characterizations within the same group).
Moreover, personal names appeared to have an effect in characterization although it was not as
significant as originally hypothesized. In Finnish language context, the name Hellä repeats as a personality
attribute, ‘hellä’ (‘gentle’) in the translated names NA group. Melody’s musicality is brought up by one
respondent in the English language context group GV; it should be noted that the name Melody is
phonetically almost identical to the Finnish equivalent, Melodi. These could be seen as descriptor words
derived from character names, although for Melody, the argument could also be a sum of attributes both
textual and extratextual had an effect on the characterization of her musicality. In this regard, it could be
argued that the names performed their functions as described in chapter 2.1 in this small sample.
Language also seemed to affect how respondents perceived the fictive names in their fictive
environment, as respondents who had been exposed to Finnish language context with semantic names
that could be understood responded with more transparently descriptive names when asked to name
their own character. The NA group also named their character with Finnish conventional name more
often than the GV group. The effects of English language could also be witnessed in the naming
conventions of the GV group, where respondents used unconventional names with foreign letters in
greater frequency. This is indicative that the audience perceived the names differently depending
whether the allusive function of descriptive names was satisfied, and whether the names appeared in a
language context that was familiar to the respondents.
However, it became apparent that regardless of language context, in the case of this particular animation,
character behavior is the strongest influencer on characterization. Characters were most often described
with words that related to their actions as they were seen and perceived by the audience, with words
referring to Melody’s anger over her lost stereo and Sweetheart helping and defending others. Out of
implicit characterizations, sweetness, kindness and friendliness were the most frequent theme for words
74
used to describe either character in both NA and GV groups. The striking similarities in the responses of
both groups could be indicative that language context has little effect on how the respondents determine
character attributes, which would strongly suggest that textual elements such as descriptive names (and
their allusions) were not as important in this particular study as originally hypothesized.
This could implicate that illustrations and direct characterizations are the driving force for how young
audiences perceive the characters. It would be interesting to do a similar study with illustrated literature,
where character actions are explicitly spelled out, but not shown in action like in animation, leaving more
for the reader to decipher and interpret based on their own experiences. Alternatively, a study on how
character action influences characterization in literature void of illustration could also be a fruitful source
of study on characterization.
The questionnaire survey saw considerable challenges, as due to a miscommunication with the
participating classes the translations were shown to the wrong age groups. This resulted in the younger
class (ages 7 to 8) seeing the translation which had the English names retained (and which I dubbed the
‘more difficult’ version), and the older class (ages 8 to 9) saw the episode with the names translated in
Finnish (or, the ‘easier version’). I had planned for the Finnish name translation to be shown to younger
students who are already at a disadvantage with less English education than their older peers, and for the
older students to see the English name version because of assumed experience level with English would
have (presumably) made for a more level ground for research. However as this did not happen, the
results could potentially be vastly different if the study were to be conducted again with an adjustment to
target audiences. For future reference, I would make sure to communicate with the teachers in person to
ensure that the correct age groups are shown the correct version and confirm in advance which age
group is taking part in the questionnaire.
Another challenge was acquiring respondents, as my initial assumption of class sizes appeared to be
vastly overestimated. Most teachers opted out, with two teachers responding out of twelve; nine
teachers that I contacted directly and three more teachers who received my request for permission to
conduct a study via the school head teacher. I had not anticipated this challenge and if I were to conduct
my study again, I would seek to contact many more teachers in many more schools to ensure a large
enough participant count. This problem was perhaps foreseeable, as school curriculums can be quite
strict and it can be a challenge to fit in extracurricular activities such as videos and questionnaires.
75
The responses received through the questionnaire were too vague and left too much open and up to
personal interpretation to be considered an exact science. There was variation in the responses in terms
of quality, which is to be expected in a questionnaire survey. The questionnaire could have been followed
up with interviews or further questions to probe into the reasons respondents answered the way that
they did. This could have provided valuable information on the strategies respondents used to gauge
character personalities; whether their interpretation was based on direct characterizations such as
behavior or appearance, or if they utilized indirect characterizations such as interpretations of the
character’s personality or disposition and furthermore, if these responses used textual elements such as
the character name. It could also have explored why respondents chose to leave blank answers, whether
it was due to uncertainty of how to spell names, or genuinely not remembering. Qualitative questions
asking for the reasons for the response in the form of brief recorded interviews or additional questions
included in the questionnaire or as a separate questionnaire altogether could be used to probe further
into the effects of extratextual and textual elements that affect characterization and memorability of
characters with descriptive names.
Another point to improve on is the instruction of respondents. My questionnaires yielded too many blank
answers, which is indicative that respondents were not confident answering questions when they
experienced uncertainty of the correct answer. This unfortunately disturbs the research goal of testing
spelling accuracy of foreign language names compared to native language names, as well as whether
characters are recognized or not. It is possible that the level of recognition was higher, but respondents
chose to leave a blank instead of communicating a positive identification when they were unsure of
spelling. For future research it would be more conductive to encourage respondents to respond to the
best of their abilities, not to worry about possible spelling errors or wrong answers, and to attempt to
answer all questions and not leave blanks. A large volume of blanks resulted in a lower response rate and
thus diminished the already depleted body of data that could have been acquired.
Although it is difficult, if not impossible, to assert the hypothesis as true, I would like to conclude it is not
without merit and warrants further study into the effects of descriptive names on character relatability,
memorability and characterization. Possible methods of further study include interviewing respondents
to explore the reasoning behind their answers, whether respondents used textual or extratextual cues,
what affected their characterization (whether it was character behavior, appearance, or if personal name
had any effect) and whether language context affects memorability. Research on personal names and
their effects on the narrative in translated texts (texts here include multimedia content such as
76
animation, movies and games) have recently been the target of vigorous study in the field of literature
and translation studies, which is a welcome shift in focus from mere formal onomastics to a more
functional, end-user oriented approach to translation studies.
77
References:
Literature:
Ainiala, T., Saarelma, M. and Sjöblom, P. 2008. Nimistötutkimuksen perusteet. Helsinki: Suomalaisen
Kirjallisuuden Seura.
Austin, J. L. 1975. How to do Things with Words, Second Edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bertills, Y. 2003. Beyond Identification. Proper Names in Children’s Literature. Turku: Åbo Akademi
University Press.
Carroll, L., Haughton, H., & Carroll, L. (2009). Through the looking-glass and What Alice found there. New
York: Penguin Classics.
Cruse, A. 2004. Meaning in Language. An Introduction to Semantics and Pragmatics. Second Edition.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Diaz-Cintas, J. (ed.) 2009. New Trends in Audiovisual Translating. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Docherty, T. 1986. Reading (Absent) Character. Towards a Theory of Characterization in Fiction. Oxford:
Clarendon.
Heikkinen, H. 2007. Puuha-Petestä Pokémoniin – Lastenohjelmien dubbaus Suomessa. In Oittinen, R. and
Tuominen, T. (eds), Olennaisen äärellä. Johdatus audiovisuaaliseen kääntämiseen. Tampere: Tampere
University Press. 235–241.
Hermans, T. 1988. On Translating Proper Names with reference to De Witte and Max Havelaar. In Wintle,
M. and Vincent, P. (eds), Modern Dutch Studies : Essays in Honour of Peter King. London and Atlantic
Highlands, NJ: Atlone. 11–24.
78
Hirvonen, N. 2012. Translation of personal names in the children's television series My little Pony Tales. A
comparative study of the translations conventions of semantically loaded names in three versions of My
little Pony Tales. Unpublished BA thesis. Joensuu: The University of Eastern Finland, Department of
Foreign Languages and Translation Studies.
Holz-Mänttäri, J. 1984. Translatorisches Handeln. Helsinki: Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia.
Huddleston, Rodney D. and Pullum and Geoffrey K. 2002. The Cambridge Grammar of the English
Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kapari, J., Katellus, K. and Sivillis, K. 2002. Erisnimet kirjoissa. Kääntäjä, 7/2002. 1,4.
Kapari, J. 2005. Kohtaamisia tuntemattoman kanssa. In Rikman, K. (ed.), Suom. Huom. Vantaa: WSOY. 29 –
40.
Kapari-Jatta, J. 2008. Pollomuhku ja posityyhtynen. Helsinki: Tammi.
Käpynen, K. 2011. Fiktiiviset nimet Mauri Kunnaksen teoksessa Viikingit tulevat! ja niiden englannin- ja
ruotsinkieliset käännökset. MA thesis, University of Tampere, Translation studies (English).
Lathey, G. 2006. Translation of Children’s Literature: A Reader. Topics in Translation: 31. Clevedon:
Cromwell Press.
Leppihalme, R. 2007. Kääntäjän strategiat. : In Riikonen, H.K., Kovala U., Kujamäki P. and Paloposti O.
(eds), Suomennoskirjallisuuden historia 2. Helsinki: SKS. 365–373.
Leskinen, T. 1995. Pekka Poikasesta Peter Paniksi ja Liisasta Aliceksi: erisnimien käsittelyä englannista
suomennetuissa lastenkirjoissa. MA thesis, University of Tampere, Translation studies (English).
Nida, E. 1964. Principles of Correspondence. In Venuti L. 2000. Translations Studies Reader. London:
Routledge.
Nikolajeva, M. 2002. The Rhetoric of Characters in Children's Literature. Lanham, Maryland and London:
Scarecrow Press.
Nikolajeva, M. 2005. Aesthetic approaches to children's literature : an introduction. Lanham, Maryland:
Scarecrow Press.
79
Nord, C. 1997. Translation as a Purposeful Activity. Functionalist Approaches Explained. Manchester: St
Jerome.
Nord, C. 2003. Proper Names in Translations for Children. Alice in Wonderland as a Case in Point. Meta
48, 182 –196. Web. LLBA Database. Retrieved April 29, 2015.
http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.uef.fi:2048/docview/85592814?accountid=136582
Nordenswan, S. 2014. Kääntäjä ja karakterisaatio teoksen The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn kahdessa
suomennoksessa. MA thesis, University of Tampere, Translation studies (English). Web. Retrieved April 14,
2015. https://tampub.uta.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/95737/GRADU-1403081663.pdf?sequence=1
Oittinen, R. 1997. Liisa, Liisa ja Alice. Tampere: Tampere University Press.
Oittinen, R. 2000. Translating for Children. New York: Garland Publishing.
Pym, A. 2010. Exploring Translation Theories. New York: Routledge.
Rahja, J. 2013. Translation of Personal Names in Robin Hobb's Fantasy Trilogies The Farseer Trilogy and
The Tawny Man. MA thesis, University of Eastern Finland, Translation studies (English).
Reiss, K. and H.J. Vermeer 1984. Grundlegung einer allgemeinen Translationstheorie. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Saussure, F. 2002. Writings in General Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Shavit, Z. 1986. Translation of Children’s Literature. In Lathey, G. 2006. Translation of Children’s
Literature: A Reader. Topics in Translation: 31. Clevedon: Cromwell Press.
Stolt, B. 1978. How Emil becomes Michel in Children’s Books in Translation. The Swedish Institute of
Children’s Literature. 130–146.
Tiihonen, T. 2007. Puhumme suomea! – Mutta miten animaatiodubbaus oikein syntyy?. In Oittinen, R.
and Tuominen, T. (ed.), Olennaisen äärellä – Johdatus audiovisuaaliseen kääntämiseen. Tampere:
Tampere University Press. 171–186.
Toury, G. 1995. Descriptive Translation Studies – and Beyond. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John
Benjamins.
80
Van Coillie, J. 2006. Character Names in Translation. A Functional Approach. In Van Coillie, J. and
Verschueren, W. (eds), Childrens Literature in Translation. Challenges and Strategies. Manchester: St.
Jerome. 124–131.
Vermeer, H., Reiss,K. 1984. Towards a General Theory of Translational Action. Skopos Theory Explained.
Manchester: St Jerome.
Vermeer, H.J. 1996. A skopos theory of translation. Some arguments for and against. Heidelberg:
TEXTconTEXT.
Vermeer, H. and Reiss. K. 2013. Towards a General Theory of Translational Action: Skopos Theory
Explained. Translated by Nord,C. Machester: St. Jerome.
Vertanen, E. 2007. Ruututeksti tiedon ja tunteiden tulkkina. In Oittinen, R. and Tuominen, T. (ed.),
Olennaisen äärellä – Johdatus audiovisuaaliseen kääntämiseen. Tampere: Tampere University Press. 149–
170.
81
Online sources:
Brenes, P. In my own Terms. Terminology for Beginners and Beyond. Web.
http://inmyownterms.com/mysmartterms/mysmarterms-5-the-semantic-triangle-words-dont-meanpeople-mean/ . [Accessed June 22, 2015]
CIA. 2014. Fact Book, Finland. Web. https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-worldfactbook/geos/fi.html . [Accessed January 29, 2015]
Čičelytė, V, Jaleniauskienė, E. 2009. The Strategies for Translating Proper Names in Children’s Literature.
Web. http://www.kalbos.lt/zurnalai/15_numeris/06.pdf .[Accessed March 4 2012]
"Descriptive." Merriam-Webster.com. Merriam-Webster, n.d. Web. http://www.merriamwebster.com/dictionary/descriptive . [Accessed November 7, 2014]
Kielitoimiston sanakirja. Web. http://www.kielitoimistonsanakirja.fi. [Accessed May 3, 2016]
MOT Englanti 2.0. Web. http://mot.kielikone.fi.ezproxy.uef.fi:2048/mot/uef/netmot. [Accessed April 4,
2016]
Ogden C. K., Richards I. A. 1923. Meaning of Meaning. Magdalene College, University of Cambridge. Web.
http://s-f-walker.org.uk/pubsebooks/pdfs/ogden-richards-meaning-all.pdf . [Accessed August 20, 2015]
Tilastokeskus. 2013. Etnisyystiedon merkitys kasvaa maahanmuuton lisääntyessä. Web.
http://www.stat.fi/artikkelit/2013/art_2013-09-23_003.html?s=5. [Accessed January 29, 2015]
Media Consulting Group. 2011. Study on the use of subtitling. The potential of subtitling to encourage
foreign language learning and improve the mastery of foreign languages. Web.
http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/llp/studies/documents/study_on_the_use_of_subtitling/rapport_final-en.pdf .
[Accessed May 6, 2016 ]
My Little Pony Tales. Wikipedia.Web. http://www.wikipedia.com. [Accessed April 5, 2015]
My Little Wiki. Web. http://www.mylittlewiki.org. [Accessed April 5 2015]
82
Lahti, K, Sarakontu, L, Ruhanto, H, Arpiainen, H, Turunen, L, Sulaine. Myrskyttären ponisivut –
Suomennoksia. Web. http://www.elisanet.fi/myrskytar/kaannoksia.htm . [Accessed December 5, 2012]
83
Image sources:
Figure 1. My Little Pony Tales. 1992. Hasbro.Web. http://afponygroup.blogspot.com/2013/10/stables-ofdamned-7-madness-of-patch.html . [Accessed May 6, 2016]
Figure 2. My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic. 2014. Hasbro. Web. http://mlp.wikia.com/wiki/Bulk_Biceps.
[Accessed May 6, 2016]
Figure 3. My Little Pony Tales. 1992. Hasbro. Web. http://mylittlewiki.org/wiki/Gribet . [Accessed May 6,
2016]
Figure 4. My Little Pony Tales. 1992. Hasbro. Web.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v497/RaptorRed/B-rony/Pinkie_in_2nd_Cartoon.png . [Accessed
May 6, 2016]
Figure 5. My Little Pony. Web.
http://img02.deviantart.net/60b1/i/2014/042/3/4/g1_cutie_marks_by_starbat-d6eqzdd.png . [Accessed
May 6, 2016]
Figure 13. My Little Pony Tales. 1992. Hasbro. http://mlptales.wikia.com/wiki/Ace . [Accessed May 6,
2016]
84
Appendix 1.
Time stamped lines where character name is spoken, episode ‘Seison rinnallasi’ Nordic Agapio Oy.
Time
Character
Line
00:00:26 Melodi:
Olet tyhmä, Teddy!
00:00:34 Melodi:
Anna se takaisin, Teddy!
00:00:51 Hellä:
Mutta Teddyhän ihan vain yritti auttaa sinua, Melodi.
00:01:02 Hellä:
Ehkäpä jos sanoisit Melodille, että olet ihan oikeasti pahoillasi.
00:01:08 Teddy:
... en pyydä anteeksi keltään, varsinkaan tuolta kaikkitietävältä Melodilta.
00:01:15 Herra Jokinen:
Hei Hellä, tekikö tuo pikku Teddy sinulle taas kiusaa?
00:02:09 Tilkku:
Mikä hätänä, Melodi?
00:02:24 Melodi:
Anna se takaisin, Teddy!
00:02:34 Tähti:
Voisimmeko tutkia Teddyn syyllisyys ...
00:02:42 Neiti Simanen: Tähti, sinä kun olet niin tasapuolinen ...
00:02:55 Neiti Simanen: Räpsyn täytyy todistaa, että Teddy on todella syyllinen.
00:03:10 Hellä:
Minä voisin ihan todella auttaa Teddyä.
00:03:18 Neiti Simanen: ... todisteiden perusteella, onko Teddy syyllinen.
00:03:20 Neiti Simanen: Jos toteatte Teddyn syylliseksi ...
00:03:34 Herra Jokinen:
... mitäs kummaa, Hellä?
00:03:45 Hellä:
No Teddy, kerro ...
00:04:19 Räpsy:
Teen listaa kaikista niistä syistä miksi Teddy on syyllinen.
00:04:30 Melodi:
Hei Räpsy, Hei Tähti.
00:04:31 Hellä:
Melodi, kiva kun tulit! Minulla olikin asiaa sinulle Teddystä.
00:04:37 Melodi:
Kuulitko jotain, Tähti?
00:04:38 Tähti:
Se on Hellä.
00:04:47 Hellä:
Olen myös Teddyn ystävä.
00:04:49 Melodi:
Et voi olla Teddyn ja meidän ystävä.
00:04:53 Melodi:
Eikä niin, Tähti?
00:05:03 Tilkku:
No Hellä, miten on? Teddy vai me?
00:05:17 Hellä:
Haluan auttaa Teddyä ...
00:05:23 Hellä:
Mennään, Teddy.
00:05:34 Tähti:
... oletko valmis esittämään syytteen Teddyä vastaan?
00:05:41 Räpsy:
... todistajinani haluaisin esitellä Apilan ja Bon Bonin.*
00:05:51 Tähti:
Näittekö Teddyn ottavan sen?
00:05:55 Apila:
Emme oikeastaan nähneet Teddyn sitä vievän.
00:07:33 Tähti:
Ehkäpä sinun pitäisi kutsua Teddy todistamaan.
00:07:54 Hellä:
... jonka Melodi näki takertuneena, ei ollutkaan Melodin?
00:07:58 Teddy:
Hellitä jo, se oli Melodin.
00:08:19 Teddy:
Olen pulassa. Auta minua Hellä.
00:08:21 Hellä:
Miten voisin, Teddy?
00:08:33 Hellä:
Tähti, öh, tarkoitan tuomari.
00:08:55 Herra Jokinen:
Mitäs kummaa, Hellä?
00:09:35 Neiti Simanen: Entä sinä, Teddy?
00:09:48 Teddy:
Hellä, auta!
00:09:51 Hellä:
Odota, minä autan sinua, Teddy.
85
Appendix 2.
Time stamped lines where character name is spoken, episode ‘Seison rinnallasi’ Goden Voice AB.
Time
Character
Line
00:00:28 Melody:
Tuo ei ole yhtään hauskaa, Teddy!
00:00:51 Sweetheart:
Teddy halusi vain olla kiltti ja auttaa sinua, Melody.
00:01:04 Sweetheart:
... että sinun pitäisi pyytää Melodylta anteeksi.
00:01:14 Talonmies:
Hei Sweetheart, Teddykö täällä taas teki pahojaan?
00:02:09 Patch:
Mikä hätänä, Melody?
00:02:25 Melody:
Anna nauhuri heti takaisin, Teddy!
00:02:45 Opettaja:
Starlight, koska sinä olet niin viisaskavioinen ...
00:02:55 Opettaja:
Henkilö, jonka tehtävä on todistaa onko Teddy syyllinen vai ei.
00:02:58 Opettaja:
... joka auttaa Teddyä puolustautumaan.
00:03:12 Opettaja:
Hyvä, Sweetheart!
00:03:20 Opettaja:
Ja ratkaistava onko Teddy syyllinen vai ei.
00:04:20 Bright Eyes:
... listaa asioita, jotka puoltavat Teddyn syyllisyyttä.
00:04:31 Melody:
Hei Starlight.
00:04:32 Sweetheart:
Melody, hyvä että tulit! Haluan puhua kanssasi Teddystä.
00:04:37 Melody:
Kuulitko sinä jotakin, Starlight?
00:04:39 Starlight:
Sehän on Sweetheart.
00:04:47 Sweetheart:
Mutta olen myös Teddyn ystävä.
00:04:54 Melody:
Vai mitä, Starlight?
00:05:02 Patch:
No Sweetheart, kumman valitset? Teddyn vai meidät?
00:05:17 Sweetheart:
Minä autan Teddyä.
00:05:24 Sweetheart:
Tule, Teddy.
00:05:37 Starlight:
… oletko valmis aloittamaan oikeudenkäynnin Teddyä vastaan?
00:05:42 Bright Eyes:
… todistajikseni kutsun Cloverin ja Bon Bonin.
00:05:50 Starlight:
Näittekö Teddyn ottavan sen?
00:06:17 Sweetheart:
Ette tiedä Teddystä kaikkea.
00:07:33 Starlight:
Sinun pitäisi kutsua Teddy todistamaan, että hän on syytön.
00:07:56 Starlight:
Oliko se Melodyn nauhurista?
00:08:01 Teddy:
… silloin kun yritin auttaa Melodya.
00:08:09 Sweetheart:
Mitä sinä Melodyn nauhurilla tekisit?
00:08:20 Teddy:
Nyt minä mokasin, Sweetheart!
00:08:25 Sweetheart:
Miten ihmeessä, Teddy?
00:08:33 Sweetheart:
Starlight, tarkoitan herra tuomari ...
00:08:47 Talonmies:
Mitäs sinulla on sydämelläsi, Sweetheart?
00:09:36 Opettaja:
Entäpä sinä Teddy, mitä sinä opit?
00:09:48 Teddy:
Sweetheart, tule auttamaan!
00:09:51 Sweetheart:
Ei hätää, Teddy! Minä tulen, Teddy!
86
Appendix 3.
Blank questionnaire.
87