Les formes d’adresse dans un corpus de films français et leur traduction en finnois

The use of forms of address in French films and their Finnish translations The use of forms of address constitutes an integral part of speakers’ communicative competence. In fact, they are not only used to assign to whom the speech is addressed, but also to construct the relationship between speakers. However, the choice of a suitable form is not necessarily evident in modern, pluralistic society. By the notion form of address, I refer to pronouns of address (tu vs. vous) and different nouns of address like names, titles (Monsieur, Madame, Mademoiselle), kinship terms, occupational terms, terms of endearment and insults. The purpose of the present thesis is, first, to study the semantic and pragmatic values of forms of address in dialogues of modern French films, and, second, their translation in Finnish subtitles. It is evident that film language is not spontaneous, but only a representation of authentic speech, and that subtitles are a written version of the original spoken language. Consequently, this thesis studies spoken fictive dialogues and their written translations. The methods applied in the study are the Interactional and Pragmatic Approach as well as Translatology. The role of forms of address in an interpersonal relationship is studied with dimensions of distance and power (Brown and Gilman 1960, Kerbrat-Orecchioni 1992), whereas the pragmatic dimension permits studying in particular the use of forms of address in speech acts (Kerbrat-Orecchioni 2001). The translation strategies are studied with the help of Venuti’s (1995) notions of foreignizing and domesticating strategies. The results of the thesis suggest that the pronoun use in the studied films is usually reciprocal. However, the relations of power have not disappeared, but are expressed in a more discrete manner with nouns of address (for instance vous + Docteur vs. vous + Anita). The use of the pronoun of address vous seems still to be common, but increased intimacy is expressed by accompanying familiar nouns of address like first names. The nominal forms of address accompany different speech acts, but not in a systematic manner. In a dialogue they appear usually in the first speech act, and more rarely in the response, but not in both. In addition, they have an important role in the mechanics of conversation. The translators here face multiple demands, and their translations seem mostly to be a compromise between foreignizing and domesticating strategies.