Email this article Riformulazioni e reinterpretazioni transmediali di Romeo and Juliet
Abstract
Abstract – This chapter examines a selected corpus of multisemiotic reformulations of Romeo and Juliet, which is subject to multimodal processes of re-narration and re-interpretation that are meant to make Shakespeare’s tragedy more accessible to different types of implied receivers, according to their age, gender and familiarity with the media hosting the retextualizations. Three case studies shall be explored: a short clip produced for the British Council and available on the Internet in the context of the Shakespeare Lives! festival; an online video game commissioned by ‘Shakespeare Country’ in order to promote Warwickshire county to international tourists as well as to introduce children and younger receivers to the basic story of Romeo and Juliet; an amateur video game that resorts to discourse hybridization between the original text, intralinguistic simplification and the style of ‘Japanese role-play games’ in order to foster an interactive re-enactment of the play. By means of multimodal analyses of the selected corpus of extracts, this chapter will enquire into the cognitive-functional nature of the ‘transmedial reformulations’ under discussion, revealing the influence of the authors’ expectations concerning implied receivers on the verbal and multimodal aspects of target versions, and the pragmatic inferences that senders wish to prompt in viewers and players through the associations between register features, lexical and structural dimensions, and non-verbal characteristics.
References
Austin J.L. 1962, How to Do Things with Words, Clarendon Press, Oxford.
Di Giovanni E., Orero P. e Agost R. 2012, Multidisciplinarity in Audiovisual Translation, in “MonTI” 4, pp. 9-22.
Díaz Cintas J. 2004, In Search of a Theoretical Framework for the Study of Audiovisual Translation, in Orero P. (a cura di), Topics in Audiovisual Translation, John Benjamins, Amsterdam/Philadelphia, pp. 21-34.
Dickey F.M. 1957, Not Wisely, but too Well, Huntington Library and Art Gallery Publications, California.
Dusi N.M. 2015, Intersemiotic Translation: Theories, Problems, Analysis, in “Semiotica” 2015 [206], pp. 181-205.
Eco U. 1985, Casablanca: Cult Movies and Intertextual Collage, in “SubStance” 14 [2], pp. 3-12.
Fairclough N. 2015, Language and Power, Routledge, Londra.
Halliday M.A.K. 1978, Language as Social Semiotic. The Social Interpretation of Language and Meaning, Edward Arnold, Londra.
Hart E. 2007, Destabilising Paradise: Men, Women and Mafiosi: Sicilian Stereotypes, in “Journal of Intercultural Studies” 28 [2], pp. 213-226.
Iaia P.L. 2016, Analysing English as a Lingua Franca in Video Games. Linguistic Features, Experiential and Functional Dimensions of Online and Scripted Interactions, Peter Lang, Berna.
Jenkins H. 2014, Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Converge, New York University Press, New York/Londra.
Kramsch C. 1998, Language and Culture, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Kress G. 1993, Against Arbitrariness: The Social Production of the Sign as a Foundational Issue in Critical Discourse Analysis, in “Discourse and Society” 4 [2], pp. 169-193.
Kress G. e van Leeuwen T. 2006, Reading Images: The Grammar of Visual Design, Routledge, Londra.
Langacker R.W. 2008, Cognitive Grammar. A Basic Introduction, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Levinson S.C. 1983, Pragmatics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
van Leeuwen T. 2005, Introducing Social Semiotics, Routledge, Londra.
Matthiessen C.M.I.M. 2001, The Environments of Translation, in Yallop C. e Steiner E. (a cura di), Beyond Content: Exploring Translation and Multilingual Texts, Mouton de Gruyter, Berlino, pp. 41-124.
Minutella V. 2013, Reclaiming Romeo and Juliet. Italian Translations for Page, Stage and Screen, Rodopi, Amsterdam/New York.
Moschini I. 2014, “You Should’ve Seen Luke!” or the Multimodal Encoding/decoding of the Language of Postmodern ‘Webridized’ TV Series, in “Text & Talk” 34 [3], pp. 283-305.
Pym A. 2003, Redefining Translation Competence in an Electronic Age. In Defence of a Minimalist Approach, in “Meta: Translators’ Journal” 48 [4], pp. 481-497.
Roberts S. 1998, Writers and their Work: Romeo and Juliet, Northcote House, Tavistock.
Sager J.C. 1997, Text Types and Translation, in Trosborg A. (a cura di), Text Typology and Translation, John Benjamins, Amsterdam/Philadelphia, pp. 25-41.
Wain J. 1964, The Living World of Shakespeare: A Playgoers’ Guide, Macmillan, New York.
Widdowson H.G. 2004, Text, Context, Pretext. Critical Issues in Discourse Analysis, Blackwell, Oxford.
Widdowson H.G. 2007, Discourse Analysis, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Full Text: pdf
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
