Accessibility of Taboo and Offensive Language for the Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing

The Case of Torrente 4

Abstract

This study examines the treatment of taboo topics and offensive language in the subtitles for the deaf and hard-of-hearing (SDH) of Torrente 4: Lethal Crisis (Segura, 2011), a Spanish comedy known for its provocative humour on sex, race, politics, and disability (Juan-Navarro, 2018). Using quantitative and qualitative content analysis, the types and frequency of taboo elements in the source text (ST) and their treatment in the target text (TT) are identified. The analysis reveals a high retention rate (94.29%) of taboo language in the SDH, demonstrating a strong commitment to preserving the film’s satirical tone and humour. In the remaining 5.71% of non-transferred taboo language, minor omissions (1.90%) and partial transfers (2.86%) result mainly from time and space constraints, while compensation strategies (0.95%) occasionally introduce additional taboo elements to enhance the impact of the SDH. Despite these efforts, reproducing the unique speech patterns and humour of the characters poses challenges, sometimes leading to inaccuracies, including some reversals of meaning. The findings underline the delicate balance required to ensure accessibility while maintaining narrative and stylistic fidelity in SDH. The study concludes by advocating for reception studies to assess how effectively SDH conveys the taboo elements, the humorous aspects, and the provocative essence of the original content.

Lay summary

How do subtitles for the deaf and hard-of-hearing (SDH) handle films with offensive language and humour? Our study explores this question by analysing the SDH of Torrente 4: Lethal Crisis (Segura, 2011), a Spanish comedy full of provocative jokes about sex, race, politics, and disability. We wanted to understand how subtitles for people with hearing impairments deal with offensive language and to what extent they meet the purpose of the original text. To do this, we compared the original dialogue with the subtitles to see how much of the tone, humour, and style of the film was retained. Our results show that 94.29% of the offensive language in the original dialogue was preserved in the subtitles. This indicates a strong effort to preserve the satirical humour of the film. The remaining 5.71% includes examples where offensive terms were omitted (1.90%) or only partially conveyed (2.86%), mostly due to technical constraints such as space and timing. Notably, in a small number of cases (0.95%), the subtitles introduced new offensive expressions to keep the humorous effect. Despite this high retention rate, there were challenges. Characters with fast or unique speech patterns were more difficult to subtitle, resulting in minor errors such as the meaning of some lines being reversed. This study highlights the importance of balancing accessibility and fidelity in SDH. Subtitles should be clear and easy to understand, while remaining faithful to the tone and content of the film. This is essential to ensure that deaf and hard-of-hearing people can fully experience the humour and themes of the original work. The relevance of this research lies in its contribution to improving SDH practice. By understanding how offensive language and humour are handled, we can create better subtitles that respect the needs and expectations of all viewers while preserving the essence of the original film. Our work also encourages further research, including feedback from deaf and hard-of-hearing people using SDH, to refine subtitle quality and accessibility.