37 121 ............................................................................... CROSSROADS. A JOURNAL OF ENGLISH STUDIES 38 (2022) (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) AGATA ROZUMKO1 DOI: 10.15290/CR.2022.38.3.06 University of Białystok, Poland https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7718-3253 Between V and T address: The translation of English address terms into Polish in serial storytelling (the case of Doc) Abstract. This study is concerned with the translation of address terms in serial storytelling. It adopts the interpersonal pragmatics perspective on address terms and treats them as elements of fictional charactersʼ relational work, i.e. the work they do to negotiate their relationships in interaction. More specifically, this paper focuses on the renditions of the form Doc as used by detective Jane Rizzoli to address doctor Maura Isles in the Polish translation of Tess Gerritsen s̓ Rizzoli and Isles crime fiction series. Since English and Polish have different address systems (N-V-T and T-V, respectively) and there are no informal terms equiv- alent to Doc to address a female doctor in Polish, its renditions depend entirely on the translator s̓ ability to understand and recreate the charactersʼ relational interaction. The Polish translators of the Rizzoli and Isles series showed different degrees of attention to the interactional coherence of the translation, which is why some of its parts contain inappropriate and impolite address forms. Overall, the relational work done by the characters has largely been domesticated in the translation and adapted to Polish speech pat- terns and rules of politeness. Consequently, shifts in the charactersʼ address mode take place at different moments in the translation than they do in the original version, and the form Doc is rendered in a variety of ways (both formal and informal) depending on the stage of the charactersʼ relational interaction. Keywords: address term, Doc, translation, crime fiction series, relational work, English, Polish. 1 Address for correspondence: University of Białystok, Centre for Linguistic Studies, Faculty of Philology, Pl. NZS 1, 15-420 Białystok, Poland. E-mail: a.rozumko@uwb.edu.pl https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7718-3253 122 ............................................................................... CROSSROADS. A JOURNAL OF ENGLISH STUDIES 38 (2022) (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) 1. Introduction The choice of address terms depends, among other things, on the degree of social distance between interlocutors, the nature of their relationship and the context in which their interaction is taking place (cf. e.g. Braun 1988; Mühleisen 2003; Clyne et al. 2009). In fiction, address terms serve as indicators of social and personal relationships among characters. The range and usage of address terms differ across languages, which is why recreating relationships between fictional characters within different address systems often poses problems for literary translators (cf. Kluge 2019; Ton 2019; Rozumko 2023). This paper contributes to the existing literature on the translation of address terms by examining their treatment in the translation of serial storytelling. It focuses on the renditions of the address term Doc, an informal variant of Doctor, in the Polish trans- lation of Tess Gerritsen s̓ Rizzoli and Isles crime fiction series. Polish does not have a direct equivalent of the address term Doc, which is why its renditions always depend on the translator s̓ ability to interpret the relationship between the characters who use it, and to find an equivalent which is suitable at a given stage of their relational interaction. This study focuses on the uses of Doc by detective Jane Rizzoli in her interactions with doctor Maura Isles, a pathologist she cooperates with throughout the series, and analy- ses its renditions in different parts of the series as the professional and personal rela- tionship between the characters develops. The analysis is conducted from the perspec- tive of the pragmatics of fiction and interpersonal pragmatics, with a focus on the use of address terms as part of the “relational work” (cf. Locher 2008) done by the two charac- ters. The aim of the study is to examine how the renditions of the address term Doc affect the interactional coherence of the translation and how they influence the presen- tation of the characters and their relationship. 2. Theoretical framework: interpersonal pragmatics and the pragmatics of fiction Interpersonal pragmatics focuses on the role of language in the creation and negotiation of relationships (cf. Locher & Graham 2010). One of the key notions in the field is “rela- tional work”, i.e. the “work” individuals do in defining and negotiating relationships with others in interaction (Locher & Watts 2005; Locher 2008). It involves making choices concerning the selection of address terms, greetings, politeness formulae, syntactic structures, the tone of voice, etc., by means of which interactants position themselves vis-à-vis others and construct their relationships. In the process, they also construct and negotiate their identities (Locher & Watts 2005; Locher 2008). Interpersonal pragmatics tends to adopt the postmodernist understanding of identity as “a relational and socio- cultural phenomenon”, constructed intersubjectively (rather than individually) in inter- action (Bucholtz & Hall 2005: 585). Interpersonal pragmatics is primarily concerned with the relational work that takes place in real-life communication, but the framework 123 ............................................................................... CROSSROADS. A JOURNAL OF ENGLISH STUDIES 38 (2022) (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) it offers can also be applied to the analysis of fictional works and their translations (cf. Locher 2020; Rozumko 2023). As explained by Jucker (2015: 63), “fictional language offers a large and very rich data source for pragmatic analyses provided it is analysed on its own terms and not as a less than perfect substitute for spontaneous spoken commu- nication”. The communicative behaviour of fictional characters is one of the areas exam- ined within the pragmatics of fiction. This branch of pragmatics focuses on such issues as polite and impolite behaviour of fictional characters, character positioning, charac- terisation, linguistic variation, the role of dialogue in fiction, etc. (cf. e.g. Culpeper 2001; Jucker 2015, 2016; Bednarek 2017; Culpeper & Fernandez-Quintanilla 2017). While fictional discourse tends to differ from everyday communication, interactions among fictional characters need to be realistic and convincing. As observed by Dynel with reference to telecinematic discourse, its creators “operate on the assumption that charactersʼ interactions should be tacitly accepted by viewers as natural relative to the socio-cultural context and should not strike them as being artificial, even if statistically infrequent” (Dynel 2017: 56). This observation also applies to the presentation of rela- tional work in written fiction. Because relational work tends to be culture and language specific, recreating it in a believable way in translation is often difficult. While in real- life communication relational work is usually unmarked (situationally appropriate) and a considerable part of it goes unnoticed (Locher & Watts 2005), in translation it is more likely to be marked (because it is impolite, overpolite or inappropriate) and draw atten- tion to itself (cf. e.g. Rozumko 2023). Inconsistency in the use of address terms and the use of inappropriate address terms in translation may disrupt the interactional coher- ence of the translation (cf. Reiber 2016; Rozumko 2023). 3. English and Polish address terms in translation The translation of address terms between English and Polish has already received a considerable amount of scholarly attention (cf. e.g. Szarkowska 2006, 2013; Woźniak 2008; Sojda 2012; Hołobut & Woźniak 2017) and there is agreement among scholars that it requires a careful consideration of the relationships among discourse participants. However, the specific choices made by fiction translators in this area have not been studied systematically as elements of the charactersʼ relational work. Many of the find- ings reported in previous studies are, however, relevant to the aims of this paper because they discuss the role of address terms in fictional characterization and styliza- tion of fictional discourse. Woźniak (2009) shows, for instance, that the address terms used in Polish translations of science fiction films do not always correspond to their source language equivalents in terms of style and register; Szarkowska (2013) notes the difficulties involved in recreating idiolects and non-standard forms of address, while Hołobut and Woźniak (2017) analyse the role of address terms in the archaization of the language used in English language historical films and in their Polish and Italian 124 ............................................................................... CROSSROADS. A JOURNAL OF ENGLISH STUDIES 38 (2022) (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) translations. Studies have also shown some general tendencies in the treatment of address terms in translation (cf. Kluge 2019). Sinner (2011) and Brehmer (2015) report that pronominal address is often domesticated, i.e. translated according to the norms of the target language, while nominal address is more likely to be foreignized, i.e. oriented towards the norms of the source language. The specific solutions in the translation of address terms often result from the differ- ences between the address systems of the languages concerned. In the case of English and Polish, the differences occur on the lexico-grammatical as well as socio-cultural levels. Both languages have pronominal and nominal address, but Polish, which is a pro- drop language, also expresses address by means of verbal inflections (cf. Rusiecki 2008; Szarkowska 2013), e.g. Dokąd idziesz? [2nd p. sg present tense] ʻWhere are you going? .̓ Neither of the two languages has the classic T-V distinction in their pronominal systems. The T-V model, proposed by Brown and Gilman (1960) with reference to the semantics of the Latin address pronouns tu (T) and vos (V), works best for languages which have infor- mal and formal address pronouns, such as French (tu/vous) and German (du/Sie). English, however, has one universal address pronoun (you), while in Polish pronouns only express T semantics (ty in the singular and wy in the plural). A framework which seems better suited for the study of address terms in English and Polish is Cook s̓ (2019) N-V-T model, which is an extended version of Brown and Gilman s̓ (1960) proposal, where N stands for a neutral mode of address. Importantly, Cook (2019) notes that T and V semantics can be conveyed by both pronominal and nominal terms of address. The meanings associated with T include: informality, intimacy, solidarity, closeness, and familiarity, while the meanings associated with V are: formality, respect, deference, distance, and politeness (Bresin 2021: 1). In the absence of T and V pronouns, English expresses T and V semantics solely by nominal terms of address; in Polish, all V encoders are nouns. While the N-V-T distinction is relatively straightforward when applied to address pronouns, whose number is small, it is more difficult to apply to nominal address terms as those express a whole spectrum of meanings, and indicate different degrees of famil- iarity and distance between interlocutors. There seems to be agreement among scholars (e.g. Brown & Ford 1961; Leech 1999) that the most distancing address terms in English are honorifics (e.g. Sir, Madam), followed by titles/honorifics + last names (e.g. Mr/Pro- fessor Jones), and last names alone (cf. Brown & Ford 1961). More informal address terms, associated with T semantics, include first names (full forms being more formal than short ones), familiarisers (e.g. mate), family terms (e.g. mummy) and endearments (e.g. darling) (Leech 1999; Cook 2019)2. In Polish, V semantics is primarily expressed by the honorifics pan ʻSir/Mr ,̓ pani ʻMadam/Msʼ (followed by third person verb forms, 2 The term “title” is used by some scholars to include honorifics as well (Brown & Ford 1961; Leech 2009). Following Clyne et al. (2009), in this work it is used to refer to professional titles, such as Doctor and Professor. 125 ............................................................................... CROSSROADS. A JOURNAL OF ENGLISH STUDIES 38 (2022) (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) e.g. Co pani robi?, lit. ʻWhat is madam doing?ʼ), whose status is similar to that of V pronouns in other languages (cf. Braun 1988; Huszcza 2005; Szarkowska 2013). Formal situations require the use of pan/pani in combination with titles (pani doktor ʻMs Doctor ,̓ panie profesorze ʻMr Professorʼ). Slightly less formal is the use of pan/pani with the word proszę (lit. ʻI askʼ), as in proszę pana/pani, which is the default V address when the profes- sional titles of interactants are unknown or irrelevant. The least distancing form within the V domain is the combination of pan/pani with first names (e.g. pani Agato ʻMs Agataʼ). In contrast to English, titles and honorifics are not normally combined with surnames in Polish. Unless they have a distinguishing function, e.g. when one person from a group is addressed, such combinations are usually perceived as impolite or foreign (cf. Marcjanik 2009). As noted by Marcjanik (2009: 32), combinations of titles and honorifics with surnames are sometimes used by non-native speakers of Polish who are accustomed to such forms in their native languages. The shift from V to T requires a ritual agreement, which should be initiated by the older person, a woman (in interac- tion with a man) or a work superior (cf. Marcjanik 2009, 2020). T forms are used among young people, friends and members of the family. The T domain is also characterised by frequent use of diminutive forms of first names, not only among family and friends, but also co-workers. Both English and Polish show the tendency towards familiarization and informaliza- tion in the use of address terms (cf. Leech 1999; Marcjanik 2002, 2009, 2020; Murray 2002; Lakoff 2005; Bruns & Kranich 2022). Bruns and Kranich (2022: 114) link it partly with the increasing emphasis on “the importance of equality, participation, and antidis- crimination” in modern western societies. In Poland, the use of less formal address forms is also attributed to Anglo-American influence on Polish ways of speaking (cf. Marcjanik 2009). The changes reported by scholars primarily include an increase in the use of first names and a decrease in the use of titles, but in English, the trend seems to also concern the use of clipped forms of titles, such as Doc (Doctor) and Prof (Professor). An equivalent change in Polish involves the omission of the honorific panie and the use of the title alone (doktorze, profesorze), but, as observed by Marcjanik (2009: 39), it is only possible with masculine forms. The only appropriate way to address a woman doctor and a woman professor in Polish is thus by combining the honorific pani with their professional titles: pani doktor (ʻMs Doctorʼ) and pani profesor (ʻMs Professorʼ), respec- tively. In the absence of direct Polish counterparts of informal variants of titles, transla- tors must rely on their pragmatic competence to render them appropriately. 4. Translations of crime fiction series as a source of data for interpersonal pragmatics Crime fiction has become one of the most popular fiction genres. It owes much of its popularity to translation, through which it has become “the most globalised of all 126 ............................................................................... CROSSROADS. A JOURNAL OF ENGLISH STUDIES 38 (2022) (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) popular genres” (McCaw 2020: 48). Hopkins and Seago (2018: 220) note that popular literature is now more often read in translation than high literature, which may be one of the reasons why the translation of crime fiction has received a considerable amount of scholarly attention in recent years. The quality of crime fiction translation as well as the strategies adopted by its translators depend on a number of factors. Seago and Lei (2020: 85) name the following: “The status of the respective languages involved, the status of the text or author to be translated, and whether the receiving culture is familiar with the genre or author.” Despite its high readership and an increased interest from scholars, the genre still has a rather low status, and crime fiction series are particularly often perceived as lowbrow. As observed by Mayer (2020), serial storytelling in general and crime fiction in particular tend to be valued less than stand-alone works. The association of crime fiction series with “cheap and fast” literature (cf. Mayer 2020) has a bearing on the quality of its translation, though, somewhat ironically, it requires more skill than the rather low reputation of the genre may suggest. One of the reasons why crime fiction is not easy to translate is that it is highly culture specific. Its translation requires the ability to use appropriate terminology and to recreate the discourse of various social groups: police officers, experts in various fields, witnesses and criminals. As summarised by Seago (2014: 5), “the crime translator needs to create a believable and nuanced cultural and professional setting, handle a range of voices, register, dialect, slang and swearing to evoke distinct characters within their social context, location and interaction with each other”. Equally important is the translator s̓ attention to the details and clues that lead to solving the case and make a crime fiction text coherent (cf. Seago & Lei 2020). Maintaining “macro-coherence”, i.e. the “logical, cognitive, factual congruity” of the textual world (Merlini Barbaresi 2002: 120), is particularly challenging in the translation of crime fiction series, as serial storytelling requires a consistent presenta- tion of the events, places, characters and relationships throughout different parts of the series. As observed by Merlini Barbaresi (2002: 122-123), charactersʼ “actions, reactions, emotions and expressions must be logically connected and internally congruent. Equally important are the relationships among various characters, which must be mutu- ally motivated at every stage of their development”. Crime fiction series often have one or two main characters who enter into multiple personal and professional relationships in different parts of the series. The development of their relationships is reflected in their “relational work”, which involves address terms negotiations and shifts in address use. It is thus the relational dimension of crime fiction series that makes their transla- tion particularly interesting from the perspective of interpersonal pragmatics. 5. Material and research procedure This study examines the renditions of the address term Doc in the Polish translation of the Rizzoli and Isles series by the American crime fiction writer Tess Gerritsen. More 127 ............................................................................... CROSSROADS. A JOURNAL OF ENGLISH STUDIES 38 (2022) (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) precisely, it focuses on the uses of Doc by the main character of the series, homicide detective Jane Rizzoli (in her early thirties at the beginning of the series), in her interac- tions with doctor Maura Isles (4-5 years older than Jane Rizzoli), a forensic pathologist she cooperates with. Tess Gerritsen s̓ Rizzoli and Isles series consists of thirteen books published between the years 2001 and 2022. The two characters meet in the second part of the series; in the subsequent parts, they work together and gradually become friends. The relational work they do is thus an important part of their characterisation. The thir- teen books in the series were translated by six different translators: Jerzy Żebrowski (parts 1, 3, 4, 6, 10, 11 and 13), Zygmunt Halka (parts 2 and 5), Zbigniew Kościuk (part 7), Krzysztof Obłucki (part 8), Anna Jęczmyk (part 9), and Andrzej Szulc (part 12). To analyse the renditions of the title Doc in the Polish translation of the series, I first examined the address terms used between the two characters in the original version to establish how they address each other in different contexts and how their address mode changes as their relationship develops. Subsequently, I analysed the ways in which they address each other in the Polish translation of the series. The analysis which follows is qualitative in character. It focuses on the renditions of the title Doc as part of the rela- tional work done by the two characters and with reference to the interactional coher- ence of the translation. It aims to answer the following research questions: (1) How is Doc rendered by the different translators of the series? (2) Are its renditions consistent with the other elements of the charactersʼ relational work? (3) How do the renditions of Doc affect the presentation of the two characters and the relationship between them? 6. Discussion of results 6.1. Address terms used between Jane Rizzoli and Maura Isles in the original version of the series The two characters meet in the second part of the series, The Apprentice, in the autopsy lab, where doctor Isles is performing an autopsy on a victim of the crime that Jane Rizzoli is investigating. Their relationship is first strictly professional. Throughout part 2, Maura Isles addresses Jane Rizzoli as Detective Rizzoli (V address), as illustrated in (1), whereas Jane Rizzoli does not use any nominal forms of address and only addresses Maura Isles by the pronoun you (N). (1) ʻDetective Rizzoli, you asked me what kind of blade he used.̓ ʻPlease tell me it s̓ not a scalpel.̓ (The Apprentice, p. 42) In part 3, The Sinner, they spend a lot of time together and talk not only about their investigation, but also about their private lives. During one of their conversations Maura Isles shifts to T address, and begins addressing Jane Rizzoli by her first name (example 128 ............................................................................... CROSSROADS. A JOURNAL OF ENGLISH STUDIES 38 (2022) (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) 2). Occasionally, she also addresses her by her surname, as in (3). Jane Rizzoli, however, consistently addresses Maura Isles by Doc (example 3). It needs to be noted that even when the two characters become friends, they mostly meet in connection with the crimes they are investigating, usually at crime scenes or in the autopsy lab, where the title Doc used by Rizzoli indicates that their relationship continues to be professional. (2) She turned to look at Rizzoli. ʻYouʼre Catholic, Jane. Arenʼt you?ʼ (The Sinner, p. 37) (3) Maura Isles: ʻThere s̓ nothing more to see here.̓ Jane Rizzoli: ʻWe just got here, Doc.̓ (…) Maura Isles: ʻRizzoli ,̓ she whispered. ʻCan we get out of here now?ʼ (The Sinner, p. 240) This non-reciprocal pattern continues until part 8, The Killing Place, in the course of which Jane Rizzoli begins addressing Maura Isles by her first name (example 4). She does so in a very emotional situation when Maura contacts her after a long absence during which her life was at threat. However, in addition to using Maura s̓ first name, Jane Rizzoli continues to address her as Doc until the end of part 11. (4) ʻJane?ʼ The voice was close to a sob. ʻThank God you answered!ʼ (…) ʻI thought you were dead!ʼ Jane blurted. ʻIʼm alive. Iʼm okay!ʼ ʻJesus, Maura, we had your memorial service!ʼ (The Killing Place, p. 291-292) It is important to note that the changes in the charactersʼ address mode are not accompanied by any meta-comments from the characters or the narrator anywhere in the series. Thus, the translators could only rely on their own interpretation of the rela- tional interaction between the characters to render the address terms appropriately. 6.2. The address terms used between Jane Rizzoli and Maura Isles in the Polish translation The relational work done by the two characters in the Polish translation of the series is quite different from its original version. The translators of the different parts clearly worked independently and did not always pay attention to consistency in the use of address terms or the coherence of the charactersʼ relational work throughout the series, which supports the common perception of serial storytelling and its translation as being “cheap and fast” (cf. Mayer 2020). Continuity is only maintained within the parts trans- lated by Jerzy Żebrowski (1, 3, 4, 6, 10, 11, 13). Otherwise, the relational work done by the two characters is characterised by frequent and unexpected shifts in address use, which have no counterparts in the original version and make their relational interaction illogical and incoherent. In the Polish translation of the series, Jane Rizzoli first 129 ............................................................................... CROSSROADS. A JOURNAL OF ENGLISH STUDIES 38 (2022) (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) addresses Maura by T, from which she switches to V (parts 3-4), and then again to T (parts 5-13), but she also occasionally uses V and combinations of T and V. Maura Isles shifts from V to T already at the end of part 2 (even though she still uses V in the English version at the time), but in parts 3 and 4 she returns to V, which she uses interchange- ably with combinations of V and T before she shifts to T for good in part 5. Some of the choices made by the translators make the charactersʼ utterances impolite while they are completely neutral in the original version, which affects the presentation of the characters and their relationship in the series. For instance, in part 2 (The Appren- tice) Jane Rizzoli addresses Maura Isles by the N pronoun you, which the translator (Zygmunt Halka) invariably renders as T (the 2nd p. sg pronoun ty and the 2nd p. sg verbs), as in (5b), even though Maura Isles addresses her as Detective Rizzoli (V), as illus- trated in (6b). (5a) Jane Rizzoli: Did you X-ray the neck? (The Apprentice, p. 86) (5b) Jane Rizzoli: Zrobiłaś [2nd p. sg, past tense] prześwietlenie szyi? (Skalpel, p. 84) (6a) Maura Isles: Detective Rizzoli, you are coming in, right? (The Apprentice, p. 192) (6b) Maura Isles: Detektyw Rizzoli, czy pani przyjedzie? (Skalpel, p. 182) Such asymmetrical address is unlikely to be used in real life because it would be highly disrespectful for a detective to respond with T if a medical doctor addresses them with V. As observed by Szarkowska (2006), the rendition of the neutral pronoun you as T regardless of the situational context is the most common problem in the translation of English address terms into Polish. A detailed analysis of all the address terms used between the two characters in the two language versions of the series is beyond the scope of this paper, but some of them are discussed in section 6.3, which focuses on the renderings of the form Doc. 6.3. Renditions of the address term Doc Jane Rizzoli does not address Maura Isles as Doc in all the parts of the series. In parts 2 (The Apprentice) and 5 (Vanish) she addresses her by the pronoun you, while in parts 12 (I Know a Secret) and 13 (Listen to Me) she uses you and her first name. In the other parts, the renditions of the term are characterised by similar inconsistency as the renditions of all the other address terms used between the two characters. The only translator who attempted to recreate the shifts in the charactersʼ address mode resulting from the development of their professional and personal relationship is Żebrowski, which is why his renditions of the term Doc will be discussed first, followed by a discussion of the treatment of the term by the other translators of the series. In the parts translated by Żebrowski, the characters first use reciprocal V (the begin- ning of part 3, The Sinner/Pol. Grzesznik), then Maura Isles switches to V combined with 130 ............................................................................... CROSSROADS. A JOURNAL OF ENGLISH STUDIES 38 (2022) (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) T, while Jane Rizzoli continues using V, until they move to reciprocal T (part 6, The Mephisto Club/Pol. Klub Mefista). At the stage of reciprocal V, Żebrowski renders Doc as pani doktor (lit. ʻMs Doctorʼ) and translates the pronoun you (N) as pani in both charac- tersʼ utterances, as illustrated in (7a) and (7b). The translation strategy he uses is thus domestication (both in the case of nominal and pronominal address). The characters address each other more formally than they do in the original version, but their address is consistent with Polish rules of politeness (cf. e.g. Marcjanik 2009). (7a) ʻHey Doc.̓ At the front of the chapel, a mop of dark hair popped up as Detective Jane Rizzoli rose to her feet and waved. ʻThe vic s̓ up here.̓ Maura Isles: ʻDo you know what happened? What did the sisters tell you?ʼ (The Sinner, p. 17) (7b) Pani doktor? – W głębi kaplicy dostrzegła burzę ciemnych włosów, gdy detektyw Jane Rizzoli wyprostowała się i pomachała do niej. – Ofiara jest tutaj. Maura Isles: Wie pani, co się wydarzyło? Co powiedziały siostry? (Grzesznik, p. 19) The problem begins when Maura Isles starts addressing Jane Rizzoli by her first name (in the middle of part 3, The Sinner), but Jane Rizzoli continues responding with Doc. The relational work that they do in the original version of the novel (they show interest in each other s̓ personal lives, feelings and emotions) indicates that their relationship is becoming closer, but the change in their address mode is one-sided. While in English the distance between the informal term Doc, the neutral pronoun you, and the first name is relatively small, the distance between their most straightforward Polish equiva- lents (the V form pani doktor on the one hand and first name address on the other) is considerably greater, which makes it difficult to recreate the charactersʼ asymmetrical address mode in translation. The translator decided to solve this problem by using mixed forms (V+T), i.e. Maura Isles continues using the V form pani (which is the rendi- tion of the pronoun you), but she combines it with first name address (T), while Jane Rizzoli still addresses Maura Isles with the V form pani doktor (ʻMs Doctorʼ), as illustrated in (8a) and (8b). (8a) ʻDoc ̓? Rizzoli was standing at the other end of the hallway. ʻWhy didnʼt you call me?ʼ said Maura. ʻCostas is taking this one.̓ ʻSo I just heard.̓ ʻYou donʼt need to be here.̓ ʻYou could have told me, Jane. You could have let me know.̓ (Body Double, p. 393) (8b) Pani doktor? – Rizzoli stała u wylotu korytarza. – Dlaczego pani do mnie nie zadzwoniła? – spytała Maura. 131 ............................................................................... CROSSROADS. A JOURNAL OF ENGLISH STUDIES 38 (2022) (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) – Zajmuje się tym Costas. – Właśnie się dowiedziałam. – Nie powinna pani tu przyjeżdżać. – Mogła mi pani powiedzieć, Jane. Mogła mnie pani zawiadomić. (Sobowtór, p. 290) The problem with such mixed forms (V+T) is that they are very infrequent in real-life communication in Polish, and sound rather artificial. Marcjnik (2009: 40) notes that the combination of first name address with the form pan/pani is sometimes used by older and socially superior speakers to address their significantly younger interlocutors (e.g. older university professors addressing their students) to indicate a friendly attitude. This, however, is not the case in the Rizzoli and Isles series, as the two characters are of a similar age. Maura s̓ use of the V+T form makes her appear more distant and reserved towards Jane Rizzoli than she is in the original version. The unnaturalness of the charac- tersʼ address at that stage of their relational interaction was probably the reason why the translator decided that Jane Rizzoli should start addressing Maura Isles by her first name earlier than she does in the original version. Thus, in the Polish version of part 6 (The Mephisto Club/Pol. Klub Mefista) the characters already use reciprocal T and address each other by their first names, even though in the original version of the book their address is still asymmetrical: Jane Rizzoli addresses Maura Isles as Doc, while Maura Isles addresses her by her first name. The translator s̓ decision to shift to reciprocal T makes their relational work more coherent; first name address is more in line with the informal greetings they use (e.g. hey/Pol. witaj) and with the personal topics they discuss. However, in consequence, the term Doc is either omitted (example 9b) or replaced with the first name Maura (example 10b) in part 6 (The Mephisto Club/Pol. Klub Mefista) and the subsequent parts of the series translated by Żebrowski. (9a) ʻIf youʼre looking to get warm, Doc,̓ said Jane, ʻyouʼre not going to find it out here. But I guess that s̓ your choice.̓ (Mephisto Club, p. 134) (9b) – Jeśli chcesz [2nd p. sg, present tense] się rozgrzać – powiedziała Jane – to nie tutaj. Ale twój wybór. (Klub Mefista, p. 95) (10a) ʻCʼmon Doc,̓ she said, climbing out. ʻWeʼll get you home.̓ (Mephisto Club, p. 265) (10b) – Chodź, Mauro – powiedziała, wysiadając. – Odwieziemy cię do domu. (Klub Mefista, p. 192) The other translators of the series mostly translate the charactersʼ address as recipro- cal T, but they are less consistent and less concerned with the coherence of the charac- tersʼ relational work. Zbigniew Kościuk, the translator of part 7 (Keeping the Dead/Pol. Mumia) mostly renders you (N) as ty (T), and often omits the term Doc, which is consis- tent with Żebrowski s̓ strategy used in part 6. However, in some contexts, he renders Doc 132 ............................................................................... CROSSROADS. A JOURNAL OF ENGLISH STUDIES 38 (2022) (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) as pani doktor ʻMs Doctorʼ (V) and in others, he translates it using the diminutive form doktorku (T). The V form pani doktor appears during one of the charactersʼ interactions in the autopsy lab (example 11b). (11a) Jane turned to Maura, ʻLet s̓ get on with the autopsy, Doc. We need more information to work with.̓ (Keeping the Dead, p. 40) (11b) Jane zwróciła się do Maury. – Kontynuujmy autopsję, pani doktor. Potrzebujemy więcej informacji, żeby zacząć dochodzenie. (Mumia, p. 50) On the one hand, such a translation is inconsistent with the T forms they use through- out the novel; on the other hand, the professional context in which it occurs to some extent justifies the translator s̓ choice. The other term used by Kościuk as an equivalent of Doc, doktorku (example 12b) is, however, entirely inappropriate. First of all, doktorku is a masculine form and, as such, it is never used to address female doctors in real life. Its use in the translation breaks both the local and macro-coherence of the textual world (cf. Merlini Barbaresi 2002). It is situationally inappropriate and disrupts the coherence of the charactersʼ relational work. Moreover, doktorku is a diminutive with derisive and condescending overtones, which are entirely absent from the charactersʼ relational work in the original version of the series. The form was popularized in the Polish trans- lation of Bugs Bunny cartoons, as the rendition of Doc in the well-known phrase “What s̓ up Doc?” that Bugs Bunny uses to address Elmer Fudd, a character who is trying to hunt him. Elmer Fudd is not a medical doctor, and in the cartoon, Doc functions as an infor- mal synonym of the word man. While doktorku sounds appropriate and funny when used by the cartoon character, it is highly disrespectful when used to address a medical doctor. It is, however, the only informal variant of the word doktor available in Polish, which is probably why, despite its inappropriateness, it was also used by Krzysztof Obłucki in his translation of the next part of the series (part 8, The Killing Place/Pol. Dolina umarłych), as shown in example (12b). (12a) Hey, Doc, weʼre wondering where you are,̓ said Jane. ʻGive me a call, okay?ʼ (The Killing Place, p. 86) (12b) Cześć, doktorku, zastanawiamy się, gdzie jesteś – powiedziała Jane. – Zadzwoń do mnie, dobrze? (Dolina Umarłych, p. 76) There is not much interaction between Jane and Maura in part 8. With the exception of the instance quoted in (12a), they address each other using their first names. In part 9 (The Silent Girl/Pol. Milcząca dziewczyna), translated by Anna Jęczmyk, Doc is rendered as pani doktor (V) and combined with cię, the object case of the ty pronoun (T), as illus- trated in (13b). 133 ............................................................................... CROSSROADS. A JOURNAL OF ENGLISH STUDIES 38 (2022) (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) (13a) ʻHey, Doc,̓ called out Jane, crossing towards her, the wind scrambling her dark hair, ʻI see Tam finally found you.̓ (The Silent Girl, p. 57) (13b) Cześć, pani doktor! – zawołała Rizzoli, idąc w jej stronę. Wiatr rozwiewał jej ciemne włosy. – Widzę, że detektyw Tam jednak cię znalazł. (Milcząca dziewczyna, p. 49) In contrast to the T+V combination involving the use of the first name and the form pani (Ms) in one utterance, employed by Żebrowski in the translation of part 3, The Sinner (example 6b), the V+T combination involving title + surname and the pronoun ty is, according to Marcjanik (2009: 40), considered impolite in Polish. Marcjanik (2009) notes that such mixed address terms are encountered among people who have worked together for a long time but the distance in their professional status makes it difficult for them to shift to T address. This, however, is not the case in the analysed translation, as the characters already use T address earlier in the book. In (13b) the V form pani doktor is also combined with the informal greeting cześć (hey), which is unlikely to happen in real life, unless the speaker intends to use it jokingly. Such playful use of address terms combined with the impolite forms that Jane Rizzoli uses in the Polish version of the earlier parts make the detective appear less professional than she is in the original version of the series. 7. Conclusions By analysing the renditions of the form Doc as used by detective Jane Rizzoli to address doctor Maura Isles in the Polish translation of Tess Gerritsen s̓ Rizzoli and Isles crime fiction series, this study has hoped to offer some insights into the translation of address terms in serial storytelling. Address terms are part of the relational work done by fictional characters; they indicate the nature of relationships among them and reflect the development of their relationships throughout the series. In Tess Gerritsen s̓ series, Jane Rizzoli uses the form Doc to address doctor Maura Isles at different stages of their relational interaction, first as the only address term and later, when they become friends, interchangeably with her first name. Such use is facilitated by the availability of the neutral pronoun you in English, which can be combined with various types of nominal address. The absence of informal ways equivalent to Doc to address a female doctor and the existence of the binary opposition between V and T address in Polish makes recreating their address mode in translation quite difficult and requires a good understanding of the charactersʼ relational work. The six Polish translators of the series showed varying degrees of sensitivity towards the issue in question, which has resulted in numerous inconsistencies in the charactersʼ address mode, unexpected shifts in address terms and the use of inaccurate and impolite forms (e.g. the disrespectful masculine diminutive doktorku). Disregarding all the inconsistencies and translation 134 ............................................................................... CROSSROADS. A JOURNAL OF ENGLISH STUDIES 38 (2022) (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) errors, the main strategy adopted by the translators was to domesticate the charactersʼ relational work and adjust their address to the Polish rules of politeness. Thus, Doc is rendered as pani doktor ʻMs Doctorʼ at the initial V stage of the charactersʼ interaction, and omitted or replaced with the doctor s̓ first name when the charactersʼ relationship becomes too close to maintain V address. Such findings reveal the usefulness of the concept of relational work in the study of address terms in the translation of serial story- telling, and show that both nominal and pronominal address terms undergo domestica- tion if it facilitates maintaining the coherence of the charactersʼ relational interaction. References Primary sources Gerritsen, T. 2001. The Surgeon. New York: Ballantine Books. [Pol. transl. J. Żebrowski, Chirurg. Warszawa: Albatros, 2017] Gerritsen, T. 2002. The Apprentice. London/Toronto/Sydney/Auckland/Johannesburg: Bantam Books. [Pol. transl. Z. Halka. Skalpel. Albatros: Warszawa, electronic edition 2019] Gerritsen, T. 2003. The Sinner. New York: Ballantine Books. [Pol. transl. J. Żebrowski. Grzesznik. Warszawa: Albatros, electronic edition 2015] Gerritsen, T. 2004. Body Double. London/Toronto/Sydney/Auckland/Johannesburg: Bantam Books. [Pol. transl. J. Żebrowski. Sobowtór. Warszawa: Albatros, electronic edition 2011] Gerritsen, T. 2005. Vanish. London/Toronto/Sydney/Auckland/Johannesburg: Bantam Books. [Pol. transl. Z. Halka, Autopsja. Warszawa: Albatros, electronic edition 2019]. Gerritsen, T. 2006. The Mephisto Club. London/Toronto/Sydney/Auckland/Johannesburg: Bantam Books. [Pol. transl. J. Żebrowski, Klub Mefista. Warszawa: Albatros, electronic edition 2012] Gerritsen, T. 2008. The Keepsake. New York: Ballantine Books. [Pol. transl. Z. Kościuk. Mumia. Warszawa: Albatros, 2017] Gerritsen, T. 2010. The Killing Place. London/Toronto/Sydney/Auckland/Johannesburg: Bantam Books. [Pol. transl. K. Obłucki. Dolina umarłych. Warszawa: Albatros, 2019] Gerritsen, T. 2011. The Silent Girl. London/Toronto/Sydney/Auckland/Johannesburg: Bantam Books. [Pol. transl. A. Jęczmyk. Milcząca dziewczyna. Warszawa: Albatros, 2017] Gerritsen, T. 2012. Last to Die. London: Bantam Books. [Pol. transl. J. Żebrowski. Ostatni, który umrze. 2013. Warszawa: Albatros, electronic edition 2019] Gerritsen, T. 2014. Die Again. London/Toronto/Sydney/Auckland/Johannesburg: Bantam Books. [Pol. transl. J. Żebrowski. Umrzeć po raz drugi. Warszawa: Albatros, 2017] 135 ............................................................................... CROSSROADS. A JOURNAL OF ENGLISH STUDIES 38 (2022) (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) Gerritsen, T. 2017. I Know a Secret. London/Toronto/Sydney/Auckland/Johannesburg: Bantam Books. [Pol. transl. A. Szulc. Sekret, którego nie zdradzę. Warszawa: Albatros, 2017] Gerritsen, T. 2022. Listen to Me. New York: Ballantine Books. [Pol. transl. J. Żebrowski, Wysłuchaj mnie. Warszawa: Albatros, 2022] Secondary sources Bednarek, M. 2017. The role of dialogue in fiction. In: M. A. Locher & A. H. Jucker (eds.), The Pragmatics of Fiction, 129-158. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Braun, F. 1988. Terms of Address: Problems of Patterns and Usage in Various Languages and Cultures. Berlin/New York/Amsterdam: Mouton de Gruyter. Brehmer, B. 2015. Was können Parallelkorpora für die Ausbildung von Übersetzern leisten? Eine Fallstudie zur Übersetzung von Anredeformen im Polnischen. In: C. Badstübner-Kizik, Z. Fišer & R. Hauck (eds.), Übersetzung als Kulturvermittlung. Translatorisches Handeln, neue Strategien, didaktische Innovation, 57-81. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. Brown, R. & Gilman, A. 1960. The pronouns of power and solidarity. In: T. A. Sebeok (ed.), Style in Language, 253-276. Cambridge (MA) The M.I.T. Press. Brown, R. & Ford, M. 1961. Address in American English. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 62 (2): 375-385. Bruns, H. & S. Kranich. 2022. Terms of address: A contrastive investigation of ongoing changes in British, American and Indian English and in German. Contrastive Pragmat- ics 3: 111-143. Bucholtz, M. & Hall, K. 2005. Identity and interaction: A sociocultural linguistic approach. Discourse Studies 7 (4-5): 585-614. Clyne, M. G., Warren, J. & Norrby, C. 2009. Language and Human Relations: Styles of Address in Contemporary Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Cook, M. 2019. N-V-T, a framework for the analysis of social dynamics in address pronouns. In: P. Bouissac (ed.), The Social Dynamics of Pronominal Systems: A Comparat- ive Approach, 17-34. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Culpeper, J. 2001. Language and Characterisation: People in Plays and Other Texts. Harlow: Pearson. Culpeper, J. & Fernandez-Quintanilla, C. 2017. Fictional characterisation. In: M. A. Locher & A. H. Jucker (eds.), The Pragmatics of Fiction, 93-128. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Dynel, M. 2017. “Is there a tumour in your humour?”: On misunderstanding and miscommunication in conversational humour. In: R. Giora & M. Haugh (eds.), Doing Pragmatics Interculturally: Cognitive, Philosophical, and Sociopragmatic Perspectives, 55-78. Berlin/New York: Mouton De Gruyter. 136 ............................................................................... CROSSROADS. A JOURNAL OF ENGLISH STUDIES 38 (2022) (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) Hołobut, A. & Woźniak, M. 2017. Historia na ekranie. Gatunek filmowy a przekład audiow- izualny. Kraków: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego. Hopkinson, A. & Seago, K. 2018. Crime fiction. In: K. Washbourne & B. Van Wyke (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Literary Translation, 220-239. London: Routledge. Huszcza, R. 2005. Politeness in Poland: From ʻtitlemaniaʼ to grammaticalised honorifics. In: L. Hickey & M. Stewart (eds.), Politeness in Europe, 218-233. Clevedon/Buffalo/ Toronto: Multilingual Matters. Jucker, A. H. 2015. Pragmatics of fiction: Literary uses of uh and um. Journal of Pragmat- ics 86: 63-67. Jucker, A. H. 2016. Politeness in eighteenth-century drama: a discursive approach. Journal Politeness Research 12 (1): 95-115. Kizelbach, U. 2017. (Im)politeness in fiction. In: M. A. Locher & A. H. Jucker (eds.), Prag- matics of Fiction, 425-454. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Kluge, B. 2019. On translating pronominal and nominal terms of address: State of the art and future directions. In: B. Kluge & M. I. Moyna (eds.), It’s Not All About ‘You’: New Perspectives on Address Research, 47-74. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Lakoff, R. T. 2005. Civility and its discontents: Or, getting in your face. In: R. T. Lakoff & S. Ide (eds.), Broadening the Horizon of Linguistic Politeness, 23-43. Amsterdam/ Phil- adelphia: John Benjamins. Leech, G. 1999. The distribution and function of vocatives in American and British English conversation. In: H. Hasselgård & S. Oksefiell (eds.), Studies in Honour of Stig Johansson, 107-118. Amsterdam: Rodopi. Locher, M. A. 2008. Relational work, politeness, and identity construction. In: G. Antos & E. Ventola (eds.), Handbook of Interpersonal Communication, 509-540. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Locher, M. A., 2020. Moments of relational work in English fan translations of Korean TV drama. Journal of Pragmatics 170: 139-155. Locher, M. A. & Watts, R. J. 2005. Politeness theory and relational work. Journal of Polite- ness Research 1: 9-33. Locher, M. A. & Graham, S. L., 2010. Introduction to interpersonal pragmatics. In: M. A. Locher & S. L. Graham (eds.), Interpersonal Pragmatics, 1-13. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Locher, M. A. & Jucker, A. H., 2017. Introducing Pragmatics of Fiction: Approaches, trends and developments. In: Locher, M. A. & A. H. Jucker (eds.), Pragmatics of Fiction, 1-24. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Marcjanik, M. 2002. Proces przewartościowania polskiej grzeczności językowej. In: G. Szpila (ed.), Język trzeciego tysiąclecia II. Vol. I Nowe oblicza komunikacji we współczes- nej polszczyźnie, 391-396. Kraków: Tertium. 137 ............................................................................... CROSSROADS. A JOURNAL OF ENGLISH STUDIES 38 (2022) (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) Marcjanik, M. 2009. Mówimy uprzejmie. Poradnik językowego savoir-vivre’u. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN. Marcjanik, M. 2020. Słownik językowego savoir-vivre’u. 2nd edition. Warszawa: Wydawn- ictwa Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego. Mayer, R. 2020. The crime fiction series. In: J. Allan, J. Gulddal, S. King, & A. Pepper (eds.), The Routledge Companion to Crime Fiction, 31-38. London: Routledge. McCaw, N. 2020. Adaptations. In: J. Allan, J. Gulddal, S. King & A. Pepper (eds.), The Routledge Companion to Crime Fiction, 48-56. London: Routledge. Merlini Barbaresi, L. 2002. Text linguistics and literary translation. In: A. Riccardi (ed.), Translation Studies: Perspectives on an Emerging Discipline, 120-132. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Messerli, T. C., 2017. Participation structure in fictional discourse: Authors, scriptwriters, audiences and characters. In: M. A. Locher & A. H. Jucker (eds.), Prag- matics of Fiction, 25-54. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Mühleisen, S. 2003. Interpreting social roles and interpersonal relations: A cross-cul- tural perspective on address forms in film translation. Studies in Communication Sciences 3(2): 135-162. Murray, A. 2002. A New Look at Address in American English: The Rules Have Changed. Names: A Journal of Onomastics 50 (1). 43-61. Reiber, R. 2016. Zur Übersetzung von Anredeformen in Untertiteln und Synchronisa- tionen. Ein Vergleich am Beispiel von The Nanny. [Unpublished Master s̓ thesis]. Universität Hildesheim. Rozumko, A. 2023. Interpersonal relationships in translation: Address terms in the English and Polish translations of Henning Mankell s̓ The Dogs of Riga. Journal of Prag- matics 206: 19-28. Rusiecki, J. 2008. Appellatives and verbal forms of address. Linguistica Silesiana 29: 29- 42. Seago, K. & Lei, V. 2020. Translation. In: J. Allan, J. Gulddal, S. King & A. Pepper (eds.), The Routledge Companion to Crime Fiction, 85-93. London: Routledge. Sinner, C. 2011. Relaciones sociales en la traducción de la oralidad fingida: Formas y fórmulas de tratamiento como dificultad y problema en la traducción. In: S. Roiss, C. F. Gil, M. Á. Recio Ariza, B. Santana López, P. Zimmermann González & I. Holl (eds.), En las vertientes de la traducción e interpretación del/al alemán, 223-243. Berlin: Frank & Timme. Sojda, S. 2012. Adresat dziecięcy w tłumaczeniach Winnie-the-Pooh A. A. Milneʼa na język polski i słowacki. Przekłady Literatur Słowiańskich 3 (1): 149-163. Szarkowska, A. 2006. Formy adresatywne w przekładzie z języka angielskiego na polski. Rocznik Przekładoznawczy. Studia nad teorią, praktyką i dydaktyką przekładu 2: 211-221. 138 ............................................................................... CROSSROADS. A JOURNAL OF ENGLISH STUDIES 38 (2022) (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) Szarkowska, A. 2013. Forms of Address in Polish-English Subtitling. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. Ton, T. N. L., 2019. A literature review of address studies from pragmatic and sociolin- guistic perspectives. In: Kluge, B. & M. I. Moyna (eds.), It’s Not All About ‘You’: New Perspectives on Address Research, 23-46. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Woźniak, M. 2008. Jak rozmawiać z kosmitami? Kilka uwag o tłumaczeniu lektorskim telewizyjnych filmów fantastycznonaukowych. Przekładaniec 20: 50-88. * * * Agata Rozumko is an Assistant Professor in the Centre for Linguistic Studies at the University of Bialystok, Poland. Her current research interests are in the areas of modal- ity, evidentiality, discourse markers, relational work, and translation, with a particular focus on the translation of discourse markers and address terms. * * * This study was supported by the Regional Initiative of Excellence Programme of the Polish Ministry of Science and Higher Education for the years 2019-2022; project number 009/RID/2018/19; the amount of funding 8,791,222 PLN. AGATA ROZUMKO DOI: 10.15290/CR.2022.38.3.06 Between V and T address: The translation of English address terms into Polish in serial storytelling (the case of Doc)