e-ISSN: 2695-8465
ISSN: 2255-3703
67
Skopos 14 (2023), 67-88
The Forgotten Speech Tag: An In-depth Look into the
Translation of Speech Tags into Lithuanian in George
Orwell’s Animal Farm
Gabrielė Jakaitytė
Loreta Kamičaitytė
Vilnius University
Vilnius University
gabriele.jakaityte@knf.stud.vu.lt
loreta.kamicaityte@knf.vu.lt
Recibido: 26.06. 2023
Revisado: 24.10. 2023
Aceptado: 25. 10. 2023
Abstract: This paper analyses and compares the three currently available Lithuanian
translations of George Orwell’s novel Animal Farm (1945) by Arvydas Sabonis
(1991), Edita Mažonienė (2021) and Jovita Liutkutė (2022) with special attention
given to the frequently overlooked translation of speech tags. It aims to reveal the
peculiarities as well as assess the quality of the translations of the collected speech
tags. This is achieved by applying quantitative and qualitative analysis methods, i.e.
by systematising the relevant elements of the text and analysing them according to
the chosen classification of translation shifts as well as comparing the collected data
of each individual translation. One of the most notable aspects of the translations, as
observed during the analysis, is a significant variety in the translations of pronouns
and verbs, occurring due to the application of the translation shifts of specification
and implicitation, which function on a semantic level. These aspects reflect the
linguistic preferences of translators when translating into synthetic languages and
highlight the richness of the Lithuanian language.
Key words: translation shifts, speech tags, Animal Farm
La etiqueta discursiva olvidada: Una mirada en profundidad a la
traducción de las etiquetas discursivas al lituano en Rebelión en la
granja de George Orwell
Resumen: Este artículo analiza y compara tres traducciones lituanas actualmente
disponibles de la novela de George Orwell Rebelión en la granja (1945) realizadas
por Arvydas Sabonis (1991), Edita Mažonienė (2021) y Jovita Liutkute (2022),
prestando especial atención a las etiquetas en el lenguaje que a menudo se pasan
por alto en la traducción. Su objetivo es revelar las peculiaridades y evaluar la
calidad de las traducciones de las etiquetas coloquiales recogidas. Para ello se
aplican métodos de análisis cuantitativos y cualitativos, es decir, se sistematizan los
The Forgotten Speech Tag: An In-depth Look into the Translation
68
Skopos 14 (2023), 67-88
elementos relevantes del texto y se analizan según la clasificación de métodos de
traducción elegida, y se comparan los datos recogidos para cada traducción
concreta. Uno de los aspectos más notables de las traducciones observadas en el
análisis es la importante diversidad en la traducción de pronombres y verbos
derivada de la aplicación de tales métodos de traducción, como la especificación y la
implicación, que operan a nivel semántico. Estos aspectos reflejan las preferencias
lingüísticas de los traductores a la hora de traducir a lenguas sintéticas y ponen de
relieve la riqueza de la lengua lituana.
Palabras clave: cambios de traducción, etiquetas coloquiales, Rebelión en la granja
Sumario: 1. Introduction. 2. Dialogue and speech tags. 3. Translation shifts as a topic of
research. 4. Analysis of the collected data. 4.1. Modulation (generalization). 4.2. Modulation
(specification). 4.3. Syntactic-stylistic modification (explicitation). 4.4. Syntactic-stylistic
modification (implicitation) 4.5. Mutation (addition). 4.6. Mutation (deletion). 5. Conclusions.
1. Introduction
The analysis of translation shifts is not a particularly novel area of
translation studies. Scholars such as Jean-Paul Vinay and Jean Darbelnet
(1958), John C. Catford (1965), Kitty van Leuven-Zwart (1989), etc. have
revolutionised this field of study by establishing many of the currently
implemented approaches to translation, as well as encouraging future
generations to analyse how the process of translation functions, and what
effect shifts have on various aspects of translated literary works.
To this day, translations into different languages continue to be an
area of interest among those who explore this field of study. Mátyás
Bánhegyi (2012), Seyed Mohammad Hosseini-Maasoum and Azadeh
Shahbaiki (2013), Shadam Hussaeni Handi Pratama and Rudi Hartono
(2018), etc. have analysed unique aspects of translation shifts in languages
ranging from Persian to Indonesian. However, relatively few authors have
looked into Lithuanian translations of literary works and the occurring
translation shifts (e.g. Reda Baranauskienė and Inga Kriščiūnaitė (2008),
Marija Blonskytė and Saulė Petronienė (2013)), while Lithuanian-centred
studies into translations of speech tags specifically, appear to be non-
existent.
While limited in scope, this study aims to contribute to the current
discussion surrounding the translation of literary works into Lithuanian and
encourage further studies into the translation of speech tags. To achieve
this, it will analyse the translation shifts occurring on a semantic level in the
three available Lithuanian translations of George Orwell’s Animal Farm, with
special attention given to the translation of speech tags.
The Forgotten Speech Tag: An In-depth Look into the Translation…
69
Skopos 14 (2023), 67-88
2. Dialogue and speech tags
In literature, much like in any other form of entertainment, the
presentation of content is often as important as the content itself. Vladimir
Nabokov’s Lolita (1955); Markus Zusak’s The Book Thief (2005) and Donna
Tartt’s The Goldfinch (2013) are just a few literary works that, among other
reasons, are remembered for the beauty of their prose. These books contain
expertly crafted segments of narration that reflect the authors’ understanding
of effective language use. However, one should not forget that dialogue, and
by extension speech tags, is also a vital part of a quality piece of writing.
Elise Nykänen and Aino Koivisto (2016: 2) describe dialogue as “a
narrative mode that displays a conversation or speech between two
characters or a group of people (polylogue).” In other words, dialogue in
literature visually represents a verbal exchange between characters.
Traditionally, the identification of dialogue in any given page is relatively
simple, as it is often placed in a separate line than the narration and is
framed (or at the very least preceded) by an M-dash, single or double
quotation marks, guillemets or other similar punctuation markings.
Dialogue is exceptionally useful when conveying exposition and
providing character depth. When used properly, it can bring an entire world
to life. However, it is applicable not only in this sense. Kempton (2004: 14–
24) broadens the understanding of dialogue application in literature by also
highlighting, among others, such aspects as the creation of tension and/or
suspense, an increase in perceived speed (i.e. how fast any given scene is
progressing), or the establishment of a unique atmosphere.
In most cases dialogue is preceded, followed, and/or interrupted by
speech tags. It is noteworthy, that there is a surprising variety in the
terminology used to refer to these tags. One of the most commonly used
synonyms is dialogue tags; however, they are also referred to as reporting
clauses / inquits (Allison 2018: 111) or speaker tags (He et al. 2013: 1313).
For the sake of clarity, the abovementioned units will be referred to as simply
speech tags.
Speech tags are short, often (but not exclusively) two-word units that
provide additional information regarding who is speaking, how something is
said, what someone is doing while an utterance is made, etc. Character
identification is done by defining an explicit (e.g. Tom said), anaphoric (e.g.
he said) or implicit speaker (specified in a different part of the text and not
within the tag itself) (Ek et al. 2018: 818). The latter two aspects are
seemingly only limited by the author’s imagination. In addition, other than
references to the speaker, speech tags also contain verbs, such as said,
asked or shouted. However, it is worth mentioning that the popularity of
The Forgotten Speech Tag: An In-depth Look into the Translation
70
Skopos 14 (2023), 67-88
certain verbs periodically changes. According to Peprník (1969: 146–147),
while say was often implemented in the 20th-century literature as a universal
verb of sorts, in the 18th century authors preferred verbs such as add,
answer, reply, etc. and their 19th century counterparts – address, remark,
demand, etc. Naturally, while some overlapping in the use of verbs was
unavoidable, each century still displayed a clear preference in vocabulary.
It is also worth noting, that while Sedláček (2016: 16) describes
speech tags as a pragmatic and stylistic, but ultimately a non-obligatory
aspect of prose. Allison considers them to be an almost crucial part of
storytelling. The author even states that speech tags are “a technique for
representing moral aspects of character keyed to sincerity” (Allison 2018:
110), i.e. they help the reader get a deeper understanding of a character’s
inner world, what they really think or feel. This is illustrated by analysing an
extract from Dickens’s work and explaining that the feelings of a character
were not reflected in their short utterances, but rather in their body language,
which was depicted in the speech tags (Allison 2018: 111–113).
Simply put, speech tags, while not frequently looked into, are an ever-
present aspect of prose that provide additional information, vital for character
or scene enhancement. These tags are characteristically short (created only
with a name / pronoun and a verb) and implemented to specify the speaker;
however, they can also be relatively complex, i.e. include the information
which recontextualises an utterance.
3. Translation shifts as a topic of research
Changes are an unavoidable aspect of the translation process. This
has prompted scholars to attempt to better understand and systematise
these changes, which resulted in the creation of several classifications of
translation shifts (also referred to as translation procedures). In this study,
due to some restrictions, only three classifications, created by Vinay and
Darbelnet, Carford, and van Leuven-Zwart, will be introduced and reviewed.
The earliest recorded attempt at classifying translation shifts was
Jean-Paul Vinay’s and Jean Darbelnet’s introduction of direct and oblique
translation procedures in Comparative Stylistics of French and English. A
methodology for translation (1958). While not explicitly referring to these
changes as translation shifts, Vinay and Darbelnet still created the
foundation for future approaches to this area of study. In addition, according
to Cyrus (2009: 92), their didactic and pedagogical approach is relatively
unique among other, theory-based ones.
The Forgotten Speech Tag: An In-depth Look into the Translation…
71
Skopos 14 (2023), 67-88
Direct translation procedures include borrowing, calque and literal
translation, while oblique procedures include transposition, modulation,
equivalence and adaptation (Cyrus 2009: 92).
Borrowing, much like its name suggests, includes taking a source
language (SL) element and then transferring it to the target language (TL)
with little to no changes to its form. This approach is considered to be the
simplest and is often implemented to create a certain stylistic effect, or to
add the unique colour of the SL culture (Vinay and Darbelnet 1995: 31–32).
Calque is implemented when a translator borrows an SL utterance
and translates each element within that utterance, hence creating either a
lexical or a structural calque that often becomes part of the TL (Vinay and
Darbelnet 1995: 32).
Literal translation (also known as word-for-word translation) is a
translation technique which includes taking an SL utterance and directly
translating it into the TL, while adhering to the grammar of the TL. This
approach is frequently observed among languages that belong to the same
family (e.g. Swedish and Norwegian, or French and Italian), and is even
more prevalent if the language pairs share the same culture (Vinay and
Darbelnet 1995: 33–34).
When applying the abovementioned techniques, changes to the
source text (ST) can be considered relatively minor, as the translator stays
“close” to the original utterance. It is when one applies the oblique
techniques that more significant changes can be observed.
Transposition is primarily concerned with changes made to the word
class of an SL element as it is transferred into the TL and can even be
applied when reformulating an utterance within the same language. A key
aspect of transposition is the fact that when it is applied in translation, it does
not affect the overall meaning or weight of an utterance. Due to this, it is a
frequently implemented approach in literary translation (Vinay and Darbelnet
1995: 36).
Modulation changes the point of view of the translated element. This
includes turning a positive SL utterance into a negative, a singular
expression into a plural, or an abstract concept into a concrete one (Vinay
and Darbelnet 1995: 36–37).
Equivalence is achieved by taking an SL utterance and transforming it
into (frequently) a structurally completely different TL utterance. Equivalent
utterances are in most cases fixed and generally mean the same thing
among various languages (Vinay and Darbelnet 1995: 38).
The Forgotten Speech Tag: An In-depth Look into the Translation
72
Skopos 14 (2023), 67-88
Adaptation is in a way similar to equivalence, as it also includes taking
an SL utterance and transforming it into a different TL utterance that
contains the original meaning. However, unlike equivalence, adaptation is
not set. Adapted utterances only retain the original meaning in certain
contexts; therefore, an adapted film title in the cinema will not be understood
the same in a completely different context (Vinay and Darbelnet 1995: 39).
Generally, while the term translation shifts was not explicitly used in
Vinay and Darbelnet’s work, the classification proposed by them is to this
day frequently used by those who analyse translations.
Translation shifts as a term was first officially introduced in 1965 by
John C. Carford in his publication A Linguistic Theory of Translation: An
Essay in Applied Linguistics. In his work, Catford described shifts as
“departures from formal correspondence in the process of going from the SL
to the TL” (Catford 1965: 73). In other words, shifts are related to changes
made to SL elements as they are translated into the TL.
Unlike the much broader Vinay and Derbelnet’s approach, Catford’s
classification is concise. It differentiates only two possible types of shifts:
level and category (Catford 1965: 73). Level shifts include cases in which a
TL element is on a different linguistic level than its equivalent in the TL (e.g.
an imperfective verb is translated as either a past simple or past continuous
verb). While a category shift deals with unbounded and rank-bound
translation, it is further divided into four subcategories: a) structure shifts (the
structure of a TL utterance is altered as it is translated into the TL), b) unit
shifts (SL items of one rank change into a different rank), c) class shifts
(during the translation process an SL item shifts from one word class into a
different word class), d) intra-system shifts (cases when the source and
target languages have the same formal constitution but when translating the
TL takes on a non-corresponding term) (Catford 1965: 73–82).
A more recent attempt at systematising translation shifts was made by
Kitty van Leuven-Zwart in her article Translation and Original Similarities and
Dissimilarities I (1989). In her work, the scholar introduces three types of
shifts: modulation, modification and mutation (van Leuven-Zwart 1989: 159).
Modulation occurs when a transeme is turned into an architranseme
or a hyponym during the translation process. This category is further
subcategorised into semantic modulation and stylistic modulation, both of
which can include generalization (translation applying more abstract terms)
and specification (translation using more concrete terms) (Cyrus 2009: 96).
It is worth noting, that specification is generally more frequently
observed in translations from analytical languages, such as English, into
The Forgotten Speech Tag: An In-depth Look into the Translation…
73
Skopos 14 (2023), 67-88
synthetic languages (e.g. Lithuanian) which could reflect the stylistic
preferences or certain linguistic needs of that language (Pažūsis 2014: 501).
This idea is supported by Kubáčková’s paper, in which it is further explained
that synthetic languages tend to use words that contain more concrete
meanings (Mathesius 1975 in Kubáčková 2009, 37).
Modification is subcategorised into semantic, stylistic and syntactic
modification (van Leuven-Zwart 1989: 165–168). Since modification and
modulation can occur both on a semantic and stylistic level, they can be
considered strongly related. However, according to Cyrus, the main
difference between the two translation strategies is that “both transemes are
hyponyms of the architranseme, so the relationship between them is one of
contrast” (Cyrus 2009: 96).
While changes made on a semantic and stylistic level were already
mentioned in modulation, syntactic changes are unique to modification. They
occur when “both transemes show different disjunctive aspects of a syntactic
nature” and are generally language-bound (van Leuven-Zwart 1989: 166).
Syntactic modifications can be further sub-categorised into syntactic-
semantic (related to grammatical changes, i.e. word class, function, etc.),
syntactic-stylistic (related the number of elements used to translate an
utterance, i.e. explicitation or implicitation), and syntactic-pragmatic (related
to changes made to the speech act or its thematic meaning) modifications
(van Leuven-Zwart 1989: 166–168).
Mutation is the third differentiated type of shift and is concerned with
cases that do not establish a connection between two transemes, as one is
either missing an element, has an addition, or is semantically too different in
meaning (Cyrus 2009: 97). Due to this, mutation is divided into addition,
deletion, and radical change of meaning (van Leuven-Zwart 1989: 169).
All of the reviewed authors have aided in the creation of research of
translation shifts, which remains a vital area of study to this day. Scholars
from all around the world have implemented their works in creation of newer
classifications and in the analysis of written translation as a whole. In the
following section, this will be done with special attention given to the
translation of speech tags.
4. Analysis of the collected data
In this section, the data collected from the available translations of
George Orwell’s Animal Farm (1945) by Arvydas Sabonis (1991) (hereinafter
referred to as TT1), Edita Mažonienė (2021) (TT2) and Jovita Liutkutė
The Forgotten Speech Tag: An In-depth Look into the Translation
74
Skopos 14 (2023), 67-88
(2022) (TT3) are analysed and compared. The analysis is done according to
Kitty van Leuven-Zwart’s classification; however, due to the limitations of this
study, only the shift categories that primarily affect the translation on a
sematic level are considered. These categories are modulation
(generalization, specification), syntactic-stylistic modification (explicitation,
implicitation) and mutation (addition, deletion).
For this study, 222 sentences containing speech tags were collected
from the three available translations (74 sentences in each translation). The
collection process included reviewing the ST and gathering sentences that
contained a speech tag which preceded, interrupted or followed an
utterance. Since the story contained several cases of characters quoting
someone else’s words, as long as the sentence contained a speech tag, it
was also counted. If a tag was longer than the characteristic two-word unit,
the entire sentence was considered. After the tags had been gathered from
the ST, their translations were collected from TT1, TT2 and TT3 and placed
in a database. The table below presents the total number of translation shifts
identified in each TT.
TT1
TT2
TT3
Total
GENERALIZATION
2
1
4
7
SPECIFICATION
30
19
38
87
IMPLICITATION
13
8
12
33
EXPLICITATION
9
2
4
15
ADDITION
3
3
10
16
DELETION
13
4
6
23
Total number of shifts
70
37
74
181
Table 1. The frequency of applied translation shifts in the Lithuanian translations of George
Orwell’s Animal Farm
It can be immediately noticed that the number of applied shifts is
significantly smaller in TT2. This deviation form TT1 and TT3 is caused by
the translator’s choice to frequently apply direct translation of speech tags.
Among all three versions a clear tendency to implement specification and
implicitation has been observed, while generalization and explicitation make
up two of the smallest recorded groups. The analysis has also shown that
the use of addition and deletion is quite uncommon. However, their
application does not seem to be dictated by the TL, but rather by the
preferences of the translator.
In the following subsections, the relevant categories will be analysed
in greater detail.
The Forgotten Speech Tag: An In-depth Look into the Translation…
75
Skopos 14 (2023), 67-88
4.1. Modulation (generalization)
In the previous section the uncommon application of generalizing
techniques when translating into synthetic languages was mentioned
(Pažūsis 2014: 501). This idea is reflected perfectly in the number of
generalization cases in the three available translations of Animal Farm.
Between the three versions, generalization was observed in only 7 cases
among the collected 222 sentences. The first set of translations can be
observed below:
ST
“Surely, comrades,” cried Squealer almost pleadingly,
skipping from side to side and whisking his tail, “surely
there is no one among you who wants to see Jones
come back?”
p. 26
TT1
– Nejaugi, draugai, – kone gailiai sužviegė jis,
straksėdamas į šalis ir iš visų jėgų vizgindamas
uodegigalį, – nejaugi tarp jūsų yra tokių, kurie norėtų,
kad sugrįžtų Džonas?
p. 37
TT2
– Juk tikrai, draugai, – kone maldaujamai rėkė
Žvieglys, straksėdamas iš šono į šoną ir viksėdamas
uodegėle, – juk tikrai nėra tarp jūsų tokio, kuris lauktų
sugrįžtant Džonso?
p. 49
TT3
Neabejoju, draugai, – kone maldaudamas pridūrė jis,
kraipydamasis į šalis ir viksnodamas uodega, – esu
tikras, kad nė vienas iš jūsų nenori matyti grįžtant
Džounsą?
p. 34
Table 2. The first example of the modulation (generalization) shift.
As can be seen in table 2, only in TT1 and TT3 generalization was
implemented for the translation of Squealer. In both cases, the translators
chose to translate the character’s name as the pronoun jis (he).
In some cases, this approach to translation can create a certain level
of ambiguity, as not mentioning who is speaking for an extended period of
time can result in readers becoming confused. However, in TT1 this
possibility is somewhat remedied by specifying the verb cried as sužviegė
(squealed), as it is a sound often associated with pigs. In addition, it is
possible that in both TT1 and TT3 the translators utilised the fact that the
sentence was part of a monologue, resulting in minimised risk of confusion.
In contrast, the translator of TT2, as will be observed quite often
further in the paper, chose to retain the original element, and instead
specified the meaning of cried. The specification of this particular verb
alongside said is an approach that can generally be observed among all
three translations.
The Forgotten Speech Tag: An In-depth Look into the Translation
76
Skopos 14 (2023), 67-88
Overall, in the few cases that generalization was applied, translations
were centred around character names, which were almost always translated
as pronouns. The only non-name related case is, incidentally, the only
identified case of generalization in TT2.
ST
The very first question she asked Snowball was: / “Will
there still be sugar after the Rebellion?”
p. 11
TT2
Pirmas dalykas, ko ji paklausė Sniegiaus, buvo toks: /
– Ar po Sukilimo vis dar bus cukraus?
p. 34
Table 3. The second example of the modulation (generalization) shift.
In this case, the original word and its translation are nouns. While in
TT1 and TT3 longer tags were often translated by implementing several
different shifts, and at times, completely altering parts of the tag, the
translator in TT2 often stayed close to the original and translated most
elements directly. In this case, except for a minor addition, the translator
hardly changed anything in the structure of the tag itself and generalized
only the word question. This change is to an extent redundant, as while in
spoken language “the first thing she asked” is accepted, in translation it can
be regarded as word-for-word, and by extension, somewhat stylistically
awkward.
4.2. Modulation (specification)
Specification is the second and largest group of shifts, which was
observed in 87 cases between the three translations.
During the analysis process it was quickly discovered that said was
the most commonly implemented verb in the ST. Naturally, being the most
frequently observed, it also displayed a notable variety when translated. The
original 34 instances were translated in 17 different ways (including
deletions) in TT1, while 9 and 14 unique translations were observed in TT2
and TT3 respectively.
During the analysis, cases where said was translated as sakė and
tarė (and their derivations) were considered to be direct translations.
Following this approach, it was observed that the translator of TT2 chose to
translate said directly in a far greater frequency than the translators of TT1
and TT3. In TT2, out of the original 34 cases, 19 of them were direct
translations, while in TT1 and TT3 this approach was applied in 13 and 9
cases respectively.
The Forgotten Speech Tag: An In-depth Look into the Translation…
77
Skopos 14 (2023), 67-88
Most of the remaining unique translations were specifications. TT1
contained 18 specifications of said, TT2 – 12, and TT3 – 23. The first case
displays one of the simpler approaches to specifying the verb said:
ST
“What is that gun firing for?” said Boxer.
p. 77
TT1
– Kodėl jis iššovė? – paklausė Dobilas.
p. 99
TT2
– Kam šauta iš to šautuvo? – paklausė Boksininkas.
p. 99
TT3
– Kokia proga ši salvė? – paklausė Kuoka.
p. 87
Table 4. The first example of the modulation (specification) shift.
Here, all three translators chose to specify the verb in a manner which
reflects the fact that the speaker is actually asking a non-rhetorical question
and used paklausė (asked). In this case, while it would have resulted in
slightly more faithful translations, the retention of said would have likely been
considered a mistake, since while in English the use of said in a question
might be accepted for stylistic reasons, in Lithuanian a question paired with
sake/pasakė would clash with the interrogative structure of the sentence and
distort its overall meaning. Due to this, the use of verbs pertaining to the
function of the character’s direct speech is far more fitting in such cases.
Notably, in the three cases that said appeared after an interrogative
sentence, the translators of TT1 and TT3 chose relatively conventional
approaches to its translation. Both chose the translations paklausė and
nusistebėjo, while in TT3 – paklausė and perklausė were used. The use of
perklausė, while not incorrect, is quite unusual, as it is not frequently used by
the speakers of Lithuanian.
Due to the limitations of the interrogative clause, the translations in
nearly all cases were quite simple. However, the table below provides an
example of more varied translations of verbs in declarative sentences.
ST
“But he was wounded,” said Boxer. “We all saw him running
with blood.”
p. 59
TT1
– Jį sužeidė, – prieštaravo Dobilas, – mačiau jį pasruvusį
krauju.
p. 78
TT2
– Bet jis buvo sužeistas, – nenusileido Boksininkas. – Visi
matėme, kaip jam bėgo kraujas.
p. 82
TT3
– Bet Sniegelis buvo sužeistas, – priminė Kuoka. – Visi
matėme jį plūstant krauju.
p. 70
Table 5. The second example of the modulation (specification) shift.
In this case, the translations of said reflect the aforementioned
inclination to use words with more specific meanings in translations into
Lithuanian and the level of synonymity that can be achieved.
The Forgotten Speech Tag: An In-depth Look into the Translation
78
Skopos 14 (2023), 67-88
In their texts, the translators of TT1 and TT2 chose to use the verbs
that highlight the ongoing argument between two characters (Boxer and
Squealer). Both nenusileido (did not back down) and prieštaravo (objected)
have strong meanings, which can be associated with such attributes as
persistence or resolve, and generally refer to a more “heated” atmosphere.
The use of such words implies that the discussion is not a quick exchange of
thoughts, but rather a confrontation of what two individuals believe to be
true.
Priminė (reminded) in TT3 is an outlier in this case, as it does not
really reflect the situation when taken out of context. Contrarily, priminė
establishes a significantly softer tone, as it is not primarily associated with a
heated exchange or argument. While in theory it does function properly in
this translation, i.e. it does not alter the overall meaning of the tag, and the
sentence, it is the least effective in creating the sought after interpretation of
the situation.
4.3. Syntactic-stylistic modification (explicitation)
Explicitation is the second smallest group considered in this paper,
with only 15 cases. Since synthetic languages are known to contain more
words with more concrete meanings, it is not at all surprising that a
technique associated with rendering TL utterances with additional words was
not frequently implemented.
ST
“He didn't! I wasn't! It isn't true!” cried Mollie, beginning to
prance about and paw the ground.
p. 33
TT1
– Netiesa! Jis neglostė! Neleidau! – sušuko Molė,
pradėjusi trypčioti ir kanopa kasti žemę.
p. 47
TT2
–Jis neglostė! Aš neleidau! Tai netiesa! – sušuko Molė,
ėmusi pūstis ir kasti kanopa žemę.
p. 56
TT3
–Nešnekino! Neleidau! Tai netiesa! – sušuko Molė,
muistydamasi ir kanopa kasdama žemę.
p. 44
Table 6. The first example of the syntactic-stylistic modification (explicitation) shift.
The verb paw does not have a one-word equivalent in Lithuanian, so
in the case above, all three translators applied explicitation by translating the
verb as two-word combinations consisting of the verb to dig and the noun
hoof. The only difference among these three translations is the fact that in
TT1 the translator used a noun + verb combination, in TT2 – a verb + noun
combination, and in TT3 – a noun + verb in a half-participle form
The Forgotten Speech Tag: An In-depth Look into the Translation…
79
Skopos 14 (2023), 67-88
combination. However, this did not affect the overall meaning of the tag, as
the word order in Lithuanian is relatively flexible.
In this tag, the translators did not have much freedom when choosing
a possible equivalent for the verb paw, since it refers to a specific action: an
animal scraping the ground. Words such as krapštyti (pick at) or kapstyti
(scratch) are a possible alternative; however, connotatively they do not fit
with the animals in mind (i.e. horses), and knisti (dig) has a strong
connection with pigs. Naturally, since the speaker is a horse, it also severely
limits the words to refer to the limb used for the action, i.e. it basically
narrows it down to only kanopa (hoof). Due to this, the only appropriate
translation was kasti kanopa and its variations.
ST
“Good-bye, Boxer!” they chorused, “good-bye!”
p. 89
TT1
– Viso gero, Dobile! – skandavo jie. – Viso geriausio!
p. 114
TT2
– Viso gero, Boksininke! – choru šaukė jie. – Viso
gero!
p. 111
TT3
– Lik sveikas, Kuoka! – visi kaip vienas baubė jie. –
Lik sveikas!
p. 98
Table 7. The second example of the syntactic-stylistic modification (explicitation) shift.
Since explicitation is one of the less commonly occurring shifts, it is
not surprising that not many matching cases can be observed in all three
translations. In TT1, there is no observed case of explicitation, as the
translator chose to retain the chant-like nature of the original with skandavo
(chant). Skandavo is likely the only possible verb choice which contains both
original components of meaning, i.e. an action done by several individuals,
and the simultaneous production of loud sounds.
The approach in TT2, while technically considered explicitation, is at
the same time also quite literal. While the translation does expand from a
single word to two words, it does not exactly make the translation sound
natural. As explained above, chorused refers to a loud, somewhat
synchronised utterance made by several individuals. This is reflected in the
verb šaukė (shouted) and choru (in chorus). However, even though this
translation remains the closest to the original, it is quite awkward in
comparison to the other two, as one does not often come across such a unit
in Lithuanian.
In TT3 the translator opted for a combination of visi kaip vienas (all as
one) and baubė (bellowed). In this case, the use of a specifying description
of the “speakers” was unavoidable, as the selected verb does not
necessarily reflect the participation of others in the action. If the translator
had chosen to not use such a term, the result could be considered a
The Forgotten Speech Tag: An In-depth Look into the Translation
80
Skopos 14 (2023), 67-88
mistranslation, as it would change meaning of the original with no real
motivation. In addition, the verb baubė also reaffirms the identity of the
speakers since this specified verb has strong animalistic associations.
4.4. Syntactic-stylistic modification (implicitation)
Implicitation is the fourth type of shift and is the second largest
category, appearing in 33 cases among 222 sentences.
ST
“He didn't! I wasn't! It isn't true!” cried Mollie,
beginning to prance about and paw the ground.
p. 33
TT1
– Netiesa! Jis neglostė! Neleidau! – sušuko Molė,
pradėjusi trypčioti ir kanopa kasti žemę.
p. 47
TT2
–Jis neglostė! Aš neleidau! Tai netiesa! – sušuko
Molė, ėmusi pūstis ir kasti kanopa žemę.
p. 56
TT3
–Nešnekino! Neleidau! Tai netiesa! – sušuko Molė,
muistydamasi ir kanopa kasdama žemę.
p. 44
Table 8. The first example of the syntactic-stylistic modification (implicitation) shift.
The first analysed sentence might be familiar, as it was already
introduced in a previous sub-section. In that case, it was analysed for the
instance of explicitation; however, in this case, it also illustrates a typical
case of implicitation. Here it can be observed that all three translators
implemented implicitation in the translation of prance about. The two-word
unit was shrunk down to a single word, with various degrees of faithfulness
to the original.
TT1’s translation is the closest in meaning and association. Trypčioti
can be associated with horses and can be understood as something akin to
nervous/restless stomping, i.e. it does not have any connotations related to
aggression. The use of trypčioti thematically works, as the speaker herself is
a mare. In TT3, the translation muistydamasi (squirming), while still retains
the nervousness of the character, somewhat strays from the fact the speaker
is an animal and brings them to a more human level. The choice to either
retain or remove animalistic qualities of the speaker, could be a reflection of
not only the stylistic preferences of the translator, but also the expectations
of the target readers.
The translation of TT2 is quite interesting, as it, in a way, takes an
approach similar to the ST. Here the translator chose to use the word pūstis
which has negative connotations and is even primarily associated with
vanity. Naturally, in this context it can be understood as something similar to
bristling. However, due to the word’s strong negative connotations, it might
The Forgotten Speech Tag: An In-depth Look into the Translation…
81
Skopos 14 (2023), 67-88
be misunderstood by the reader. The same can happen with the wording of
the original. The primary meaning that most might associate with prance
about is “to walk or move in a spirited manner”
1
, so while the context allows
one to understand that the speaker is agitated, there is still a risk of it being
misinterpreted. As a result, while this translation does remain closer to the
original stylistically, it does not convey the intended meaning as well.
ST
“[…] SNOWBALL!” he suddenly roared in a voice of
thunder. "Snowball has done this thing! […]”
p. 52
TT1
– [...] SNIEGUOLIS! – suriaumojo jis griausmingu balsu.
– Tai Snieguolio darbas! [...]
p. 69
TT2
– […] SNIEGIUS! – staiga griausmingai užriaumojo
jisai. –Tai padarė Sniegius! […]
p. 75
TT2
– […] SNIEGELIS! – staiga suriko Napoleonas, kiek tik
gerklė nešė. – Tai – Sniegelio darbas! […]
p. 63
Table 9. The second example of the syntactic-stylistic modification (implicitation) shift.
For the translation of the idiomatic expression in a voice of thunder,
the translator of TT3 took a rather interesting approach. In this sentence, in
both TT1 and TT2, impicitation was implemented, which shortened the
phrase into a two-word unit. While roared is technically not part of the
analysed phrase, it is relevant in the context of the translations. In TT1, the
translator stayed rather faithful to the original, i.e. they retained the elements
roar and voice, and chose an adjective (griausmingu), which reflects the
image established by the original. Their back-translation into English would
sound quite similar to the original: roared in a thunderous voice. In TT2,
voice was deleted altogether which allowed the surrounding context to
create the required sonic effect by only applying užriaumojo (roared) instead
of TT1’s verb + noun approach. Generally speaking, both translations are
similar in quality and work well in this context.
In the TT3, however, the translator took a different route and
completely transformed the phrase. While it retained the core meaning of the
original, kiek tik gerklė nešė (something akin to as loud as he could) does
weaken its impact to an extent. The original created a visual of a strong,
booming voice; a voice of a commander informing their subordinates of
someone’s betrayal. Yet, TT2’s translation takes this commanding quality
away, and in the context of the story, establishes a weaker leader, i.e. he
has to strain his voice to acquire the desired volume.
1
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/prance
The Forgotten Speech Tag: An In-depth Look into the Translation
82
Skopos 14 (2023), 67-88
4.5. Mutation (addition)
The fifth group is mutation, specifically addition. The occurrence of
this shift among the three translations varies substantially, as only 3
instances were observed in TT2, while TT3 contained 10. However, overall,
the mutation (addition) shift was observed in only 16 cases between the
three translations.
Much like with explicitation, the relatively small number of additions
makes the analysis of this group rather difficult, as there were no sentences
in which a case contained addition in at least two of the three translations.
Due to this, the sets of examples will only contain one case of addition.
ST
“Surely, comrades,” cried Squealer almost
pleadingly, skipping from side to side and whisking
his tail, “surely there is no one among you who wants
to see Jones come back?”
p. 26
TT1
– Nejaugi, draugai, – kone gailiai sužviegė jis,
straksėdamas į šalis ir iš visų jėgų vizgindamas
uodegigalį, – nejaugi tarp jūsų yra tokių, kurie norėtų,
kad sugrįžtų Džonas?
p. 37
TT2
– Juk tikrai, draugai, – kone maldaujamai rėkė
Žvieglys, straksėdamas is šono į šoną ir
viksėdamas uodegėle, – juk tikrai nėra tarp jūsų
tokio, kuris lauktų sugrįžtant Džonso?
p. 49
TT3
– Neabejoju, draugai, – kone maldaudamas pridūrė
jis, kraipydamasis į šalis ir viksnodamas uodega, –
esu tikras, kad nė vienas iš jūsų nenori matyti
grįžtant Džounsą?
p. 34
Table 10. The first example of the mutation (addition) shift.
In table 10, it can clearly be seen that in TT2 and TT3 it was chosen to
directly translate the verb whisk as viksnoti, which is a unique choice in the
sense that it contains a strong association with animals, though it does slow
the perceived movements of the speaker, as viksnoti is defined as “slowly
moving (a tail)”
2
.
In TT1 the translator, however, does quite the opposite, by adding a
phrase that translates as “to do something with all one’s might”. This
addition, along with straksėdamas (skipping), creates a strong erratic effect
and highlights Squealer’s restless manner of speaking. In this case, it is a
motivated addition, which conveys the actions of the character well. And
2
https://ekalba.lt/dabartines-lietuviu-kalbos-zodynas/viksnoti,%20~~jimas?paieska=viksnoti&i=68319f25-fee8-43af-8dee-
313f95ac1491
The Forgotten Speech Tag: An In-depth Look into the Translation…
83
Skopos 14 (2023), 67-88
while in TT2 and TT3 the translations are adequate; they do not convey the
full meaning of the original.
The second case to be analysed contains two additions in one
sentence.
ST
“Never mind the milk, comrades!” cried Napoleon,
placing himself in front of the buckets. “That will be
attended to. […]”
p. 18
TT1
– Pienu mes pasirūpinsim, draugai! – sušuko
Napoleonas, atsistodamas priešais kibirus. – Nesukit
dėl to sau galvos [...].
p. 27
TT2
– Nesukite galvos dėl pieno, draugai! – sušuko
Napoleonas, atsistojęs priešais kibirus. – Išspręsime
šitą klausimą.
p. 41
TT3
– Dėl pieno nesukite galvos, draugai! – sušuko
Napoleonas, klestelėdamas ant žemės, priešais
pilnus kibirus. – Pienu bus pasirūpinta.
p. 26
Table 11. The second example of the mutation (addition) shift.
In table 11, it can be seen that only TT3 contains the shift of
modification (addition). In TT1 and TT2 the translators chose to apply
implicitation and translated placing himself as a one-word unit
atsistodamas/atsistojęs, which roughly means the same as the original. In
contrast, TT3 chose to specify that the speaker (Napoleon) placed himself
on the ground by adding the phrase ant žemės. This may appear redundant,
as there seemingly is no reason to clarify such a detail – it is clear enough in
the given context. However, ant žemės becomes necessary when one takes
into account the verb that was used. Klestelėdamas refers to the action of
suddenly falling or sitting down
3
, and while it can be used alone, in most
cases it appears alongside a specifying element (e.g. on the ground, on the
sofa, on the chair, etc.), almost as a collocation. This necessity was not
encountered in TT1 and TT2, as the chosen verb stand can be used alone.
In addition, TT3 was the only translation, in which the translator saw the
need to specify that the buckets were full. This, while introducing an
additional descriptive element into the translation, is ultimately somewhat
redundant, as the context (the author mentioning that five buckets were filled
with milk, and, later on, that the milk had disappeared) implied this detail
perfectly well. Moreover, unlike the previously mentioned phrase ant žemės,
3
https://ekalba.lt/dabartines-lietuviu-kalbos-zodynas/klestel%C4%97ti,%20~~jimas?paieska=klestel%C4%97ti&i=c4e983f3-f600-
4600-9ca0-5a6fa56bbece
The Forgotten Speech Tag: An In-depth Look into the Translation
84
Skopos 14 (2023), 67-88
the added word pilnus is not inserted due to a stylistic expectation. Hence,
while not wrong in this case, it is redundant.
4.6. Mutation (deletion)
Deletion is the sixth and final type of shifts that is analysed in this
study. Much like addition, it is not a commonly implemented approach
among the translators, appearing in only 23 cases among the collected 222
sentences.
ST
“It was the most affecting sight I have ever seen!” said
Squealer, lifting his trotter and wiping away a tear.
[...]
p. 90–91
TT1
– Nieko panašaus dar nebuvau patyręs! – pasakojo
Spieglys, braukdamas ašaras. – Iki paskutinės
akimirkos nesitraukiau nuo jo. [...]
p. 116
TT2
– Nesu matęs labiau jaudinančio vaizdo! – kalbėjo
Žvieglys, braukdamas ašarą. – Iki paskutiniosios
budėjau prie jo.
p. 113
TT3
– Tai buvo labiausiai jaudinantis vaizdas, kokį tik kada
nors esu regėjęs! – tarė Žvieglys ir, pakėlęs nagą,
nusibraukė ašarą. – Sėdėjau prie Kuokos lovos, kai jis
mus paliko.
p. 101
Table 12. The first example of the mutation (deletion) shift.
In this example, it can be seen that in TT1 and TT2 the original three-
word unit lifting his trotter was removed altogether. This deletion does not
negatively affect the overall meaning of the tag, as the context provides
enough information for the idea itself to be understood – regardless of
whether the reference to the trotter is there or not, the reader can still
understand that Squealer used his front legs (as an equivalent to hands) to
wipe away his tears. The retention of the original element would not assist in
conveying the meaning of the ST, but instead, could lead to possible
confusion (as will be discussed with TT3).
The potential issue with retaining lifting his trotter can be seen in TT3.
The translator chose to preserve the original unit by only removing his and
nearly directly translating lifting and trotter. However, this translation of
trotter is a bit unusual, since while the original word itself refers to a pig’s leg,
the primary meaning of the word nagas is a nail, which can be
The Forgotten Speech Tag: An In-depth Look into the Translation…
85
Skopos 14 (2023), 67-88
misunderstood. A better solution in this case would have been to use words
such as koja or kojelė (both meaning leg), since the general Lithuanian-
speaking community refers to animal appendages as legs or paws.
The ST in table 13 displays another case of deletion, in which it can
immediately be noticed that TT2 is the outlier among the three versions.
ST
“Fools! Fools!” shouted Benjamin, prancing round
them and stamping the earth with his small hoofs.
“Fools! Do you not see what is written on the side of
the van?”
p. 89
TT1
– Kvailiai! Kvailiai! – ėmė šaukti Benjaminas,
lakstydamas aplinkui ir trypdamas savo mažytėmis
kanopomis. – Kvailiai! Argi nematot, kas parašyta ant
furgono?
p. 114
TT2
– Kvailiai! Kvailiai! – rėkė Benjaminas, šokinėdamas
aplink juos ir trypdamas žemę mažomis kanopėlėmis.
– Kvailiai! Ar nematote, kas parašyta ant furgono?
p. 111
TT3
– Kvailiai! Kvailiai! – subliuvo Bendžaminas,
straksėdamas tarp jų ir trepsėdamas kanopėlėmis. –
Goželiai! Argi nematote, kas parašyta ant vežimo
šono?
p. 98
Table 13. The second example of the mutation (deletion) shift.
In this case, the direct approach in TT2 can be considered the
preferred one when compared to TT1. Both translators used the word
trypdamas (stomping), yet much like with klestelėdamas, the word
trypčiodamas is also commonly used alongside a specifier. While this
approach in TT1 is technically not wrong, it does raise the question “What is
he stomping?”. In this case, even though the context does make it clear that
the speaker is anxiously stomping the ground, such a simple translation
should not raise questions.
In TT3 a synonym of trypdamas was used. However, trepsėjimas has
a slightly different meaning, i.e. instead of just stomping the ground, the
speaker is, to an extent, trotting in place. The action itself is much lighter in
perceived weight, but also reflects the speaker’s restlessness. In addition,
trepsėjimas can be used both with and without a specifying word or phrase,
so in this case, the lack of the word ground does not appear awkward or
raise any questions.
After reviewing all the chosen cases, all three translations reflect the
aforementioned preference for word specification when translating from
analytical languages. Approaches that primarily condensed the meaning of
The Forgotten Speech Tag: An In-depth Look into the Translation
86
Skopos 14 (2023), 67-88
the original into fewer words (i.e. specification and implicitation) were by far
more commonly employed than their opposites (generalisation and
explicitation). Addition and deletion were both relatively uncommon, but it
also could be noted that their application was not always adequate.
Generally speaking, the translator of TT1 tended to retain the animalistic
quality of the original, while in TT2 and TT3 more human-related words were
often used. In addition, although it was only partially reflected in the analysis,
the collected data shows that the translator of TT2 directly translated tags far
more frequently than the translators of TT1 and TT3.
5. Conclusions
Regardless of the fact that speech tags are an important and ever-
present part of literature, which provides copious amounts of additional
information within a few words, they are still an under-researched topic in
translation studies. Few have looked into their translation specifically, and
Lithuanian-centred studies on the topic appear to be non-existent.
During the theoretical overview it was established that when
translating from analytical languages into synthetic ones, translators show
an immediate preference for specifying techniques. This was reflected in the
three Lithuanian translations of George Orwell’s Animal Farm by Arvydas
Sabonis, Edita Mažonienė and Jovita Liutkutė, as among the collected 222
sentences, the modulation (specification) shift was observed in 87 cases;
and the shift of syntactic-stylistic modification (implicitation) in 33 cases.
Unsurprisingly, since modulation (generalisation) and syntactic-
stylistic modification (explicitation) are essentially the exact opposite of the
previously mentioned shifts, their recorded numbers are far smaller.
Generalisation was only observed in 7 cases and explicitation in 15. It is
noteworthy that generalisation was mostly implemented for the translation of
character names, as only one non-name related case was noted in the three
translations.
Mutations of addition and deletion were relatively uncommon,
appearing in only 16 and 23 cases respectively. The quality of their
application was at times questionable, as in some cases they either failed to
convey the intended meaning, or their implementation was redundant.
Generally, it appears that the employment of these shifts was not motived by
the TL, but rather by the personal preferences of the translators, as the
number of recorded cases varies greatly from one translation to the other.
The Forgotten Speech Tag: An In-depth Look into the Translation…
87
Skopos 14 (2023), 67-88
The analysis of the collected data clearly indicates that the translator
of TT2 tended to directly translate speech tags regardless of their length. In
TT1 and TT3, translation shifts were implemented at least twice as often as
in TT2; however, while direct translations are often associated with lower
quality translations, in this case, such an approach was, at times, preferable,
as the translation was better, or at the very least, not incorrect.
Since one of the most frequently used verbs in the ST was said, it
displayed the largest variety of synonymy when translated into Lithuanian.
The translation of character names / references to characters or translation
of nouns shows no real trend, as most of the recorded cases were either
directly translated or occurred only once or twice.
Translation of speech tags, while unpopular in research, is an
interesting area of study, which helps establish a better understanding of the
translator’s stylistic preferences, and the expectations of the target readers.
Depending on the quality of the translation, a speech tag can greatly
enhance the interpretation of the spoken words, or completely diminish their
impact.
Bibliography
ALLISON, S. (2018). Reductive Reading: A Syntax of Victorian Moralizing.
Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
BÁNHEGYI, M. (2012): “Translation Shifts and Translator Strategies in the
Hungarian Translation of Alice Munro's “Boys and Girls””. Central
European Journal of Canadian Studies, 8(1), 89-102.
BARANAUSKIENĖ, R., & KRIŠČIŪNAITĖ, I. (2008): “Transformation
Peculiarities in the Lithuanian Translation of “Eat, Pray, Love” by E.
Gilbert”. Jaunųjų mokslininkų darbai, 4(20), 22-28.
BLONSKYTĖ, M., & PETRONIENĖ, S. (2013): “Translation of the Russian
Nadsat Slang in Anthony Burgess' Novel “A Clockwork Orange” into
Lithuanian”. Kalbų studijos, (22), 62-70.
CATFORD, J. C. (1965). A Linguistic Theory of Translation; an Essay in
Applied Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
CYRUS, L. (2009). “Old Concepts, New Ideas: Approaches to Translation
Shifts”. MonTI. Monographs in Translation and Interpreting, (1), 87-
106.
EK, A., WIRÉN, M., ÖSTLING, R., BJÖRKENSTAM, K. N., GRIGONYTĖ,
G., & GUSTAFSON-CAPKOVÁ, S. (2018). “Identifying Speakers and
Addressees in Dialogues Extracted from Literary Fiction.” Proceedings
of the Eleventh International Conference on Language Resources and
Evaluation (LREC 2018).
The Forgotten Speech Tag: An In-depth Look into the Translation
88
Skopos 14 (2023), 67-88
HOSSEINI-MAASOUM, S. M., & SHAHBAIKI, A. (2013): “Translation Shifts
in the Persian Translation of “A Tale of Two Cities” by Charles
Dickens”. Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, 2(1), 391-
398.
HUSSENI, S., & HARTONO, R. (2018): “Semantic Shift in the English -
Indonesian Translation of Dessen’s “What Happened to Goodbye””.
English Education Journal, 8(2), 195-207.
KEMPTON, G. (2004). Write Great Fiction – Dialogue. Cincinnati: Writer’s
Digest Books.
KOIVISTO, A., & NYKÄNEN, E. (2016). “Introduction: Approaches to
Fictional Dialogue”. International Journal of Literary Linguistics, 5(2).
KUBÁČKOVÁ, J. (2009). “Keeping Czech in Check: A Corpus-based Study
of Generalization in Translation”. SKASE Journal of Translation and
Interpretation, 4 (1), 33-51.
NABOKOV, V. (1955). Lolita. Paris: Olympia Press.
ORWELL, G. (1991). Gyvulių ūkis. Vilnius: Vyturys.
ORWELL, G. (2021). Gyvulių ūkis. Kaunas: LECTIO DIVINA.
ORWELL, G. (2021). Animal farm. London: Macmillan Collector’s Library.
ORWELL, G. (2022). Gyvulių ūkis. Vilnius: Alma littera.
PAŽŪSIS, L. (2014). Kalba ir vertimas. Vilnius: Vilniaus universitetas.
PEPRNÍK, J. (1969): “Reporting Phrases in English Prose”. Brno Studies
in English, 8(1), 145-151.
SEDLÁČEK, M. (2016). Reporting Clauses in Czech and in English.
TARTT, D. (2013). The Goldfinch. Boston: Little, Brown and Company.
VAN LEUVEN-ZWART, K. (1989): “Translation and Original: Similarities and
Dissimilarities, I”. Target. International Journal of Translation
Studies, 1(2), 151-181.
VINAY, J. P., & DARBELNET, J. (1995). Comparative Stylistics of French
and English: A Methodology for Translation (Vol. 11). Amsterdam:
John Benjamins Publishing Company.
ZUSAK, M. (2005). The Book Thief. Sydney: Picador.
Lietuvių kalbos išteklių informacinė sistema E. KALBA. [Online]
https://ekalba.lt/dabartines-lietuv iu-kalbos-
zodynas/klestel%C4%97ti,%20~~jimas?paieska=klestel%
C4%97ti&i=c4e983f3-f600-4600-9ca0-5a6fa56bbece
Lietuvių kalbos išteklių informacinė sistema E. KALBA. [Online]:
https://ekalba.lt/dabartines-lietuviu-kalbos-
zodynas/viksnoti,%20~~jimas?paieska=viksnoti&i=68319f
25-fee8-43af-8dee-313f95ac1491.
Merriam-Webster. [Online] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/prance.