Globalization has been defined as the "effective erasure of national boundaries for economic purposes."¹ The tendency is to create a uniform environment in which standard "rules" are applied to different economic systems to attempt to achieve a more global market. Such an approach has been the target of furious protests by international organizations that call for a fair trade instead of a free trade in which Third World countries will just succumb under the weight of First World dictates. The same fear of a "first world" that imposes its rules on other countries can be found within media, where the monopolistic influence of the United States is clearly recognizable among the programs imported abroad. Programs that are sold and exported on a large scale, are usually "neutral," meaning that they need the characteristics of universality and standardization, that is, their elements must be easily understandable by and adaptable for different cultures.² The realm of media, especially television, has experienced, ever since McLuhan’s theory of global village, a process of transformation towards more homogeneous products and formats, a tendency that has characterized most networks ever since.

Despite this general enthusiasm for media globalization, European television presents, at times, interesting characteristics that seem to push for more culturally specific programs. While the European Union sought to erase natural boundaries,⁴ its development has also inspired nationalistic impulses that seem to contradict the rush for globalization. The "old" continent remains profoundly dependent upon traditional divisions, especially in terms of language, and this is an aspect European broadcasters, producers and distributors need to take into consideration when trying to promote global programs.

This paper examines a specific example of television adaptation that highlights the contradictions and problematics European TV programmers face in their attempt to embrace globalization. The Italian version of The Nanny questions the idea of universality and standardization of imported programs and proposes a new and specific nationalism by modifying the very comic elements on which the series is originally based. Aired in the United States on CBS from 1993 to 1999, The Nanny tells the story of Fran (Fran Drescher), a young Jewish woman from Flushing, Queens (New York). After being fired by her ex-boyfriend from her job at a bridal shop, Fran arrives at the home of Maxwell Sheffield, a British widower who produces Broadway musicals, to sell cosmetics. Once in Mr. Sheffield’s house, for fortuitous circumstances, Fran is hired as the nanny of his three children. A contemporary Sound of Music story is developed. From the pilot episode to the end of the series, in which Fran and Mr. Sheffield finally wed, the show bases its episodes on the humorous gags of the characters that include the butler Niles, Maxwell’s business associate C.C., Fran’s mother Sylvia and grandmother Yetta.5 The fundamental comic element of the show is offered by the clashing and diverse lifestyles of the two families: Maxwell’s polite and "cold" British lifestyle and Fran’s eccentric and invasive Jewish relatives and friends. In particular, Fran and Sylvia with their strong accents, "tacky clothes and too much make up,"6 incarnate the stereotypical Jewish/New York woman, which provides a further source of entertainment.

In the Italian version of The Nanny (La Tata) Fran Drescher (Francesca) loses her Jewish features, and becomes an Italian descendent with a complete list of Italian stereotypes based on dialectical and regional expressions. Francesca’s family comes from Ciociaria, from the city of Frosinone, situated in the south area of Lazio. Ciociaria is mostly an agricultural area located between Rome and Naples, and offers traditional stereotypes of humble cultural background and Italian-style passions for cooking and food. Italy’s most successful humor is often based on issues of north versus south areas, the first being more industrialized and urbanized, the latter being more rural. This is then the "new" irony introduced by La Tata, an irony easily recognizable to and understandable for Italian spectators.

The adaptation creates a series that, in spite of losing its major and original comic elements, is successful with the new audience to which it is presented. The analysis proposed here will focus on linguistic issues related to adaptation and dubbing, exploring different methodologies in the translation of programs. The paper ultimately aims to provide an understanding of the reasons behind some of the changes aforementioned, and to illustrate the continued push for nationalism and the lack of a homogenous culture despite globally distributed programs. Through the textual analysis of different episodes in both the versions, this paper offers concrete evidence of the cultural aspects the adaptation takes into consideration and applies in order to appeal to the new audience.

To understand the ground in which this specific adaptation takes place, it is important to consider the fundamental steps and historical characteristics of Italian television. A turning point in Italian communication took place in 1944 when RAI (the present national broadcaster) was founded and a year later was given exclusive broadcast rights. The monopoly given to RAI marks a clear tendency towards governmental control in Italian communication, a tendency that would particularly characterize television in the two following decades. In 1952 RAI’s programs were extended to television, although regular transmission did not begin until 1954. The 1950s and 1960s were years of significant growth for Italian television in terms of popularity. The main party in the Italian political system at that time, the Christian Democracy, made great use of national broadcasting for propaganda, one more time supporting the idea of the national network as a monopolistic and governmental instrument. In 1960 the Italian Constitutional Court officially approved state monopoly, but also expressed a strong desire for diversity. As a consequence of such a necessity, RAI 2 was founded, a channel that could provide such diversity, by offering other political views and approaches. Nonetheless, since political monopoly went on and the Christian Democracy continued to exert its power through the national networks, in 1975 a specific commission created by the Parliament started to look over RAI to assure political pluralism and diversity. As a consequence, the Christian Democratic Party kept its control over RAI 1, while the Socialist Party got the major control over RAI 2 (a situation that might better be described as bi-polarism than pluralism).

In this environment, the deregulation of the Italian broadcast system brought about private cable TV and radio. At least thirty-five private television stations and about 150 private radio stations began to broadcast without a license. This situation created confusion as well as a decrease in the quality of programming, but on the other hand offered that diversity that had always been lacking in the broadcast system. As a consequence of the privatization in Italian television, in 1980 Silvio Berlusconi entered into the communication arena, by setting up Canale 5, whose target, like that of RAI 1 and RAI 2, was, and still is a general audience. In 1982, Berlusconi bought Italia 1 and Rete 4, channels geared toward a younger, female audience. Up to the present, the television system in Italy has maintained its organization almost unchanged, if not for Berlusconi’s increasing influence in Italian broadcasting and communication system in general.7 The Mediaset Group was officially founded in 1993, although it was not offered publicly on the board of trade until 1996. It includes Canale 5, Italia 1, and Rete 4 and represents now the most important private group in terms of Italian media.8

The Nanny was aired from 1995 to 2001 on Italia 1 under the title of La Tata.9 As mentioned, the intended audience for Italia 1 was young and female. The time of the day in which La Tata was aired, 1:00 to 1:30 pm, further targeted this market, since housewives and teenagers would be at home in that specific moment of the day. The series was particularly successful and brought about the creation of "La Tata Fans Club,"10 founded in 1998, and stimulated several protest debates when it was definitely cancelled.11 The decision of airing The Nanny, a North American series adapted for the Italian audience, is not an innovative strategy for Mediaset. Since its birth, the Berlusconi group has always scheduled international adapted programs, particularly sit-coms, TV series and quiz shows (i.e. Family Ties, Dallas, and Wheel of Fortune, among others), on a much larger scale than RAI, which tends to rely more on national productions.12 In this respect, Mediaset represents the general tendency towards imported programs that European television networks opted for since the 1970s when a drastic increase in the schedule of television programming obligated European broadcasters to look for new material in order to satisfy the growing demand for programs. Such a shift in network administration and programming caused broadcasters to look for ways to adapt and translate the imported programs, a transformation that introduced specific policies in different countries.

Nonetheless, there are two main fundamental critiques of the global tendency of media industries. First, those networks that opt for global and adapted programs clearly do not support the production of a national and local television industry. Such a tendency leads directly to the second issue related to media globalization: the risk of creating bland, uniform and standardized programs unable to depict the specific characteristics of a particular nation or society.3 Therefore, globalization influences media production both on an economic and a cultural point of view, and it usually supports the hegemonic role of a specific national production (US) over others, given the homogeneity of programs broadcasters buy and later offer to their audience.

The import of international programs not only can be seen as a risk for national programs and identities, but it also creates a number of practical problems especially in terms of translation and adaptation. Not all programs present convenient characteristics for translation and adaptation, and numerous problems are faced when searching for products to import. The very distinction between a mere literal translation of a dialogue and a cultural and social adaptation of a text that can include significant modifications from the original version is significant when considering film and television.

Let us focus on the problems of translation first, briefly analyzing the different methods used when importing and translating a foreign program: dubbing and subtitling. (A specific analysis related to issues of adaptation will be provided later on in the paper.) In dubbing, the totality (or at least the majority) of the original sound track is substituted by a new version in the language of the target audience, while in subtitling a written text is provided to translate the dialogue of each character. Subtitling and dubbing each offer practical opportunities, which then often raise issues of accuracy and effectiveness of the translation. While dubbing is critiqued for its lack of authenticity compared to the original version, subtitling may cause confusion and distraction from the visuals. This aspect and the issues concerning translation and adaptation are usually not ignored by national media commissions and institutions that aim to ensure a balance between international programs and national productions, both on a cultural and economic level.

In this respect, the discussion concerning dubbing and subtitling often causes single countries to have specific policies about imported programs and to opt for one method or the other. According to Kilborn, "broadly speaking, the larger and more economically powerful the country, the more likely it is that dubbing will have assumed a position of dominance. In France, Italy and Germany, for instance, dubbing is the established mode."14 Those countries that happen to be more "powerful" (therefore often present a stronger national background) prefer dubbing to subtitling given the idea of subtitling as the insert of a written text that substantially does not modify the original product.

On the other hand, dubbing undoubtedly allows a higher level of manipulation of the original text. By dubbing a film or a television program, translators are able to "hide" the old text and provide the audience with a new, modified version.15 As a direct consequence, dubbing also allows specific national elements to be explored: traditional stereotypes, national idiosyncrasies, and historical events that can be recalled and easily recognized by the audience. Dubbing especially allows the use of a specific and cultural sense of humor and, above all, dialectical expressions. This is the main reason that countries with strong traditional and national backgrounds opt for dubbing, in that it is the method that better allows the reinforcement of cultural and linguistic identities. The increasing costs of dubbing over those of subtitling causes countries with less strong national identities to opt for the cheaper method of translation, despite the risks of standardization in the final product.

Where does Italy fit within such systems of translation? As already mentioned, Italian television traditionally opted for dubbing over subtitling, given its past proudly based on national and cultural consciousness. There are, however, more specific reasons concerning the choice of dubbing over subtitling that are related to social, historical and political events. Generally speaking, the necessity for dubbing becomes evident only with the coming of sound in the late 1920s when "the talking picture became the prisoner of its own language."16 Most European countries, moved by nationalistic pride and the influx of English language films, decided to introduce specific protectionist measures in order both to preserve national production and also to ensure translations of the films in their own language. Such decisions were important not only from a cultural point of view, but also from an economic one. Hollywood and its film industry were destined to be profoundly influenced by European necessities and expectations. As will be examined later, the studios created specific policies concerning translation and dubbing, and hired entire casts of foreign actors, directors and writers.17

In this environment, Italy in particular, prohibited the import of films that were not Italian spoken, and many other countries followed its example (Spain, France and Germany among others).18 The analysis of 1920s Italy gives an understandable and specific reason for such a drastic approach: the coming of sound coincided with the rise of the Fascist Party, led by Benito Mussolini (officially holding power since October 1922). Mussolini began to introduce a political dictatorship based on the preservation and exaltation of Italian national identity and history. Such vision included banning the use of all words coming from foreign languages, including those words that had officially been accepted in the everyday and commonly spoken language. This context clearly presented a further pressure for the strengthening of national identities and characteristics in relation to language.

Hollywood’s response to the linguistic demands coming from Europe was at first that of shooting multi-language versions of the same film (a solution "invented and tried out first in Britain in 1929 when E. A. Dupont directed Atlantic in English-, German-, and French-versions").19 The studios mainly chose two different solutions: the first was that of using immigrant actors, directors, and screenwriters that could speak different languages, or "importing" entire different casts for the different versions (the method used by MGM, for example). The second option for the studios was to create productions in Europe, like Paramount did, and shoot the multi-language versions directly in different countries.20 The old continent was a market that Hollywood certainly did not have any interest to lose, that is why the move towards multi-language versions was easy to make. Nonetheless, the great costs of both the solutions (coming in the hard times of the Depression) obligated the studios to opt for a third, less expensive, method, dubbing. Despite its evident advantages in eliminating the shooting of multiple versions, dubbing was less reliable and, at the time, very problematical for several reasons: synchronization, quality of sound, and ultimately credibility of the new version. As Vincendeu writes, "dubbing upset the feeling of unity, of plenitude, of the character, and thus the spectator position. Moreover, it produced in the contemporary audience a feeling of being duped."21 Considering the poor quality of the first dubbed versions, as well as the audiences’ lack of familiarity with dubbing, it is not surprising that spectators were confused and disappointed by products that ultimately looked, and most of all sounded "fake."

Nonetheless, dubbing techniques have developed, over the years, a much better quality. The results, in countries like Italy, are quite surprising, and have led to the creation of official dubbing schools and an entire tradition of dubbing, of which Italy is particularly proud. Italian audience does not seem to mind the loss of the original sound track and dialogue and is now used to dubbed products. Actors and actresses such as Ferruccio Amendola, Roberto Chevalier or Ilaria Stagni, only to mention a few examples, are well known in Italy in their role of voice performers, and they are easily recognizable on the screen by the majority of the audience.22

The chosen method of translation not only influences the reception by and understanding of the audiences, as seen above, but it also affects the choice of station programmers looking for the "perfect" and most successful formats. What are then the international programs that are more likely to be imported in foreign countries according to the possibilities of a "successful" translation? Richard Kilborn provides a clear answer: "programming in which speech, dialogue or argument are important components has been given low priority, while programming which rely for their effect on music, movement and display have become the staple diet."23 Kilborn further comments that, while the approach of importing easily translatable programs has successfully appealed to younger audiences, it risks creating a homogeneity unable to take into consideration national and cultural differences. Programs that make heavy use of music and sensational special effects and are not strictly based on dialogue and linguistic comic elements, are more likely to be "neutral" than culturally specific. Thus, the audience perceives and enjoys what is on the screen more directly, without the need of specific national or traditional backgrounds. A direct consequence of more uniform TV programs is the lack of diversity and specificity that characterizes them, and creates homogeneity and cultural standardization. Music and special effects do not usually need particular attention in the process of adaptation. Almost every audience can enjoy what is on the screen without having to make efforts in order to understand the message delivered. Translators’ intervention is, therefore, less drastic than with long dialogues or complicated plots which need to be adapted in order to be fully understood and enjoyed. These are the cases in which a good translation can make a program culturally specific, especially thanks to the use of dubbing which allows a stronger form of manipulation of the text.

Let us focus, then, on the peculiarities of dubbing, and on its "creation of meaning," given the opportunities it gives in terms of linguistic manipulation and consequent national and cultural specificity. Cinema was considered a universal language at the time of its birth, but with the coming of sound it soon became clear that films needed to use different languages and texts in order to be understood by different audiences. If early on the main changes to the original version simply concerned the language itself in which the film was released, later on translations underwent a process of greater differentiation from the original versions and were enriched by different cultural elements, such as regional expressions.

In this respect, the analysis of dubbing and translation becomes interesting when considering the linguistic jokes and language itself as "use," that is as a code that becomes meaningful in a specific social and cultural context (as Wittgenstein claimed).24 In terms of adaptation then, the recreation of the original linguistic significance usually does not simply lie in the literal translation. Therefore, a good translator should not be particularly concerned about giving an exact paraphrase of the original version. He or she should focus instead on the re-creation of those linguistic relations, or "jokes," that ultimately produce specific feelings and reactions among the audience. The final goal should be exactly that of providing spectators with an understanding and a reading of the new version that can be the closest possible to the original one.25 Most of the times, and ironically, this achievement presupposes significant changes from the original version more than an exact conversion of it, and also justifies the term adaptation over a "simple" translation.

This specific aspect of adaptation brings back the idea of the neutrality of some texts over others, as aforementioned in the paper. Those texts that are more easily translatable will be those that do not present peculiar linguistic, dialectical, and cultural expressions, but are instead characterized by a substantially uniform dialogue. Therefore, adaptations are profoundly dependent upon issues of dub-ability of the text, and need to take into consideration the specific elements upon which the ultimate significance is based. The credible recreation of meaning and humor is precisely the focus of the Italian adaptation of The Nanny that, as previously mentioned, transforms the original Jewish environment and irony of the US version into a "new" series based on Italian stereotypes and sarcasm.

The vision of adaptations as active cultural processes supports the idea of linguistic manifestations (dialectical expressions or linguistic jokes, for example) as mechanisms able to create and deliver social significance. Specific phrases and idiomatic expressions are related not only to linguistic elements, but also to national and cultural characteristics. The translation of dialectical expressions and slangs, for instance, provides a particularly interesting example of how a translator can adapt peculiar dialectical jokes or colloquial expressions in an effective way. Again, it is important to remember that "effective" in this instance by no means signifies "exact", but "understandable."26

The use of dialects offers a particularly good example in the analysis of adapted programs. Specific regional and local expressions often represent a hard obstacle to deal with in terms of translation. Dialectical jokes often belong more to what could be defined as popular wisdom, than to "standard" humor. Therefore, in the process of adaptation, translators encounter several difficulties when trying to recreate similar feelings and responses among the new audience. Italy, a country divided into twenty regions, each of which still speaks a different dialect despite the common language, particularly enjoys the use of local expressions. The choice of a dialect gives information about the characters’ origins and often depicts a specific class and cultural status. An actor or actress with a strong accent from the southern regions of Italy will be more likely to represent a rural, less educated character. On the other hand, the accent from the north, especially from Milan, is usually associated with snobbish and wealthy characters.

Most of the elements just described are essential characteristics of the Italian adaptation of The Nanny. Although Fran (Francesca Cacace, in the Italian version) does not speak with a particular accent (itself a big change from the original in which Fran’s voice and accent are quite important) her background is clearly understandable both by her use of dialectical expressions and by her last name itself, which immediately recalls Southern Italy. The pilot episodes in both the US and Italian versions introduces Fran’s (and Francesca’s) characteristics very clearly: her eccentricity and self confidence are evident first of all in the way she looks (strong make-up, tight clothes) but also in her attitude with Maxwell (she writes her resume with lipstick and answers a phone call in the house when the butler cannot answer). The Italian version stresses the humble origins of her family (one of her aunts used to work in Pozzuoli, a particularly poor town in the Naples area) while the US version highlights Fran’s humble background from Queens.

Francesca’s character seems to be introduced in a less positive light than Fran’s. In this respect, the analysis of Francesca’s and Fran’s last names gives an interesting view to the representation of the two women. In the US version, Fine is the family name of the nanny. By being called Miss Fine, Fran is to some extent raised to a higher level than the other characters on the show. On the other hand, the last name Cacace is usually perceived in a humorous way by Italians, and beyond distinguishing the clear Southern origin of the character, it adds a form of vulgarity to her representation (the last name Cacace clearly recalls the word cacca, which is commonly used in Italian as excrement).

The "tone" used in the conversation is another interesting element to take into consideration when examining the use of dubbing in adaptations. Tone, considered in this case in its connotation of style or manner of expression in speaking or writing, usually helps express not only the different moods of the characters but also their specific interaction. A good example comes from the analysis of the pronouns used to address the characters, also defined in Italian as "forme allocutive"27 (Lei more formal, usually used to show respect especially towards older people, and Tu more direct and informal, used among friends and people of the same age). In the translation from English to Italian this type of linguistic adaptation usually requires translators to take a specific position in respect to the characters. By choosing one or the other form (a choice that in English, with the general use of "you," is non existent) translators establish specific relations as well as social stati. La Tata undergoes this adaptation process by having different characters addressing one another with different pronouns, depending on the characters’ relationships (Francesca and Maxwell both use the Lei form for each other, Maxwell uses the Tu form with Niles, while Niles addresses Maxwell with Lei, for example). Therefore, in the Italian version the gap between characters is to some extent more evident than in the US version, for the class/social/economic clear distinction in the way they address one another.

Following the same line of linguistic examination, a particularly interesting aspect in the analysis of The Nanny and La Tata concerns the comparison of Jewish and regional Italian expressions in the dialogue. "The Pen Pal," first episode of the third season, offers an interesting example of the linguistic aspects of the adaptation. Fran’s mysterious pen pal Lenny is finally visiting New York and wants to meet her. Worried about his possible disappointment for a real encounter with her, Fran is extremely nervous and pays particular attention to how she looks. While she is still upstairs getting ready for her date, Maxwell and Niles have a conversation about Fran, a conversation in which the two British men speak Yiddish, in the US version, and use expressions from the Naples dialect, in the Italian version.

Translation:

The significant use of Yiddish by two British men stresses Fran’s influence in their lives and in the family life in general. On the other hand, in the Italian version Maxwell and Niles use only a couple of expressions from the dialect, and the conversation loses most of its humor and it is not particularly based on linguistic jokes, but on traditional cultural stereotypes (Maxwell and Niles mention Rafael and the Pope, Julius II, in the Renaissance and play with the double meaning of the word "dipingere" that denotes both painting and make-up). This aspect in the adaptation of The Nanny exemplifies quite well those characteristics of dubbing that allow a text to undergo drastic changes, and become, to some extent, an entire new product.

Accents as well as dialectical and regional expressions are all elements that profoundly influence the modifications made to the original text. Therefore, dubbing offers a form of manipulation depending on several factors that, when combined, may create a significant different version from the original. Dubbing’s potential to change the text introduces interesting questions about authenticity, as well as the broader idea of authorship in terms of translation and adaptation. Is the new version an entirely new product as well as a new text? Such a question aims to understand if adaptations offer in the end not only a different program but also a different perception and interpretation of it. According to Ascheid the dubbed version is an original text and issues of authenticity are "meaningless" since the "dubbed motion picture becomes a new and fundamentally recontextualized product in the process."28

Such a discussion introduces a "traditional" debate that concerns translators’ frustration for not being considered authors. National associations of dubbing, such as AIDAC (Associazione Italiana Dialoghisti e Adattatori Cinetelevisivi) generally complain about the lack of consideration given to the creative elements introduced by translators in adaptations. As Murri reminds us, those who rewrite dialogue do not simply translate texts, but "force the linguistic patrimony of a country in a new order of ideas."29

Murri clarifies and re-proposes the idea of cultural adaptations as creative processes that reinforce national identity. The comparison of The Nanny and La Tata offers again a good example in this respect. The adaptation is not only modified in some of its linguistic elements, but also presents significant cultural differences. For example, in the Italian series Fran is Catholic instead of Jewish. Let us briefly focus on some of the reasons and consequences of such a change. Given the massive influence of the Catholic Church and the Vatican in Italian life, it is not surprising that the adaptation tries to recreate a familiar religious environment. Furthermore, Jewish stereotypes are not particularly shared by Italians who would have problems in understanding the jokes of The Nanny based on specific New York ironies.

Such a significant change from the original version clearly causes the dialogue to undergo drastic modifications, especially when trying to justify the visual presence of Jewish elements in the series, such as the synagogue in "The Cantor Show" or the rabbis and Jewish guests in the wedding episode. Although the series has to deal with this aspect of the adaptation on many occasions (given the importance of the Jewish stereotypes in the US version), these two particular episodes illustrate and exemplify the problematics of the translation when trying to justify the new Catholic environment of the Italian version.

"The Cantor Show," an episode from the third season, shows Fran attending synagogue and dating the new cantor, who will be later contracted by Maxwell as the main singer for his latest Broadway production. The translation needs to justify Fran’s and Sylvia’s presence in the synagogue in the first place, and the solution is found by having the two women attending the service with a Jewish cousin they only mention. When Fran and Gary, the cantor, speak for the first time, Fran makes jokes about Jewish traditions (while in the original version she lies about her age) and shows a clear ignorance in religious matters (she confuses the synagogue with the mosque). Furthermore, Gary constantly reminds the audience how Fran - a Christian - and he get along even if of different religious beliefs ("anche se di religioni diverse"), re-confirming the idea that Fran and her family are "devoted" Italian Catholics. This drastic change from the original version aims to create an environment that becomes more familiar to an audience used to the strong influence of the Catholic Church in many aspects of daily life.

The episode in which the original version undergoes the most significant changes though (and the adaptation is perhaps less credible), is the wedding episode, aired at the end of the fifth season. The US version shows a mixed wedding (Jewish and Christian) between Fran and Maxwell, conducted both by a rabbi and a priest. The Italian version transforms the original mixed wedding into a Christian-Civil ceremony, where the priest celebrates the rite together with an improbable justice of the peace (the rabbi in the US version). The major problems in the adaptation are faced in the attempt of justifying the presence of clearly Jewish guests at the ceremony, as well as the traditional Hava Nagila dance for the bride and groom during the party. As aforementioned, this episode is not particularly credible and effective in its adaptation, given the multiple visual elements that ultimately cannot be changed; the result does not completely convince the audience that is left, in the end, with unanswered questions about the Jewish elements in the mise-en-scene (Jewish symbols such as Stars of David, and the presence of the rabbi or the guests themselves) and a general sense of disorientation.

Although it presents some problems, this episode similarly supports the idea that translators are authors, and the linguistic and cultural elements modified in the adaptation create, in the end, new texts. Translators’ urge to be considered authors appears to be, in this respect, legitimate, because in the final instance it is their work that allows the effective perception and understanding of a text. Translators achieve a particularly important role when considering issues of nationalism and cultural identity since they are the ones who seem to hold the ultimate "power" in making texts more or less culturally and nationally specific.

The analysis of the Italian version of The Nanny has shown how, despite the general tendency towards media globalization, international imported formats undergo drastic processes of modification, in order to become more understandable and appealing to the new audience. The use of local expressions and popular humor, made possible thanks to the characteristics of dubbing, allow national elements to be explored and reinforced. The Nanny and its adaptation highlight the necessity for cultural specificity when translating imported programs and represent an interesting example of national identity reinforced through the use of means of communication.

The analysis of this specific adaptation raises some essential questions and ideas that are worthy of further study. The first of such questions concerns the ultimate necessity of the changes made. It would be interesting to examine if Italian audiences would have understood the original series and its Jewish irony without any modifications. In other words, a further analysis could try to establish whether the changes were considered "necessary" by Mediaset in its goal of re-creating a successful as well as understandable and enjoyable program. It would also be interesting to understand to what extent the changes work in terms of the success itself of the series.

In November 2002, more than a year after the series ended, Fran Drescher appeared as special guest in a TV show, "Matricole e Meteore" aired on Italia 1. This event not only demonstrates the continued affection of Italian audience for the actress and her character, but also introduces a further question to be considered. Fran Drescher and the producers of The Nanny must have allowed the changes made to the Italian version, since the producers generally make the overseas sales. Thus, they were aware that the main comic elements of the series would have been lost. What are the "artistic compromises" an author as Fran Drescher needs to accept when trying to export a product that inevitably undergoes changes that might be drastic? Fran’s live appearance in Italy does not help in answering such interrogations: the changes made to the original versions are not mentioned in "Matricole e Meteore" and the idea of Drescher as a perfect Italian-style nanny is reinforced.

The analysis of the audience becomes in this respect particularly interesting. Further research can be dedicated to the study of spectators and their identification with the character and wheter the Italian audience identifies with Fran (or Francesca) because of her humor and eccentric kindness or because she "is" Italian. The discussion about national specificity is complex and it would be relevant for this analysis to understand if the adaptation really and effectively reinforces cultural identity simply by modifying the main character’s origins. In other words, are the changes made to the Italian version sufficient to "persuade" and appeal to the new audience, therefore are they successful in re-establishing cultural traditions and national stereotypes?

Such questions relate back to the idea of globalization discussed in the first section of the paper. As aforementioned, those programs that happen to be less related to national, regional, and local environments are the ones that more likely will be chosen to be exported and adapted in an international system. Co-productions such as Highlander for example, are usually "global" or at least "more global," due to the necessity of creating something that can be clearly and successfully understood in the different countries involved in the production. The approach of producing programs with an eye toward global distribution undoubtedly facilitates and speeds up the circulation of media products. A program is created and then "simply" sold and adapted to other countries, by dubbing it and modifying those elements such as dialectical expressions or linguistic jokes that are too culturally specific.

Nonetheless, the adaptation of The Nanny can be seen as a "challenge" for the increasing tendency towards media globalization. It accepts the risk of significant modifications from the original and it establishes such modifications as the stronger elements of the series, in the name of a "better" understanding of the final product. It could be argued that the new version of the series does not effectively reinforce Italian cultural identity as a whole. What come across in the adaptation are those stereotypes, based on north versus south irony and differences, on which Italian humor has traditionally been based. On the other hand, it can be claimed that La Tata appeals to its audience specifically for those elements, national divisions and irony that are adapted and altered according to Italian idiosyncrasies and taste. Therefore Fran’s character is especially accepted and enjoyed because of the incarnation of those idiosyncrasies.

The original format presents in the end significant changes. Francesca takes on a new Italian connotation and sensibility that, no matter if realistic or not, ultimately satisfies cultural and national identification.

1 Daly, H. “Globalization and Its Discontents.” Available from: http://www.puaf.umd.edu/faculty/papers/daly/global.pdf.  Based in part on a discussion given at The Aspen Institute’s 50th Anniversary Conference. “Globalization and the Human Condition”, 8/20/00, Aspen, CO.

2 Kilborn, R. 1993, “Speak my language: current attitudes to television subtitling and dubbing”, Media, Culture and Society, Vol. 15, No. 4, 655.

4 With the introduction of the so called “television without frontiers” the European Parliament aims to “ensure that all the residents in the EC have access to all EC broadcasts which have become possible with satellite and cable technology.” “SCADPlus: Pursuit of televisual broadcasting (television without frontiers).” Activities of the European Union Summaries of legislation. Available from: http://europa.eu.int/scadplus/leg/en/lvb/l24101.htm.

5 From “The Nanny Zone”, available from: http://www.geocities.com/lauratnz/thenanny.html.

6 Wilinsky, B.  1996, “ ‘Who Talks Like That?’ Foregrounding Stereotypes on The Nanny.” Mediated Women: Representation in Popular Culture. Ed. Marian Meyers. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press, 305.

7 Information taken from Noam, E. 1992, Television in Europe, New York: Oxford U, 149-161.

8 Information available from: http://www.gruppomediaset.it/indexgruppo.jsp?lang=IT

9 Information available from: http://www.geocities.com/TelevisionCity/Set/6592/

10 Ibid.

11 “Telefilm Italia 1. Forum.” Available from: http://jforum3.jumpy.it/eshare/server?action=130&PAGE=3&BOARD=8&EXPANDFULLY=1

12 D’Amico, A. “ItaliaUno, ecco la nuova identita’.” Italia Oggi. 4 October, 2001

13 Information taken from Kilborn.

3 Ibid, 653-4.

14 Ibid, 643.

15 Bakewell, in Kilborn, 645.

16 Dibbets, K. “The Introduction of Sound” In Geoffrey Nowell-Smith, ed. The History of World Cinema, Oxford, NY: Oxford U P, 1996. 213.

17 Vincendeau, G. “Hollywood Babel.” Screen, vol. 29, no. 2, Spring 1998, 24.

18 Dibbets, 213.

19 Ibid.

20 Vincendeau, 24.

21 Ibid, 33.

22 Guidorizzi, M. “Storia del doppiaggio.” Available from: http://www.professionespettacolo.it/cinema/stodeldopp.htm 

23 Ibid, 655.                                                     

24 “…Non si tratta tanto di imparare a tradurre qualcosa, quanto di acquistare la capacita’ di comprendere il ‘gioco linguistico,’ come lo chiamerebbe Wittgenstein, di percepire la lingua come ‘uso,’ capacita’ che non si acquisisce se non sbattendo la testa cento volte materialmente su cio’ che e’ intraducibile.” Murri, S. “Lo scrittore che non c’e’.” in Il doppiaggio- trasposizioni linguistiche e culturali. Baccolini, R., R. M. Bollettieri Bosinelli and L. Gavioli (eds.) 1994 Bologna, CLUEB, 81.

25 Murri, 81-2.

26 Oittinen, R. 1992, “Teaching Translation of Fiction – A dialogic point of view” in Cay Dollerup e Anne Loddegaard (eds), Teaching Translation and Interpreting, Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 76-78.

27 Pavesi, M. “L’allocuzione nel doppiaggio dall’inglese al’italiano.” In Baccolini, R., R. M. Bollettieri Bosinelli and L. Gavioli (eds.), 29.

28 Ascheid, Antje. “Speaking Tongues: Voice Dubbing in the Cinema as Cultural Ventriloquism.” The Velvet Light Trap. 40 (Fall 1997), 33.

29 “Il dialoghista non deve tradurre ma forzare il patrimonio linguistico di un paese in un ordine di idee diverso, deve importare lo spirito linguistico di un intero retaggio culturale.” Murri, S. “Lo scrittore Che non C’e’.” in R. M. Bollettieri Bosinelli and L. Gavioli (eds), 82.

Agost, R. 1999, Traducción y doblaje: palabras, voces e imagines. Barcelona: Editorial Ariel.

Alvarado, M. 1995. “Selling Television”, in Moran Film Policy, pp. 62-71.

Alvarado, M. (ed.) 1990, Trasnationalization of television in Western Europe. Academia Research Monograph 5. London, John Libbey.

Anderson. B. 1983, Imagined Communities, London And New York: Verso.

Ang, I. 1991, Desperately Seeking the Audience, London and New York: Routledge.

Baccolini, R., R. M. Bollettieri Bosinelli and L. Gavioli (eds.) 1994, Il doppiaggio- trasposizioni linguistiche e culturali. Bologna, CLUEB.

Bakewell, Michael. 1987. “Factors Affecting the Cost of Dubbing”. In EBU Review. Programmes, Administration, Law, XXXVIII/6, November. p. 16-17

Ballester Casado, A. 2001, Traducción y Nacionalismo: la Recepción del Cine Americano en España a Través del Doblaje, 1928-1948. Granada: Editorial Comares.

Baltruschat, D. “Globalization and International TV and Film Co-productions: In Search of New Narratives.” Media in Transition 2: Globalization and Convergence. May 10-12, 2002 at MIT, Cambridge, USA. Available from: http://cms.mit.edu/conf/mit2/Abstracts/DorisBaltruschat.pdf

Browne, D.R. 1989, Comparing Broadcast Systems: The Experience of Six Industrialized Nations, Ames, Iowa: Iowa State University Press.

Bruno, E. “Il mio format per il successo.” .com. 14 March, 2002.

Cere, R. 2000, European and National Identities in Britain and Italy. Maastricht on Television. Lampeter, Wales, The Edwin Mellen Press Ltd.

D’Amico, A. “ItaliaUno, ecco la nuova identita’.” Italia Oggi. 4 October, 2001.

Daly, H. “Globalization and Its Discontents.” Available from: http://www.puaf.umd.edu/faculty/papers/daly/global.pdf.  Based in part on a discussion given at The Aspen Institute’s 50th Anniversary Conference. “Globalization and the Human Condition”, 8/20/00, Aspen, CO.

De Swaan, A. 1991, “Notes on the emerging global language system: Regional, national and supranatural”, Media, Culture and Society, Vol. 13. No. 3, pp309-24.

Di Fortunato, E. and Mario Paolinelli, eds. Barriere Linguistiche e Circolazione delle Opere Audiovisive. La Questione Doppiaggio. Available from: http://www.aidac.it/docu/pub/barriere.pdf    

Dibbets, K. “The Introduction of Sound” In Geoffrey Nowell-Smith, ed. The History of World Cinema, Oxford, NY: Oxford U P, 1996. 211-219

Dizard, W.R. 1966, Television – A World View, Syracuse, NY: Syracuse U P.

Drummond, P. 1986, Television and its audience: international research perspectives: a selection of papers from the second International Television Studies Conference, London, 1986.

Drummond, P., R. Patterson and J. Willis (eds.) 1993, National Identity and Europe: The Television Revolution, London: BFI Publishing.

Finatti, L. 1996 “La Messa in Scena Umoristica Della Coscienza Ebraica”. “Omaggio a Woody Allen.” Garage. Cinema. Autori. Visioni. Torino, Italy: Scriptorium.

Furno, G. “Versione Italiana, Piccola Storia” available from: http://www.aidac.it/docu/procul/002.pdf 

Garroni, E. 1968, Semiotica ed Estetica, l’eterogeneità del linguaggio e il linguaggio cinematografico. Bari, Laterza.

Giannini, M. “Il conflitto di interessi esiste ma il Cavaliere non vendera’.” La Repubblica. 5 May, 2001.

Gillespie, M. 1995, Television, Ethnicity and Cultural Change, London and New York: Routledge.

Gilman, S. 1991, The Jew’s Body. New York & London: Routledge.

Gottlieb, H. 1992, “Subtitling- A new university discipline” in Cay Dollerup e Anne Loddegaard (eds), Teaching Translation and Interpreting, Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 161- 170.

Gray, T. M. Review of the television program The Nanny. Variety. 8 November 1993. 32.

Guback, T. H. and Varis T. 1982, “Transnational Communications and Cultural Industries.” Reports and Papers on Mass Communications. No 92, UNESCO, Paris.

Heinderyckx, F. 1994, “Language as the irreducible impediment to transnational television programmes”, paper presented at the Turbulent Europe conference, London.

“In the Spotlight. ‘The Nanny’ Co-creator and Star Fran Drescher.” Jewish Televimage Report, Nov. 1993, no 3, pp. 5-8.

Kilborn, R. 1993, “Speak my language: current attitudes to television subtitling and dubbing”, Media, Culture and Society, Vol. 15, No. 4, pp641-60.

“La Tata Fans Club.” Available from: http://www.geocities.com/TelevisionCity/Set/6592/

Larsen, P. ed. 1990, “Import/Export: International Flow of Television Fiction.” Reports and Papers on Mass Communications, no 104, UNESCO, Paris.

Liebes, T. and E. Katz 1993, The Export of Meaning: Cross-Cultural Readings of Dallas, Oxford: Polity Press.

Manca, D. “Fininvest patrimonio italiano, non indebolitela.” Corriere della Sera. 30 May, 2001.

Meisler, A. “Mary Poppins She’s Not” The New York Times, December 18, 1994, pp. 45-47.

Meocci, A. “La TV europea sta cambaindo. La direttiva all’esame dell’Authority.” .Com.14 March, 2002.

Minini, S. “La Tata.” TV, Sorrisi e Canzoni. Milano: Mondadori, available from: http://www.geocities.com/TelevisionCity/Set/6592/

Monaco, P. “Globalization and Television.” Society, Culture and Television. Praeger: Westport, CT, 1998. Available from: http://uwadmnweb.uwyo.edu/AMS/WebCt_Mall/myweb/tv files/globalizationAndTelevision.htm

Moran, A. 1998, Copycat TV. Globalisation, Program Formats, and Cultural Identity.  Luton, United Kingdom: U of Luton P.

Moran, A. (ed.), Film Policy: International, National and Regional Perspectives, London and New York: Routledge.

Morley, D. 1992, “Electronic communications and domestic rituals: Cultural consumption and the production of European cultural identities”, in Skovmand and Schroeder, Media Cultures, pp48-69.

Noam, E. 1992, Television in Europe, New York: Oxford U P.

Plazzotta, C. “Vi racconto la mia Mediaset tra crisi, Europa e nuovi media.” Italia Oggi, 8 November, 2001.

Oittinen, R. 1992, “Teaching Translation of Fiction – A dialogic point of view” in Cay Dollerup e Anne Loddegaard (eds), Teaching Translation and Interpreting, Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 75-80.

Paolinelli, M. “Doppiaggio Ultima Spiaggia” available from: http://www.aidac.it/docu/procul/004.pdf  

Richeri, G. 1985 “Television from service to business: European tendencies and the Italian case”, in P. Drummond (ed.) Television in transition: papers from the First International Television Studies Conference, London : BFI Pub.

“SCADPlus: Pursuit of televisual broadcasting (television without frontiers).” Activities of the European Union Summaries of legislation. Available from: http://europa.eu.int/scadplus/leg/en/lvb/l24101.htm 

Schement, J. R. 1984, “The International Flow of Television Programmes.” Communication Research, vol. 11, no 2, pp 163-182.

Silj, A. 1992, The New Television in Europe, London : Libbey

“The Nanny Zone”, available from: http://www.geocities.com/lauratnz/thenanny.html

Thompson, K. 1985, Exporting Entertainment: America in the World Film Market 1907-1934, London: British Film Institute.

Thussu, D. K. 2000 International Communication. Continuity and Change. New York: Oxford U P.

Tomlinson, J. 1991, Cultural Imperialism, London: Pinter Publishers.

Vincendeau, G. “Hollywood Babel.” Screen, vol. 29, no. 2, Spring 1998.

Wieten, J., G. Murdock and P. Dahlgren (eds.) 2000, Television Across Europe. A Comparative Introduction. London, Sage Publications.

Wilinsky, B.  1996, “ ‘Who Talks Like That?’ Foregrounding Stereotypes on The Nanny.” Mediated Women: Representation in Popular Culture. Ed. Marian Meyers. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.