Translating the Translated: An Intertextual Approach in Subtitling Ernest Hemingway’s Adaptation of To Have and Have Not to Nakhoda Khorshid

| ABSTRACT Literary texts have been regularly adapted into the motion picture since the invention of talkies. Accordingly, the relationship between the original literature, the adapted movie and its translation for international audiences, mainly in the form of subtitling, have become an attractive and growing source of study. This intertextuality is argued to influence the perception and evaluation of the vulnerable subtitle by the viewers. Therefore, adopting an intertextual approach to the subtitling of dialogue in the Iranian film Captain Khorshid , the present study aims at discussing the extent to which the subtitle corresponds to the audiences’ expectations. For this purpose, Ernest Hemingway’s To Have and Have Not and the adapted film Captain Khorshid , directed by Naser Taghva’i, are analysed. F arahzad’s (2009) model of intertextuality and Sanatifar and Kenevisi’s (2017) reformulated model of Grice are employed as the models for analysing, establishing and assessing the relationship between the texts. After discussing the relationship between the literary text and the adapted movie within the theory of intertextuality, the English subtitle of the Persian soundtrack is discussed by comparing it with the original English quote. This intertextual relationship is maintained to be mainly the source of comparison between the literature, i.e. protext, and the adaptation film, i


Introduction
Soon after the invention of sound films, literary texts have been frequently adapted into the motion picture. The adaptation of literature started in the cinema started with the adaptation of King John, a play written by Shakespeare, which was released in 1899 (Cartmell and Whelehan, 2010). Since then, numerous films have been adapted from literary works by the major film studios Almost all of such studies have emphasized the importance of the concept of translatability for understanding the process of film adaptation and that it can help to identify the challenges and opportunities of translating literary works for the screen. Likewise, as discussed by such theorists as Doloughan (2011), Krebs (2012) and Venuti (2007), the two processes of translation and adaption enjoy much in common. Krebs (2012), for example, argues that studying the similarities between translation and adaptation can lead to a more comprehensive understanding and construction of culture. Based on polysystem theory, Catrysse (2014) discusses the common grounds between the two areas and proposes a descriptive approach to adaptation study. Catrysse (2014: 52) also maintains that in both adaptation and translation, semantic content is relocated from one product and one context to another. Accordingly, the source text of the translation was argued to be located in a context of production and reception. This context includes such individuals as the authors, editors and publishers who are involved in the writing process as well as those like the readers and reviewers who receive the end product. Accordingly, a similar context of production and reception is also determined for the translated text, with a reverse role for the writer and the mediator. Although the contexts of the two texts may be away from one another in spatial, temporal or sociocultural terms, the translating act carries over the transmission of a message, thus involving implicit communication between them. Moreover, Vandal-Sirois and Bastin (2012) view adaptation as a form of functional translation which caters to the needs of the target audience. Consequently, adaptation can be generalized to refer to the conversion of a text which is translated for a different audience.
However, what is important to notice (as a neglected area of study in translation) is the fact that the adaptation of literary texts into films has led the audience of the films to view, compare and evaluate the adapted products against their source texts, which can be argued to be mainly, or at least partly, due to the intertextual relationship existing between the two products. Moreover, according to such scholars as Andrew Dudley (2000) and Andre Bazin (2005), film adaptation needs to be investigated within the boundaries of translation and intertextuality. Films are multisemiotic texts. That is, the intertextual relationship between the adapted film and the literary text can be represented in different channels of the films, including the verbal-visual, nonverbalvisual, verbal-acoustic and nonverbal-acoustic ones, examples of which are street signs, sceneries, dialogues and background noises, respectively. Among these channels, the verbal-acoustic channel of films, i.e., the dialogues between the characters, is considered one of the most important channels through which intertextuality is manifested. This channel is also particularly important from a translatological perspective. This intertextual relationship between the original and the translation of the adapted film as well as the evaluations made by the audience of the translation is exactly what triggered the writing of the present paper. Recently, I was watching the well-known Iranian movie Captain Khroshid with some friends of mine (they are students of literature) when they questioned the quality of the English subtitle as well as the source Persian soundtrack of probably one of the most wellknown quotes in novel and the film. They particularly referred to the original English quote in Ernest Hemingway's novel To Have and Have Not and told me how the adapted version and particularly the English subtitle of the adapted film differed from the original English quote. The following is the original quote in English, the Persian soundtrack of the adapted films, and the English subtitle of the Persian soundtrack: Harry Morgan: "I don't know who made the laws, but I know there ain't no law that you got to go hungry." But I know nowhere in the world there is no law that wants mankind hungry.
Official English Subtitle: I don't know who wrote the law…But I know there is no place in the world who'd want you to be hungry.
The dissatisfaction of my friends from the translation led me to contemplate how significantly and negatively can the quality of the English subtitle of a Persian adapted movie affect the expectations of the audience; this is particularly when the audience is familiar with the original text. However, the importance of the viewers' expectations and satisfaction is one of the understudied areas of translation studies. This is in contrast to the importance given to the expectation of the audience by numerous researchers such as Leppihalme (1997) Gutt (1991), for example, translation is expected to be similar to the original, only to the extent that makes it relevant to the audience. Venuti (2004) also maintains that translation is the invention of new readerships. According to Nord (2005: 57), nothing in translation is ignored as much as the audience and their expectations. Li (2012: 128-129) also believes that translation is in the service of the readers, the success of which is evaluated based on their acceptance of the translation. Therefore, the audience's responses, as well as the extent their expectations are fulfilled, can be argued to be a yardstick for validating a translation. So, the target audiences are not totally passive factors whose attitudes and expectations should be disregarded by the translator. They can actually accept or reject the translation. And consequently, considering the translation of an adapted text as well as the expectation of the audience might pose additional challenges for the translators. This is because, in our case, the English subtitle of the Persian movie (adapted from an English novel) has come to a reunion with the original quote from the English novel. Here, we can give the example of the translation of very 1 Literally means 'the sun' in Persian sensitive texts, such as medical texts, where the first translation is further translated by another translator back to the original language. Accordingly, two texts in the original language are obtained, one of which has gone through two translation processes.
In line with what has been mentioned so far, this relationship can be discussed with regard to the concept of intertextuality. This concept can generally be maintained as one of the fundamental factors in the production and reception of a translation. Intertextuality can be loosely defined on the basis of the common sensical notion of texts being related and influenced by other texts. That is, as defined by Hays, intertextuality refers to "the imbedding of fragments of an earlier text with a later one" (in Russell 2007: 97). This mutual relationship or intertextuality is such that according to Venuti (2009), every text is fundamentally an intertext.
With regards to translation, this mutual relationship between texts can be clearly observed in an adaptation which is a "TT in which a particularly free translation strategy has been adopted" (Shuttleworth and Cowie 2014: 3). However, in spite of the free translation, the target text is still fundamentally and basically created based on a source. Therefore, the translation and, particularly, a second translation from this translation is intertextually related to the original text. The term that is used by many researchers for such a process is 'relay translation.' Relay translation is the translation of a translated text (either spoken or written) into a third language; for example, from English into Persian and then from Persian into another language, which is English again in the present study.
Another term which is also used in this regard is 'retranslation' (see, for example, Idema 2003). However, Gambier (1994) made a distinction between the two by defining retranslation as a translation of an already translated message into the same language (e.g. English to Persian and then again into Persian). Dollerup (2000) also differentiated relay translation from indirect translation and support translation. While in the former, the intermediary translation is not intended for publication (only as a bridge to come to the second translation), in the latter, the translators refer to and consult previous translations when preparing their own translations.
However, what is important for the present study is the fact that, whatever term to select, the final translation is intertextually related to the original text. This is particularly important when considering the translation of an already adapted text since, as mentioned, although it is mainly a free translation of the original, the original text has still laid the foundation of the final rendition. In other words, as it is known, adaptations are carried out as a shift between a diversity of modes and channels, including from book into media and screen, i.e. film adaptation (the production of films based on novels) or between media as in cross-cultural film-to-film remakes. Also, as mentioned, the link and similarity of the adapted text to the original text vary to a great extent. Nevertheless, there is always a connection between the adapted and the adoptee. It is this connection that has caused some audiences, my friends studying literature in this case, to be able to evaluate the English subtitle of the adapted film based on the original novel.

Intertextuality, Adaptation and Translation
The term 'intertextuality' was first introduced by Kristeva. Kristeva conceived texts to be "a permutation of texts" than autonomous pieces. For her, "[A]ny text is constructed as a mosaic of quotations; any text is the absorption and transformation of another" (Kristeva 1986: 37). With regards to translation, three sets of intertextual relationships have been envisaged by Venuti (2009: 158): (1) those between the foreign text and other texts; (2) those between the foreign text and the translation; and (3) those between the translation and the other texts. Two types of intertextuality between the source and the target texts, called the protext and metatext (Farahzad 2009: 125), have also been recognized in translation: overt and covert. While in the former, the intertext "bears direct citations from other intertexts", in the latter ", the intertext relates to and depends on other intertexts not only in terms of genre and discourse but also, and basically, in terms of concepts" (Farahzad 2009: 127).
Regarding the notion of intertextuality, adaptation (the production of films based on novels) should also be considered an intertextual practice which is the outcome of "a dynamic interpretative exchange between the literary and cinematic text" (Shiloh 2007). The intertextuality between a source novel and the associated adapted film, however, is not as correlated as a translation of a novel to another language and culture. Moreover, the arbitrary boundaries between the two fields of Translation and Adaptation Studies have long been debated by different scholars. Bastin (1998: 5), for example, defines adaptation as "a set of translative operations which result in a text that is not accepted as a translation but is nevertheless recognized as representing a source text of about the same length". He views adaptation in connection with translation procedures and translation genres. The former refers to such definitions of adaptation as provided by Vinay and Darbelnet, where the nonexistence of the original element in the target culture demands some form of re-creation. The latter form, translation genres or "genre switching", revolves around the issue of recreation and modifications in the discourse of the original text, which is required by "the sociolinguistic needs of a different readership" (Bastin 1998: 6). Hence, what is entailed is the significance of 'relevance' than 'accuracy' in adaptation. In other words, while "[T]ranslation […] stays basically at the level of meaning, adaptation seeks to transmit the purpose of the original text, and exegesis attempts to spell out the intentions of the author" (Bastin 1998: 8). Similarly, as mentioned by Shuttleworth and Cowie (2014), the term adaptation implies a considerable change in the outcome text. Rado (1979: 192) also maintains that it is a misnomer to call adaptation a translation as it is more a type of pseudo-translation.
Nevertheless, as mentioned, there is always an extent of relationship and link between the novel and the adapted film. This is remarkably significant when analysing the translation of an already translated text back into the original language. While the connection between the adapted text to the original one can vary to different extents, there is always a relationship between the adapted and the adoptee, as mentioned. This is significantly important when considering well-known dialogues or scenes, which can result in the evaluation of the translation by some audience, not based on the intermediate language (the Persian source soundtrack in this case) but based on the original protext (the original English quote in the novel). Hence, in the present paper, adopting an intertextual approach, I intend to examine the official English subtitling of one of the effective quotes in Ernest Hemingway's To Have and Have Not, i.e., "I don't know who made the laws; But I know there ain't no law that you got to go hungry" in the adapted Iranian film Nakhoda Khorshid directed by Naser Taghva'i. In other words, this paper attempts to examine the extent to which the translator has considered the original English novel in his translation and the extent deviations from the original text can cause dissatisfaction with the translation by the audience.

Methodology
To better understand the situation and the condition in which the quote is said, the two texts, i.e., the novel and the adapted films, are compared and analysed. Subsequently, in light of the model of intertextuality presented by Farahzad (2009), the relationship between the English subtitle of the quote and the novel was investigated to establish the intertextual relationship between the two. Finally, the reformulated Gricean maxims for the translation set forth by Sanatifar and Kenevisi (2017) are applied to evaluate the translation of the quote based on the idea of faithfulness.

Richard Krevolin's (2003) method of analysing intertextuality
In order to better understand the way the novel is adapted into the films as well as to show the points of intertextuality between the two works, a comparison of the novel To Have and Have Not and the adaptation film Nakhoda Khorshid is presented first. This has been carried out on the basis of Richard Krevolin's (2003) method of analysing intertextuality between a literary text and its adaptation. According to Krevolin (2003), in order to analyse intertextuality between a novel and an adapted film, the two texts need to be compared in terms of their protagonist or the main characters, the main characters' needs, i.e. the dramatic problem of the character, the antagonist, the way the heroes achieve their goals in an amusing way, what is stated through the ending of the story, the way the story is narrated, and the way the protagonist and the dependant characters are changed throughout the story.

Farahzad's (2009) Model of Intertextuality
After an analysis of the intertextuality of the original novel and the adapted film based on Krevolin's (2003) method, the translation of the quote is discussed in more detail from an intertextual relationship. In translating a protext into a metatext, first, the linguistic elements of the source text are decoded at the linguistic level. Later, the decoded elements are encoded in the language of the target text. However, from an intertextuality perspective, a protext needs to be considered as an intertext in a particular sociocultural context which has intertextual correlations with other intertexts. Similarly, the metatext, as the translation of the protext, is an intertext which is required to be considered in the recreation of the protext in another socio-cultural context of the target language, which per se has intertextual correlations with other intertexts in the target setting. Farahzad (2009) demonstrates the relationship between the protext and the metatext, not as an equivalent relation, but from an intertextual standpoint: The protext: (1) overtly and covertly repeats and transforms other texts preceding it in its own language, in terms of content and form; (2) is not the source of anything, including the metatext; it does trigger its production but is not its origin; and (3) does not have an original or fixed meaning; its meaning shapes as a result of what Lodge (1990: 86) calls 'the dialogic process between speaking subjects, between texts and readers, between texts themselves'. This process contributes to its multivocity and makes the meaning of the protext potentially plural.
Second, the metatext: (1) covertly repeats and transforms the protext in terms of content and form; (2) is not a reproduction of any other text, including the protext; (3) reflects only one of the possible meanings (interpretations) of the protext; and (4) can never be equivalent to the protext, because it unfolds in a different socio-historical and intertextual context (Farahzad 2009: 127).

Translating the Translated: An Intertextual Approach in Subtitling Ernest Hemingway's Adaptation of To Have and Have Not to Nakhoda Khorshid
Page | 58

Sanatifar and Kenevisi's (2017) Reformulated Model of Gricean Maxims
The other model, which is applied to better evaluate the fidelity of the original quote and English subtitle, is the model proposed by Sanatifar and Kenevisi (2017). Although they did not intend to reject the fundamental applicability of the Gricean maxims in translation, in order to be more sensitive to the needs of translation, Sanatifar and Kenevisi (2017) attempted to reformulate them within a faithfulness framework. Therefore, by drawing on the idea of faithfulness from the principle of relevance and adjusting it for translational purposes, a sub-maxim (the italicized maxim) was subsumed under each of the four maxims. Hence, the model of Gricean maxims is reformulated as follows (Sanatifar and Kenevisi, 2017): (1) Quantity: Give the right amount of information: a: Make your contribution as informative as is required.
b: Do not make your contribution more informative than is required.
c: Be faithful to the amount of information as presented in the source text.
(2) Quality: Try to make your contribution one that is true:  Therefore, based on the idea of faithfulness and by observing the cooperative sub-maxim of faithfulness, a translator may maximally resemble the TT to the ST. Any violation of the source language and, accordingly, not projecting sufficient and relevant contextual information, the translator may divert from faithfulness and resemblance. depicted as a daring one-handed captain of a small wooden ship who lives in the small port of Kang on the coast of the Persian Gulf in the south of Iran during the 1960s. He is depicted on-handed from the beginning of the film and has lost his hand to the security forces of some Arabian countries of the Persian Gulf during smuggling cigarettes.

B. The dramatic problem of the protagonists
The main characters' need, i.e. the dramatic problem of the character in Ernest Hemingway's To Have and Have Not, is the fear of destitution and poverty. Harry Morgan is essentially a good man who struggles to sustain and provide food for his wife and three children. In one part, which is the focus of the current study, Harry Morgan says: "I don't know who made the laws, But I know there ain't no law that you got to go hungry".
Compatibly, Nakhoda Khorshid also worries about the same fears and lives with his wife and three daughters. In a scene from the film, the Captain is shown to be talking to his wife, explaining has no way but to accept the offer to smuggle the criminals to an Arabian country. He repeats the same dialogue in Bandari (South of Iran) accent:

C. The antagonists
Different factors can be seen as antagonists or the persons or the things that prevent Harry Morgan from attaining his want and needs. One antagonist is Johnson, a wealthy man who stiffs Harry on the fee he owes him for charting his boat and leaves the city of Key West and causing Morgan to be destitute. The other factors are the coast guard officers who shot him in hand, causing the loss of his limb, and customs officers who confiscate Harry's boat as they find out that he smuggles alcoholic drinks with his boat.
In Naser Taghva'i's Captain Khorshid, approximately comparable antagonists are shown to act against the Captain. One factor is the Coast Guard officers of an Arabian country to which Nakhoda transports goods and who shot him in the arm as they had found him smuggling illegal goods. Another antagonist is Khaje Majed, the local crime baron who trades pearls in the small port and who informs the customs officers about Nakhoda Khorshid's smuggling of cigarettes. The customs officers are shown to confiscate Nakhoda's boat and act against his goal. In both the novel and the film, it can generally be argued that the fear of poverty prohibits the heroes of the stories from achieving and attaining their goals.

D. How is the story going to be narrated?
The novel is narrated from different perspectives throughout the story. The story is divided into the three chapters of spring, autumn, and winter. The narration perspectives are from Harry Morgan's and the omniscient's perspectives in the spring and autumn, respectively. The chapter of Winter is per se narrated from three perspectives: Albert's perspective at the beginning of the chapter, Harry Morgan's perspective in the second chapter of Winter, omniscient's perspective from the third chapter till the end of the sixteenth chapter, and Mary's perspective in the final chapter of the novel.
On the other hand, in the adapted film, the narration of the story has remained from the omniscient's perspective, who are the viewers. This is to say that the camera acts as the omniscient's or the viewers' eye and perspective, and the viewers become able to observe the characters, their actions, and different situations that occurred in the story of the film. Therefore, what can be argued about the way Nakhoda Khorshid is adapted is that the film has Iranized the English masterpieces. As mentioned by Chan (2012: 415), adaptation is comparable to domesticated translation through which the receptor community's "values, conventions, and norms are superimposed on the source text, cultural differences are erased, and the foreign become palatable for the local audience" and accordingly, a reincarnated version of the original text is generated which is particularly what is advocated in the current era of globalization and cultural exchange. In other words, with regards to intertextuality, the film, as the metatext of the novel, is produced in an Iranian socio-cultural context which is different from the American socio-cultural context. Hence, such elements as the time, place, names of the characters, etc., are changed to fit the Iranian society's values, conventions, and norms as the receptor community. Nevertheless, in the view of the audience, it still bears a close relationship to the original work.
In the following section, an analysis of the extent to which the official English subtitling of the quote in the film has been successful in bearing and demonstrating its relationship to the source novel's quote is discussed in detail.

Analysis of the Translation
Based on Farahzad's (2009) model of intertextuality, the novel To Have and Have Not, as the protext here, is to be also considered as an intertext formed in a source socio-cultural context. When the novel is adapted to Nakhoda Khorshid (the metatext), the resultant intertext (Nakhoda Khorshid) bears relationships to both To Have and Have Not (the protext) and other intertexts in the target socio-cultural context. In other words, on the one hand, the novel To Have and Have Not is both overtly and covertly a repetition and transformation of other texts preceding it. At the same time, compared to the adapted film Nakhoda Khorshid as the metatext, the novel is not regarded as the only source text. This is to say that the novel only trigger and originates the film, as it would have plural meanings due to the intertextuality and the setting of the novel. Moreover, Nakhoda Khorshid is one

Translating the Translated: An Intertextual Approach in Subtitling Ernest Hemingway's Adaptation of To Have and Have Not to Nakhoda Khorshid
Page | 60 interpretation of the To Have and Have Not which covertly repeats and transforms the novel; it is not a reproduction of the novel and should not be regarded as equivalent to it since it is produced in a different socio-historical and intertextual context.
With regard to the case of the present study, this idea can also be extended to the subtitle of the well-known quote in the film. In other words, when subtitling the film into English, the Persian soundtrack is considered the protext and the English subtitling the metatext. Therefore, the above-mentioned intertextual relationship can be discussed for the English subtitle of the source soundtrack, but in the reverse direction. This is to say that, this time, the soundtrack of the adapted Persian-language film (Persian) is considered as the protext. This protext per se has been a reproduction of another protext (English as the language of the novel). The English subtitling, then, is the metatext which is produced for the target audience of the film. This is where the previously protext (the English original quote in the novel) and what is now the metatext (the English subtitle of the Persian soundtrack) meet one another in the same language. This is to say that the English subtitling of the Persian soundtrack can be regarded as so-called a reunion of the metatext back to the protext.
So, based on the model of intertextuality, the film should not be regarded as the only source text for subtitling the film into English. That is, the Persian soundtrack of the film only triggers and originates the English subtitle. To put it more precisely, the English translation should be regarded as only one interpretation of the Persian soundtrack, and it is not to be considered as the only source text by the subtitler, i.e. the source text could mainly be the English novel also. With regards to our case, being furious about the situation, the conversation between Harry Morgan and his wife goes as follows: Captain Morgan: "I don't know who made the laws; But I know there ain't no law that you got to go hungry." In Naser Taghva'i's Nakhoda Khorshid, similarly being wrathful to the unfair condition, this sentence is repeated and said by Captain Khorshid to his wife:
As mentioned, the film has been screened in a number of international film festivals and has been awarded different prizes. The official English subtitle of the above quote is as follows: Official English Subtitle: I don't know who wrote the law…But I know there is no place in the world who'd want you to be hungry To evaluate the sources of deviation, we first use Sanatifar and Kenevisi's (2007) model. Based on the model, the subtitler is expected to give the right amount of information and also to be faithful to the amount of information as presented in the source soundtrack. Accordingly, the subtitler is required not to be more informative than what is required. Comparing the original quote from the novel with the English subtitle, the subtitler has added, "There is no place in the world", which is not present in the English quote of the novel. In other words, it can be argued that the English subtitle seems to be not as informative and faithful as required. Similarly, the subtitler has also said what is unfaithful to the truth of the source sound track as well as the original source quote violates the quality. This is to say that the replacement of the word 'law' with 'place' has negatively impacted the quality of the subtitle. And as a vulnerable translation, the subtitle can be subjected to the comparison, evaluation and criticism of the non-Iranian audience. Furthermore, the subtitler needs to be faithful to the source text in relevant aspects. Relevance needs to be redefined in our case. So, we can argue the relevance to be the relationship not between the English subtitle and the Persian soundtrack of the film but between the former and the original English quote. The addition of "there is no place in the world" instead of just translating in such a way as "there is no law" has violated faithfulness to the source text. Moreover, the sentence "who made the laws" in the novel has been changed into "who wrote the law", which is in disagreement with the style and manner of the information in the novel. Therefore, the English subtitle of the quote seems to be far from what is expected by the English audience, who, knowing the film as an adaptation of the novel To Have and Have Not, would expect an intralingual translation of the original quote in a more faithful way.
In line with this, as can be seen in the original English quote and the Persian soundtrack, the place and importance of 'law' is emphasized. The speaker expresses the belief that there may be laws and regulations in place that govern society, but there is no law that should allow individuals to go hungry. Therefore, it can be interpreted as a commentary on the inequalities and injustices present in society, particularly in relation to wealth and poverty, with the importance of law emphasized. The quote, both in the original English and the Persian soundtrack, also implies that individuals have a responsibility to take action to address issues like hunger and poverty, even if there are no specific laws mandating it, which aligns with Hemingway's themes of individual responsibility and agency. However, looking at the subtitle, the word 'law' is replaced by 'place,' which definitely deemphasizes the role of law in the subtitle. As it is discussed by Díaz Cintas (2003: [43][44], subtitling can be considered a type of "vulnerable translation." This is due to the fact that not only is the medium specially and temporally restricted, but the co-existence of subtitles and original soundtrack can also cause a comparison between the ST and TT by the audience, whose judgement can lead to the criticism of the translation from a more or less bilingual audience. However, if we assume that most of the non-Iranian audiences of the Iranian film in the international film festivals were not bilinguals, they were not expected to be able to compare the original Persian sound track with the English translation. Nevertheless, due to the intertextuality of the original English novel, the subtitle can still be considered to be vulnerable to those who are familiar with the original English quote, of To have and Have not. Therefore, the deviations from the original English quote in the English subtitle of the Persian soundtrack can lead to criticism of the translation from a more or less bilingual audience, i.e. audience with the knowledge of both the original quote and the subtitle. Furthermore, contrary to real situations in which the speaker adapts his conversation to the addressees and the auditors, the director of a film uses the characters to address the audience to who, consequently, the speaker needs to adapt his/her discourse and dialogue. Therefore, it can be said that the real addressee of the character in the film shall not be considered the real receiver, but "It is an initiative taken by the primary communicators, who form a mental construct of the social cultural groups to whom they address themselves. As a result, the style of the film screenplay would be influenced to a greater degree by the auditors than by the addresses in the fictional dialogue" (Bartrina 2004: 161). Bartina (2004) continues that the "role of the translator involves maintaining the coherence of the communication between the addressees on the screen, while at the same time seeking to transmit the coherence of the discourse that the communicator directs towards the auditors en masse" (p. 161). As mentioned, in adaptation, the literature can also be re-composed into another setting. This is what happened in the film adaptation of Ernest Hemingway's To Have and Have Not by the Iranian director Naser Taghva'i. However, when an audience watches the adapted film, s/he would expect to see certain themes to be recreated in a new context. Hence, while watching the film, s/he would simultaneously compare the adaptation to the novel. This is to say that, although Naser Taghva'i's Nakhoda Khorshid is recreated in a different time, place, culture, etc., from the original novel, specific themes from the novel are played out and, therefore, the viewers would compare it to the novel. This is exactly what causes dissatisfaction among my friends, and probably the foreign audience of the films in the international film festivals which were not familiar with the Persian language, with regards to the English subtitle of the adapted movie. This is to say that, being familiar with the original English quote, the audience compared and contrasted the English subtitle with the original subtitle. Accordingly, any deviations from the original English quote may lead to the dissatisfaction of the audience with the subtitle and, accordingly, the film, which was also discussed as a vulnerable nature of subtitling.
Therefore, with regard to the audience's perception, I also discussed the issue with some of the viewers. My particular focus was on the viewers' perception and evaluation of the English subtitle of the Persian quote and its relationship to the original English quote. Comparing the adapted film and the cultural accommodations with the English novel, one subject expressed his eagerness to learn about Iranian culture through watching the adapted movie: Iran has a very distinct culture from my country. It is interesting to learn about the people and cultural diversity. As for me, the easiest way to learn Iranian culture is by watching Iranian movies. But, I was comparing the Iranian movie with the English novel and the English adapted film. It is interesting. I had read the quote on some cards. Of course, I prefer a more faithful translation in the subtitle.
Another respondent also expressed her dissatisfaction with the English subtitle as the significance of the quote could be lost by the less accurate translation: So far, the subtitles have been good enough to give the meaning. But I guess the significance of the quote is missing out to some extent.
Another viewer expressed that: I think that the originality of the quote must be known and respected. The thing is that it is not very difficult for me and others maybe to understand it, but I think that the subtitles must be done in a way that, if they are universally known, this aspect is retained, especially when it is reflected in the Persian soundtrack.
So, what is discussed and stated by my friends also corroborates the idea that translation is in the service of the readers and that the extent to which translation is considered to be successful is based on the audiences' evaluation and acceptance of the translation, to a great extent. Therefore, as mentioned earlier, the audience's responses and expectations are the yardstick for validating a translation, as they are not

Conclusion
The aim of the present paper was to assess the English official subtitle of one of the famous quotes of the film Nakhoda Khorshid based on its intertextual relationship with the original literary text. Moreover, we intend to investigate the extent to which this relationship is evaluated by the audiences' expectations. Accordingly, for the purpose of examining intertextuality and the extent of equivalence to the source text, Richard Krevolin's (2003) model was selectively employed first. Subsequently, Farahzad's (2009) model of intertextuality was also applied to establish the relationship between the protexts and the metatexts. Next, utilizing Sanatifar and Kenevisi's (2017) reformulated model of Grice, the extent to which the English subtitle of the quote deviated from the original one in the novel was examined. Accordingly, it is argued that considering quantity and manner, the English official translation of the film deviated from the original quote of the novel. Therefore, the subtitler can be discussed to be not faithful to the information presented in the original novel. The changes, consequently, can be argued to influence the perception and evaluation of the subtitle by the audience. This is particularly the case when a subtitler is dealing with a famous quote, where the viewers have the chance to compare it with the original text. This is to say that this intertextuality is argued to influence the perception and evaluation of the subtitle, as a vulnerable mode of translation, by the viewers. Hence, when translating a text, its intertextual relationship with other texts needs to be considered by translators as well, which can either directly or indirectly cater for the extent to which the subtitle meets the audience's expectations. While several other cinematic factors are influential, this may suggest one of the reasons for the audience's phrase 'I think the book was better' after watching an adapted film from literature. This, in turn, corroborates the fact that the audience and the viewers set the source novel as the point of comparison for evaluating the film, which, as mentioned, highlights the significance of intertextuality in translation.
However, the present study was limited in certain aspects. First, while a well-known quote was investigated, the study was limited to this quote only. Moreover, the subjects who were interviewed were mainly students of literature and were familiar with the original text. Also, only a few people were interviewed. Therefore, future studies are recommended to extend and corroborate the obtained results of the present research by investigating more adapted films. In order to get a better understanding of the expectations of the audience, more subjects from different backgrounds and knowledge of the original text can be interviewed.
Funding: This research received no external funding.