“Dear Emma…”. Genre Overlapping and Register Variation in the English and Italian Version of Sergio Marchionne’s Letter to Confindustria

Abstract The aim of this paper is to examine whether genre overlapping and register variation have implications in terms of translation outcomes. To this end, the English and the Italian version of the letter sent by Sergio Marchionne to the President of Confindustria – Italy’s most important employers’ organisation – will be analysed. The decision to investigate Marchionne’s statement is based on the fact that this is a letter disseminated as a press release, which also contains highly-technical terminology pertaining to the discourse of Employment Relations (ER). It is stressed that a number of issues arise when deciding which genre and register to use when translating specialised texts. It is argued that genre overlapping and register variation affect the texts in English and Italian in important respects, leading to different perceptions on the part of the target audience.


Overview
On 30 September 2011, Sergio Marchionnewho at the time was the CEO of FIAT and Chairman of FIAT Industrial Spaaddressed a letter to Emma Marcegaglia, the then President of Confindustria, announcing the decision to leave Italy's largest employers' organisation. FIAT's withdrawal was a historic decision and attracted a lot of attention in the media, particularly considering that FIAT had been a long-standing member of Confindustria. The letter followed the conclusion of the agreement between Confindustria and a number of trade unions on 21 September 2011, which marked a turning point in employment relations (ER) in Italyand above all the approval by Parliament of a specific provision (Article 8) establishing among other things that the June agreement would apply retroactively. Marchionne motivated FIAT's decision with the fact that the new terms placed limitations on Italian companies operating in the international markets, particularly in terms of employment relations and flexible working arrangements. The letter to Confindustria hit the headlines in the national and international press, as it was disseminated in the form of a press release, in both English and Italian.
These two versions of the text will be examined in this paper, which aims to investigate the linguistic aspects of the English and the Italian document issued by FIAT. Specifically, the paper explores the extent to which genre overlapping and register variation play a role in translation. To this end, a critical analysis will be provided of the terms used in the two versions, also focusing on ER terminology, which characterises many passages of the letters. As this is a specialised domain (Bromwich and Manzella 2018), ER features linguistic peculiarities that need to be taken into account when rendering terms denoting distinctive practices and institutions. This assumption is based on the fact that discourse is closely linked to the sociocultural context in which it is constructed. Consequently, its interpretation relies to a large extent on the contextual constraints of the event in which it is expressed or received, cultural elements representing an essential part of these contextual constraints as they influence both the discursive organisation and the choice of realisation (Gotti 2007). These peculiarities will be scrutinised at length, examining whether genre overlapping and register variation have an impact on the effectiveness of the translation, the degree of equivalence between the source text (ST) and the target text (TT), and the extent to which context-specific terms are likely to be understood by TT readers. The remainder of this paper is organised as follows. An analysis of the existing literature on this topic will be provided in section 2, followed by a close examination of the documents selected for analysis (section 3). Finally, section 4 will comment on the main findings, making suggestions for future research.

Literature Review
Previous linguistics research has considered CEO letters and Chairman statements from different perspectives. In some cases, metadiscourse has been the main focus of investigation (Garzone 2007, Gillaerts and Van de Velde 2011, Huang and Rose 2018, Hyland 1998. In this sense, it has been stressed that the CEO is now expected to set the tone, shape the corporate culture, and outline a vision for the future. This is because effective CEO communication has become essential to the management and financial performance of the corporation (Ngai and Singh 2014). The aim of the CEO letter may be said to project a positive image of the company and to raise the profile of the CEO. Thus company reporting is an important genre, especially when it is aimed at a public audience by a large corporation (Kong 2014). CEO communication has also been examined by means of text analysis (Karlsson and Rutgersson 2014, Loewenstein, Ocasio and Jones 2012, Murphy 2015. A particular focus has been placed on the vocabulary used by CEOs, with the result that more nuanced conceptualisations of the role of corporate terminology are emerging (Craig and Amernic 2014). The function of the CEO's message is to provide the investment community and the general public with information and to construct a positive relationship with them. Each of these functions may be more or less explicit and emphasised, but both are always present (Schnizter 2017).
In addition, the terminology used in the CEO letter is intended to reflect and reinforce core organisational values, to highlight shared experience, to indicate opportunities and point to challenges to be overcome, while promoting a common organisational identity and commitment (Ilie 2017). Other scholars have looked at CEO discourse as a way to generate legitimation, which is understood as an ideological space within which the institution can operate, enjoying sufficient social acceptance to freely pursue its activities (Breeze 2013). Persuasion is another aspect that has been analysed in CEO statements. In this sense, it has been argued that these messages carefully set out their assessment of situations and events. As a rule, they construct their arguments so rationally that it is difficult to challenge them (Amernic and Craig 2006). In other words, perceptions and ideologies are shaped by means of a language game (Clifton 2012).
Finally, multilingual CEO letters have been examined from a translation perspective (Neumann 2014). Specifically, textual conventions need to be adapted to meet cultural expectations concerning the degree of certainty with which an assertion is made (Kranich 2016). The problem of equivalence has also been discussed, in that the functions that the source language text fulfils for a ST audience can only be maintained if the translator makes adaptations to enable the text to work in the same or a comparable way for a TT reader (Kranich 2016). It should be noted that the considerable body of work produced in this domain mostly deals with CEO discourse in which the target group consists of shareholders or stakeholders (in particular, employees, suppliers and customers). Building on these previous contributions, this paper aims to take a step further, examining the linguistic aspects of a letter sent by a CEO to the president of an employers' organisation, i.e. Confindustria.

Discussion
This paper considers the English and Italian version of the letter sent by Marchionne Confindustria in September 2011. The two documentsreproduced in Appendix A and Bwill be examined through a contrastive analysis approach, which has been widely applied to translation in connection with different language pairs (Gast 2015;Ke 2018). Contrastive analysis has proved most useful in pointing out areas where direct translation of a term or a phrase fails to accurately convey in the target language the meaning intended in the source text (Hassan 2014). More recently, contrastive analysis has become more descriptive and theoretical, and it has taken language use into account, to compare frequencies and distributions, as well as structures (Aijmer and Lewis 2017). Contrastive analysis has been used in particular to study elements which are multifunctional and cases in which the meaning is not entirely clear. This is because the translated text may give rise to issues in terms of polysemy, multi-functionality, core meaning and the distinction between meaning and function (Aijmer and Altenberg 2013). The terminology examined was selected considering the following criteria. When investigating genre overlapping, the candidate terms were identified by looking at the Italian version of the text, manually extrapolating those pertaining to specialised communication industrial relations in our caseunderstood as expert-to-expert communication or communication in which at least the text producer has full expert status with regard to the topics covered (Schubert 2007). The terms chosen were then investigated to see how they were rendered in English. As for register variation, the two versions were contrasted, analysing those passages in which a clear difference emerged in relation to register use.
For the purposes of this study, it was assumed that the letter was originally drafted in Italian and then translated into English, taking account of the fact that both Marchionne (the sender) and Emma Marcegalia (the recipient) speak Italian as their first language, although Marchionne was in fact bilingual, having lived in Canada for many years before returning to Italy.

Genre Overlapping
The letter by Marchionne is characterised by a degree of genre overlapping. It contains elements of economic, ER, and political discourse, bringing to mind Bhatia's notion of interdiscursivity, which has been defined as the appropriation of contextual and text-external generic resources within and across professional genres and professional practices (Bhatia 2004(Bhatia , 2008(Bhatia , and 2010). An awareness of interdiscursivity is key to understanding the complexities and the objectives of professional communication and to providing the opportunity for shared meaning and mutual understanding across a diverse audience (Gill 2011). It should also be noted that the message was disseminated in the form of a press release, which is usually drafted to inform the general public. More generally, one should understand the importance of framing complex issues (Lakoff 2009) in a way that is not only accurate, but also accessible to a lay readership (French and Watt 2018). Finally, it bears highlighting that the document under examination is a letter intended for both the primary addressee (the Confindustria President) and the secondary addressee (the investment community and the general public). This aspect should also be considered, in that it might give rise to communication issues as different readers may receive different messages from the text, and even the same reader may interpret the meaning differently on a second or third reading (Bloor and Bloor 2007).
The hybrid nature of the texta letter disseminated in the form of a press releasemight affect translation. Furthermore, the text is intended for a diverse audience and features a blend of technical and non-technical terminology. Consequently, some issues emerge when translating this text into another language, because doubts arise as to how to deal with it. Marchionne's letter was produced in press release format, i.e. it was ultimately intended to reach the general public. While the corporate press releasewhich constitutes an important sub-genre within the overall press release genrehas not yet been clearly characterised (Crawford Camiciottoli 2013), it certainly aims to meet the criteria of explanatory force and clarity (Malavasi 2011). In this sense, one might question the assumption that some concepts pertaining to specialised discourse (ER in our case) are shared knowledge, so they do not need expanding in the target language.
One example of this is 'Confindustria', which as noted above is the name of the largest employers' organisation in Italy. The wordwhich appears several times throughout the textis always left in Italian in the English version of the document, without providing any explanation (an example of this is to be found in line 5 of the English version). While most Italian readersincluding of course the primary addresseeare familiar with this concept, doubts arise as to whether international readersto which the English version is directedare aware of the Italian system of representation. Using words from the ST in the TT language runs counter to the objective of press statements, which should be developed in a manner engaging the media with a newsworthy subject presented in a clear and compelling manner (Morrow, Hirano and Christensen 2008).
The same observation may be made in relation to another concept pertaining to ER terminology, i.e. accordo interconfederale, which is used extensively throughout the text. An accordo interconfederale can be defined as a collective agreement concluded by the employee and employer organisations, applicable to an entire sector of the economy (industry, commerce, agriculture) (EUROFOUND 2003). Unlike 'Confindustria', which was not translated, accordo interconfederale was rendered with the English 'interconfederate agreement' (line 4 of the English version). In other words, a literal translation was used. Even though in one case it was specified that the agreement was signed by 'national trade unions' (line 4 of the English version) the advisability of leaving this word in Italian in the TT might be questioned, because it frustrates the attempt of press releases to adopt language which is readily understood by a non-specialised audience. This is true especially in consideration of the fact that literal translations can sometimes result in awkward expressions that puzzle readers from both cultures (Liu, Volcic and Gallois 2015). Further explanation would have been necessary to make sure this concept was readily understood. Alternatively, the recourse to different terminology in the TT might have served the purpose of ensuring clarity. A different rendering of accordo interconfederale could have been 'national multiindustry agreement' which, although less literal, seems to better convey the meaning of this concept in the TT. In passing, it could also be noted that in addition to accordo, another term was used in the Italian version of the letter to refer to this concept, intesa. Both accordo and intesa (line 4 and line 6 of the Italian version, respectively) were translated into English as 'agreement' (lines 4 and 7 of the English version). While this terminology is perfectly acceptable, a different word could have helped international readers to recognise the distinction between the types of agreements concluded. In this sense, it is worth recalling that "consistency of register, together with what has been referred to as internal cohesion, is what makes a text hang together, function as a unit in its environment" (Hatim and Munday 2004: 191).
Unlike the lexical items examined so far, some concepts were expanded in the English version, in order to make them understandable to an international audience consisting of both specialists and laypersons. In other words, a different approach was adopted, which affected the translation outcome. For example, flessibilità (flexibility) in the Italian letter became 'labour flexibility' in the English version (line 6). The aim in this case is to specify that the changes made to Article 8 do not affect all types of flexibility, a concept so diluted that can mean everything and nothing (Stråth 2000). Rather, Marchionne referred to labour or workforce flexibility, which Fairclough has characterised as pertaining to neo-liberal discourse (Fairclough 2010) and which was based on concepts such as 'lean production', 'slimming down', 'the flexible company', and 'outsourcing' (Magnusson and Stråth 2016).
Consequently, while in the Italian version, reference is made to the general concept of 'flexibility', the concept is expressed in greater detail in the English version, as the flexibility mentioned here is the one concerning the workforce. A different approach is therefore used in terms of domain-specific concepts.

Register Variation
In addition to genre overlapping, the Italian and the English versions of the letter examined in this paper are characterised by variation in terms of register. In other words, sometimes there is a minimal correspondence between the style used in the ST and that adopted in the TT. Along with language contrast and translation decisions, register differences can give rise to issues with respect to variation between originals and translations (Neumann 2014). Halliday defines register as a configuration of meanings that are typically associated with a particular situational configuration of field, mode and tenor (Halliday 1985). However, register also has a bearing on genre, in that different genres are observed to have different degree of formality (Fang, Cao 2015). In some cases, the register used in the TT features higher levels of formality than the one chosen for the ST. The following passage from the Italian version of Marchionne's letter concerning workers' rights clearly illustrates this point: i rapporti con i nostri dipendenti e con le Organizzazioni sindacali saranno gestiti senza toccare alcun diritto dei lavoratori (line 30 and 31 of the Italian version. Our translation: Relations with our employees and with the trade unions will be handled without affecting any of the workers' rights). Toccare (line 30)literally 'to touch'was used in a figurative sense to mean 'to affect'. The English translation reads as follows: "Relations with our employees and with the trade unions will be conducted in a manner that does not infringe on any rights of workers". In the TT, 'to infringe on' was used to render the Italian toccare (line 31 of the English version). In considering three levels of formality, viz. formal, neutral and informal (Wallwork 2016), toccare can be seen as having a neutral degree of formality. On the contrary, 'to infringe on' is an expression mostly employed in formal communication (Cambridge Dictionary 2020).
Another example of register variation between the Italian and the English version of the letter is to be found at the beginning of the second paragraph, when Marchionne pointed out that La Fiat fin dal primo momento ha dichiarato a Governo, Confindustria e Organizzazioni sindacali il pieno apprezzamento per i due provvedimenti (line 8 of the Italian version). Our translation: 'From the very beginning, FIAT expressed its full appreciation to the government, Confindustria and trade unions for the two provisions'.
Significantly, pieno apprezzamento was translated into English as 'unreserved appreciation' (line 8 of the English version), where 'unreserved' is a formal adjective meaning 'without any doubts or feeling uncertain; total' (Cambridge Dictionary 2020). 'Unreserved' is characterised by a higher level of formality than 'full', which in this context could be seen as the closest equivalent of the Italian pieno.
The same holds true for utilizzare (line 28, lit. 'to use', 'to utilize', or 'to make use of') which appears in the following sentence of the Italian version: Da parte nostra, utilizzeremo la libertà di azione applicando in modo rigoroso le nuove disposizioni legislative (Our translation: 'On our side, we will make use of our freedom of action to rigorously implement the new provisions). In the English version of the letter to Confindustria, this sentence reads as follows: 'On our side, we will exercise our freedom to rigorously apply the new legislative provisions' where 'exercise' (line 29) is more formal than 'use' or 'utilize', which would have been closer to the ST meaning.
These lexical items appear to imply that the English version adopts more formal terminology than the Italian one. Yet this is not always the case, because in some cases the terms used in the ST are characterised by a higher degree of formality than the terms in the TT. Lines 17 and 18 of the Italian version of the letter by Marchionne read as follows: un acceso dibattito che […] ha fortemente ridimensionato le aspettative sull'efficacia dell'Articolo 8 (Our translation: a lively debate which […] has played down expectations about the efficacy of Article 8). There exist a number of options to render efficacia in English, e.g. effectiveness, efficacy, validity, strength, with the first two words frequently used as synonyms (Zoppei 2017). The English version of the text under examination here makes use of 'effectiveness' (line 17) to translate efficacia, which is less formal than 'efficacy' (Cambridge Dictionary 2020) and might also take on a different meaning. Specifically, 'efficacy' is the ability to get things done and meet targets. The focus of efficiency is on the achievement of the result, not on the resources spent to achieve the desired result.
'Effectiveness' in this context means doing the right things, setting the right targets to achieve an overall goal and including the elements in the process. As a result, what is effective is not necessarily efficacious (Addink 2019).

Conclusion
This paper has examined the English and the Italian version of the letter by Sergio Marchionne, the then FIAT CEO and Chairman of FIAT Industrial Spa, to Emma Marcegaglia, who at the time was the President of Confindustria, Italy's largest employers' organisation.
The message is of a hybrid nature, in that it features the characteristics of both a letter and a press release, while containing specialised terminology pertaining to ER discourse. This combination of different genres -which Bhatia has termed 'interdiscursivity'resulted in different and sometimes opposing translation strategies. In some cases, the text was treated as if it were a letteri.e. peer-to-peer communicationbetween two professionals operating in the same field. For this reason, certain domain-specific items were taken for granted, so they were either left untranslated (e.g. 'Confindustria') or rendered literally (i.e. accordo interconfederale). In other cases, the need to ensure clarity prevailed, as is usually the case with press releases. Consequently, attempts were made in the English version of the message to break down certain notions that the non-specialist reader could find difficult to appreciate. The attempt to simplify specialised concepts for a wider readership has been defined as 'popularisation', i.e. "making specialised knowledge accessible to non-specialised readers for information purposes" (Gotti 2014: 14). In the letter examined in this paper, the popularisation process seems to take place in the translation from one language to another, in the sense that some terms which are specific to ER discourse in the source language are made more accessible in the target one. However, the use of different translation strategies tends to make the TT more difficult and ambiguous, at times affecting clarity.
In addition to genre overlapping, register variation might also alter the effectiveness of communication. Striking the right note in terms of the tenor of discourse in the translation can be difficult, because it depends on whether the translator perceives a certain level of formality as 'right' from the perspective of the source culture and the target culture (Baker 2011). The lexical items examined ('effectiveness', 'to infringe on') point to a divergence between the ST and the TT in terms of register. While there is little change in meaning, an upward or a downward register shift might affect reader perception. For instance, the translation of a general, stylistically neutral word with a more specific, value-laden term may contribute to a change in the narrative standpoint, by bringing the textual world closer to the reader (Shuttleworth and Cowie 2014). Furthermore, register variation might be interpreted as an attempt to increase or decrease the relevance of the issue being discussed (Neumann 2014) i.e. workers' rights and the efficacy of the law in the text examined here. Consequently, readers of the English text, which is characterised by more formal terminology, might treat the issues discussed in the letter more seriously than their Italian counterparts. It is a matter of speculation whether genre overlapping and register variation were the result of a deliberate choice. Yet they affect the texts drafted in English and Italian in important respects, in that they might be perceived differently by the target audience, be they professionals or non-specialist readers. Future research might consider examining other press releases by CEOs published in two different languages over a specific timeframe, to see if they too are characterised by genre overlapping and register variation, evaluating the possible impact of these linguistic phenomena on the effectiveness of translation.