We identify a large positive effect for subtitled original version broadcasts

I grew up as an English speaker in Sweden in the early 1970s. TV broadcast was very limited. Two state-owned channels basically broadcasting from late afternoon to late evening only, perhaps longer on the weekend.

Their budget was extremely constrained and therefore we were treated to the bonanza of silent movies as well as black & white movies through the 1930s, East German and Polish cartoons, documentaries from third world countries and other near zero cost treats from places needing hard currency.

As a consequence of all this foreign content, many shows were dubbed or subtitled. It was a useful aid to me to watch a Laurel & Hardy talking picture subtitled from English into Swedish. It allowed me to hone my rudimentary Swedish in a way that was not really possible were the movie simply dubbed in English.

But there are arguments from both sides in terms of which is better for a foreign language learner.

Subtitling>Dubbing by Alex Tabarrok. He posts a summary of the findings of research on the relative advantage or subtitling versus dubbing.

We study the influence of television translation techniques on the worldwide distribution of English-speaking skills. We identify a large positive effect for subtitled original version broadcasts, as opposed to dubbed television, on English proficiency scores. We analyze the historical circumstances under which countries opted for one of the translation modes and use it to account for the possible endogeneity of the subtitling indicator. We disaggregate the results by type of skills and find that television works especially well for listening comprehension. Our paper suggests that governments could promote subtitling as a means to improve foreign language proficiency.