More haste less speededited versus verbatim respoken subtitles

  1. Romero Fresco, Pablo
Revista:
VIAL, Vigo international journal of applied linguistics

ISSN: 1697-0381

Ano de publicación: 2009

Número: 6

Páxinas: 109-133

Tipo: Artigo

DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR

Outras publicacións en: VIAL, Vigo international journal of applied linguistics

Resumo

The choice between edited and verbatim subtitles has always been a controversial issue in subtitling for the deaf and hard-of-hearing (SDH). Whereas scholars often support editing, deaf associations tend to demand verbatim subtitles as the only way to have full access to audiovisual programmes. Now that European legislation is making SDH no longer a privilege but a right for all viewers, this demand for verbatim subtitles has also been extended to live programmes. Yet, live subtitles, nowadays mostly produced by speech recognition (respeaking), present a different situation and require a different analysis. The aim of this article is to provide a description of respoken subtitles, especially with regard to their speed. First of all, an overview is given of the different parties involved in the issue of subtitling speed, followed by a review of the research carried out so far and of the guidelines that have been implemented as a result, with particular focus on the UK. Then, an analysis is presented of ten respoken programmes broadcast by the BBC, providing data regarding the speed of the original soundtrack, the speed of respoken subtitles, the amount of editing carried out and the information lost in this process. The results obtained in this analysis show that verbatim respoken subtitles, at least in the programmes analysed, are rarely produced. It is argued that editing, as currently carried out by respeakers, causes a minimal loss of information, especially as compared to the potential loss of information for viewers reading respoken subtitles at the current speeds.

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Arnáiz Uzquiza, V. 2008. “Tecnología eye-tracking contra la arbitrariedad en los estudios de recepción”. Paper presented at II Congreso AMADIS 08 on 30 June 2008 at Auditorio de la ONCE in Barcelona. Available on http://www.cesya.es/es-taticas/amadis08/ponencias/presentaciones/Sesion3/4.pdf (accessed 15-10-2008)
  • Arumí Ribas, M. and P. Romero-Fresco. 2008. “A Practical Proposal for the Training of Respeakers”. The Journal of Specialised Translation 10:106-127.
  • Carver, R. P. 1974. “Improving reading comprehension: Measuring readabil-ity”. American Institute for Research, Final Report, R742.
  • ______. 1976. “Word length, prose difficulty, and reading rates”. Journal of Reading Behavior 8: 193-203.
  • Chafe, L. W. 1980. “The Deployment of Consciousness in the Production of a Narrative”. In L. W. Chafe (ed.) 1980 The Pear Stories: Cognitive, Cultural and Lin-guistic Aspects of Narrative Production. Norwood, N. J.: Ablex Publishing Corp, 9-50.
  • ______. 1985. “Linguistic differences produced by differences between speak-ing and writing”. In D. Olson, N. Torrance and A. Hildyard (eds.) 1985 Literacy, language, and learning: The Nature and consequences of reading and writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 105-123.
  • Conrad, R. 1977. “The reading ability of deaf school-leavers”. British Journal of Education Psychology 47:138-148.
  • De Linde, Z. and N. Kay. 1999. The Semiotics of Subtitling. Manchester:St. Jerome.
  • Díaz-Cintas, J. 2003. Teoría y práctica de la subtitulación: inglés/español. Barce-lona: Ariel.
  • ______. 2008. “Teaching and learning to subtitle in an academic environ-ment”. In J. Díaz Cintas (ed.) The Didactics of Audiovisual Translation. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 89-103.
  • D’Ydewalle, G., J. V. Rensbergen and J. Pollet. 1987. “Reading a message when the same message is available auditorily in another language: The case of subti-tling”. In J. K. O’Reagan and A. Lévy-Schoen (eds.) 1987 Eye Movements: From Physi-ology to Cognition. Amsterdam / New York: Elsevier Science Publishers, 313-321.
  • D’Ydewalle, G. L. Warlop and J. V. Rensbergen. 1989. “Differences between Young and Older Adults in the Division of Attention over Different Sources of TV Information”. Medienpsychologie 1: 42-57.
  • D’Ydewalle, G., C. Praet, K. Verfaillie and J. Van Rensbergen. 1991. “Watch-ing Subtitled Television: Automatic Reading Behaviour”. Communication Research18(5): 650-666.
  • D’Ydewalle, G. and W. De Bruycker. 2007. “Eye Movements of Children and Adults While Reading Television Subtitles”. European Psychologist 12(3): 196-205.
  • EBU. 2004. EBU Report on Access Services. I44-2004. European Broadcasting Union. Available on http://www.ebu.ch/CMSimages/en/tec_text_i44-2004_tcm6-14894.pdf (accessed 1-11-2008).
  • Eugeni, C. 2006. “Introduzione al rispeakeraggio televisivo”. Intralinea, Special Issue. Available on http://www.intralinea.it/specials/respeaking/eng_more.php?id=444_0_41_0_M (accessed 1-11-2008).
  • Eugeni, C. 2009. “Respeaking the BBC News. A Strategic Analysis of Respeak-ing on the BBC”. The Sign Language Translator and Interpreter (SLTI) 3 (1): 29-68.
  • ITC. 1999. ITCGuidance on Standards for Subtitling. London: Independent Television Commission.
  • Jensema, C. 1998. “Viewer reaction to different television captioning speeds”. American Annals of the Deaf 143(4): 318-324.
  • Jensema, C., S. E. Sharkawy, R. S. Danturthi, R. Burch and D. Hsu. 2000. “Eye Movement Patterns of Captioned Television Viewers”. American Annals of the Deaf 145(3): 275-285.
  • Kelly, J. and M. Steer. 1949. “Revised concept of rate”. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders 14: 222-226.
  • Lambourne, A. 2006. “Subtitle respeaking”. Intralinea, Special Issue. Available on http://www.intralinea.it/specials/respeaking/eng_more.php?id=447_0_41_0_M (accessed 1-11-2008).
  • Marsh, A. 2006. “Respeaking for the BBC”. Intralinea, Special Issue. Available on http://www.intralinea.it/specials/respeaking/eng_more.php?id=484_0_41_0_M (accessed 1-11-2008).
  • Neves. J. 2005. Audiovisual Translation: Subtitling for the Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing.Unpublished PhD Thesis. School of Arts, Roehampton University. Available at: http://roehampton.openrepository.com/roehampton/handle/10142/12580 (accessed on 1-11-2008)
  • .______. 2008. “10 fallacies about Subtitling for the d/Deaf and the hard of hearing”. The Journal of Specialised Translation 10: 128-143.
  • OFCOM. 2005. Subtitling – An Issue of Speed?. London: Office of Communica-tions.
  • ______. 2006. Television Access Services - Review of the Code and guidance. London: Office of Communications.
  • Perego, E. 2008. “What Would We Read Best?”. The Sign Language Translator and Interpreter 2(1): 35-63.
  • Rayner, K. and A. Pollatsek. 1989. The Psychology of Reading. Broadway (US): Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Remael, A. and B. van der Veer. 2006. “Real-time Subtitling in Flanders: Needs and Teaching”. Intralinea, Special Issue. Available on http://www.intralinea.it/specials/respeaking/eng_more.php?id=492_0_41_0_M(accessed 26-11-2008).
  • Romero-Fresco, P. 2009. “La subtitulación rehablada: palabras que no se lleva el viento”. In A. Pérez-Ugena and R. Vizcaíno-Laorga (eds.) 2009 ULISES: Hacia el desarrollo de tecnologías comunicativas para la igualdad de oportunidades. Madrid: Obser-vatorio de las Realidades Sociales y de la Comunicación, 49-73.
  • ______. Forthcoming. “Viewers’ comprehension of scrolling respoken sub-titles in the news”. In A. Matamala and J. Díaz Cintas (eds.) Media for All (working title). Manchester: St. Jerome.Samuels,
  • S. J. and P. R. Dahl. 1975. “Establishing appropriate purpose for reading and its effect of flexibility of reading rate”. Journal of Educational Psychology 67:38-43.
  • Sancho-Aldridge, J. and IFF Research Ltd. 1996. Good News for Deaf People: Subtitling of National News Programmes. London: Independent Television Commission.
  • Santiago Araújo, V. 2004. “Closed subtitling in Brazil”. In P. Orero (ed) 2004 Topics in Audiovisual Translation. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 199-212.
  • Steinfield, A. 1999. The benefit to the deaf of real-time captions in a mainstream classroom environment. Unpublished PhD Thesis. The University of Michigan.
  • Torres Monreal, S. and R. Santana Hernández. 2005. “Reading Levels of Span-ish Deaf Students”. American Annals of the Deaf, 150 (4): 379-387.
  • Uglova, N. and T. Shevchenko. 2005. “Not so fast please: Temporal features in TV speech”. Paper presented at the meeting of the Acoustical Society of America, Vancouver, BC.
  • Wingfield, A., S. L. McCoy, J. E. Peelle, P. A. Tun and L. C. Cox. 2006. “Ef-fects of adult aging and hearing loss on comprehension of rapid speech varying in syntactic complexity”. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology 17: 487-497
Fonte de datos: Dialnet