Skip to main content

Cross-fertilization between Reception Studies in Audio Description and Interpreting Quality Assessment: The Role of the Describer’s Voice

  • Chapter

Part of the Palgrave Studies in Translating and Interpreting book series (PTTI)

Abstract

Scholars, such as Braun (2007) and Gambier (2006), have been calling for a cross-fertilization of disciplines concerned with the study of human communication in an attempt to gain a fuller understanding of the complex nature of audio description (AD). The AD script is a hyposemiotic text that uses the aural medium as the sole vehicle for relaying the input derived from visual stimuli, both iconic and verbal. The nonvocal visual and/or verbal input is conveyed as aural output consisting of vocal stimuli (both verbal and nonverbal). As it is the aural medium that is so prominent in AD, one would expect that research in this field would pay more attention to the aural dimension and that it would attract attention from disciplines related to spoken communication and media studies, such as radio broadcasting, television, advertising and film theory. A perusal of the existing literature on media communication reveals the potential of the aural dimension, from the characters’ vocal expression of emotion, to soundtrack, ambient sounds and special effects. While it is true that some scholars have highlighted the critical role of the aural medium in audiovisual products and their translation (Chion 1994; Díaz Cintas et al. 2007; Gottlieb 2005; Matamala 2005; Orero 2005; Salway and Palmer 2007), the true potential of the aural dimension has not yet been fully explored.

Keywords

  • Voice Quality
  • Feature Film
  • Vocal Quality
  • Vocal Expression
  • Impaired User

These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • DOI: 10.1057/9781137552891_5
  • Chapter length: 24 pages
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
eBook
USD   109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • ISBN: 978-1-137-55289-1
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
Hardcover Book
USD   139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • AENOR. 2005. Audiodescripción para personas con discapacidad visual. Requisitos para la audiodescripción y elaboración de audioguías. UNE 153020. Madrid: AENOR.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benecke, Bernd. 2004. ‘Audio-Description.’ Meta 49(1): 78–80.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Benecke, Bernd. 2007. ‘Audio description: Phenomena of information sequencing.’ In Heidrun Gerzymisch-Arbogast and Gerhard Budin (eds) MuTra 2007 — LSP Translation Scenarios: Conference Proceedings. Vienna: Mutra. http://www.euroconferences.info/proceedings/2007_Proceedings/2007_Benecke_Bernd. pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boersma, Paul and David Weenink. 2000. Praat, a System for Doing Phonetics by Computer.http://www.praat.org.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bolivar, Valerie, Annabel Cohen and John Fentress. 1994. ‘Semantic and formal congruency in music and motion pictures: effects on the interpretation of visual action.’ Psychomusicology: Music, Mind and Brain 13(1–2): 28–59.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Bourne, Julian and Cristina Lachat. 2010. ‘Impacto de la norma AENOR: valoración del usuario.’ In Catalina Jiménez Hurtado, Claudia Seibel and Ana Rodríguez Domínguez (eds) Un corpus de cine: Fundamentos teóricos y aplicados de la audiodescripción (pp. 315–33). Granada: Tragacanto.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braun, Sabine. 2007. ‘Audio description from a discourse perspective: a socially relevant framework for research and training.’ Linguistica Antverpiensia 6: 357–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braun, Sabine. 2008. ‘Audiodescription research: state of the art and beyond.’ Languages and Translation: Papers from the Centre for Translation Studies. Guilford: University of Surrey. http://epubs.surrey.ac.uk/translation/13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bühler, Hildegund. 1986. ‘Linguistic (semantic) and extra-linguistic (pragmatic) criteria for evaluation of conference interpretation and interpreters.’ Multilingua 5(4): 231–35.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Chion, Michel. 1994. La audiovisión. Barcelona: Ediciones Paidós.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collados Aís, Ángela. 1998. La evaluación de la calidad en interpretación simultánea. La importancia de la comunicación no verbal. Granada: Comares.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collados Aís, Ángela. 2002. ‘Quality assessment in simultaneous interpreting: the importance of nonverbal communication.’ In Franz Pöchhacker and Miriam Shlesinger (eds) The Interpreters’Studies Reader (pp. 327–36). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collados Aís, Ángela, Esperanza Pradas Macías, Elisabeth Stévaux and Olalla García Becerra (eds). 2007. La evaluación de la calidad en interpretación simultánea: Parámetros de incidencia. Granada: Comares.

    Google Scholar 

  • Culler, Jonathan. 1981. The Pursuit of Signs. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Díaz Cintas, Jorge, Pilar Orero and Aline Remael (eds). 2007. Media for All. Subtitling for the Deaf, Audio Description and Sign Language. Amsterdam: Rodopi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fels, Deborah, John Patrick Udo, Jonas Diamond and Jeremy Diamond. 2006. ‘Comparison of alternative narrative approaches to video description for animated comedy.’ Journal of Visually Impairment & Blindness 100(5): 295–305.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fryer, Louise. 2010. ‘Audio description as audio drama: a practitioner’s point of view.’ Perspectives: Studies in Translatology 18(3): 205–13.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Gambier, Yves. 2006. ‘Multimodality and audiovisual translation.’ In Mary Carroll, Heidrun Gerzymisch-Arbogast and Sandra Nauert (eds) MuTra 2006 -Audiovisual Translation Scenarios: Conference Proceedings. Copenhagen: Mutra. http://euroconferences.info/proceedings/2006_Proceedings/2006_Gambier_ Yves.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerzymisch-Arbogast, Heidrun. 2007. ‘Workshop audio description.’ Summer School Forlí: Screen Translation, 25 May 2007. http://www.translationconcepts.org/pdf/audiodescription_forli.pdf.

  • Gile, Daniel. 2003. ‘Quality assessment in conference interpreting: methodological issues.’ In Ángela Collados Aís, María Manuela Fernández Sánchez and Daniel Gile (eds) La evaluación de la calidad en interpretación: Investigación (pp. 109–23). Granada: Comares.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gottlieb, Henrik. 2005. ‘Multidimensional translation: semantics turned semiotics.’ In Heidrun Gerzymisch-Arbogast and Sandra Nauert (eds) MuTra 2005 -Challenges of Multidimensional Translation: Conference Proceedings. Saarbrücken: Mutra. http://euroconferences.info/proceedings/2005_Proceedings/2005_ Gottlieb_Henrik.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hyks, Veronika. 2005. ‘Audio description and translation. Two related but different skills.’ Translating Today 4: 6–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iglesias Fernández, Emilia. 2007. ‘La incidencia del parámetro agradabilidad de la voz.’ In Ángela Collados Aís, Esperanza Pradas Macías, Elisabeth Stévaux and Olalla García Becerra (eds) La evaluación de la calidad en interpretación simultánea: Parámetros de incidencia (pp. 37–51). Granada: Comares.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iglesias Fernández, Emilia. 2010. ‘La dimensión paralingüística de la audiode-scripción: un acercamiento multidisciplinar.’ In Catalina Jiménez Hurtado, Claudia Seibel and Ana Rodríguez Domínguez (eds) Un corpus de cine: Fundamentos teóricos y aplicados de la audiodescripción (pp. 205–22). Granada: Tragacanto.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kurz, Ingrid. 1989. ‘Conference interpreting: user expectations.’ In Deanna Hammond (ed.) Coming of Age. Proceedings of the 30th Conference of the ATA (pp. 143–48). Medford, NJ.: Learned Information.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kurz, Ingrid and Franz Pöchhacker. 1995. ‘Quality in TV interpreting.’ Translatio-Nouvelles de la FIT—FIT Newslettter 14(3–4): 350–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Matamala, Anna. 2005. ‘Live audio description in Catalonia.’ Translating Today 4: 9–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Orero, Pilar. 2005. ‘Audio description: professional recognition, practice and standards in Spain.’ Translation Watch Quarterly 1: 7–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Packer, Jaclyn and Corinne Kirchner. 1997. Who’s Watching: A Profile of the Blind and Visually Impaired Audience for Television and Video. New York: American Foundation for the Blind.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peli, Eli, Elisabeth M. Fine and Angela T. Labianca. 1996. ‘Evaluating visual information provided by audio description.’ Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness 90(5): 378–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petré, Leen. 2005. User Feedback on Audio Description and the Case for Increasing Audiodescription Targets. http://www.mib.org/uk/xpedio/groups/public/documents/publicwebsite/public_userfeedback.doc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pradas Macías, Esperanza M. 2003. Repercusión del intraparámetro pausas silenciosas en la fluidez: Influencia en las expectativas y en la evaluación de la calidad en interpretación simultánea. Unpublished PhD Thesis. Granada: University of Granada.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pradas Macías, Esperanza M. 2007. ‘La incidencia del parámetro fluidez.’ In ángela Collados Aís, Esperanza Pradas Macías, Elisabeth Stévaux and Olalla García Becerra (eds) La evaluación de la calidad en interpretación simultánea: Parámetros de incidencia (pp. 53–70). Granada: Comares.

    Google Scholar 

  • Romero-Fresco, Pablo and Louise Fryer. 2013. ‘Could audio described films benefit from Audio Introductions? An audience response study.’ Journal of Visual Impairment and Blindness 107(4): 287–5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russell, James. 1980. ‘A circumplex model of affect.’ Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 39: 1161–78.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Salway, Andrew and Alan Palmer. 2007. ‘Describing actions and thoughts.’ Paper presented at the Advanced Seminar: Audiodescription — Towards an Interdisciplinary Research Agenda. University of Surrey, 28–29 June.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schaeffer, Pierre. 2004. ‘Acousmatics.’ In Christoph Cox and Daniel Warner (eds) Audio Culture. Readings in Modern Music (pp. 76–81). London: Continuum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scherer, Klaus R. 1979. ‘Personality markers in speech.’ In Klaus R. Scherer and Giles Howard (eds) Social Markers in Speech (pp. 147–209). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scherer, Klaus R. 2003. ‘Vocal communication of emotion: a review of research paradigms.’ Speech Communication 40: 227–56.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Schmeidler, Emilie and Corinne Kirchner. 2001. ‘Adding audio description. Does it make a difference?’ Journal of Visually Impairment & Blindness 95(4): 197–212.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yeung, Jessica. 2007. ‘Audio description in the Chinese world.’ In Jorge Díaz Cintas, Pilar Orero and Aline Remael (eds) Media for All. Subtitling for the Deaf, Audio Description, and Sign Language (pp. 231–43). Amsterdam: Rodopi.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Copyright information

© 2015 Emilia Iglesias Fernández, Silvia Martínez Martínez and Antonio Javier Chica Núñez

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Fernández, E.I., Martínez, S.M., Núñez, A.J.C. (2015). Cross-fertilization between Reception Studies in Audio Description and Interpreting Quality Assessment: The Role of the Describer’s Voice. In: Piñero, R.B., Cintas, J.D. (eds) Audiovisual Translation in a Global Context. Palgrave Studies in Translating and Interpreting. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137552891_5

Download citation