在学术背景下设计音像翻译产品的评分标准

IF 0.3 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS Baltic Journal of English Language Literature and Culture Pub Date : 2022-05-12 DOI:10.30813/jelc.v12i2.3237
Alvin Taufik
{"title":"在学术背景下设计音像翻译产品的评分标准","authors":"Alvin Taufik","doi":"10.30813/jelc.v12i2.3237","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Although publications on audiovisual translation are gaining more and more attention, very little has been done on its assessment (Kajzer-Wietrzny & Tymczyńska, 2015). In the workfield, audiovisual translation is reviewed to be given ffedback. In Universitas Bunda Mulia (UBM), audiovisual translation assessments need to be objectively assessed to produce grades, in addition to individual and collective feedbacks. However, the grading in UBM has always been conducted subjectively. Subjective assessment might result in emotional judgment and inappropriate feedbacks. For that reason, this research aims to devise a marking criteria for the assessment of audiovisual translation products in an academic context, namely in UBM. The audiovisual translation in UBM is divided into four categories, namely captioning, subtitling, audio description, and dubbing. The marking categories to be used on each category needs to have different criteria. This research determines the criteria to be assessed based on market requirements as written in different literature. The criteria specifically developed in this research are those of captioning and dubbing. Both criteria is developed with translation or rendering accuracy as the most significant criteria, followed by synchronies and alignment as the second most significant criteria, and followed by equal values in formatting and technical accuracies. These criteria needs to be further tested for reliability and validity. In addition, training of the schemes must be administered considering that there are numerous specific terminologies used in them.","PeriodicalId":55896,"journal":{"name":"Baltic Journal of English Language Literature and Culture","volume":"46 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"DEVISING A MARKING CRITERIA FOR THE ASSESSMENT OF AUDIOVISUAL TRANSLATION PRODUCTS IN AN ACADEMIC CONTEXT\",\"authors\":\"Alvin Taufik\",\"doi\":\"10.30813/jelc.v12i2.3237\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Although publications on audiovisual translation are gaining more and more attention, very little has been done on its assessment (Kajzer-Wietrzny & Tymczyńska, 2015). In the workfield, audiovisual translation is reviewed to be given ffedback. In Universitas Bunda Mulia (UBM), audiovisual translation assessments need to be objectively assessed to produce grades, in addition to individual and collective feedbacks. However, the grading in UBM has always been conducted subjectively. Subjective assessment might result in emotional judgment and inappropriate feedbacks. For that reason, this research aims to devise a marking criteria for the assessment of audiovisual translation products in an academic context, namely in UBM. The audiovisual translation in UBM is divided into four categories, namely captioning, subtitling, audio description, and dubbing. The marking categories to be used on each category needs to have different criteria. This research determines the criteria to be assessed based on market requirements as written in different literature. The criteria specifically developed in this research are those of captioning and dubbing. Both criteria is developed with translation or rendering accuracy as the most significant criteria, followed by synchronies and alignment as the second most significant criteria, and followed by equal values in formatting and technical accuracies. These criteria needs to be further tested for reliability and validity. In addition, training of the schemes must be administered considering that there are numerous specific terminologies used in them.\",\"PeriodicalId\":55896,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Baltic Journal of English Language Literature and Culture\",\"volume\":\"46 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-05-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Baltic Journal of English Language Literature and Culture\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.30813/jelc.v12i2.3237\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Baltic Journal of English Language Literature and Culture","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30813/jelc.v12i2.3237","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

虽然关于视听翻译的出版物越来越受到关注,但对其评估的研究却很少(Kajzer-Wietrzny & Tymczyńska, 2015)。在工作现场,对视听翻译进行审查并给出反馈。在Bunda Mulia大学(UBM),除了个人和集体反馈外,视听翻译评估还需要客观评估以产生分数。然而,UBM的分级一直是主观的。主观评价可能导致情绪化的判断和不恰当的反馈。因此,本研究旨在设计一个在学术语境下,即在UBM中评估视听翻译产品的评分标准。UBM的视听翻译分为四类,分别是字幕、字幕、音频描述和配音。每个类别使用的评分类别需要有不同的标准。本研究根据不同文献中所写的市场需求来确定评估标准。本研究特别制定的标准是字幕和配音标准。这两个标准都以翻译或呈现准确性作为最重要的标准,然后是同步和对齐作为第二重要的标准,然后是格式和技术准确性的同等值。这些标准的可靠性和有效性有待进一步检验。此外,必须考虑到计划中使用的许多具体术语,对计划进行培训。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
DEVISING A MARKING CRITERIA FOR THE ASSESSMENT OF AUDIOVISUAL TRANSLATION PRODUCTS IN AN ACADEMIC CONTEXT
Although publications on audiovisual translation are gaining more and more attention, very little has been done on its assessment (Kajzer-Wietrzny & Tymczyńska, 2015). In the workfield, audiovisual translation is reviewed to be given ffedback. In Universitas Bunda Mulia (UBM), audiovisual translation assessments need to be objectively assessed to produce grades, in addition to individual and collective feedbacks. However, the grading in UBM has always been conducted subjectively. Subjective assessment might result in emotional judgment and inappropriate feedbacks. For that reason, this research aims to devise a marking criteria for the assessment of audiovisual translation products in an academic context, namely in UBM. The audiovisual translation in UBM is divided into four categories, namely captioning, subtitling, audio description, and dubbing. The marking categories to be used on each category needs to have different criteria. This research determines the criteria to be assessed based on market requirements as written in different literature. The criteria specifically developed in this research are those of captioning and dubbing. Both criteria is developed with translation or rendering accuracy as the most significant criteria, followed by synchronies and alignment as the second most significant criteria, and followed by equal values in formatting and technical accuracies. These criteria needs to be further tested for reliability and validity. In addition, training of the schemes must be administered considering that there are numerous specific terminologies used in them.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
50.00%
发文量
11
期刊最新文献
POWER AND MANIPULATION DEPICTED BY MILES BRON IN GLASS ONION (2022) ELICITATION TECHNIQUE EMPLOYED BY EFL TEACHERS IN MOTIVATING JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS TO SPEAK A SOCIOPRAGMATIC ANALYSIS OF THE SPEECH ACT OF REQUESTING IN LOCAL ENGLISH COURSEBOOKS THE CULTURAL IDENTITY OF NUSANTARA IN A MOVIE "RAYA AND THE LAST DRAGON “ FUNCTIONS OF SPEECH ACTS IN AUSTRALIAN MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS SPEECH AT UNGA
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1