The Routledge Handbook of Audiovisual Translation 2018
DOI: 10.4324/9781315717166-23
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Audiovisual translation and audience reception

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 1 publication
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…It is noteworthy that several viewers, though small in number, volunteered to produce interlingual subtitles, demonstrating prosumption (see Table 5, theme 10). In assuming the role of subtitlers, these individuals served not only as consumers but also as prosumers of AVT (Dwyer, 2019), which echoes the growing interest in reception studies of fan-subtitled content explored by researchers such as Bogucki (2009), Dwyer (2019), andOrrego-Carmona (2019). On the other hand, the minimal attention dedicated to language acquisition (theme 11) suggests that viewers primarily consume videos for entertainment rather than language learning.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 93%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…It is noteworthy that several viewers, though small in number, volunteered to produce interlingual subtitles, demonstrating prosumption (see Table 5, theme 10). In assuming the role of subtitlers, these individuals served not only as consumers but also as prosumers of AVT (Dwyer, 2019), which echoes the growing interest in reception studies of fan-subtitled content explored by researchers such as Bogucki (2009), Dwyer (2019), andOrrego-Carmona (2019). On the other hand, the minimal attention dedicated to language acquisition (theme 11) suggests that viewers primarily consume videos for entertainment rather than language learning.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…Since the 1980s, audience-oriented research has continued to draw scholarly attention and has established itself as a flourishing area within AVT. In recent decades, studies in AVT have evolved to embrace an array of empirical methods and tools, such as questionnaires, eye tracking, interviews, and direct observations (Chaume, 2018;Orrego-Carmona, 2019). Although these studies have yielded useful findings, relatively less attention has been paid to the audience reception of subtitles in online streaming videos.…”
Section: Reception Studies Of Television Dramas and Subtitlingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The existing scholarship ranges from research about traditional subtitling [2][3][4], quality of subtitles through practical experiments [5], as well as quality of templates [6] or theoretical quality assessment models [7]. More recent research has delved into media accessibility [8][9][10], new subtitling workflows, especially those that involve machine translation [8] and post-editing [9] and the translation process itself, be it traditional translation process research or TPR [10] or on online platforms [11]. Finally, there are also audience reception studies [12,13] but almost no studies that focus on subtitlers' various micro-workflows and their evaluation of traditional or new hybrid workflows and, most importantly, their agency in creating the tools they might use in the future.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There is no lack of reviews in the AVT literature, with two most recent ones being Orrego-Carmona (2019) and Di Giovanni (2020). These reviews take stock of what AVT research has achieved and offer suggestions to move the field forward.…”
Section: Making a Case For A Systematic Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%