The Routledge Handbook of Audiovisual Translation

Luis Pérez-González, Luis Pérez-González

• Éditeur: Routledge
• Année: 2018
• ISBN:
  9781317509165
• Édition: 1
• Sujet: Lingue e linguistica
• Sous-sujet: Linguistica

The Routledge Handbook of Audiovisual Translation provides an accessible, authoritative and comprehensive overview of the key modalities of audiovisual translation and the main theoretical frameworks, research methods and themes that are driving research in this rapidly developing field.

Divided in four parts, this reference work consists of 32 state-of-the-art chapters from leading international scholars. The first part focuses on established and emerging audiovisual translation modalities, explores the changing contexts in which they have been and continue to be used, and examines how cultural and technological changes are directing their future trajectories. The second part delves into the interface between audiovisual translation and a range of theoretical models that have proved particularly productive in steering research in audiovisual translation studies. The third part surveys a selection of methodological approaches supporting traditional and innovative ways of interrogating audiovisual translation data. The final part addresses an array of themes pertaining to the place of audiovisual translation in society.

This Handbook gives audiovisual translation studies the platform it needs to raise its profile within the Humanities research landscape and is key reading for all those engaged in the study and research of Audiovisual Translation within Translation studies.

1

Rewiring the circuitry of audiovisual translation

Introduction

Luis Pérez-González

It is customary for introductions to new publications on audiovisual translation (AVT) to start by drawing the reader’s attention to various signs of its vitality. The nature and significance of developments witnessed over the last decade, however, has generated a raft of sophisticated indicators to measure the vibrancy of AVT. No longer limited to the growing number of thematic collections and monographs, specialized conferences and dedicated training programmes, the growing prominence, diversity and clout of AVT studies is now also signalled by the inception of collective research projects funded by international stakeholders, the formation of transnational research groups, and the participation of AVT scholars and trainers in successful programmes of collaboration with industry partners.

Crucially, this sense of buoyancy and expansiveness poses its own risks. As a self-standing area of scholarly enquiry within a wider discipline whose short history has been often accounted for in terms of successive, occasionally spasmodic, twists, AVT has recently attempted to foreground its growing maturity through the trope of the ‘turn’. Remael’s cautiously hedged claim that ‘[t]he 21st century well may see the advent of the “audiovisual turn” in T[ranslation]S[tudies]’ (2010: 15) is now routinely repeated like a mantra in the literature, albeit devoid of the caveats and presentational nuances that moulded the original statement (see, for example, McLaughlin 2014: 380) and/or diluted by a trivializing understanding of ‘turns’ as little more than relatively self-standing research themes. Jiménez-Crespo’s (2017: 5) premise that developments in the study of crowdsourced translation are ‘inspired by the “technological turn” (Cronin 2010; O’Hagan 2013), the “sociological turn” (Wolf 2007; Angelelli 2012), and the “audiovisual turn” (Remael 2010)’ is a case in point. Troping the history of a discipline, by acknowledging that an assemblage of turns could potentially co-exist at any given point, somewhat erodes the scholarly significance of the research domain that the term ‘turn’ sought to foreground in the first place. A mechanistic adoption of the logic of turns can be interpreted as an endorsement of ‘commodification, superficiality and transitory (and thus flimsy) commitments’ (Straw 2016: 2), where contributions are valued only inasmuch as they point ‘to a direction in which we want to go now, largely because we see so many others going there as well’ (ibid: 3). Ultimately, any attempt to appraise the vitality of a given research domain in terms of its competitive positioning within the knowledge regime in which it is embedded is bound to be ‘sutured with neoclassical assumptions of neoliberalism, the prevailing political economy of the modern academy, which promotes accumulation and quantitative growth above other values’ (Keeling 2016: 317). Apart from these ethical risks, troped disciplinary narratives can also have other unintended consequences—potentially even frustrate attempts to gauge that discipline’s capacity to set its own research agenda, develop new methodological directions and facilitate advances in cognate areas of research. Recent views on the state of AVT studies articulated by scholars in the wider translation studies community suggest that qualitative appraisals should be prioritized at this point in the construction of the field. As Baker (2014: xiv) notes, for all its vibrancy,

most of the literature published by scholars of audiovisual translation, while unquestionably useful and welcome, has failed to engage other disciplines and lay the foundation for interdisciplinary research and critical theorizing. Understandably, perhaps, the priority has been to address practical needs, with training manuals and descriptive accounts of professional practice dominating the field.

The need for AVT research to move beyond what has traditionally been regarded as its core remit is more pressing than ever before. In the digital culture, the instantaneity and global reach of audiovisual content flows has undermined the homogeneity of national audiences and the internal coherence of the markets that once thrived around them—which has, in turn, begun to erode the dominance of specific AVT modalities within individual countries. Technological advances also mean that we are becoming increasingly exposed to audiovisual content that facilitates new forms of interaction between the producers and consumers, amid the gradual shift of cultural and creative industries towards participatory forms of organization—thus challenging existing means of analysis and critique. Crucially, AVT is under pressure to develop in seemingly opposing directions. On the one hand, it is increasingly envisioned and funded to play a socially inclusive role by fostering the integration of sensory impaired members of the community within mainstream society, as far as their access to cultural commodities and venues is concerned. On the other hand, it is at the heart of various initiatives and projects to optimize revenue generation through new technologization processes driven by corporate players.

The impact of these developments—prompted by the ever more complex technology-mediated interplay between verbal and visual semiotics, complete with its industrial and social dimensions—is beginning to resonate beyond the confines of AVT and attract attention from scholars who have not been traditionally associated with this field of scholarly enquiry. Tymoczko (2005), for example, has acknowledged the potential of AVT processes to effect change in the wider field of translation, possibly requiring the re-theorization of fundamental concepts of translation studies. The two-way dialogue between AVT studies and the broader discipline, however, could be hampered by the lack of comprehensive reference works showcasing the scope of the research undertaken by AVT scholars.

Indeed, the body literature on AVT comprises a significant number of encyclopedia or companion entries—see, for example, Baker and Hochel (1998), Gottlieb (1998), O’Connell (2007), Pérez-González (2009), Chiaro (2009), Díaz Cintas (2010), Díaz Cintas and Orero (2010), Remael (2010), Remael (2012), Díaz Cintas (2013), Chaume (2013), Gambier (2013), Taylor (2013), and Yau (2014); practical textbooks specializing in a single AVT modality—examples include, but are not limited to Díaz Cintas and Remael (2007), Franco et al. (2010), Romero-Fresco (2011), Chaume (2012); and relatively wide-ranging collections—an indicative non-exhaustive list would encompass, for example, Orero (2004), Chiaro et al. (2008), Anderman and Díaz Cintas (2009), Díaz Cintas (2007), Díaz Cintas et al. (2007), Díaz Cintas (2009), Remael et al. (2012), Orrego-Carmona and Lee (2017). The publication rate of special journal issues covering a specific research theme within AVT—e.g. Agost et al. (2012), Baños et al. (2013), Díaz Cintas (2012)—or the field as a whole—Gambier (2003), Gambier and Ramos Pinto (2016)—has accelerated in recent years, as has that of monographs specializing in one AVT modality. Until the recent publication of Audiovisual Translation: Theories, Methods, Issues (Pérez-González 2014), however, there was no volume in English that systematically charted and critiqued influential concepts, research models and methodological approaches in AVT studies, or theorized recent developments and trends. But while this recent volume fills a gap and provides a solid foundation for new researchers in the field, a single monograph written by one author cannot possibly be expected to capture the diverse and vigorous developments that are currently shaping every corner of AVT.

The Routledge Handbook of Audiovisual Translation therefore aims to deliver the sort of comprehensive survey of state of the art research that the field currently needs. Its four sections engage, respectively, with (i) the evolving practices associated with both consolidated and emerging AVT modalities; (ii) key theoretical models that have informed and continue to drive scholarly advances in the area; (iii) methodological approaches supporting traditional and innovative ways of interrogating data sets; and (iv) key themes revealing the impact of AVT on various aspects of social life. Through its thirty-two chapters, the Handbook seeks to rewire the circuitry of this scholarly domain, bringing to the fore current and potential avenues for scholarly interaction and mutual engagement across individual practices, theories, methods and themes—both among members of the AVT research community and with scholars working across a range of disciplines.

Part I: Audiovisual translation in action

Part I consists of ten chapters focusing on established and emerging modalities of AVT. These contributions examine key terms and practices, explore the changing contexts in which these modalities have been and continue to be used, provide an indication of their future trajectory, and intervene in the debates arising from the evolving contexts of production and consumption for each of these forms of interlingual, intersemiotic and intercultural mediation. All chapters in this part identify key debates at the heart of these areas, thus contributing to set the research agenda for years to come.

In Chapter 2, Carol O’Sullivan and Jean-François Cornu deliver a chronological overview of the technological developments and socio-cultural changes that shaped the birth and evolution of audiovisual translation—inextricably associated, during its formation years, with film as the first form of mass entertainment. Taking a look at the interplay between changing translation practices, technical processes and marketing strategies, the authors identify a range of important issues that remain uncharted territory in the history of AVT, as research conducted to date has tended to concentrate on the same AVT modalities and filmic cultures and/or industries. The authors’ call for more research on how film translation practices have evolved throughout the twentieth century and their impact on their reception by audiences resonates with similar recommendations in other chapters focusing on the contemporary AVT scene, including Chapters 3, 4, 22 and 23.

In her forward-looking contribution to this Handbook, Chapter 3, Marie-Noëlle Guillot looks at one of the most widely studied AVT modalities from a refreshingly original perspective, structuring her chapter around three main aspects: the constraints and opportunities informing subtitling practices, the means and modes—understood as the range of semiotic resources—that lend themselves to manipulation during the subtitling process, and the research models and methods informing scholarship in subtitling studies. In addition to a rigorous overview of traditional research foci in this area, the reader is presented with a stimulating critique of the role that subtitling plays in the new cultural regime unleashed by digitization. Guillot’s treatment of the creative specificities and potential of subtitling and subtitles, the implications of emerging co-creative subtitling models involving professionals and amateurs, and the impact of these new practices on the negotiation of intercultural differences in a global context brings into sharp relief the extent to which these issues have come to take centre stage in subtitling studies.

Echoing Chapter 2’s call to take action against dominant Eurocentric perspectives, Charlotte Bosseaux identifies additional priorities for the development of dubbing studies in Chapter 4. One of the most established research topics within AVT studies, dubbing, is examined here from new angles that are not yet widely represented in the extant body of literature. In keeping with her own interest in the prosodical dimension of dubbing, Bosseaux advocates the relevance of multimodal theory as a new research avenue for dubbing scholars. Other suggested angles pertain to the technologization of dubbing—both in terms of the involvement of amateurs in the practice of this activity and the transformation of the dubbing workflow through the use of voice-synthesizing tools—and the development of ‘accessible dubbing’, a concept that Bosseaux models after Romero-Fresco’s notion of ‘accessibility’ in AVT, as elaborated in Chapter 31.

Voice-over, an AVT modality that has been relatively neglected by translation scholars to date, takes centre stage in Anna Matamala’s Chapter 5. The fact that voice-over is prevalent in audiovisual markets where subtitling and dubbing have not traditionally had a significant presence is reflected in the geographical origin of a substantial part of the experiments and studies that this chapter reports on. And yet, the impact of technological advances on voice-over practices and the need to conduct more research on the reception of voiced-over commodities also emerge here as challenges to be tackled in connection with this AVT modality. The circuitry of AVT is thus being rewired through the emergence of research agendas that cut across individual AVT modalities, as they evolve to cater for the niche audiences that digitization has empowered.

But nowhere is the need to question and reconceptualize current professional practices—and the body of scholarship that these conventions have informed—more pressing than in assistive subtitling, an AVT modality that Josélia Neves surveys and interrogates in Chapter 6. Drawing on the premise that technological affordances have the potential to enhance the quantity, quality and diversity of the current provision of subtitles for the deaf and hard of hearing, Neves advocates a change in the paradigm of mediation at the heart of this field. The shift towards an ‘enriched (responsive) subtitles’ model that does not regard ableism as the benchmark against which disabilities are to be defined will enable access to personalized subtitle formats on demand, first on web-based platforms and then via traditional broadcast media. As Neves notes, this should not represent the end of...