Scripted or spontaneous? Two approaches to audio describing visual art in museums

References

• ADLAB PRO. (2017a). IO1 report: Assessment of current AD training practices. Retrieved November 22, 2020, from https://www.adlabpro.eu/results/intellectual-outputs/.
   Google Scholar
• ADLAB PRO. (2017b). IO2 report: Audio description professional: profile definition. Retrieved November 22, 2020, from https://www.adlabpro.eu/results/intellectual-outputs/.
   Google Scholar
• Arminen, I. (2016). Institutional interaction: Studies of talk at work. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Best, K. (2012). Making museum tours better: Understanding what a guided tour really is and what a tour guide really does. Museum Management and Curatorship, 27(1), 35–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/09647775.2012.644695
   Google Scholar
• De Coster, K., & Mühleis, V. (2007). Intersensorial translation: Visual art made up by words. In J. Díaz-Cintas, P. Orero, & A. Remael (Eds.), Media for all: Subtitling for the deaf, audio description and sign language (pp. 189–200). Rodopi.
   Google Scholar
• Deppermann, A. (2020). Interaktionale semantik. In J. Hagemann, & S. Staffeldt (Eds.), Semantiktheorien II: Analysen von Wort- und Satzbedeutungen im Vergleich. Stauffenburg.
   Google Scholar
• Di Giovanni, E. (2020). Eye-tracking and the museum experience in Italy. Altre Modernità, 24, 10–24. https://doi.org/10.13130/2035-7680/14511
   Google Scholar
• Eardley, A. F., Fryer, L., Hutchinson, R., Cock, M., Ride, P., & Neves, J. (2017). Enriched audio description: Working towards an inclusive museum experience. In S. Halder, & L. C. Assaf (Eds.), Inclusion, disability and culture: An ethnographic perspective traversing abilities and challenges (pp. 195–209). Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-55224-8_13.
   Google Scholar
• Everts, E. (2012). In the face of blindness: Negotiating identity and relationship in blind/sighted interaction [Dissertation]. Georgetown University.
   Google Scholar
• Glenn, P. (2003). Laughter in interaction. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Goffman, E. (1961). Encounters. Two studies in the sociology of interaction. Bobbs-Merrill.
   Google Scholar
• Goffman, E. (1971). Relations in public. Microstudies of the social order. The Penguin Press.
   Google Scholar
• Goodwin, M., & Goodwin, C. (1986). Gesture and coparticipation in the activity of searching for a word. Semiotica, 62(1-2), 51–75. https://doi.org/10.1515/semi.1986.62.1-2.51
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hayashi, M. (2003). Language and the body as resources for collaborative action: A study of word searches in Japanese conversation. Research on Language & Social Interaction, 36(2), 109–141. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327973RLSI3602_2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hirvonen, M., & Tiittula, L. (2018). How are translations created? Using multimodal conversation analysis to study a team translation process. Linguistica Antverpiensia, New Series: Themes in Translation Studies, 17, 157–173.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hirvonen, M., & Wiklund, M. (2021). From image to text to speech: The effects of speech prosody on information sequencing in audio description. Text & Talk, 41(3), 309–334. https://doi.org/10.1515/text-2019-0172
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holšánová, J. (2008). Discourse, vision, and cognition. John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Hutchinson, R., & Eardley, A. F. (2018). Museum audio description: The problem of textual fidelity. Perspectives. Studies in Translation Theory and Practice, 27(1), 42–57.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koskela, M., Koskinen, K., & Pilke, N. (2017). Bilingual formal meeting as a context of translatoriality. Target. International Journal of Translation Studies, 29(3), 464–485. https://doi.org/10.1075/target.16017.kos
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kreplak, Y., & Mondémé, C. (2014). Artworks as touchable objects. Guiding perception in a museum tour for blind people. In P. Haddington, T. Heinemann, M. Nevile, & M. Rauniomaa (Eds.), Interacting with objects: Language, materiality, and social activity (pp. 295–317). John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Larjavaara, M. (1990). Suomen deiksis. Suomalaisen kirjallisuuden seura. Karisto.
   Google Scholar
• Larjavaara, M. (2007). Pragmasemantiikka. Suomalaisen kirjallisuuden seuran toimituksia 1077. Hakapaino.
   Google Scholar
• LeBaron, C. (2005). Considering the social and material surround: Toward microethnographic understandings of nonverbal behavior. In V. L. Manusov (Ed.), The sourcebook of nonverbal measures (pp. 493–506). Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Márquez Linares, I. (2007). Chuchotage para ciegos: Un susurro ensayado. In C. Jiménez Hurtado (Ed.), Traducción y accesibilidad (pp. 209–227). Peter Lang.
   Google Scholar
• Mondada, L. (2017). Walking and talking together: Questions/answers and mobile participation in guided visits. Social Science Information, 56(2), 220–253. https://doi.org/10.1177/0539018417694777
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mondada, L. (2018). Multiple temporalities of language and body in interaction: Challenges for transcribing multimodality. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 51(1), 85–106. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2018.1413878
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Neather, R. (2018). Museums, material culture, and cultural representations. In S.-A. Harding, & O. C. Cortés (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of translation and culture (pp. 361–378). Taylor & Francis.
   Google Scholar
• Neves, J. (2012). Multi-sensory approaches to (audio) describing the visual arts. MonTI: Monografías de Traducción e Interpretación, 4, 277–293. https://doi.org/10.6035/MonTI.2012.4.12
   Google Scholar
• Neves, J. (2015). Descriptive guides: Access to museums, cultural venues and heritage site. In A. Remael, N. Reviers, & G. Vercauteren (Eds.), Pictures painted in words: ADLAB audio description guidelines (pp. 68–71). EUT Edizioni Università di Trieste.
   Google Scholar
• Orero, P. (2006). Algunas consideraciones sobre la audiodescripción comercial en España. In R. Pérez-Amat, & A. Pérez-Ugena (Eds.), Sociedad, integración y televisión en España (pp. 277–292). Laberinto.
   Google Scholar
• Pekarik, D., Doering, Z. D., & Karns, D. A. (1999). Exploring satisfying experiences in museums. Curator (New York, N.Y.), 42(2), 152–173.
   Google Scholar
• Perego, E. (2019). Into the language of museum audio descriptions: A corpus-based study. Perspectives, Studies in Translatology, 27(3), 333–349.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perttula, J. (2005). Kokemus ja kokemuksen tutkimus: Fenomenologisen erityistieteen tieteenteoria. In J. Perttula, & T. Latomaa (Eds.), Kokemuksen tutkimus: Merkitys – tulkinta – ymmärtäminen (pp. 115–162). Dialogia.
   Google Scholar
• Quereda Herrera, M. (2007). Interpretación simultánea/bilateral con apoyo táctil. In C. Jiménez Hurtado (Ed.), Traducción y accessibilidad (pp. 229–240). Peter Lang.
   Google Scholar
• Risku, H., Hirvonen, M., Rogl, R., & Milosevic, J. (2022). Ethnography. In F. Zanettin, & C. Rundle (Eds.), Routledge handbook of translation and methodology (pp. 324–339). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Rizzo, A. (2021). Introduction. The value of accessibility in the cultural and creative industries: Translation-driven settings. Bridge: Trends & Traditions in Translation and Interpreting Studies, 1(2) (Special Issue “Translation and Accessibility for All in the Creative Industries: Digital Spaces and Cultural Contexts”, ed. by A. Rizzo).
   Google Scholar
• Schmitt, R., & Deppermann, A. (2010). Die multimodale konstitution eines imaginären raums als interaktive problemlösung. In A. Deppermann, & A. Linke (Eds.), Sprache intermedial: Stimme und schrift, Bild und Ton (pp. 199–241). de Gruyter.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, J. K., & Smith, L. F. (2001). Spending time on art. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 19(2), 229–236. https://doi.org/10.2190/5MQM-59JH-X21R-JN5J
   Google Scholar
• Soler Gallego, S. (2015). Painting with words: A corpus study of verbal description of art. In L. Carlucci, & C. Álvarez de Morales (Eds.), Insights into multimodal translation and accessibility (pp. 15–35). Ediciones Tragacanto.
   Google Scholar
• Soler Gallego, S., Luque Colmenero, M.-O., & Rodríguez Posadas, G. (2016). Words to see: On the intersemiotic translation of composition in paintings. In A. Rojo López, & N. Campos Plaza (Eds.), Interdisciplinarity in translation studies: Theoretical models, creative approaches and applied methods (pp. 277–294). Peter Lang.
   Google Scholar
• Streeck, J., & Mehus, S. (2005). Microethnography: The study of practices. In K. L. Fitch, & E. R. Sanders (Eds.), Handbook of language and social interaction (pp. 24–45). Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Tiittula, L., & Voutilainen, E. (2016). Puhe, kirjoitus ja puheen muuttaminen kirjoitukseksi. In L. Tiittula, & P. Nuolijärvi (Eds.), Puheesta tekstiksi: Puheen kirjallisen esittämisen alueita, keinoja ja rajoja (pp. 29–62). Suomalaisen kirjallisuuden seuran toimituksia 1424.
   Google Scholar
• VISK (= Iso suomen kielioppi, verkkoversio). (2008). § 595 NP suomen asiaproosassa, kirjallisuudessa ja keskustelupuheessa. Kotimaisten kielten tutkimuskeskus. Retrieved December 28, 2020, from https://scripta.kotus.fi/visk/sisallys.php?p=595).
   Google Scholar
• vom Lehn, D., & Heath, C. (2016). Kunstinteraktion. In H. Hausendorf, & M. Müller (Eds.), Handbuch Sprache in der kunstkommunikation (pp. 361–379). De Gruyter.
   Google Scholar