MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2270436734

A user-centred study of the norms for subtitling for the deaf and hard-of-hearing on french television

2015· article· en· W2270436734 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Laetitia Tia Muller

Bibliographic record

VenueDipòsit Digital de Documents de la UAB (Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSubtitles and Audiovisual Media
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversität des SaarlandesEuropean CommissionUniversitat Autònoma de BarcelonaMinisterio de Ciencia e InnovaciónYork UniversityUniversity of SouthamptonUniversitat Pompeu FabraBaiduUniversity of Roehampton
KeywordsGovernment (linguistics)Quality (philosophy)Order (exchange)State (computer science)Subject (documents)Political scienceSociologyPsychologyLinguisticsBusinessComputer scienceLibrary science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Subtitles for the deaf and hard-of-hearing (SDH) have been present on French television since the late seventies. However, it was not until nearly thirty years after they first appeared that the practice was made mandatory on the main channels. In February 2005, the French government passed a law on equal rights and opportunities for disabled people which required all state-owned and private channels with a minimum annual audience share of 2.5% to use adapted subtitles in order to make 100% of their programming accessible to the deaf and hard-of-hearing by 12 February 2010. Following increasing complaints that regulations of this kind promoted a rapid increase in the quantity of SDH to the detriment of quality, the government produced a reference document about minimum SDH requirements. This document was signed by major SDH stakeholders and put into practice on 12 December 2011. Although this discipline is now recognised by the government, research into subtitling for the deaf and hard-of-hearing in France is still very scarce. This doctoral research is the first on this subject in France and the first to involve French viewers of SDH at a national level. Written in the form of three articles, this empirical study places itself within what translation theorist Holmes (2000, 176) defined as a product-oriented descriptive approach, with a restricted scope within the audiovisual text-type on the medium of television. The study of norms in a given place at a given time being the essence of this research project, this work centres on the rationale behind the theory of norms developed by Toury (1995), and extended by Chesterman (1997) and Hermans (1999), in the realm of subtitling for the deaf and hard-of-hearing. Due to its complexity and its functional nature, SDH, and by extension this study, draws on different disciplines and areas of research?including Film Studies, Musicology, Deaf Studies, Linguistics, Psychology, and, within the realm of Translation Studies, interlingual subtitling, SDH theory, and live subtitling. Adopting a quantitative research strategy with a questionnaire as research method, this doctoral thesis examines whether deaf and HoH viewers of subtitles are satisfied with the norms of these subtitles as they are used on French television at the beginning of the second decade of the twenty first century. This work first maps the practice of subtitling for the deaf and hard-of-hearing in France, retraces its history and its main actors, and determines who defines and implements its norms and rules. Then it sets out to study whether the required output of SDH was met prior to and following the implementation of the 2005 law in February 2010 by analysing live and pre-recorded programmes with SDH between 2009 and 2010 on the five national channels with the highest annual audience share. Next, this study progresses to its core element, the questionnaire to SDH viewers conducted at a national level on the Internet, which evaluates French SDH norms, including the colour code. Finally, France?s national quality standard for SDH (Charte), which establishes minimum subtitling rules across television channels and programmes, is analysed considering the validity of the requirements it sets out for all of the stakeholders involved. The results suggest that there is ample room for improvement in the French norms and, by extension, in the Charte.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.238
Threshold uncertainty score0.424

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.042
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.214 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDipòsit Digital de Documents de la UAB (Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona)Same topicSubtitles and Audiovisual MediaFrench-language works237,207