The Concise Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics. Carol A. Chapelle

gauge their work in line with these cues after which subtitles are checked for sync with changes of frames. However, technology now allows translators to work directly onto electronic files that enable them to create complete products from their personal workstations.

      Conventionally, subtitles were restricted to 30 to 40 characters, including spaces, that were displayed at the center bottom of the picture, or else left aligned (Gottlieb, 2001b). Nowadays, such restrictions are disappearing as subtitling programs working with pixels allow letters to be modified according to space. Furthermore, wider screens tend to have longer lines and DVDs allow viewers to rewind and reread features they may have missed, while alignment changes according to the directionality of script in individual languages (Díaz Cintas & Remael, 2007). In addition, because of the possibility of placing the titles anywhere on the screen, the term “caption(ing)” is now becoming widespread.

Fansubbing

Fansubbing initially stemmed from the dissatisfaction of fans with what they considered the less than optimal quality of dubbing and subtitling of their favorite TV series. A fansub consists of nonprofessional translation carried out by fans of TV series for other fans (Díaz Cintas & Sanchez, 2006). Fansubbers “digitise, translate, add subtitles to and make available online unauthorized copies of TV series and films” (Condry, 2010, p. 194). Two major differences between fansubbing and mainstream subtitling lies in features such as the presence of explanatory notes and the preservation of strong language present in the original which tends to be omitted in official subtitles. Furthermore, these unauthorized copies are available on line at the same time as the original series is broadcast in the place of origin to the advantage of fans who no longer have to wait for the series to be released by an official outlet. Fansubbing can be considered a forerunner of crowdsourced translation (O'Hagan, 2012) where volunteers translate Web products, such as Ted talks, free of charge.

Accessibility

      Accessibility or “inclusion” refers to the provision of audiovisual products such as plays, films, and opera for all members of the public including those who are in some way sensorially challenged. Thus accessibility endorses intralingual translations in the form of subtitles, sign language interpreting for the deaf and hard of hearing, and audio descriptions for the blind and visually impaired. A sign language interpreter will translate verbal information (audio) into meaningful hand signals (visual) while subtitles for the hard of hearing, as well as conveying the verbal contents of audiovisuals, will also transmit other nonverbal acoustic information, such as music and sound effects, in writing. Subtitles for the hard of hearing for TV programs are available in Europe by means of each country's individual teletext service.

      Audio descriptions consist of an additional soundtrack especially recorded for the use of blind and visually impaired people to help them enjoy audiovisual products. During breaks in the dialogues, an off‐screen voice provides an account of what is happening on screen. Audio descriptions are especially common in museums and art galleries, thus exemplifying a type of intersemiotic translation in which visual signs are transmuted into verbal signs.

      SEE ALSO: Cultural Approaches to Translation; History of Translation

References

      1 Antonini, R. (2005). The perception of subtitled humor in Italy: An empirical study. In D. Chiaro (Ed.), Humor and translation (Special issue). Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 18(2), 209–25.

      2 Chiaro, D. (2008). Issues of quality in screen translation: Problems and solutions. In D. Chiaro, C. Heiss, & C. Bucaria (Eds.), Between text and image: Updating research in screen translation (pp. 241–56). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.

      3 Chiaro, D. (2009a). The politics of screen translation. In F. M. Federici (Ed.), Translating regionalised voices in audiovisuals (pp. 27–42). Rome, Italy: Aracne.

      4 Chiaro, D. (2009b). Issues in audiovisual translation. In J. Munday (Ed.), The Routledge companion to translation studies (pp. 141–65). London, England: Routledge.

      5 Condry, I. (2010). Dark energy: What fansubs reveal about the copyright wars. Mechademia, 5(1), 193–208.

      6 Danan, M. (1991). Dubbing as an expression of nationalism. Meta, 36(4), 606–14.

      7 Díaz Cintas, J., & Remael, A. (2007). Audiovisual translation: Subtitling. Manchester, England: St. Jerome.

      8 Díaz Cintas, J., & Sanchez, P. (2006). Fansubs: Audiovisual translation in an amateur environment. JoSTrans, The Journal of Specialised Translation, 6, 37–52.

      9 Gottlieb, H. (2001a). Anglicisms and TV subtitles in an Anglified world. In Y. Gambier & H. Gottlieb (Eds.), (Multi)media translation. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.

      10 Gottlieb, H. (2001b). Subtitling: Visualizing filmic dialogue. In L. Garcia & A. M. Pereira Rodriguez (Eds.), Traducción subordinada (II): El subtituolado (pp. 85–110). Vigo, Spain: Servicio de la Univeridad de Vigo.

      11 Izard, N. (2000). La traducció i la normalització de la llengua catalana: El cas de la televisió. In A. Engelbert (Ed.), Actes du XXIIe Congrès International de Linguistique et de Philologie Romane (Vol. III). Tübingen, Germany: Niemeyer.

      12 Jakobson, R. (1959). On linguistic aspects of translation. In R. A. Brower (Ed.), On translation (pp. 232–9). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

      13 Luyken, G.‐M., Herbst, T., Langham‐Brown, J., Reid, H., & Spinhof, H. (1991). Overcoming language barriers in television: Dubbing and subtitling for the European audience. Manchester, England: European Institute for the Media.

      14 O'Connell, E. (1996). Media, translation and translation studies. In T. Hickey & J. Williams (Eds.), Language, education and society in a changing world (pp. 151–6). Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.

      15 O'Hagan, M. (2012). From fan translation to crowdsourcing: consequences of Web 2.0 user empowerment in audiovisual translation. Approaches to Translation Studies, 36, 25–41.

      16 Paolinelli, M., & Di Fortunato, E. (2005). Tradurre per il doppiaggio. Milan, Italy: Hoepli.

      17 Zanettin, F. (Ed.). (2008). Comics in translation. Manchester, England: St. Jerome.

      18 Zanettin, F. (2014). Visual adaptation in translated comics. inTRAlinea, 16.

Authenticity in the Language Teaching Curriculum

      EVE ZYZIK

      Authenticity in language teaching is a broad concept since it can refer to an inherent quality of a text, the types of tasks used in language classrooms, or the subjective way in which learners engage with the materials presented to them (see Gilmore, 2007, for eight interrelated definitions of authenticity). Zyzik and Polio (2017, p. 1) define authentic materials as “those created for some real‐world purpose other than language learning, often, but not always, by native speakers for native speakers.” Under this definition, authentic materials comprise a wide variety of spoken and written language samples, including newspaper articles, graphic novels, greeting cards, restaurant menus, radio broadcasts, political speeches, songs, and films. The common feature among these materials is that they were created with a particular communicative intent and were not modified for pedagogical purposes.

      This entry will focus primarily on authentic materials as described above, noting that other conceptualizations of authenticity are possible. The previous entry on this topic (McKay, 2012) characterized authenticity in terms of learner relevance and engagement: “Authentic language learning texts are… those texts that particular groups engage with and create discourse around for meaningful purposes” (p. 2). Yet another vantage point comes from task‐based language learning, where some tasks are designed to simulate real‐world activities (e.g., making a reservation at a restaurant). In contrast, many classroom tasks do not resemble activities we do in real life, and yet these tasks achieve interactional authenticity (Ellis, 2017). Consider an opinion gap activity in which a group of learners has to