BEGIN:VCALENDAR VERSION:2.0 PRODID:-//Sabre//Sabre VObject 4.5.7//EN CALSCALE:GREGORIAN BEGIN:VTIMEZONE TZID:Europe/Zurich X-LIC-LOCATION:Europe/Zurich TZURL:http://tzurl.org/zoneinfo/Europe/Zurich BEGIN:DAYLIGHT TZOFFSETFROM:+0100 TZOFFSETTO:+0200 TZNAME:CEST DTSTART:19810329T020000 RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;BYMONTH=3;BYDAY=-1SU END:DAYLIGHT BEGIN:STANDARD TZOFFSETFROM:+0200 TZOFFSETTO:+0100 TZNAME:CET DTSTART:19961027T030000 RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;BYMONTH=10;BYDAY=-1SU END:STANDARD END:VTIMEZONE BEGIN:VEVENT UID:news559@english.philhist.unibas.ch DTSTAMP;TZID=Europe/Zurich:20250129T161844 DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Zurich:20240924T124500 SUMMARY:Screen-to-text discourses: Writing in an audiovisual context DESCRIPTION:In my talk\, based on the research I published over the last fi ve years\, I delve into the ways three types of written discourse are shap ed by their orientation towards the screen.\\r\\n Subtitling is not only a diagonal translational process that renders spoken dialogue into a writt en target text in the same or a different language. It is also a voice of the collective sender (the conglomerate of agents who together produce fil m or television)\, a part of telecinematic meaning-making\, and a text gen re that is shaped by its copresence with and orientation towards an audiov isual artefact. Pseudo-synchronous comments written by fans while watchi ng television episodes are a way of engaging with other fans as well as wi th the contemporaneously streaming fictional artefact. Scholarly transcr iption of film or television data metonymically renders the same audiovisu al artefact in a more distant offscreen fashion but is similarly shaped by its focus towards the screen. \\r\\nEmploying a linguistic pragmatic len s to these discourses\, I outline the characteristics of screen-to-text di scourse in terms of the commonalities between these three types of texts w hile also highlighting some of the particularities each type of data exhib its – from authoritative pre-processing of information in subtitles\, to collaborative meaning-making in comments\, to a selective reproduction an d recontextualization in transcription. X-ALT-DESC:

In my talk\, based on the research I published over the last five years\, I delve into the ways three types of written discourse are sh aped by their orientation towards the screen.

\n
  1. < span>Subtitling is not only a diagonal translational process that renders spoken dialogue into a written target text in the same or a different lang uage. It is also a voice of the collective sender (the conglomerate of age nts who together produce film or television)\, a part of telecinematic mea ning-making\, and a text genre that is shaped by its copresence with and o rientation towards an audiovisual artefact.
    2. Pseudo-synchronous comments written by fans while watc hing television episodes are a way of engaging with other fans as well as with the contemporaneously streaming fictional artefact.
  2. Scholarly transcription of film or televi sion data metonymically renders the same audiovisual artefact in a more di stant offscreen fashion but is similarly shaped by its focus towards the s creen.
\n

Employing a linguistic pragmat ic lens to these discourses\, I outline the characteristics of screen-to-t ext discourse in terms of the commonalities between these three types of t exts while also highlighting some of the particularities each type of data exhibits – from authoritative pre-processing of information in subtitle s\, to collaborative meaning-making in comments\, to a selective reproduct ion and recontextualization in transcription.

DTEND;TZID=Europe/Zurich:20240924T134500 END:VEVENT END:VCALENDAR