Introduction 2 Problem Statement 3 The RASU Audio Description Project 3.1 Background 3.2 Data 4 A Roster for Audio Description Analysis 4.1 Communication Partners 4.1.1 Communication level Kom A 4.1.2 Communication level Kom A' 4.1.3 Communication level Kom B 4.1.4 Communication level Kom B' 4.1.5 Communication level Kom C 4.1.6 Communication level Kom C' 5 Communicative Levels analyzed in "Sams in Gefahr" 6 Theme/Rheme characteristics 6.1 Assumed knowledge in the communication with the blind and visually impaired 6.2 Time code changes and Theme/Rheme 6.3 Introducing 'intended hyper descriptions' 6.4 Changing focus of attention 6.5 Introducing Character Fixation 7 Summary 8 References 9 Appendix: Audio Description "Sams in Gefahr" (Minutes 0-7

This paper presents results of an eye-tracking study involving sight translation. It was assumed that interpreting trainees at a more advanced stage of training would display more efficient reading patterns than their less experienced colleagues. Eighteen participants with either one year or two years of interpreting training were asked to sight translate a text from A language (Polish) into B language (English). The text included such independent variables as target sentence type (simple SVO sentences and complex non-SVO sentences) and low frequency lexical items. The dependent variables included measures assumed to indicate lexical access and syntactic processing, such as fixation count, fixation length and observation length. The study found no group effect in total task time and processing of lexical items, which indicates that one year of training might not be sufficient to show differences in the sight translation skill development. The study also revealed that sentence readability could be a better predictor of processing load than syntax and, as expected, that more readable sentences generated less cognitive load than less readable ones.

The issue of interpretation in audio description continues to divide both AD practitioners and researchers. In this contribution we look at interpretation from the point of view of narratological behaviour of sighted viewers. To this end, we analyse data from twelve languages collected in the Pear Tree Project -a research project in which sighted viewers were asked to watch a short film and subsequently recount what they saw. Linking our findings to AD, we find in our analysis that sighted viewers interpret visual events but they avoid extremely subjective interpretations or interpretations in which they pass moral judgments. Thus, we propose that instead of applying the binary opposition of objective versus subjective, we should rather be using an objectivity-subjectivity scale, which can help determine which interpretive descriptions are less subjective and can consequently be used in AD without running the risk of being patronising or spoonfeeding the sense to the visually impaired.

Abstract:The article reports on the Pear Tree Project (PTP), conducted as part of the Media for All project whose original aim was to develop audio description (AD) guidelines in Europe in order to ensure consistent high quality AD. However, before streamlining AD standards, a number of issues had to be addressed, the most essential one being whether relevant cross-linguistic and cross-cultural differences in Europe are insignificant enough to enable the development of such common European AD guidelines.In order to answer these questions a methodology proposed by Chafe (1980) concerning the way representatives of various cultures and languages perceive and describe moving images was adopted by a group of AD researchers in the PTP. Participants from various countries were asked to watch a short film and recount what they saw. The data were then subjected to comparative lexical, discourse and narrative analysis in order to uncover both similarities and differences in the processing of visual information by representatives of the languages and cultures concerned. The results and their analysis will be presented in the paper on the basis of which the authors will attempt to provide an answer to the question of whether creating common European audio description guidelines is feasible.

In recent years localization has become a popular concept in both translation practice and theory. It has developed a language of its own, which, however, still seems to be little known among translation scholars. What is more, being primarily an industry-based discourse, the terms related to localization are very fluid, which makes theorizing about it difficult. Therefore, the aim of this article is, first of all, to explain the basic terms of the metalanguage of localization, as they are used by both localization practitioners and scholars, and, secondly, to make this metalanguage more consistent by proposing some general definitions that cover the basic concepts in localization. This, in turn, should, on the one hand, facilitate scholar-to-practitioner communication and vice versa and, on the other, should result in concept standardization for training purposes. In the conclusions I link the present discussion of the metalanguage of localization to a more general debate on metalanguage(s) in Translation Studies and propose that in the future we might witness the emergence of a new discipline called Localization Studies.