Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

BBC Subtitle Guidelines

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 88 posts

Re: BBC Subtitle Guidelines

#51

Post by jameshart »

TechBro8615 wrote: post #4

Something I've wondered... when politicians give speeches they often have some hand gesturing from a sign language interpreter standing next to them. But I've never understood why this is better than subtitles. If you're deaf then wouldn't you rather read text than follow sign language?

Think about how you learn to read - you 'sound out' words, turning letters into sounds to match them to a pronunciation to figure out what word is represented.

Now imagine trying to learn how to do that when you have never heard any words spoken out loud.

People who are deaf from birth often have a lot of difficulty with spelling and reading, because both skills are closely connected to saying and hearing words. Connecting written words to lip movements (which is kind of the closest thing to 'phonics' for a deaf person) is lossy - the letter-to-lip connections are fuzzier than letter-to-sound, and lip-to-letter is very ambiguous.

Subtitles are great for people who are confident and comfortable readers - say, people who have become deaf due to age - but for some deaf people following subtitles can be like asking someone who's dyslexic to quickly read a sentence out loud.

Re: BBC Subtitle Guidelines

#52

Post by IanCal »

enkid wrote: post #38
crazygringo wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but the closed captioning is still extremely good. The typists use chorded keyboards for speed and yes they occasionally make mistakes but everything is generally quite clear and accurate. On the other hand, signing involves actual translation , not just transcription, which is much more likely to drop meaning or introduce confusion. Translation is already hard enough, and live translation is a whole other leve…

I don't know much about sign language. Does it use a different grammar from English?

Yes, it's best to consider it an entirely different language rather than replacements of words.

Re: BBC Subtitle Guidelines

#53

Post by M2Ys4U »

crazygringo wrote: post #17
rwmj wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since I live with someone whose first language isn't English I basically watch everything with subtitles. And live subtitling - while it's a thing - isn't that good. Try turning on subtitles for something like a news programme or live broadcast and it'll usually be quite delayed, with lots of misspellings and even outright wrong text. (This is true for premier public broadcasters in the UK such as the BBC, I don't kn…

Sure, but the closed captioning is still extremely good. The typists use chorded keyboards for speed and yes they occasionally make mistakes but everything is generally quite clear and accurate. On the other hand, signing involves actual translation , not just transcription, which is much more likely to drop meaning or introduce confusion. Translation is already hard enough, and live translation is a whole other leve…

>Sure, but the closed captioning is still extremely good. The typists use chorded keyboards for speed and yes they occasionally make mistakes but everything is generally quite clear and accurate.

Live subtitling (on the BBC at least) is mainly done using re-speaking and voice recognition, rather than typing.

Re: BBC Subtitle Guidelines

#54

Post by M2Ys4U »

ErikVandeWater wrote: post #24

Couldn't find anything about the use of (sic) or [sic]. Maybe they want leeway on that so as not to be offensive?

The default position is that subtitles are a verbatim transcription of what was actually said, so there's no need for "[sic]".

Re: BBC Subtitle Guidelines

#55

Post by payamb »

fredoralive wrote: post #46
zinekeller wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it only Apple TV (and not on iPhone for example)? If it's Apple-wide I can imagine it but I'm curious what is the possible reason that BBC can't support having a separate subtitle renderer?

I just checked, iPad has it (and using colour coding, as that has come up elsewhere in these threads). On Apple TV a subtitle menu appears in the time bar, but it doesn't seem to do anything in either the "Automatic" or "CC" options it gives? CC is a bit of an Americanism, perhaps it is running more directly though some Apple playback code that is more particular about subtitle formats? I suspect the ultimate case is…

iPlayer on TV (across all platforms) is a generic web application, topped with a custom wrapper app (think webview) for each platform, responsible to hook platform’s native APIs to Web/JS APIs.

I’m guessing there are some complications hooking Apple TV’s native subtitles APIs to relevant web APIs, and low usage statistics doesn’t help prioritising fixing the issue. Although the rumour is that they are working on a completely new Apple TV app.

Re: BBC Subtitle Guidelines

#56

Post by mgkimsal »

crazygringo wrote: post #20
rwmj wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No I think you're missing the grandparent's point. Inflection in spoken language "translates" to facial expression in sign language.

No I'm getting that completely. But inflection in spoken language is redundant to a large degree with facial expression. If you're watching the original speaker, you're already getting that. For example, if we ask a question, it's not just that our voice goes up at the end. Our eyes move in a certain way too, slightly more opened and our eyebrows and sometimes cheeks raise.

Not everything that's spoken in a televised event has a single accompanying speaker to watch for cues the entire time.

Separately, relatively dry sarcasm can't be visually picked up directly, but a signer may be able to suggest some of that with body/hand language.

Re: BBC Subtitle Guidelines

#57

Post by dfee »

blowski wrote: post #36
crazygringo wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but the closed captioning is still extremely good. The typists use chorded keyboards for speed and yes they occasionally make mistakes but everything is generally quite clear and accurate. On the other hand, signing involves actual translation , not just transcription, which is much more likely to drop meaning or introduce confusion. Translation is already hard enough, and live translation is a whole other leve…

I'm not deaf, don't know any sign language, am not close friends with anyone who does. However, I understand that it's much easier to be expressive in sign language. Non-verbal language used by the speaker - sarcasm, tone, inflection - either translate badly, or get lost entirely when transliterating into subtitles. A talented sign-language translator is able to carry this over much better.

Yes, but.

Now, you’re getting the inflection of the interpreter and not the speaker (derivative). Certainly you’re not hearing inflection on the original orator, either, so maybe it’s a mixed bag.

Re: BBC Subtitle Guidelines

#58

Post by retrac »

TechBro8615 wrote: post #4

Something I've wondered... when politicians give speeches they often have some hand gesturing from a sign language interpreter standing next to them. But I've never understood why this is better than subtitles. If you're deaf then wouldn't you rather read text than follow sign language?

Sign languages are not coded speech. They are languages with their own grammar and vocabulary. For example, American SL is descended from Old French Sign Language and is partially understandable by French SL speakers today, while British SL is completely different, not in the same language family. It is even possible to write sign language. it is done like with spoken language. The most basic components, akin to phonemes in spoken language, are a closed set, assigning a symbol to each allows lossless transcription. Mostly used by linguists; but there are some books in ASL.

Deaf people who speak sign language natively approach English as a second language. And it is hard to learn a spoken language when deaf. English literacy rates among ASL native speakers are rather low.

Re: BBC Subtitle Guidelines

#59

Post by lazyeye »

retrac wrote: post #58
TechBro8615 wrote: post #4

Something I've wondered... when politicians give speeches they often have some hand gesturing from a sign language interpreter standing next to them. But I've never understood why this is better than subtitles. If you're deaf then wouldn't you rather read text than follow sign language?

Sign languages are not coded speech. They are languages with their own grammar and vocabulary. For example, American SL is descended from Old French Sign Language and is partially understandable by French SL speakers today, while British SL is completely different, not in the same language family. It is even possible to write sign language. it is done like with spoken language. The most basic components, akin to phon…

This has to be a generational thing. There is no way a deaf person growing up now is not going to be using the internet.

Re: BBC Subtitle Guidelines

#60

Post by matthewbarras »

rwmj wrote: post #9
TechBro8615 wrote: post #4

Something I've wondered... when politicians give speeches they often have some hand gesturing from a sign language interpreter standing next to them. But I've never understood why this is better than subtitles. If you're deaf then wouldn't you rather read text than follow sign language?

Since I live with someone whose first language isn't English I basically watch everything with subtitles. And live subtitling - while it's a thing - isn't that good. Try turning on subtitles for something like a news programme or live broadcast and it'll usually be quite delayed, with lots of misspellings and even outright wrong text. (This is true for premier public broadcasters in the UK such as the BBC, I don't kn…

We have subtitles on all the time for my little boy and can attest that the BBC is very poor - even on iPlayer.

Interesting side note: if ever subtitles are turned off, or we are watching TV elsewhere, me and my wife can't 'hear' well. Even if the volume is up. Like we've untrained our ability...

Post reply on HN