Volume 28, Issue 2
  • ISSN 0924-1884
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9986
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes


Inspired by the belief that cognitive and pragmatic models of communication and discourse processing offer great potential for the study of Audiovisual Translation (AVT), this paper will review such models and discuss their contribution to conceptualising the three inter-related sub-processes underlying all forms of AVT: the comprehension of the multimodal discourse by the translator; the translation of selected elements of this discourse; and the comprehension of the newly formed multimodal discourse by the target audience. The focus will be on two models, Relevance Theory, which presents the most comprehensive pragmatic model of communication, and Mental Model Theory, which underlies cognitive models of discourse processing. The two approaches will be used to discuss and question common perceptions of AVT as being ‘constrained’ and ‘partial’ translation.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Arnold, Derek , and David Whitney
    2005 “Adaptation and Perceptual Binding in Sight and Sound.” InFitting the Mind to the World, ed. by Colin Clifford , and Gillian Rhodes , 339–360. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Bell, Victoria , and Philip Johnson-Laird
    1998 “A Model Theory of Modal Reasoning.” Cognitive Science22: 25–51. doi: 10.1207/s15516709cog2201_2
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog2201_2 [Google Scholar]
  3. Benecke, Bernd
    2014Audiodeskription als partielle Translation — Modell und Methode. Berlin: LitVerlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Bogucki, Łukasz
    2004 “The Constraint of Relevance in Subtitling.” JosTrans1: 71–88.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Braun, Sabine
    2007a “Audio Description from a Discourse Perspective: A Socially Relevant Framework for Research and Training.” Linguistica Antverpiensia NS6: 357–369.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. 2007b “Interpreting in Small-Group Bilingual Videoconferences: Challenges and Adaptation Processes.” Interpreting (9) 1: 21–46. doi: 10.1075/intp.9.1.03bra
    https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.9.1.03bra [Google Scholar]
  7. 2011 “Creating Coherence in Audio Description.” Meta (56) 3: 645–662. doi: 10.7202/1008338ar
    https://doi.org/10.7202/1008338ar [Google Scholar]
  8. Brown, Gillian , and George Yule
    1983Discourse Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511805226
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511805226 [Google Scholar]
  9. Desilla, Louisa
    2012 “Implicatures in Film: Construal and Functions in Bridget Jones Romantic Comedies.” Journal of Pragmatics (44) 1: 30–53. doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2011.10.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.10.002 [Google Scholar]
  10. Diaz Cintas, Jorge , and Aline Remael
    2007Subtitling. Manchester: St. Jerome.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Dicerto, Sara
    2015From Multimodal Translation to ‘Multimodal Pragmatics’: Developing a Theoretical Framework for the Study of Multimodal Translation. PhD diss. University of Surrey.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Fels, Deborah , John Patrick Udo , Jonas Diamond , and Jeremy Diamond
    2006 “Comparison of Alternative Narrative Approaches to Video Description for Animated Comedy.” Journal of Visual Impairment and Blindness (100) 5: 295–305.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Forceville, Charles
    2014 “Relevance Theory as a Model for Multimodal Communication.” InVisual Communication, ed. by David Machin , 51–70. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Fresno, Nazaret
    2014La (re)construcción de los personajes fílmicos en la audiodescripción. PhD diss. Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. www.tdx.cat/bitstream/handle/10803/285420/nfc1de1.pdf.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Gambier, Yves
    2009 “Challenges in Research on Audiovisual Translation.” InTranslation Research Projects 2, ed. by Anthony Pym , and Alexander Perekrestenko , 24–33. Tarragona: Intercultural Studies Group.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Gutt, Ernst-August
    2000Translation and Relevance. Cognition and Context. Manchester: St. Jerome.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. 2005 “On the Significance of the Cognitive Core of Translation.” The Translator (11) 1: 25–49. doi: 10.1080/13556509.2005.10799188
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13556509.2005.10799188 [Google Scholar]
  18. Herman, David
    2002Story Logic. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Jamieson, Harry
    2007Visual Communication: More Than Meets the Eye. Bristol: Intellect.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Johnson-Laird, Philip
    1983Mental Models. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. 2006How We Reason. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Kohn, Kurt , and Sylvia Kalina
    1996 “The Strategic Dimension of Interpreting.” Meta (42) 1: 118–138. doi: 10.7202/003333ar
    https://doi.org/10.7202/003333ar [Google Scholar]
  23. Kovačič, Irena
    1993 “Relevance as a Factor in Subtitling Reduction.” InTeaching Translation and Interpretation 2: Insights, Aims, Visions, ed. by Cay Dollerup , and Anne Lindegaard , 245–251. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Kress, Gunther
    1998 “Visual and Verbal Modes of Representation in Electronically Mediated Communication.” InPage to Screen, ed. by Illana Snyder , and Michael Joyce , 53–79. Sydney: Allen & Unwin. doi: 10.4324/9780203201220_chapter_3
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203201220_chapter_3 [Google Scholar]
  25. Kruger, Jan-Louis
    2012 “Making Meaning in AVT: Eyetracking and Viewer Construction of Narrative.” Perspectives: Studies in Translatology (20) 1: 67–86. doi: 10.1080/0907676X.2011.632688
    https://doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.2011.632688 [Google Scholar]
  26. Lemke, Jay
    2006 “Toward Critical Multimedia Literacy: Technology, Research, and Politics.” InInternational Handbook of Literacy and Technology, vol. 2, ed. by Michael McKenna , 2, 3–14. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Martínez, Juan José Sierra
    2010 “Approaching the Audio Description of Humour.” Entreculturas: revista de traducción y comunicación intercultural2: 87–103.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Matamala, Anna , and Pilar Orero
    2007 “Accessible Opera in Catalan: Opera for All.” InMedia for All, ed. by Jorge Díaz Cintas , Pilar Orero , and Aline Remael , 201–214. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. McGonigle, Frances
    2013Audio Description and Semiotics: The Translation of Films for Visually-Impaired Audiences. PhD diss. University of Surrey.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Orero, Pilar , and Anna Vilaró
    2012 “Eyetracking Analysis of Minor Details in Films for Audio Description.” MonTI4: 295–319. doi: 10.6035/MonTI.2012.4.13
    https://doi.org/10.6035/MonTI.2012.4.13 [Google Scholar]
  31. Setton, Robin
    1999Simultaneous Interpretation. A Cognitive-Pragmatic Approach. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/btl.28
    https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.28 [Google Scholar]
  32. Sperber, Dan , and Deirdre Wilson
    1995Relevance. Communication and Cognition. 2nd ed.Oxford: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Van Dijk, Teun , and Walter Kintsch
    1983Strategies of Discourse Comprehension. New York: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Vercauteren, Gert , and Aline Remael
    2014 “Audio-Describing Spatio-Temporal Settings.” InAudio Description: New Perspectives Illustrated, ed. by Pilar Orero , Anna Matamala , and Anna Maszerowska , 61–80. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Yus, Francisco
    2008 “Inferring from Comics: a Multi-Stage Account.” Quaderns de Filologia. Estudis de Comunicació3: 223–249.
    [Google Scholar]
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error