In fact, whenever the information input is in a different language from that of the news agency, various transformations of source texts occur either through translation or edition. Hence, translation constitutes an important aspect of describing the processes of news production.
The role of translation in the process of news-making cannot be simply defined as transferring information from one language to another. Translation is practised as part of the overall process of news production, which is geared to the goal of conveying a specific model of a situation to news users.
In fact, journalists translate and manage the information in ways that can contribute to the establishment of institutional policies and ideologies. In this regard, a comparative structural analysis of source texts and translated news texts allows for studying the similarities and differences between the information that they provide to their respective target audiences and also the social responses that each specific set of information is intended to produce.
Also, the fact that information sources in news organisations involve foreign-language news articles may imply two models of a given situation: one conveyed in the text used as the source of information and the other one built in the news item produced for a new target linguistic community. The analysis of news discourses from a translation perspective can also involve comparing two models of one situation, where models, according to van Dijk, serve to update the knowledge and beliefs that media users already have regarding a given situation.
Furthermore, the various aspects and levels of analysis offered by van Dijk can be used for comparative investigations of parallel or comparable translation corpora. A translation approach to the structural analysis of news discourses allows for comparing the informative and persuasive functions of the translated sections of news discourses and their information sources. The results of such a comparative analysis could be linked to the institutional policies and ideologies of news agencies, and ultimately to the dominant norms and values governing the whole process of news-making as a social practice.
Meanings of audiences: comparative discourses - LSE Research Online
Aller au contenu principal. Mis en ligne le 24 nov Translation In Global News.
- Menu principal.
- Services on Demand.
- Reception theory.
- Essenza di aforismi e poesia (Gli emersi poesia) (Italian Edition)!
This ground-breaking collection offers original, empirical studies of discourses about audiences by bringing together a genuinely international range of work. With essays on audiences in ancient Greece, early modern Germany, Soviet and post-Soviet Russia, Zimbabwe, contemporary Egypt, Bengali India, China, Taiwan, and immigrant diaspora in Belgium, each chapter examines the ways in which audiences are embedded in discourses of power, representation, and regulation in different yet overlapping ways according to specific socio-historical contexts.
Suitable for both undergraduate and postgraduate students, this book is a valuable and original contribution to media and communication studies.
Meanings of Audiences: Comparative discourses
It will be particularly useful to those studying audiences and international media. Umberto Eco coined the term aberrant decoding to describe the case when the reader's interpretation differs from what the artist intended. In literature, the interaction between text and reader occurs within a framework that controls and limits the interaction, through genre, tone, structure, and the social conditions of the reader and author, whereas in landscapes the interaction occurs through movement and viewing, framed by typology instead of genre and tone.
Instead of an "implied reader", reception theory of landscapes assumes an "implied visitor", who is an abstracted concatenation of responses of many visitors at different times.
Van Dijk’s News as Discourse revisited
The theory recognizes that there is no single reading of a landscape that fulfills its entire potential, and that it is important to examine the motives of visitors and the factors influencing their visits whether they read guidebooks about the place before visiting, or had strong feelings about the place or the designer, for instance. One key difference between reception theory in literature and reception theory in landscape architecture is that while literary works are accessible only to the imagination, physical landscapes are accessible to the senses as well as to the imagination.
Reception theoretical analysis of architecture differs from typical writing on the history and analysis of landscapes, which tends to focus on the intentions of the designers, the conditions leading to the creation of the design, and the building process. Reception theory also tends to de-emphasize commonly used terms of description like 'formal' and 'picturesque', unless those terms were known to have meaning to landscape visitors themselves. According to Harold Marcuse ,  reception history is "the history of the meanings that have been imputed to historical events.
It traces the different ways in which participants, observers, historians and other retrospective interpreters have attempted to make sense of events both as they unfolded and over time since then, to make those events meaningful for the present in which they lived and live. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.