The importance of subtitling software for interpreters can hardly be overrated – it provides a significant advantage for the professionals, who are assigned with the task of writing down the captions for a certain movie, TV program, a recording, etc. A range of people view subtitling software as a form of cheating; others believe that a subtitling software may fail a professional easily due to the mispronunciation of certain words and, therefore, the failure to capture the right one. However, when viewing subtitling software, such as WinCap, as a tool for providing support for a subtitler instead of doing the job of the latter, the above-mentioned program can be considered an essential tool for improving time management and the quality of subtitling and translation.
The use of software as a part of the subtitling process is often looked down at as a cheap substitute for an actual subtitler. The given statement can be viewed as true to a considerable degree; indeed, there is a possibility that it can be used as a lazy way of transcribing the speech without putting any actual effort into the process (Quah 7). The above-mentioned concern is, in fact, an integral part of the criticism for any equipment used as assistance in the process of translation or transcribing – the incorporation of the technology in question simplifies the process of subtitling (Cintas and Remael 13). As a result, the latter is reduced to editing the information supplied by the WinCap program, which might be efficient in terms of the output (Austermühl 3), yet may result in a significant drop in the proficiency of the person using it.
It should be noted, though, that WinCap cannot be considered the ultimate tool for creating subtitles without putting any actual effort into the process. Although the program does feature a range of innovative technologies and can even detect actual speech, providing subtitles in the process, it still identifies only a limited amount of sound variations (Gambier and Gottlieb 111). Specifically, the WinCap program may fail in case when a subtitler has to deal with a specific accentor to work with a recording of a speech pronounced in a specific dialect. Finally, the quality of the recording may affect the actual output to a considerable degree, turning the text generated by the software into gibberish.
Despite the above-mentioned issues, the technology is still admittedly impressive. Simplifying the job of a subtitler to checking the accuracy of the words recorded and making sure that the subtitles coincide with the recording, the WinCap program can be viewed as a huge breakthrough (Cintas and Remael 15). The properties of the software allow for integrating the visual and the audio information successfully (Bowker and Pearson 18) so that the user of the software could receive both types of information and process them accordingly; as a result, the output quality is increased significantly due to a more careful and a practically uninterrupted process of data analysis (Gambier and Gottlieb 112).
The addition of the automatic time option can be interpreted as a major advantage for the people, who write subtitles with the help of the program in question. To be more exact, the above-mentioned function can be viewed as a major assistance in timing the process of subtitling in accordance with the specifics of the working process and the environment, in which the person using the software has to work.
Finally, the issue of data storage deserves to be mentioned. While having an extensive memory is one of the subtitler’s prime assets, it is practically impossible to memorize every single bit of the information flow. Therefore, whenever a specific word or collocation used previously and requiring significant spelling skills emerges, going back in the notes in an attempt to locate the specified word or phrase and transcribe it properly is barely possible. This is the point, at which the subtitling software, such as WinCap, factors in as an essential tool for capturing data and retaining it for the further use.
Therefore, the usefulness of the program can be evaluated as moderate. Though the program has its flaws and may clearly be used for increasing the quantity of the work done instead of the quality thereof, it still supports a subtitler in the process of capturing the essential data required for putting a complex piece of text together. While WinCap is certainly not to be overused, it should be considered by professional subtitlers as a key tool to incorporate into their production process.
Though subtitling technologies, such as WinCap, can only be viewed as a support for an interpreter and not the substitute for actual subtitling skills, they still provide major assistance for translators, as they allow the latter to manage their time more efficiently and locate the appropriate equivalents for specific words in a faster manner. The WinCap technology, therefore, should be regarded as a major support for a subtitler and an impressive foot forward in the design of translation technology.
Works Cited
Austermühl, Frank. Electronic Tools for Translators. Manchester, UK: St. Jerome, 2001. Print.
Bowker, Lynne and Jennifer Pearson. Working with Specialized Language: A Practical Guide to Using Corpora. London, UK: Routledge, 2002. Print.
Cintas, Jorge Díaz and Aline Remael. Audiovisual Translation: Subtitling. Manchester, UK: Routledge, 2007. Print.
Gambier, Jerome Y. and Hans Gottlieb. (Multi) Media Translation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2001. Print.
Quah, Chiew Kin. Translation and Technology. Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2007. Print.