The relevance of redundancy in multimodal documents

Olli Philippe Lautenbacher

Abstract


The aim of this article is to refine the role of redundancy in deferred multimodal communication, from the standpoint of both communicators and their audiences and, by extension, translators. What is advocated here is the idea of a recursive reading process consisting of three phases (perception, construction and integration) and that this process is based on the detection of a salient series of trigger stimuli that the communicator offers as incentives. The shared ground of significance of these trigger compounds actually reveals core meanings in the document, especially when there is exophoric reference. In the translation process, any change within this redundancy system, such as a modification in the balance between endophora and exophora, might alter the overall reception experience.


Keywords


Reading process; Salience; Redundancy; Trigger compounds; Exophoric reference; Meaning making; Multimodal translation; Relevance theory; Constructon-Integration model

Full Text:

PDF

References


Barthes, R. (1964). Rhétorique de l’image, Communications, 4(1), 40–51. doi:10.3406/comm.1964.1027

Becher, V. (2010). Towards a more rigorous treatment of the explicitation hypothesis in translation studies. trans-kom, 3, 1–25. Retrieved from http://www.trans-kom.eu/bd03nr01/trans-kom_03_01_01_Becher_Explicitation.20100531.pdf

Forceville, C. (2014). Relevance theory as a model for analysing visual and multimodal communication. In D. Machin (Ed.), Visual communication (pp. 51–70). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London: Longman.

Harden, R. M., & Stamper, N. (1999). What is a spiral curriculum?, Medical Teacher, 21(2), 141–143. doi:10.1080/01421599979752

Ketola, A. (2016). Towards a multimodally oriented theory of translation: A cognitive framework for the translation of illustrated technical texts, Translation Studies, 9(1), 67–81. doi:10.1080/14781700.2015.1086670

King, M. L. Jr. (1963). “I have a dream”, Speech by the Rev. Martin Luther king at the “March on Washington”. Retrieved from https://www.archives.gov/files/press/exhibits/dream-speech.pdf

Kintsch, W. (1988). The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: A construction-integration model, Psychological Review, 95(2), 163–182. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.95.2.163

Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Klaudy, K. (2008). Explicitation. In M. Baker & G. Saldanha (Eds.), Encyclopedia of translation studies (pp. 80–85). London: Routledge

Kleiber, G. (2001). L’anaphore associative. Paris: Presses universitaires de France.

Lautenbacher, O. P. (2014). La redondance, principe moteur de la cohésion du film sous-titré: Étude de cas, Parallèles, 26, 53–68.

Mondada, L. (2016). Challenges of multimodality: Language and the body in social interaction, Journal of Sociolinguistics, 20(3), 336–366. doi:10.1111/josl.1_12177

Muñoz Martín, R. (2010). On paradigms and cognitive translatology. In G. M. Shreve & E. Angelone (Eds.), Translation and cognition (pp. 169–187). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Seliger, M. (2008). Katujen galleriat: Ulkomainonnan visuaalista retoriikkaa Helsingissä vuosina 2004–2005. Jyväskylä: Gummerus.

Shannon, C. E. (1948). A mathematical theory of communication. The Bell System Technical Journal, 27(3), 379–423. doi:10.1002/j.1538-7305.1948.tb01338.x

Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (1986/1995). Relevance theory: Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.

Todorović, D. (2008) Gestalt principles. Scholarpedia, 3(12), 5345. Retrieved from http://www.scholarpedia.org/article/Gestalt_principles

Vertanen, E. (2012). Ruututeksti tiedon ja tunteiden tulkkina. In R. Oittinen & P. Mäkinen (Eds.), Alussa oli käännös (pp. 131–153). Tampere: Tampere University Press.

Visual Cognition Laboratory, Kansas State University. (n.d.). Recognizing the gist of a scene. Retrieved from https://www.k-state.edu/psych/vcl/basic-research/scene-gist.html