| Translationswissenschaft »  

Audiovisual Translation Studies

Editorial Statement

Audiovisual translation is omnipresent in the age of digital media and is found in many different forms. Dubbing and subtitling are the best known practices, but surtitling, audio description, voice-over, localisation of video games and the entire domain of intersemiotic and intermodal adaptations also belong to the field. Translation processes - understood as the (partial) exchange of the given means of expression for new ones, whether emanating from the same or a different language or even entirely different sign systems - open up new target audiences for audiovisual products. This has economic, but also intangible benefits such as the many inter- and transcultural appropriation strategies, creative transformations (screen adaptations, remakes etc.), and the compensations for or removal of reception barriers (e.g., subtitling for the Deaf and hard-of-hearing).

The series Audiovisual Translation Studies (AVTS) aims to bring such translation processes into focus. It is open to authors whose works deal with innovative theoretical, applied, methodological or interdisciplinary questions on audiovisual translation. Both monographs (e.g., dissertations, post-doctoral theses) and thematically bound anthologies (conference proceedings, etc.) are envisaged as forms of publication. All book proposals go through a rigorous peer review process. The languages of publication are English, German, French, Italian, and Spanish. The series, published by Frank & Timme in Berlin, is committed to the Open Access principle. Its volumes will be published in hybrid form, i.e., in both print and digital format, and will be accessible online free of charge.

Board

Editors

Alexander Künzli (Université de Genève)

Marco Agnetta (Universität Innsbruck)

Advisory Board

Nazaret Fresno (University of Texas Rio Grande Valley)

Jan-Louis Kruger (Macquarie University)

Iwona Mazur (Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań

Dingkun Wang (University of Hong Kong)

Gert Vercauteren (University of Antwerp)

Ethics Statement

The series’ ethics policy is based on the guidelines published by COPE, the Committee on Publication Ethics.

Editors’ responsibilities

The editors have the overall responsibility for the series’ quality control and have the authority to accept a submitted manuscript for publication. More specifically, they commit to:

• giving prompt and unbiased consideration to all manuscripts received;
• providing clear guidelines for manuscript submission and review;
• protecting authors’ confidentiality and reviewers’ anonymity unless peer review will be conducted single-blind or non-blind;
• not using unpublished information disclosed in submitted manuscripts in their own research;
• ensuring that manuscripts submitted by researchers involved in the series’ editing process are also peer reviewed;
• checking the originality of all manuscripts submitted for publication using plagiarism detection software.

Authors’ responsibilities

Authors commit to submitting original research and to properly acknowledging the work and ideas of others. More specifically, they agree to:

• declare that their manuscript is not being considered for publication elsewhere, and will not be as long as the review process is ongoing;
• participate in the peer review process and revise the manuscript accordingly;
• provide, if necessary, information about where the data supporting the analyses or results presented in the manuscript can be accessed;
• clarify all questions concerning authorship attribution before submitting the manuscript.

Peer reviewers’ responsibilities

Reviewers commit to providing an objective and informed assessment of the manuscript using the evaluation grid published on the series’ website. More specifically, they agree to:

• explain and support their assessment in such a way that editors can understand the basis for their comments and authors can improve the quality of their manuscripts;
• disclose any potential conflict of interest – professional, personal or financial – with authors, and avoid cases where such conflicts prevent an objective evaluation;
• keep information obtained during the peer review process confidential and not use it for competitive advantage.