density scores in the subcorpus (relative frequencies, shown in percentages)
Chart 17. Rude and offensive lexicon in the subcorpus (relative frequencies, shown in percentages)
Chart 18. Terms of endearment in the subcorpus (relative frequencies, shown in percentages)
Chart 19. Distribution of exploitations in the ST subcorpus (relative frequencies per episode, shown in percentages)
Chart 20. Percentage occurence of types of translation solutions [T]; for each type of exploitation
←xiv | xv→
Figure 1. The hybrid nature of subtitling, holding features of translation, summarisation and medium conversion
Figure 2. Main phases in the CoPP’s ST and TT creation process
Figure 3. Treetagger example output (from M01)
Figure 4. Output of Stanford Parser showing treatment of unfinished sentence
Figure 5. Output of Stanford Parser showing treatment of fronting
Figure 6. Output of Stanford Parser showing treatment of ellipsis and repetition
Figure 7. Extract from specificities sheet provided by a multinational entertainment company to a subtitling company
Figure 8. The interplay between metaphors and intertextuality
Figure 9. TV dialogue and subtitling in the continuum from spoken to written language
←xv | xvi→←xvi | xvii→
Screenshot 1. Visual context for Example 72 [D02, 01:22:28:12]
Screenshot 2. Illustration of the use of to dump the garbage in Dexter: the protagonist collects the victim’s body parts [D01, 00:37:08:16]
Screenshot 3. Illustration of the use of to have the upper hand in Dexter: the protagonist threatens his victim [D02, 01:43:56:09]
Screenshot 4. Visual context for Example 87 [C01, 01:02:13:17]
Screenshot 5. Visual context for Example 88 [D01 00:44:32:15]
←xvii | xviii→←xviii | xix→
Table 2. Four components of the audiovisual text (from Zabalbeascoa 2008a: 24)
Table 3. Types of language according to Koch and Oesterreicher (1990)
Table 4. Summary of features typically attributed to spoken and written language
Table 5. Dexter: series’ details
Table 6. The Mentalist: series’ details
Table 7. Castle: series’ details
Table 8. Duration and word count of the episodes in the CoPP
Table 9. Previous accounts on ST-TT word reduction (selection of works)
Table 10. Participants involved in each type of sequence
Table 11. Language varieties in the CoPP
Table 12. Percentage distribution of lexical word categories in the CoPP
←xix | xx→
Table 15. Linear discriminant analysis results for PoS distribution (ST)
Table 16. Linear discriminant analysis results for PoS distribution (TT)
Table 17. Number of sentences in each episode of the CoPP
Table 18. p-values after computing t-test on number of sentences (same series, ST vs TT)
Table 20. Sentences per subtitle in the CoPP
Table 21. p-values after computing t-test on types of clauses (ST vs TT comparison)
Table 23. Sentence length scores in the CoPP
Table 24. p-values after computing t-test on sentence length (same series, ST vs TT)
Table 26. Conjuncts considered for analysis of coordination in the CoPP
