Miao

494 views

Published on

PPT for ARIN6912 Week 6

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
494
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Miao

  1. 1. Media Translation & Thinking
  2. 2.  The new medium checks our immense effect having lived to come into being.  The new medium has affected our life tremendously.
  3. 3. “Media Translation”  Print document electronic text  An act of interpretation  Something is gained as well as lost “textuality”
  4. 4. “Textuality” What is text? Traditional, editor’s view:  text— a compound of matter,concept and action; but has no substantial/material existence: no colour,font size,shape or page replacement (Shillingsburg)  A textual hierarchy——Notions of “work”, “text” and “document” in print bibliographic studies (Anna Gunder)
  5. 5. A textual hierarchy Work — “abstract artistic entity”; ideal constructions Text — manifest work through specific sign system Document — physical artifact merging with sign system
  6. 6. Recognising Textuality Conclusion:  The majority of editors and literary scholars assume the definitions of “work”, “text” and “document” are almost the same; “Ideal” work  They only focus on print media; Differences between print and electronic media are overlooked
  7. 7. Recognising Textuality  Differences between print and electronic 1. Stability  Print: After ink is impressed on paper, it remains stable and immovable  Electronic: does not exist until it is displayed on the screen
  8. 8. Recognising Textuallity Differences between print and electronic 2. Storage & Delivery Vehicles  Print: the same  Electronic texts: maybe different e.g. data files on one server while the machine creating the display in another location many possible variations in electronic text
  9. 9. Recognising Textuallity Differences between print and electronic 3. Prior existence vs Processural  Print : The print lines exist before the book is opened, read or understood.  An electronic text: have no prior existence; more like a process than an object
  10. 10. Recognising Textuallity Similarity between print and electronic Similarity: Both print and electronic text is not physically self- identical  Print : No text is identical to any others —differences always exist between any two physical objects  Electronic: Delivery vehicles producing network texts are never the same twice — “they exist in momentary configurations as data packets are switched quickly from one node to another” (Katherine
  11. 11. Recognising Textuallity Differences & similarity between print and electronic Conclusion: “Textuality is instantiated rather than dematerialialised, dispersed rather than unitary, processural rather than object-like, flickering ranther than durably imprinted.” Refine/ Revise our notion of materiality: e.g. precisely specify what a book is—impossible BECAUSE: As a physical object, it has uncountable physical characteristics. Each characteristic describe this book in a particular way
  12. 12. Materiality  A way to think about text as embodied entities without falling into the chaos of infinite differences: materiality  Definition: The materiality of an embodied text is the interaction of its physical characteristics with its signifying strategies.  Differences between “document”, “text” and “work” appear
  13. 13. Work as Assemblage (New framwork) Document 1 Document 2 Document 3 differences in materiality Text 1 (is sufficient) Text 2 Text 3 Text 4 similarities>differences clusters(near) clusters (far) eg.dif media Work
  14. 14. References & Relevant Readings  A Chinese-English translating website. http://trans.netat.net/index.php  The “William Blake Archive” http://www.blakearchive.org/blake/public/a bout/glance/index.html  Beard, D. (2008). From work to text to document. Archival Science, 8(3).  Manonton, B. (2006). Searching and indexing text document based on topic identification. The university of winsconsin.
  15. 15. Relevant Readings  Spencer, C. (2004). Use hidden text to easily create two different documents from one file. Inside Microsoft World,11(10).  Shinllingsburg, P. (2009). The dank cellar of electronic texts. Literary and Linguistic Computing, 24(1).  Sutherland, K. (2009). Material text, immaterial text and the electronic environment. . Literary and Linguistic Computing, 24(1).
  16. 16. Relevant Readings  Sehgal, A. K. (2007). Profiling topics on the Web for knowledge discovery. The University of Iowa.  Dahlstrom, M. (2004). How Reproductive is a Scholarly Edition?. Literacy and Linguistic Computing, 19(1).  Dahlstrom, M. (2004).Electronic Scholarly Editing-Some Northern European Approaches. Literacy and Linguistic Computing, 19(1).

×