Linguistic Team International Forum

Hello!

I'm taking the R2 on this one...

xx

My God! It really looks (and sounds!) like this one has been sped up! Does anyone know anything about this? or is ti just really late for me and I need to sleep? xx

Let me take a stab at proofreading this. I'm not sure whether I need to get some permission but I'll at least make some notes to myself and maybe post them here, if I can't in dotSUB.

Georgy.

R2 proofreading complete! I'm not sure how accurate the time-shifting is on this one... But then again PJ is speaking at record high speed on this one

xx

Oops, seems like gentlejewel has been working on this when I grabbed it.

Like I thought - I didn't have permissions to make changes but at this point it's probably better to not just make the changes but post the suggestions here and let others review them...

Well, here are my suggestions...

In general, I noticed that some "you know" empty phrases were removed throughout the interview and things like "gonna" were replaced with "going to". I don't know what is the principle we try to follow, so I ignored them. In some cases we did deviate from what was actually spoken a bit too much, I think. It's nice to clean up the language but at the same time it's also nice to preserve the authenticity of the spontaneous interview speech...

And here are some concrete suggestions. For some of them I noticed in the notes, posted above, that the original was edited and resulted in the discrepancy. So, it's a judgment call. For the rest, I have added or removed text in the square brackets, or replaced it (again in square brackets and a => to denote from what to what)

0:44 - which is worth mentioning[, which is] the life work of Jacque Fresco.
0:53 - [compiling] ideologies...
2:50 - ...the entire environemnt has to be low-stress[remove -ed]
3:08 - ...this system [or => you're] indoctrinated...
3:10 - [and] you think the system...
3:11 - [then yes. 10 dollars a gallon...] => uh, yes, 10 dollar-a-gallon...
3:59 - If we [are => aren't] adapting...
4:18 - ...high gasoline [prices]...
5:48 - 'The Corporatocracy'[ is => , this is]
6:19 - ...the [World ?Bank ?areas => World Bank or any other institution]
6:24 - ...they cut natural [forest => gas] programs... (I belive Peter is talking about the cut to the natural gas subsidy that existed for poor people - it was recently cut and poor people would have to freeze)
7:10 - ...[industrial revolution => Industrial Revolution]
7:34 - more we mechanize, [the] less jobs [there are and], less money in circulation - (the original text before the edits was clear enough, I think)
7:53 - Forget the labor [crippling => ???intensive???] system... (really loud background noise there but I don't think it's "crippling")
7:55 - ...on this planet, [what's called => what I call]
8:45 - ...suffering, [deaths => death], more...
10:26 - ...[Again, if you get out of the hydrocarbon economy, if] => again, you get out of the hydrocarbon economy. If
10:38 - ...whatever [temple or => temporal] purpose...

Hey Georgy - you'll get the hang of how things work soon enough...

Did you see my notes here http://sync.in/LD3u292U0f ? (for every doc there are notes where the proofreaders put their comments). This is where you can see why I've put things the way they are... I believe it's protocol to first read other proofreaders notes before doing another round.

To start with I found this doc to be really quickly spoken (quicker than usual) so that's why I've taken out words where I thought it was appropriate/possible... I've seen Bruno do this and he sets a great example in my opinion. He's also been around for ages so he knows what he's doing...

To the best of my knowledge we are supposed to omit slang: gonna = going to etc, wanna = want to etc.

In regards to your suggestions, here are my comments:
0:44 - which is worth mentioning[, which is] the life work of Jacque Fresco. (string was too long or too quickly spoken)


0:53 - [compiling] ideologies... (you're right! this can go back in there)


2:50 - ...the entire environment has to be low-stress[remove -ed] (also right!)


3:08 - ...this system [or => you're] indoctrinated... (string was too long and it's unnecessary to have this written again in my opinion - he says it in the part before)


3:10 - [and] you think the system... 3:11 - [then yes. 10 dollars a gallon...] => uh, yes, 10 dollar-a-gallon... (I just thought this was better to do it like this)


3:59 - If we [are => aren't] adapting... (the conclusion to this sentence doesn't make sense in my opinion if 'aren't' is here - see notes)


4:18 - ...high gasoline [prices]... (I thought it necessary to add prices - what is high gasoline otherwise?)


5:48 - 'The Corporatocracy'[ is => , this is] (if you read my notes you'll understand why I've omitted the 'this' - I'm not sure how to explain it here)


6:19 - ...the [World ?Bank ?areas => World Bank or any other institution] (Great! I couldn't hear what he was saying here)


6:24 - ...they cut natural [forest => gas] programs... (I believe
Peter is talking about the cut to the natural gas subsidy that existed
for poor people - it was recently cut and poor people would have to
freeze) (Fantastic! I was trying to research it but couldn't find what he was talking about - I also couldn't distinguish which words he was using)


7:10 - ...[industrial revolution => Industrial Revolution] - (of course!)


7:34 - more we mechanize, [the] less jobs [there are and], less money in
circulation - (the original text before the edits was clear enough, I
think) -(hmmm, I disagree but this is best left up to the final reviewer I believe)


7:53 - Forget the labor [crippling => ???intensive???] system...
(really loud background noise there but I don't think it's "crippling") (pretty sure he says crippling, but of course I could be wrong )


7:55 - ...on this planet, [what's called => what I call] (there are more people besides PJ that call it that...)

8:45 - ...suffering, [deaths => death], more... (right you are! until last night I was only up to here and I changed it this morning)


10:26 - ...[Again, if you get out of the hydrocarbon economy, if you get out of the... ] => again, you get out of the hydrocarbon economy. If (pretty sure he says it like this)


10:38 - ...whatever [temple or => temporal] purpose... (indeed! I missed this one!)

Oooof - quite a lot of work relaying input over the forum, don't you agree? Perhaps next time we could do a skype meeting instead?

xx Julie

I'll begin the Final Review on this one now. It will be nice to listen to PJ again!
((hugs)) from me,
Di

Hey, Guys!
This one is ready. I noticed the struggles of my fella proofers who had come before me and posted in this thread. There were some nice edits and the notepad was helpful to offer explanations for them. Two things I really noticed: There was the overuse of hyphens in places where there was no change of speaker. It could be important in this video because it's a dialogue between two speakers (interviewer & PJ) and we need the hyphen to indicate the change. This is vital to the hearing impaired, but I imagine it is helpful to translators too. Another common error was the run-on sentence, which isn't acceptable, of course, unless you are Charles Dickens. What I saw mostly here were simple sentences joined together by commas. This is easily corrected with a period and a capital letter.

I commented on the notepad because I hoped this would encourage discussions for the Eng proofin' folk. If we're all doing the same thing, we'll work smarter, for sure. We'll be able to produce better products faster, but to do that, we need to be following the same guidelines. It's not easy proofreading video, something I've really learned myself over these past months, and I've needed to adjust my understanding of the guidelines, too, along the way.

This is a fantastic interview! I love the editing job that someone smarter than I put together with the clips from 'Moving Forward' in the background of PJ's responses.

Sweet Bru, let me know if you question anything.
Love to all,
Di :roe:

SupeeeeeeerDiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii!!

What a nice report here!! These small and easy to let pass details that you mentioned are huge in consequence since the message on the transcription will be translated. And we all have played the game of passing the message from one ear to the next and realized that the final message is always different than the one which initiated the circuit And a coma is enough to do this.

By the way, I am reviewing Addendum's Portuguese translation and noticed that this project, which was reviewed by the English team some time ago, even that very carefully, has a much lower quality English transcript than the videos we are opening for translation today!! And this is amazing considering the way this international voluntary team is working! Quantity was our concern for a long time. Today "quality" is something we can use to describe the English transcriptions way to go folks!!

hugs,