volunteer contribution
- Thread starter webglider
- Start date
I did some transcription work for the old podcasts. If no one's started it, I can take #5, so there's some continuity. Has there been any sort of formatting agreed on yet?
paralleloscope
The Living Force
parallel said:
I think the best place to do it would be in the translation group. Once the Initial Transcript is done, we could bring it directly in the database of the translation group (done for #3) and someone else could proofread it and another volunteer could do, after the proofreading, whatever need to be done before publishing it on SOTT.
I am going to propose that to the translation mods and wait for their feedback.
dant
The Living Force
I liked how the other transcripts were done,
that is, to have it posted, standalone, with
the word "Transcript:" added to the beginning
of the title.
In this way, having a separate post lets us know
that a transcript is available, it can be cut and
pasted, translated, proofread, etc.
Having a transcript as an attachment within an
original post makes it difficult to know it is available
and it is hard to find it buried somewhere in many threads.
that is, to have it posted, standalone, with
the word "Transcript:" added to the beginning
of the title.
In this way, having a separate post lets us know
that a transcript is available, it can be cut and
pasted, translated, proofread, etc.
Having a transcript as an attachment within an
original post makes it difficult to know it is available
and it is hard to find it buried somewhere in many threads.
Muxel
Dagobah Resident
I do this in Audacity:webglider said:
magnify the waveform several times > highlight a segment of audio > Shift + leftclick the play button to put it on loop while I type > highlight another segment > repeat
An observation:
Speech is so organic; transcribed it's like "listening through the eyes" and doesn't quite do it justice IMO. And the Druids, who transmitted knowledge orally...
I omit most of the filler words and try to be faithful to what is spoken, and it still comes out an organic mess.
Hi everyone,
Thanks so much for the offers to transcribe the radio shows for the benefit of those with hearing issues or who can't access the show live.
Just a few reminders. The idea of a transcript is to give a sense of the show as it happened. It's fine to leave out some of the 'uuhs', 'ers', and 'you know's', and occasionally even some of the fragments of people collecting their thoughts, though I find (within reason) that they add to the "it's live" feeling of a transcript. In the main, it's crucially important to retain the conversation and events of the show as it flows. I know it's hard when the grammar alarms start going off, or something seems like it could have been phrased more succinctly, but a transcription should reproduce what was actually said, warts and all.
It's important too, to really listen and read what you've typed a couple of times, to be sure that you've gotten everything down. Sometimes a missed word will complete change the meaning of a speaker's comments. Review is tedious, but oh, so important. Think of it as being a court reporter who has to get the testimony of each witness exactly right.
In any case, do your best, and there will be plenty of eyes and ears to help with the final product. :)
Thanks so much for the offers to transcribe the radio shows for the benefit of those with hearing issues or who can't access the show live.
Just a few reminders. The idea of a transcript is to give a sense of the show as it happened. It's fine to leave out some of the 'uuhs', 'ers', and 'you know's', and occasionally even some of the fragments of people collecting their thoughts, though I find (within reason) that they add to the "it's live" feeling of a transcript. In the main, it's crucially important to retain the conversation and events of the show as it flows. I know it's hard when the grammar alarms start going off, or something seems like it could have been phrased more succinctly, but a transcription should reproduce what was actually said, warts and all.
It's important too, to really listen and read what you've typed a couple of times, to be sure that you've gotten everything down. Sometimes a missed word will complete change the meaning of a speaker's comments. Review is tedious, but oh, so important. Think of it as being a court reporter who has to get the testimony of each witness exactly right.
In any case, do your best, and there will be plenty of eyes and ears to help with the final product. :)
herondancer said:
There have been a few times in typing out the transcripts that Joe or Niall have been trying to say something a certain way but they reiterate it a different way to finalize their thought, and so I would skip out the initial thought formulation to give the transcript a better sense of flow or ease of reading. But I when I'm done, I'll go back and listen to the audio in it's entirety while reading the transcripts to see if I haven't taken away from the show by doing that.
I've been leaving those in for the most part, and I've been putting the interjected remarks from different people in parentheses in the place where it came in the other person's speech. Again, this is what adds to the "live" sense of the transcript. Imo, these are not university lectures, but interesting exchanges between intelligent people, done on the fly. So I prefer to leave in as much material as possible. There will be others who will look over the raw docs we provide and see if things need to be cleaned up here and there. It's much easier for them to edit out stuff, than add it in. :)
Fwiw there are also free (or limited) transcribing programs available, which are normally used for qualitative research to transcribe the interviews. Some if not all should have shortcuts to repeat the last 5 or 10 seconds, timestamps etc. Anyway onwards and upwards 
, cause it can be a difficult and long work.
, cause it can be a difficult and long work.
