(scoffs)

[Jerry Friedman]

I'm visiting my mother, which means I'm watching TV (mostly crime and
espionage thrillers) with the captions on. I've noticed that when a
character makes a non-verbal noise the caption is sometimes "(scoffs)".
The noises are often faint, so I can't tell what they are, but I think
they're often through the nose and are what I'd call a snort (unvoiced)
or would write "hmph" (partly voiced). Often there's no suggestion of
mockery.

Have other people noticed this? Am I right in thinking it wasn't
used a year ago, the last time I visited Mom? Has anyone run into it
outside captions? It's not in AHD, M-W, or OED, but the Urban
Dictionary has a definition from 2005:

"a sarcastic cough
basically to cough and laugh at the same time to a funny situation"

Maybe the caption sense is influenced by "cough".

--
Jerry Friedman

[Cheryl]

I've encountered "scoff" as meaning to mock or dismiss something, with
no implication as to what kind of sound is involved. In fact, until I
started seeing it in captions, I assumed that words were often involved,
not mere snorts. Sometimes captions use "scoff" in places I think I
wouldn't.

--
Cheryl

[Horace LaBadie]

In article <c05adaac-f656-492c...@googlegroups.com>,

Captioning for The Hearing Impaired as opposed to Closed Captioning,
provides descriptions of non-verbal noises and sounds, such as
mood-music, engines, gunshots, floorboard creaks, etc., to allow the
viewer to catch the nuances of a scene that the soundtrack provides. A
(scoff) might express some intention in the character's demeanor when
the non-verbal utterance was made.

The similarity to cough certainly might have influenced the description.

[Jerry Friedman]

On Wednesday, December 23, 2015 at 11:29:25 AM UTC-5, Horace LaBadie wrote:
> In article <c05adaac-f656-492c...@googlegroups.com>,
> Jerry Friedman <jerry_f...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > I'm visiting my mother, which means I'm watching TV (mostly crime and
> > espionage thrillers) with the captions on. I've noticed that when a
> > character makes a non-verbal noise the caption is sometimes "(scoffs)".
> > The noises are often faint, so I can't tell what they are, but I think
> > they're often through the nose and are what I'd call a snort (unvoiced)
> > or would write "hmph" (partly voiced). Often there's no suggestion of
> > mockery.
> >
> > Have other people noticed this? Am I right in thinking it wasn't
> > used a year ago, the last time I visited Mom? Has anyone run into it
> > outside captions? It's not in AHD, M-W, or OED, but the Urban
> > Dictionary has a definition from 2005:
> >
> > "a sarcastic cough
> > basically to cough and laugh at the same time to a funny situation"
> >
> > Maybe the caption sense is influenced by "cough".
>
> Captioning for The Hearing Impaired as opposed to Closed Captioning,
> provides descriptions of non-verbal noises and sounds, such as
> mood-music, engines, gunshots, floorboard creaks, etc., to allow the
> viewer to catch the nuances of a scene that the soundtrack provides.

That seems to be what we're using.

> A
> (scoff) might express some intention in the character's demeanor when
> the non-verbal utterance was made.

I assure you that I detected no scoffing in many of the situations where
it was used.

> The similarity to cough certainly might have influenced the description.

Thanks.

--
Jerry Friedman

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Wednesday, December 23, 2015 at 11:29:25 AM UTC-5, Horace LaBadie wrote:

> In article <c05adaac-f656-492c...@googlegroups.com>,
> Jerry Friedman <jerry_f...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > I'm visiting my mother, which means I'm watching TV (mostly crime and
> > espionage thrillers) with the captions on. I've noticed that when a
> > character makes a non-verbal noise the caption is sometimes "(scoffs)".
> > The noises are often faint, so I can't tell what they are, but I think
> > they're often through the nose and are what I'd call a snort (unvoiced)
> > or would write "hmph" (partly voiced). Often there's no suggestion of
> > mockery.
> >
> > Have other people noticed this? Am I right in thinking it wasn't
> > used a year ago, the last time I visited Mom? Has anyone run into it
> > outside captions? It's not in AHD, M-W, or OED, but the Urban
> > Dictionary has a definition from 2005:
> >
> > "a sarcastic cough
> > basically to cough and laugh at the same time to a funny situation"
> >
> > Maybe the caption sense is influenced by "cough".
>
> Captioning for The Hearing Impaired as opposed to Closed Captioning,
> provides descriptions of non-verbal noises and sounds, such as
> mood-music,

Have you ever encountered a description of the music? I've only seen
the two-eighth-notes glyph to indicate that music is playing, and
very very rarely they transcribe the words of a song being heard.

> engines, gunshots, floorboard creaks, etc., to allow the
> viewer to catch the nuances of a scene that the soundtrack provides. A
> (scoff) might express some intention in the character's demeanor when
> the non-verbal utterance was made.

I think that's not the only parenthesized grunt-indicator, but it's
probably the most common. I only turn on the subtitles when the dialog is
either in Colloquial Brit or hidden behind loud "background" music.
(Loren Order CI was an egregious example of the latter. Both Harry Potter
and LotR are examples of the two conspiring together.)

[Horace LaBadie]

In article <07f51d51-1993-4246...@googlegroups.com>,

"Peter T. Daniels" <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:

> On Wednesday, December 23, 2015 at 11:29:25 AM UTC-5, Horace LaBadie wrote:
> > In article <c05adaac-f656-492c...@googlegroups.com>,
> > Jerry Friedman <jerry_f...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > > I'm visiting my mother, which means I'm watching TV (mostly crime and
> > > espionage thrillers) with the captions on. I've noticed that when a
> > > character makes a non-verbal noise the caption is sometimes "(scoffs)".
> > > The noises are often faint, so I can't tell what they are, but I think
> > > they're often through the nose and are what I'd call a snort (unvoiced)
> > > or would write "hmph" (partly voiced). Often there's no suggestion of
> > > mockery.
> > >
> > > Have other people noticed this? Am I right in thinking it wasn't
> > > used a year ago, the last time I visited Mom? Has anyone run into it
> > > outside captions? It's not in AHD, M-W, or OED, but the Urban
> > > Dictionary has a definition from 2005:
> > >
> > > "a sarcastic cough
> > > basically to cough and laugh at the same time to a funny situation"
> > >
> > > Maybe the caption sense is influenced by "cough".
> >
> > Captioning for The Hearing Impaired as opposed to Closed Captioning,
> > provides descriptions of non-verbal noises and sounds, such as
> > mood-music,
>
> Have you ever encountered a description of the music? I've only seen
> the two-eighth-notes glyph to indicate that music is playing, and
> very very rarely they transcribe the words of a song being heard.

(Suspenseful music) and similar descriptions pop up from time to time.

[Default User]

Peter T. Daniels wrote:

> On Wednesday, December 23, 2015 at 11:29:25 AM UTC-5, Horace LaBadie
> wrote:

> > Captioning for The Hearing Impaired as opposed to Closed
> > Captioning, provides descriptions of non-verbal noises and sounds,
> > such as mood-music,
>
> Have you ever encountered a description of the music? I've only seen
> the two-eighth-notes glyph to indicate that music is playing, and
> very very rarely they transcribe the words of a song being heard.

Not in my experience. At least with the shows I watch, the CC
frequently shows the lyrics. Sometimes they even give the name of the
song and artist at the start, which can be quite useful if it's one I
know and enjoy so I can look up it up later.

As an interesting (to me) feature, you can sometimes see where a late
change in the song to play was made, as the lyrics won't match.


Brian

[Peter T. Daniels]

That could also result from limitations in the original contracts for the
use of music. Some show or other couldn't be released on DVD because the
music, which was an integral part, hadn't been cleared for "mechanical
license," but only for the original broadcast (and maybe a summer rerun or so).

[Tony Cooper]

I kinda skimmed this thread, but did notice the Subject line.

Earlier this evening we were watching an episode of "Midsomer Murders"
with the closed-captioning on. One of the characters made some sort
of sound and the closed-captioning read (scoffs). Just a few scenes
later, the same thing happened again.

When music is playing in the "Midsomer Murders" episodes the caption
will read something like (orchestral music plays). Sometimes it reads
something like (dramatic orchestral music).

We don't have a problem with accents in "Midsomer Murders", but I do
have a hearing problem. We use the closed-captioning just because we
don't want to turn the TV so loud the neighbors are part of the show.

In case you were watching the same thing, Jerry, it was the episode
where an environmental inspector is murdered in an old timberyard.
"Country Matters", #6, Series 9, 2006.



--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

[Stan Brown]

On Wed, 23 Dec 2015 11:29:20 -0500, Horace LaBadie wrote:
> Captioning for The Hearing Impaired as opposed to Closed Captioning,
> provides descriptions of non-verbal noises and sounds, such as
> mood-music, engines, gunshots, floorboard creaks, etc., to allow the
> viewer to catch the nuances of a scene that the soundtrack provides
>

Thank you. I never understood the distinction. It always seemed odd
to me, when watching a movie on DVD, to get a choice of subtitles in
"French", "Spanish", or "English for the Deaf or Hard of Hearing"
(sometimes shown in the menu as "English SDH").

--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
http://BrownMath.com/
http://OakRoadSystems.com/
"The difference between the /almost right/ word and the
/right/ word is ... the difference between the lightning-bug
and the lightning." --Mark Twain

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Wednesday, December 23, 2015 at 11:54:39 PM UTC-5, Tony Cooper wrote:

> Earlier this evening we were watching an episode of "Midsomer Murders"
> with the closed-captioning on.

In American we call that "subtitles," with "closed captioning" referring
to the simultaneous-transcription used for live (or nearly so) broadcasts,
done on the fly and usually error-ridden and several exchanges behind.

[Tony Cooper]

No, we call it what the service calls it. To have the words
displayed, I have to go to Settings on my TV and turn on "Closed
Captioning". The term is "Closed Captioning" because the service is
"closed" unless you open it using the set controls. When "open", the
closed captioning works on all programs.

I didn't pay attention to this aspect on Midsomer Murders, but many
programs show "Closed captioning provided by" and the sponsor of that
service.

[Peter T. Daniels]

The two DIFFERENT modes appear differently on the screen when they are
activated. Subtitles are neatly printed, in caps and lowercase, puctuated,
grammatical, and properly spelled. Closed captioning appears letter-by-letter
as it is typed by the transcriber, often omits bits, and cannot be corrected.

A program that has been provided with subtitles does not get closed-captioned.

[Tony Cooper]

On Thu, 24 Dec 2015 07:19:07 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"

No television program that I can recall has been subtitled. Foreign
language movies on DVD are subtitled, but when regular movies are
watched - and the closed captioning is activated - what appears is the
same as television programs with closed captioning activated.

The only time I see subtitles used on television is in news reports
where the speaker is not speaking English.

Evidently, the New Jersey feed is different from the television I
receive here. I've not seen that letter-by-letter style in closed
captioning. It sometimes gets a word wrong with near-homonyms, but is
generally very accurate.

[J. J. Lodder]

Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:

> On Wednesday, December 23, 2015 at 11:29:25 AM UTC-5, Horace LaBadie wrote:
> > In article <c05adaac-f656-492c...@googlegroups.com>,
> > Jerry Friedman <jerry_f...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > > I'm visiting my mother, which means I'm watching TV (mostly crime and
> > > espionage thrillers) with the captions on. I've noticed that when a
> > > character makes a non-verbal noise the caption is sometimes "(scoffs)".
> > > The noises are often faint, so I can't tell what they are, but I think
> > > they're often through the nose and are what I'd call a snort (unvoiced)
> > > or would write "hmph" (partly voiced). Often there's no suggestion of
> > > mockery.
> > >
> > > Have other people noticed this? Am I right in thinking it wasn't
> > > used a year ago, the last time I visited Mom? Has anyone run into it
> > > outside captions? It's not in AHD, M-W, or OED, but the Urban
> > > Dictionary has a definition from 2005:
> > >
> > > "a sarcastic cough
> > > basically to cough and laugh at the same time to a funny situation"
> > >
> > > Maybe the caption sense is influenced by "cough".
> >
> > Captioning for The Hearing Impaired as opposed to Closed Captioning,
> > provides descriptions of non-verbal noises and sounds, such as
> > mood-music,
>
> Have you ever encountered a description of the music? I've only seen
> the two-eighth-notes glyph to indicate that music is playing, and
> very very rarely they transcribe the words of a song being heard.

How uncivilised. BBC subtitling will tell you for example
what (classical) music Inspector Morse is putting on,
often something from an opera.

Jan

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

Minor commercial correction: Inspector Morse is made for and broadcast
in the UK by ITV, a competitor of the BBC.

--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)

[Peter T. Daniels]

So you're saying that NYC broadcast TV is superior to Florida cable TV?

Or else you've never actually wondered what happens if you press the button
while watching a TV show (as opposed to a DVD)?

When I put my TV on Mute, it shows me the titles or captions.

[Peter T. Daniels]

And if I were to watch an episode on Thirteen (the Public Broadcasting station
in New York), as I did a few times, and turned on the subtitling, I would see that.

Is the (classical) music Inspector Morse is putting on otherwise identified
for the watching/hearing audience?

[David Kleinecke]

I have watched, briefly, English-speaking programs with English subtitles
dubbed in Spanish and provided with Spanish subtitles on top of the
English ones with what my TV calls "closed captions" on top of that.
It is not funny enough to tolerate long.

[J. J. Lodder]

Quite possible, but on continental cable TV
these sutilities tend to get lost,

Jan

[J. J. Lodder]

Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:

> On Thursday, December 24, 2015 at 11:17:06 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
> >

> > > On Wednesday, December 23, 2015 at 11:29:25 AM UTC-5, Horace LaBadie:

Yes, completely, movement, composition, composer,
(often Wagner in the books, Mozart on TV)

Jan

[Peter T. Daniels]

So he turns to the camera, breaks the fourth wall, and says, "Now I shall put
on the LP of Beecham conducting Mozart's Symphony No. 39, the second movement"?

[Tony Cooper]

On Thu, 24 Dec 2015 08:51:04 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"

I don't understand the question. What I've described is what I see
when watching any television show with closed captioning on.

>When I put my TV on Mute, it shows me the titles or captions.

Same here.

[charles]

In article <1mfy6dm.1r5...@de-ster.xs4all.nl>, J. J. Lodder

They even seem to get lost in the country of origin. Channel 5, another
commercial competitor of the BBC is showing an old Morcambe & Wise show
which was originally made by the BBC.

--
Please note new email address:
cha...@CandEhope.me.uk

[J. J. Lodder]

Of course not. Morse puts the record on his turntable,
if you have sound on you can hear the music playing,
the subtitles read:
second movement of Mozart's Symphony No. 39

Jan

PS Trivia, FYA: the music for the series
starts with Morse theme,
which is m.o.r.s.e. in Morse.

[Jerry Friedman]

On Wednesday, December 23, 2015 at 11:54:39 PM UTC-5, Tony Cooper wrote:

Mom and I watched about three minutes of the first /Midsomer Murders/,
and the person with the veto power vetoed it. We switched to /Morse/.

--
Jerry Friedman

[Jerry Friedman]

On Thursday, December 24, 2015 at 11:17:06 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:

My mother and I have watched four Morses so far, and the only subtitles
we've seen for music have been "Classical music playing". Maybe we're
not getting the same subtitles you get, or maybe they didn't start
identifying the music till later episodes.

We watched two episodes yesterday evening. Was the second one a... no,
you'd all react the same way Mom did.

--
Jerry Friedman

[Jerry Friedman]

On Wednesday, December 23, 2015 at 11:54:39 PM UTC-5, Tony Cooper wrote:

> On Wed, 23 Dec 2015 07:19:33 -0800 (PST), Jerry Friedman
> <jerry_f...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >I'm visiting my mother, which means I'm watching TV (mostly crime and
> >espionage thrillers) with the captions on. I've noticed that when a
> >character makes a non-verbal noise the caption is sometimes "(scoffs)".
> >The noises are often faint, so I can't tell what they are, but I think
> >they're often through the nose and are what I'd call a snort (unvoiced)
> >or would write "hmph" (partly voiced). Often there's no suggestion of
> >mockery.
> >
> >Have other people noticed this? Am I right in thinking it wasn't
> >used a year ago, the last time I visited Mom? Has anyone run into it
> >outside captions? It's not in AHD, M-W, or OED, but the Urban
> >Dictionary has a definition from 2005:
> >
> >"a sarcastic cough
> >basically to cough and laugh at the same time to a funny situation"
> >
> >Maybe the caption sense is influenced by "cough".
>
>
> I kinda skimmed this thread, but did notice the Subject line.
>
> Earlier this evening we were watching an episode of "Midsomer Murders"
> with the closed-captioning on. One of the characters made some sort
> of sound and the closed-captioning read (scoffs). Just a few scenes
> later, the same thing happened again.

...

I meant to say, "Aha!"

So far, the "scoffs" I've noticed on /Morse/ have for noises made while
actually scoffing, unlike some of the ones on recent American shows,
which haven't been what I'd call scoffing, as Cheryl said.

--
Jerry Friedman

[Peter T. Daniels]

You just said you've never seen closed-captioning, only subtitles.

Have you never set the TV to Mute during one of your beloved football games?
There you would see live closed-captioning, and you'd see that it doesn't
look anything like prerecorded subtitles.

> >When I put my TV on Mute, it shows me the titles or captions.
>
> Same here.

But you've never seen one of the two kinds.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Thursday, December 24, 2015 at 4:57:12 PM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > On Thursday, December 24, 2015 at 2:01:32 PM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > > Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > > > On Thursday, December 24, 2015 at 11:17:06 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:

> > > > > How uncivilised. BBC subtitling will tell you for example
> > > > > what (classical) music Inspector Morse is putting on,
> > > > > often something from an opera.
> > > > And if I were to watch an episode on Thirteen (the Public Broadcasting
> > > > station in New York), as I did a few times, and turned on the subtitling,
> > > > I would see that.
> > > > Is the (classical) music Inspector Morse is putting on otherwise
> > > > identified for the watching/hearing audience?
> > > Yes, completely, movement, composition, composer,
> > > (often Wagner in the books, Mozart on TV)
> > So he turns to the camera, breaks the fourth wall, and says, "Now I shall
> > put on the LP of Beecham conducting Mozart's Symphony No. 39, the second
> > movement"?
>
> Of course not. Morse puts the record on his turntable,
> if you have sound on you can hear the music playing,
> the subtitles read:
> second movement of Mozart's Symphony No. 39

So when I asked if the music was identified for the hearer/viewer, and you said
yes, was that a lie?

What proportion of the viewing audience would recognize some random movement
of Mozart that happened to be playing?

[Tony Cooper]

On Thu, 24 Dec 2015 18:15:49 -0800 (PST), Jerry Friedman

Midsomer is not one of my top choices, but we're at the mercy of the
programmer at the PBS station. Morse hasn't been available for years.
If both were on, it wouldn't be a matter of switching. We record all
shows. The choice would be which to watch first.

Whoever chooses the programs at the station evidently doesn't watch
the programs. Tonight's Midsomer taping was a Part 2 of a Midsomer,
but Part 1 was not aired. I think someone just randomly sticks a
cassette in the system. Last night was a Part 1, but I have no faith
in the station to air Part 2.

Tonight we played "What were they in?" with the minor characters. We
really couldn't follow the plot because too much went on in Part 1
that wasn't explained in Part 2. Tonight's "What were they in"
included Sam Kelly (from "Barbara") and Julia McKenzie (from "Shirley
Valentine", "Fresh Fields", "French Fields", etc.) The trick is to
remember the name of the show.

Sometimes we do that with sets and try to remember what other show
that manor house or pub was in.

I haven't fully investigated the Netflix offerings, but the one show
we watched was "River". Kinda strange, but the second lead is Nicola
Walker who was in - and very good in - "Last Tango in Halifax". Maybe
Netflix will provide more choices.

[LFS]

On 25/12/2015 04:30, Tony Cooper wrote:

>
> I haven't fully investigated the Netflix offerings, but the one show
> we watched was "River". Kinda strange, but the second lead is Nicola
> Walker who was in - and very good in - "Last Tango in Halifax". Maybe
> Netflix will provide more choices.
>

She was also in Spooks. and, most recently, a very good series called
Unforgotten which, confusingly, ran at the same time as River and in
which she was also a detective, but alive.

--
Laura (emulate St George for email)

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

That's pretty much how it works here. There is a minor channel that
shows three Midsomer episodes (or Barnaby episodes, as we call them
here) each weekday afternoon that seem to be chosen at random, with no
system that I can discern. They sometimes show episodes they've already
shown a few weeks earlier.

>>>
>>> We don't have a problem with accents in "Midsomer Murders", but I do
>>> have a hearing problem. We use the closed-captioning just because we
>>> don't want to turn the TV so loud the neighbors are part of the show.

John Nettles speaks in French on our TV, but I've heard one or two
episodes in England, and I've been surprised at how RP he sounds.

--
athel

[J. J. Lodder]

It is a bit mixed up in the Low Countries.
The Belgians and the Dutch both have BBC on cable,
and they have each others channels.
So BBC material will appear at least three times,
non-BBC material at least twice, and there are many repeats.

Too hard to keep track of what came which way,

Jan

[J. J. Lodder]

Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:

> On Thursday, December 24, 2015 at 4:57:12 PM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > > On Thursday, December 24, 2015 at 2:01:32 PM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > > > Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:

> > > > > On Thursday, December 24, 2015 at 11:17:06 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder:

>
> > > > > > How uncivilised. BBC subtitling will tell you for example > what
> > > > > (classical) music Inspector Morse is putting on, > often something
> > > > > from an opera. And if I were to watch an episode on Thirteen (the
> > > > > Public Broadcasting station in New York), as I did a few times,
> > > > > and turned on the subtitling, I would see that. Is the (classical)
> > > > > music Inspector Morse is putting on otherwise identified for the
> > > > > watching/hearing audience?
> > > > Yes, completely, movement, composition, composer,
> > > > (often Wagner in the books, Mozart on TV)
> > > So he turns to the camera, breaks the fourth wall, and says, "Now I shall
> > > put on the LP of Beecham conducting Mozart's Symphony No. 39, the second
> > > movement"?
> >
> > Of course not. Morse puts the record on his turntable,
> > if you have sound on you can hear the music playing,
> > the subtitles read:
> > second movement of Mozart's Symphony No. 39
>
> So when I asked if the music was identified for the hearer/viewer, and you
> said yes, was that a lie?

??? It is identified, if you turn on the subtitling.

> What proportion of the viewing audience would recognize some random movement
> of Mozart that happened to be playing?

There isn't any 'random movement of Mozart'.
The Mozart is selected by Morse.

Jan

[J. J. Lodder]

There is a lot of Midsomer.
You could try again with a much later episode.
It isn't even the same Barnaby anymore, nowadays,

Jan

[J. J. Lodder]

Jerry Friedman <jerry_f...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On Thursday, December 24, 2015 at 11:17:06 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
> >

> > > On Wednesday, December 23, 2015 at 11:29:25 AM UTC-5, Horace LaBadie:

That's quite possible, the subtitles we get are on page 888 of Ceefax,
Teletext, or whatever you call it over there.
I don't even know if you have it at all.

> We watched two episodes yesterday evening.

That's overdoing it,

Jan

PS You could try if she likes Young Morse.
After the death of the one and only real Morse
his underling Lewis grew a personality, and carried on.
When Lewis retired they continued with Young Morse,
who is the same Morse in the years before he became Inspector Morse.

[Peter Moylan]

It often happens here that the ABC (Australia's equivalent to the BBC)
shows a series that is not particularly successful. Then, a few years
later, it resurfaces on commercial TV and is a big hit.

In such cases people have recommended the "new" show to me, and were
surprised when I said I'd already seen it.

--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia

[Richard Tobin]

In article <be3eaf07-3f40-473f...@googlegroups.com>,

Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:

>The two DIFFERENT modes appear differently on the screen when they are
>activated. Subtitles are neatly printed, in caps and lowercase, puctuated,
>grammatical, and properly spelled. Closed captioning appears letter-by-letter
>as it is typed by the transcriber, often omits bits, and cannot be corrected.

We don't use the term "closed captioning" here, but your description does
not match the American uses that I have seen, nor does it match the
Wikipedia page on the subject, which says:


The term "closed" (versus "open") indicates that the captions are
not visible until activated by the viewer, usually via the remote
control or menu option. "Open", "burned-in", "baked on", or
"hard-coded" captions are visible to all viewers.

Most of the world does not distinguish captions from subtitles. In
the United States and Canada, however, these terms do have different
meanings. "Subtitles" assume the viewer can hear but cannot
understand the language or accent, or the speech is not entirely
clear, so they transcribe only dialogue and some on-screen
text. "Captions" aim to describe to the deaf and hard of hearing all
significant audio content - spoken dialogue and non-speech
information such as the identity of speakers and, occasionally,
their manner of speaking - along with any significant music or sound
effects using words or symbols. Also the term closed caption has
come to be used to also refer to the North American EIA-608 encoding
that is used with NTSC-compatible video.

On UK television now, real-time subtitling is not done by typing, but
by having someone repeat the words to a speech-to-text system that has
been trained for their voice.

-- Richard

[Stan Brown]

On Thu, 24 Dec 2015 10:32:13 -0500, Tony Cooper wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Dec 2015 07:19:07 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"
> <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> > [quoted text muted]

> >grammatical, and properly spelled. Closed captioning appears letter-by-letter
> >as it is typed by the transcriber, often omits bits, and cannot be corrected.
> >

> >A program that has been provided with subtitles does not get closed-captioned.

That's not right, though I agree that the combination is not usual. I
can't recall titles, but occasionally I have seen both closed
captions and English SDH subtitles on offer.

> No television program that I can recall has been subtitled. Foreign
> language movies on DVD are subtitled, but when regular movies are
> watched - and the closed captioning is activated - what appears is the
> same as television programs with closed captioning activated.

I don't recall television programs being subtitled in broadcast, but
it's more common that not on the DVDs I get for TV programs. Both
/Parenthood/ and /Supernatural/, for example have English subtitles
on DVD. I'm quite certain that they are subtitles, not closed
captions, because my TV (bought Black Friday 2014) doesn't do closed
captions.

--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
http://BrownMath.com/
http://OakRoadSystems.com/
"The difference between the /almost right/ word and the
/right/ word is ... the difference between the lightning-bug
and the lightning." --Mark Twain

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

Which sometimes has humorous results.

A recent post in uk.tech.digital-tv
<quote>

Subject: subtitles in BBC coverage of Tim Peakes arriving at the ISS

In addition to NASA appearing as Nasser,
there was "They celebrated with vodka"
appearing as "They celebrated in a Ford Ka".

<endquote>

[Stan Brown]

On Fri, 25 Dec 2015 11:48:32 +0000 (UTC), Richard Tobin wrote:
> In
> the United States and Canada, however, these terms do have different
> meanings. "Subtitles" assume the viewer can hear but cannot
> understand the language or accent, or the speech is not entirely
> clear, so they transcribe only dialogue and some on-screen
> text. "Captions" aim to describe to the deaf and hard of hearing all
> significant audio content - spoken dialogue and non-speech
> information such as the identity of speakers and, occasionally,

That's the theory, I agree. But there's also "English for the deaf
and hard of hearing", which are subtitles not captions. (My TV
doesn't do closed captions, and neither does my current DVD player.)
As I turn on English subtitles whenever possible, because actors seem
to mumble more every year(*), I sometimes see description in addition
to or instead of dialog. For example, in the subtitles for the DVDs
of the series /The Leftovers/, we hear a song playing while Justin
Theroux's character is jogging. The subtitles gave the title and, if
I remember, the performer of the song; but based on the definition of
"subtitles" I would have expected to see the lyrics.

My current DVD player is on its last legs, and the new one that
arrives Tuesday supposedly does do closed captions, which will be a
nice change.

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

The new Barnaby is the cousin of the original Barnaby.

This not a case of a different actor taking over from another.
A different character has taken over from the original character.

[Tony Cooper]

On Fri, 25 Dec 2015 11:48:32 +0000 (UTC), ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk
(Richard Tobin) wrote:

>In article <be3eaf07-3f40-473f...@googlegroups.com>,
>Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>>The two DIFFERENT modes appear differently on the screen when they are
>>activated. Subtitles are neatly printed, in caps and lowercase, puctuated,
>>grammatical, and properly spelled. Closed captioning appears letter-by-letter
>>as it is typed by the transcriber, often omits bits, and cannot be corrected.
>
>We don't use the term "closed captioning" here, but your description does
>not match the American uses that I have seen, nor does it match the
>Wikipedia page on the subject, which says:
>
>
> The term "closed" (versus "open") indicates that the captions are
> not visible until activated by the viewer, usually via the remote
> control or menu option. "Open", "burned-in", "baked on", or
> "hard-coded" captions are visible to all viewers.

Which is exactly why I say what I view is closed captioning. The
captions are only visible if I turn on the closed captioning option in
the TV's settings. Subtitles would always be visible.

[Peter T. Daniels]

But I asked you about someone NOT using the subtitling.

> > What proportion of the viewing audience would recognize some random movement
> > of Mozart that happened to be playing?
>
> There isn't any 'random movement of Mozart'.
> The Mozart is selected by Morse.

If he doesn't somehow announce the selection, most viewers will not
be able to identify it. Including whether it was by Mozart. For the
viewer, it is random.

[Peter T. Daniels]

That second paragraph is exactly what I'm talking about (though the last
sentence means nothing to me) and what is apparently unknown to Tony.
("On-screen text" must mean signage in another language. It was in preparing
the subtitles that it was discovered that the graffiti artists who had
been hired to add local color to *Homeland* scenes set Over There had
written, appropriately, some anti-American slogansin Arabic.)

The one time I had to rely on closed-captioning was during a USA World Cup
match last year that was broadcast only on Univision (one of the Spanish-
language networks), and there was "simultaneous" translation of the
commentators in closed-captioning. From the few words of the Spanish that
I could catch now and then, it was clear that they were well behind the
speakers and the accuracy was dubious.

> On UK television now, real-time subtitling is not done by typing, but
> by having someone repeat the words to a speech-to-text system that has
> been trained for their voice.

How accurate has that become? What does it do with proper names?

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Friday, December 25, 2015 at 8:34:22 AM UTC-5, Stan Brown wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Dec 2015 10:32:13 -0500, Tony Cooper wrote:
> > On Thu, 24 Dec 2015 07:19:07 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"
> > <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:

> > >grammatical, and properly spelled. Closed captioning appears letter-by-letter
> > >as it is typed by the transcriber, often omits bits, and cannot be corrected.
> > >
> > >A program that has been provided with subtitles does not get closed-captioned.
>
> That's not right, though I agree that the combination is not usual. I
> can't recall titles, but occasionally I have seen both closed
> captions and English SDH subtitles on offer.
>
> > No television program that I can recall has been subtitled. Foreign
> > language movies on DVD are subtitled, but when regular movies are
> > watched - and the closed captioning is activated - what appears is the
> > same as television programs with closed captioning activated.
>
> I don't recall television programs being subtitled in broadcast,

Then you've simply never looked. Part of the switchover to digital broadcasting
was the requirement to make programming accessible to the hearing-impaired,
and I've never seen a current broadcast program that doesn't have subtitling.
Sometimes the commercials within are subtitled, sometimes they're not.
Game shows are generally closed-captioned and not subtitles.

(I've never checked which system Colbert uses -- do they have enough time
between taping and broadcast to make proper subtitles? Probably not.)

> but
> it's more common that not on the DVDs I get for TV programs. Both
> /Parenthood/ and /Supernatural/, for example have English subtitles
> on DVD. I'm quite certain that they are subtitles, not closed
> captions, because my TV (bought Black Friday 2014) doesn't do closed
> captions.

Since it was purchased well after the introduction of digital broadcasting,
it probably does. But DVDs would not be closed-captioned.

[Yusuf B Gursey]

On Friday, December 25, 2015 at 1:50:03 PM UTC+2, Richard Tobin wrote:
> In article <be3eaf07-3f40-473f...@googlegroups.com>,
> Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> >The two DIFFERENT modes appear differently on the screen when they are
> >activated. Subtitles are neatly printed, in caps and lowercase, puctuated,
> >grammatical, and properly spelled. Closed captioning appears letter-by-letter
> >as it is typed by the transcriber, often omits bits, and cannot be corrected.

That's when the captioning is done for live broadcast, either by machine or by a transciber as for news reports or sports events.

>
> We don't use the term "closed captioning" here, but your description does
> not match the American uses that I have seen, nor does it match the
> Wikipedia page on the subject, which says:
>
>
> The term "closed" (versus "open") indicates that the captions are
> not visible until activated by the viewer, usually via the remote
> control or menu option. "Open", "burned-in", "baked on", or
> "hard-coded" captions are visible to all viewers.
>
> Most of the world does not distinguish captions from subtitles. In
> the United States and Canada, however, these terms do have different
> meanings. "Subtitles" assume the viewer can hear but cannot
> understand the language or accent, or the speech is not entirely
> clear, so they transcribe only dialogue and some on-screen
> text. "Captions" aim to describe to the deaf and hard of hearing all
> significant audio content - spoken dialogue and non-speech

Or when you have to turn down the volume for some reason. I like it because it helps me catch mumbled phrases. It is also turned on for TV shown in public spaces.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Friday, December 25, 2015 at 8:39:34 AM UTC-5, Stan Brown wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Dec 2015 11:48:32 +0000 (UTC), Richard Tobin wrote:
> > In
> > the United States and Canada, however, these terms do have different
> > meanings. "Subtitles" assume the viewer can hear but cannot
> > understand the language or accent, or the speech is not entirely
> > clear, so they transcribe only dialogue and some on-screen
> > text. "Captions" aim to describe to the deaf and hard of hearing all
> > significant audio content - spoken dialogue and non-speech
> > information such as the identity of speakers and, occasionally,
>
> That's the theory, I agree. But there's also "English for the deaf
> and hard of hearing", which are subtitles not captions. (My TV
> doesn't do closed captions,

Since you bought it just over a year ago, that is not correct.

> and neither does my current DVD player.)
> As I turn on English subtitles whenever possible, because actors seem
> to mumble more every year(*), I sometimes see description in addition
> to or instead of dialog. For example, in the subtitles for the DVDs
> of the series /The Leftovers/, we hear a song playing while Justin
> Theroux's character is jogging. The subtitles gave the title and, if
> I remember, the performer of the song; but based on the definition of
> "subtitles" I would have expected to see the lyrics.

That could be a matter of copyright/licensing.

> My current DVD player is on its last legs, and the new one that
> arrives Tuesday supposedly does do closed captions, which will be a
> nice change.

DVDs are not closed-captioned. Even if you watch "great sports moments," they
will have had the opportunity to make proper subtitles.

[Yusuf B Gursey]

They wrote "Homeland is Racist" in Arabic. Anti-American slogans were what the producers wanted. I don't watch the show but I saw the result.

[Peter T. Daniels]

No. Those are "hard-coded" subtitles. They are used when conversations in a
foreign language are meant to be understood by the audience -- as in a few
scenes from this season's *Quantico*, where an agent converses with someone
in another country, or from *Madam Secretary*, where we are privy to some
goings-on at the Russian embassy and in the Kremlin.

If you were watching the program with subtitles turned on, you might see an
additional title naming the language being spoken, or maybe even transcribing
the non-English language.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Friday, December 25, 2015 at 10:31:12 AM UTC-5, Yusuf B Gursey wrote:
> On Friday, December 25, 2015 at 4:54:39 PM UTC+2, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> > On Friday, December 25, 2015 at 6:50:03 AM UTC-5, Richard Tobin wrote:
> > > In article <be3eaf07-3f40-473f...@googlegroups.com>,
> > > Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > >The two DIFFERENT modes appear differently on the screen when they are

> > > >activated. Subtitles are neatly printed, in caps and lowercase, punctuated,

I gather it's an upscale version of *24*, which I also never watched. From the
excerpts shown on the Emmy shows, I don't see how Claire Danes even got nominated,
let alone won several times.

[Jerry Friedman]

...

> I haven't fully investigated the Netflix offerings, but the one show
> we watched was "River". Kinda strange, but the second lead is Nicola
> Walker who was in - and very good in - "Last Tango in Halifax". Maybe
> Netflix will provide more choices.

It certainly has /Morse/. That's how we're watching it.

--
Jerry Friedman

[Yusuf B Gursey]

On Wednesday, December 23, 2015 at 5:19:35 PM UTC+2, Jerry Friedman wrote:
> I'm visiting my mother, which means I'm watching TV (mostly crime and
> espionage thrillers) with the captions on. I've noticed that when a
> character makes a non-verbal noise the caption is sometimes "(scoffs)".
> The noises are often faint, so I can't tell what they are, but I think
> they're often through the nose and are what I'd call a snort (unvoiced)
> or would write "hmph" (partly voiced). Often there's no suggestion of
> mockery.
>
> Have other people noticed this? Am I right in thinking it wasn't
> used a year ago, the last time I visited Mom? Has anyone run into it

I have used CC for some time (not that I am deaf or hard of hearing) and "scoffs" has always been around. When horses are involved there are a considerable number of words to describe the various sounds they make.

> outside captions? It's not in AHD, M-W, or OED, but the Urban
> Dictionary has a definition from 2005:
>
> "a sarcastic cough
> basically to cough and laugh at the same time to a funny situation"
>
> Maybe the caption sense is influenced by "cough".
>

> --
> Jerry Friedman

[Yusuf B Gursey]

On Wednesday, December 23, 2015 at 10:51:18 PM UTC+2, Peter T. Daniels wrote:

> On Wednesday, December 23, 2015 at 11:29:25 AM UTC-5, Horace LaBadie wrote:
> > In article <c05adaac-f656-492c...@googlegroups.com>,

> > Jerry Friedman <jerry_f...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > > I'm visiting my mother, which means I'm watching TV (mostly crime and
> > > espionage thrillers) with the captions on. I've noticed that when a
> > > character makes a non-verbal noise the caption is sometimes "(scoffs)".
> > > The noises are often faint, so I can't tell what they are, but I think
> > > they're often through the nose and are what I'd call a snort (unvoiced)
> > > or would write "hmph" (partly voiced). Often there's no suggestion of
> > > mockery.
> > >
> > > Have other people noticed this? Am I right in thinking it wasn't
> > > used a year ago, the last time I visited Mom? Has anyone run into it

> > > outside captions? It's not in AHD, M-W, or OED, but the Urban
> > > Dictionary has a definition from 2005:
> > >
> > > "a sarcastic cough
> > > basically to cough and laugh at the same time to a funny situation"
> > >
> > > Maybe the caption sense is influenced by "cough".
> >

> > Captioning for The Hearing Impaired as opposed to Closed Captioning,
> > provides descriptions of non-verbal noises and sounds, such as
> > mood-music,
>
> Have you ever encountered a description of the music? I've only seen
> the two-eighth-notes glyph to indicate that music is playing, and
> very very rarely they transcribe the words of a song being heard.

Sometimes they name the tune.

>
> > engines, gunshots, floorboard creaks, etc., to allow the
> > viewer to catch the nuances of a scene that the soundtrack provides. A
> > (scoff) might express some intention in the character's demeanor when
> > the non-verbal utterance was made.
>
> I think that's not the only parenthesized grunt-indicator, but it's
> probably the most common. I only turn on the subtitles when the dialog is
> either in Colloquial Brit or hidden behind loud "background" music.
> (Loren Order CI was an egregious example of the latter. Both Harry Potter
> and LotR are examples of the two conspiring together.)
>
> > The similarity to cough certainly might have influenced the description.

[Yusuf B Gursey]

On Wednesday, December 23, 2015 at 6:29:25 PM UTC+2, Horace LaBadie wrote:
> In article <c05adaac-f656-492c...@googlegroups.com>,
> Jerry Friedman <jerry_f...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > I'm visiting my mother, which means I'm watching TV (mostly crime and
> > espionage thrillers) with the captions on. I've noticed that when a
> > character makes a non-verbal noise the caption is sometimes "(scoffs)".
> > The noises are often faint, so I can't tell what they are, but I think
> > they're often through the nose and are what I'd call a snort (unvoiced)
> > or would write "hmph" (partly voiced). Often there's no suggestion of
> > mockery.
> >
> > Have other people noticed this? Am I right in thinking it wasn't
> > used a year ago, the last time I visited Mom? Has anyone run into it
> > outside captions? It's not in AHD, M-W, or OED, but the Urban
> > Dictionary has a definition from 2005:
> >
> > "a sarcastic cough
> > basically to cough and laugh at the same time to a funny situation"
> >
> > Maybe the caption sense is influenced by "cough".
>
> Captioning for The Hearing Impaired as opposed to Closed Captioning,

They are the same in US and Canadian usage.

> provides descriptions of non-verbal noises and sounds, such as

> mood-music, engines, gunshots, floorboard creaks, etc., to allow the

> viewer to catch the nuances of a scene that the soundtrack provides. A
> (scoff) might express some intention in the character's demeanor when
> the non-verbal utterance was made.
>

[Jerry Friedman]

On Friday, December 25, 2015 at 6:20:51 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> Jerry Friedman <jerry_f...@yahoo.com> wrote:
...

> > Mom and I watched about three minutes of the first /Midsomer Murders/,
> > and the person with the veto power vetoed it. We switched to /Morse/.
>
> There is a lot of Midsomer.
> You could try again with a much later episode.
> It isn't even the same Barnaby anymore, nowadays,

Thanks, I'll mention that if the opportunity comes up. However, we
didn't even get to the detective. I don't think my mother likes quaint
village murders.

--
Jerry Friedman

[Yusuf B Gursey]

On Thursday, December 24, 2015 at 2:39:17 PM UTC+2, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> On Wednesday, December 23, 2015 at 11:54:39 PM UTC-5, Tony Cooper wrote:
>
> > Earlier this evening we were watching an episode of "Midsomer Murders"
> > with the closed-captioning on.
>

> In American we call that "subtitles," with "closed captioning" referring
> to the simultaneous-transcription used for live (or nearly so) broadcasts,
> done on the fly and usually error-ridden and several exchanges behind.

No. It refers to the manner of broadcast in US and Canadian usage.

[Yusuf B Gursey]

Technically reffered to as "Closed Captioning" because you can turn it on or off.

[Jerry Friedman]

On Friday, December 25, 2015 at 10:40:42 AM UTC-5, Yusuf B Gursey wrote:
> On Wednesday, December 23, 2015 at 5:19:35 PM UTC+2, Jerry Friedman wrote:
> > I'm visiting my mother, which means I'm watching TV (mostly crime and
> > espionage thrillers) with the captions on. I've noticed that when a
> > character makes a non-verbal noise the caption is sometimes "(scoffs)".
> > The noises are often faint, so I can't tell what they are, but I think
> > they're often through the nose and are what I'd call a snort (unvoiced)
> > or would write "hmph" (partly voiced). Often there's no suggestion of
> > mockery.
> >
> > Have other people noticed this? Am I right in thinking it wasn't
> > used a year ago, the last time I visited Mom? Has anyone run into it
>
> I have used CC for some time (not that I am deaf or hard of hearing) and "scoffs" has always been around.

Thanks. I must have missed it on previous visits.

> When horses are involved there are a considerable number of words to
> describe the various sounds they make.

...

I can't think of what you need beyond "whinny" (or "neigh") and "snort".

--
Jerry Friedman

[Yusuf B Gursey]

AFAIK some have the option, as well as subtitles for foreign languages.

[Yusuf B Gursey]

I seem to remember more variety when I watched "Heraldo" (not recommended except for base entertainment).

>
> --
> Jerry Friedman

[Yusuf B Gursey]

On Friday, December 25, 2015 at 5:35:20 PM UTC+2, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> On Friday, December 25, 2015 at 9:20:09 AM UTC-5, Tony Cooper wrote:
> > On Fri, 25 Dec 2015 11:48:32 +0000 (UTC), ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk
> > (Richard Tobin) wrote:
> >
> > >In article <be3eaf07-3f40-473f...@googlegroups.com>,
> > >Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > >
> > >>The two DIFFERENT modes appear differently on the screen when they are
> > >>activated. Subtitles are neatly printed, in caps and lowercase, puctuated,
> > >>grammatical, and properly spelled. Closed captioning appears letter-by-letter
> > >>as it is typed by the transcriber, often omits bits, and cannot be corrected.
> > >
> > >We don't use the term "closed captioning" here, but your description does
> > >not match the American uses that I have seen, nor does it match the
> > >Wikipedia page on the subject, which says:
> > >
> > >
> > > The term "closed" (versus "open") indicates that the captions are
> > > not visible until activated by the viewer, usually via the remote
> > > control or menu option. "Open", "burned-in", "baked on", or
> > > "hard-coded" captions are visible to all viewers.
> >
> > Which is exactly why I say what I view is closed captioning. The
> > captions are only visible if I turn on the closed captioning option in
> > the TV's settings. Subtitles would always be visible.
>
> No. Those are "hard-coded" subtitles. They are used when conversations in a

They can't be called "Closed Captions" because they can't be turned off. "Subtitles" refers to foreign language translation (sometimes even for some English dialects such as Jamaican speech) and they don't indicate non-verbal sounds. Rarely some programs are "Open Captioned" and English speech and non-verbal sounds are indicated as part of the regular broadcast for the hearing impaired.

[Yusuf B Gursey]

On Friday, December 25, 2015 at 1:50:03 PM UTC+2, Richard Tobin wrote:

> In article <be3eaf07-3f40-473f...@googlegroups.com>,
> Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> >The two DIFFERENT modes appear differently on the screen when they are
> >activated. Subtitles are neatly printed, in caps and lowercase, puctuated,
> >grammatical, and properly spelled. Closed captioning appears letter-by-letter
> >as it is typed by the transcriber, often omits bits, and cannot be corrected.
>
> We don't use the term "closed captioning" here, but your description does
> not match the American uses that I have seen, nor does it match the
> Wikipedia page on the subject, which says:

Yes. Thank you. Exactly US and CAnadian usage.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Explain.

Show how that technical usage (if any) applies to the home viewer who gets
one or the other, depending on the producers' whim and available time.

Since Tony doesn't use broadcast TV, whatever you're referring to doesn't apply.

[Yusuf B Gursey]

On Friday, December 25, 2015 at 6:40:49 PM UTC+2, Yusuf B Gursey wrote:
> On Friday, December 25, 2015 at 5:35:20 PM UTC+2, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> > On Friday, December 25, 2015 at 9:20:09 AM UTC-5, Tony Cooper wrote:
> > > On Fri, 25 Dec 2015 11:48:32 +0000 (UTC), ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk
> > > (Richard Tobin) wrote:
> > >
> > > >In article <be3eaf07-3f40-473f...@googlegroups.com>,
> > > >Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >>The two DIFFERENT modes appear differently on the screen when they are
> > > >>activated. Subtitles are neatly printed, in caps and lowercase, puctuated,
> > > >>grammatical, and properly spelled. Closed captioning appears letter-by-letter
> > > >>as it is typed by the transcriber, often omits bits, and cannot be corrected.
> > > >
> > > >We don't use the term "closed captioning" here, but your description does
> > > >not match the American uses that I have seen, nor does it match the
> > > >Wikipedia page on the subject, which says:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > The term "closed" (versus "open") indicates that the captions are
> > > > not visible until activated by the viewer, usually via the remote
> > > > control or menu option. "Open", "burned-in", "baked on", or
> > > > "hard-coded" captions are visible to all viewers.
> > >
> > > Which is exactly why I say what I view is closed captioning. The
> > > captions are only visible if I turn on the closed captioning option in
> > > the TV's settings. Subtitles would always be visible.
> >
> > No. Those are "hard-coded" subtitles. They are used when conversations in a
>
>
> They can't be called "Closed Captions" because they can't be turned off. "Subtitles" refers to foreign language translation (sometimes even for some English dialects such as Jamaican speech) and they don't indicate non-verbal sounds. Rarely some programs are "Open Captioned" and English speech and non-verbal sounds are indicated as part of the regular broadcast for the hearing impaired.
>

The two are transmitted in different parts of the signal.

In analog days it worked like this. There was a gap between the end of the scanned line and the start of the next. Later it was decided that use can be made during this break and closed captioning data was one of them. I don't know about the structure of digital TV signals at this moment.

[Peter T. Daniels]

And SAP -- also not optional -- can give the dubbed version (*Jane the Virgin*,
for instance) or descriptions of the scene for the visually impaired.

On the syndicated *Modern Family* reruns I usually watch at 7 pm on channel 5,
the closing credits are followed by a screen giving the names of the voice
actors who dub the Spanish version ("Familia Moderna"), which I assume I could
hear if I used the SAP channel.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Friday, December 25, 2015 at 11:44:03 AM UTC-5, Yusuf B Gursey wrote:
> On Friday, December 25, 2015 at 1:50:03 PM UTC+2, Richard Tobin wrote:
> > In article <be3eaf07-3f40-473f...@googlegroups.com>,
> > Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:

> > >The two DIFFERENT modes appear differently on the screen when they are
> > >activated. Subtitles are neatly printed, in caps and lowercase, puctuated,
> > >grammatical, and properly spelled. Closed captioning appears letter-by-letter
> > >as it is typed by the transcriber, often omits bits, and cannot be corrected.
> >
> > We don't use the term "closed captioning" here, but your description does
> > not match the American uses that I have seen, nor does it match the
> > Wikipedia page on the subject, which says:
>
> Yes. Thank you. Exactly US and CAnadian usage.

As I said, the article he quoted below _exactly_ agrees with what I described.

[Jerry Friedman]

On Friday, December 25, 2015 at 6:20:51 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> Jerry Friedman <jerry_f...@yahoo.com> wrote:

[Morse]

> > We watched two episodes yesterday evening.
>
> That's overdoing it,

Possibly.

> Jan
>
> PS You could try if she likes Young Morse.
> After the death of the one and only real Morse
> his underling Lewis grew a personality, and carried on.

She's seen all of those. (I saw a few of them with her last winter.)
Somehow she didn't realize they were a sequel to anything.

Incidentally, I read most of all of the Morse novels a decade or three
ago. I'm amazed at how completely I've forgotten the plots.

> When Lewis retired they continued with Young Morse,
> who is the same Morse in the years before he became Inspector Morse.

Suggestion passed on. She might look for those when she's done
with the one and only real one.

--
Jerry Friedman

[musika]

The series was called /Endeavour/

--
Ray
UK

[Janet]

In article <de4i0k...@mid.individual.net>, acor...@imm.cnrs.fr
says...

> John Nettles speaks in French on our TV,

That isn't John Nettles' voice speaking French; his part has been
sound-dubbed by French actor Hervé Jolly. Jolly also speaks the dubbed-
into-French voice of Clint Eastwood's roles in several films.

but I've heard one or two
> episodes in England, and I've been surprised at how RP he sounds.

The version shown in UK uses Nettles' own voice. He was raised in
Cornwall and I can still detect some lingering West-country accent in
his voice.

Janet.

[Tony Cooper]

On Fri, 25 Dec 2015 18:23:41 +0000, musika <mUs...@NOSPAMexcite.com>
wrote:

Not the best effort. "Morse" was too much of a classic to be
followed-up. There was too much expectation that it would replicate
the success of "Morse". As an original series, it might have been
more acceptable.

It has always been a mark of British television to know when to stop.
They missed the mark here.

--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

[bill van]

In article <5359bd46-b2e5-4758...@googlegroups.com>,

River was a grabber. The pursuit of the murderer is more or less
standard policier, with various suspects considered and dismissed, but
the performance by Swedish actor Stellan Skarsgård in the title role is
astonishingly good.

>
> It certainly has /Morse/. That's how we're watching it.

I started from the beginning of Morse on Netflix perhaps a year ago, but
bailed out after the first season. I'd enjoyed it when it was new, but
this time around it was as if the series hadn't finished inventing
itself in the early seasons. The outcomes were predictable, including
Morse falling in love with female suspects. His character, lovable when
I first saw the series, seemed inconsiderate, mean and lacking
self-awareness this time around.

I prefer the later Lewis/Hathaway series, and especially the recent
Endeavour: Morse as a young man, with a fine turn by Roger Allam as a
Joe Friday character named Fred Thursday.
--
bill

[Richard Tobin]

In article <3546754f-6b7a-4aa2...@googlegroups.com>,

Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:

>> On UK television now, real-time subtitling is not done by typing, but
>> by having someone repeat the words to a speech-to-text system that has
>> been trained for their voice.

>How accurate has that become?

I don't use it, but it's notorious for producing humurous errors.

> What does it do with proper names?

I imagine they can prime it with the names of likely people and
places.

-- Richard

[Janet]

In article <f370b6ee-31df-4680...@googlegroups.com>,
gram...@verizon.net says...

>
> On Friday, December 25, 2015 at 8:39:34 AM UTC-5, Stan Brown wrote:
> > On Fri, 25 Dec 2015 11:48:32 +0000 (UTC), Richard Tobin wrote:

> > > In
> > > the United States and Canada, however, these terms do have different
> > > meanings. "Subtitles" assume the viewer can hear but cannot
> > > understand the language or accent, or the speech is not entirely
> > > clear, so they transcribe only dialogue and some on-screen
> > > text. "Captions" aim to describe to the deaf and hard of hearing all
> > > significant audio content - spoken dialogue and non-speech
> > > information such as the identity of speakers and, occasionally,
> >

> > That's the theory, I agree. But there's also "English for the deaf
> > and hard of hearing", which are subtitles not captions. (My TV
> > doesn't do closed captions,
>
> Since you bought it just over a year ago, that is not correct.
>
> > and neither does my current DVD player.)
> > As I turn on English subtitles whenever possible, because actors seem
> > to mumble more every year(*), I sometimes see description in addition
> > to or instead of dialog. For example, in the subtitles for the DVDs
> > of the series /The Leftovers/, we hear a song playing while Justin
> > Theroux's character is jogging. The subtitles gave the title and, if
> > I remember, the performer of the song; but based on the definition of
> > "subtitles" I would have expected to see the lyrics.
>
> That could be a matter of copyright/licensing.
>
> > My current DVD player is on its last legs, and the new one that
> > arrives Tuesday supposedly does do closed captions, which will be a
> > nice change.
>
> DVDs are not closed-captioned.

The ones sold in UK often are. Some have optional captions in a choice
of different languages; and two "English" versions, one subtitles of
the dialogue alone, and a second subtitle set which carries additional
information for the deaf and hard of hearing audience
("sounds of smashing glass/birds singing/ screaming brakes".

Janet.

[Richard Tobin]

In article <3546754f-6b7a-4aa2...@googlegroups.com>,
Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:

>> Most of the world does not distinguish captions from subtitles. In

>> the United States and Canada, however, these terms do have different
>> meanings. "Subtitles" assume the viewer can hear but cannot
>> understand the language or accent, or the speech is not entirely
>> clear, so they transcribe only dialogue and some on-screen
>> text. "Captions" aim to describe to the deaf and hard of hearing all
>> significant audio content - spoken dialogue and non-speech
>> information such as the identity of speakers and, occasionally,

>> their manner of speaking - along with any significant music or sound
>> effects using words or symbols. Also the term closed caption has
>> come to be used to also refer to the North American EIA-608 encoding
>> that is used with NTSC-compatible video.

>That second paragraph is exactly what I'm talking about

But it doesn't mention the difference between "real-time" subtitling
(for live programs) and pre-prepared subtitles, which I thought you
were saying was the distinction.

There are two separate issues:

(a) is it done in real time, so that it is likely to be slightly
delayed and inaccurate;
(b) does it include a description of all audio (suitable for the
deaf) or just speech (suitable for foreign languages or for
those whose hearing is such that they sometimes miss a word)

The Wikipedia article appears to say that the US distinction between
subtitles and captions is (b); you seemed to be saying that it was (a).

-- Richard

[Rich Ulrich]

I would not draw that comparison. But I watched only a few
episodes of "24" before rejecting it for its (apparently)
enthusiastic celebration of torture and other state immoralities.
I am judgmental about what I consider as acceptable morality
in fiction, so I also disagree with those who like "House of Cards"
and (by Netflix's prediction) "Breaking Bad."

I liked Kiefer Sutherland as a psycho killer in Freeway, where
he lost in the end.

Quite a few of us disagree with your judgment of Claire Danes.
Claire Danes won a Golden Globe on each of her first four
nominations, and matching Emmys for all but the first --
nominated but not winning for "My So-called Life."

I've heard that female chances for Best Actor are favored
by playing crazy people. Today, in support of that: Danes's
CIA character is manic-depressive; she won earlier for the TV
movie role as the famous autistic, Temple Grandin; and her
first Globe was for the single season as an alienated 15-year-
old girl (and 15-year-olds are pretty much crazy, either sex).

--
Rich Ulrich

[charles]

In article <MPG.30e7b3e...@news.individual.net>,

The best subtitles I ever saw were for a BBC transmision of"Silent Movie".
This film, for those who haven't seen it, has no dialogue, apart from one
word "Non." spoken by the French mime artist Marcal Marceau. The subtitle
were allireation of the various, important, noises: bang, thud, crash, etc.
Unlike conventional subtitles, they appeared in different parts of the
scree, as relevant.

--
Please note new email address:
cha...@CandEhope.me.uk

[Peter T. Daniels]

Didn't you read the wikipexcerpt provided earlier? DVDs are not CLOSED-CAPTIONED,
they are SUBTITLED.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Friday, December 25, 2015 at 3:20:04 PM UTC-5, Richard Tobin wrote:
> In article <3546754f-6b7a-4aa2...@googlegroups.com>,
> Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:

> >> Most of the world does not distinguish captions from subtitles. In
> >> the United States and Canada, however, these terms do have different
> >> meanings. "Subtitles" assume the viewer can hear but cannot
> >> understand the language or accent, or the speech is not entirely
> >> clear, so they transcribe only dialogue and some on-screen
> >> text. "Captions" aim to describe to the deaf and hard of hearing all
> >> significant audio content - spoken dialogue and non-speech
> >> information such as the identity of speakers and, occasionally,
> >> their manner of speaking - along with any significant music or sound
> >> effects using words or symbols. Also the term closed caption has
> >> come to be used to also refer to the North American EIA-608 encoding
> >> that is used with NTSC-compatible video.
>
> >That second paragraph is exactly what I'm talking about
>
> But it doesn't mention the difference between "real-time" subtitling
> (for live programs) and pre-prepared subtitles, which I thought you
> were saying was the distinction.

Of course it does. Real-time programs aren't subtitled (how could they be?),
they are closed-captioned on the fly, full of errors and omissions and 30 or
more seconds behind.

> There are two separate issues:
>
> (a) is it done in real time, so that it is likely to be slightly
> delayed and inaccurate;

> (b) [1] does it include a description of all audio (suitable for the
> deaf) or [2] just speech (suitable for foreign languages or for

> those whose hearing is such that they sometimes miss a word)
>
> The Wikipedia article appears to say that the US distinction between
> subtitles and captions is (b); you seemed to be saying that it was (a).

I haven't encountered a (b1) distinct from the ordinary subtitles, which
sometimes include such information, usually don't. (b2) is universal. I
don't know how far back it goes, because I didn't have any new TVs until
long after it started being required back in analog-broadcasting days.

Early TV shows don't get retro-subtitled (e.g. *Naked City*). I could put
on an *I Love Lucy* or an *All in the Family* DVD to see if it was done for
high-selling classics, but that would be a lot of trouble.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Friday, December 25, 2015 at 3:23:45 PM UTC-5, Rich Ulrich wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Dec 2015 07:38:40 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"
> <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >I gather it's an upscale version of *24*, which I also never watched. From the
> >excerpts shown on the Emmy shows, I don't see how Claire Danes even got nominated,
> >let alone won several times.
>
> I would not draw that comparison. But I watched only a few
> episodes of "24" before rejecting it for its (apparently)
> enthusiastic celebration of torture and other state immoralities.
> I am judgmental about what I consider as acceptable morality
> in fiction, so I also disagree with those who like "House of Cards"
> and (by Netflix's prediction) "Breaking Bad."

Have you watched *Breaking Bad* (and its contemporary *Dexter*)?

(I also want to get in a plug for Vince Gilligan's next, limited, series,
*Battle Creek*, starring the incomparable Dean Winters.)

> I liked Kiefer Sutherland as a psycho killer in Freeway, where
> he lost in the end.
>
> Quite a few of us disagree with your judgment of Claire Danes.
> Claire Danes won a Golden Globe on each of her first four
> nominations, and matching Emmys for all but the first --
> nominated but not winning for "My So-called Life."

The very premise that a manic-depressive would have been hired as, let alone
retained as, a CIA analyst (or whatever) seems far-fetched.

I have a suspicion that *Quantico* is a bit more credible.

*My So-Called Life* -- and its successors *thirtysomething*, etc., were
brilliant. I'll put *Brothers and Sisters* in the same category.

> I've heard that female chances for Best Actor are favored
> by playing crazy people. Today, in support of that: Danes's
> CIA character is manic-depressive; she won earlier for the TV
> movie role as the famous autistic, Temple Grandin; and her
> first Globe was for the single season as an alienated 15-year-
> old girl (and 15-year-olds are pretty much crazy, either sex).

Whereas Oscars tend to go to biopic stars.

[charles]

In article <699fe149-246a-49ce...@googlegroups.com>, Peter

Just because it's on wikipedia doesn't make it right. The author was
probably from the USA.

[charles]

In article <3c5a2900-84bf-4819...@googlegroups.com>, Peter

T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
> On Friday, December 25, 2015 at 3:20:04 PM UTC-5, Richard Tobin wrote:
> > In article <3546754f-6b7a-4aa2...@googlegroups.com>,
> > Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:

> > >> Most of the world does not distinguish captions from subtitles. In
> > >> the United States and Canada, however, these terms do have
> > >> different meanings. "Subtitles" assume the viewer can hear but
> > >> cannot understand the language or accent, or the speech is not
> > >> entirely clear, so they transcribe only dialogue and some
> > >> on-screen text. "Captions" aim to describe to the deaf and hard of
> > >> hearing all significant audio content - spoken dialogue and
> > >> non-speech information such as the identity of speakers and,
> > >> occasionally, their manner of speaking - along with any
> > >> significant music or sound effects using words or symbols. Also
> > >> the term closed caption has come to be used to also refer to the
> > >> North American EIA-608 encoding that is used with NTSC-compatible
> > >> video.
> >
> > >That second paragraph is exactly what I'm talking about
> >
> > But it doesn't mention the difference between "real-time" subtitling
> > (for live programs) and pre-prepared subtitles, which I thought you
> > were saying was the distinction.

> Of course it does. Real-time programs aren't subtitled (how could they
> be?), they are closed-captioned on the fly, full of errors and omissions
> and 30 or more seconds behind.

Obviously, terminology differs across the pond. As far as this side is
concerned, live programmes are subtitled - and have been for over 30 years.
Yes, the subtitles aren't perfect, but they provide a useful service for
the deaf and hard of hearing.

[Snip]

[Peter T. Daniels]

And the passage is labeled as describing US usage. I think Janet knows where I am.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Friday, December 25, 2015 at 4:33:46 PM UTC-5, charles wrote:

So you have no terminology whatsoever to distinguish the two qualitatively
different services?

[charles]

In article <7936f60e-494d-4355...@googlegroups.com>, Peter

yes, as has been explained earlier in this thread, we call the other
service "closed captioning".

In the days of analogue television, subtitles were provided by teletext and
became a standard feature of virtually all tv receivers - an open service.
Closed captioning became available on DVDs with special decoders.

[Yusuf B Gursey]

On Friday, December 25, 2015 at 7:03:01 PM UTC+2, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> On Friday, December 25, 2015 at 11:44:03 AM UTC-5, Yusuf B Gursey wrote:
> > On Friday, December 25, 2015 at 1:50:03 PM UTC+2, Richard Tobin wrote:
> > > In article <be3eaf07-3f40-473f...@googlegroups.com>,
> > > Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> > > >The two DIFFERENT modes appear differently on the screen when they are
> > > >activated. Subtitles are neatly printed, in caps and lowercase, puctuated,
> > > >grammatical, and properly spelled. Closed captioning appears letter-by-letter
> > > >as it is typed by the transcriber, often omits bits, and cannot be corrected.
> > >
> > > We don't use the term "closed captioning" here, but your description does
> > > not match the American uses that I have seen, nor does it match the
> > > Wikipedia page on the subject, which says:
> >
> > Yes. Thank you. Exactly US and CAnadian usage.
>
> As I said, the article he quoted below _exactly_ agrees with what I described.
>

You were describing a particular type of closed captioning that is done on the fly by machine for live programing. Normal close captioning uses proper spelling and punctuation and so forth.

[Yusuf B Gursey]

It's a matter of how it is encoded into the signal.


http://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/closed-captions

Closed captions are a text version of the spoken part of a television, movie, or computer presentation. Closed captioning was developed to aid hearing-impaired people, but it's useful for a variety of situations. For example, captions can be read when audio can't be heard, either because of a noisy environment, such as an airport, or because of an environment that must be kept quiet, such as a hospital.

Closed captioning information is encoded within the video signal, in line 21 of the vertical blanking interval ( VBI ). The text only becomes visible with the use of a decoder, which may be built into a television set or available as a set-top box . In general, an onscreen menu on newer televisions allows you to turn closed captioning on or off. Open captions, in contrast, are an integral part of a transmission that cannot be turned off by the viewer.

Most programs are captioned in advance of transmission, but the nature of some programs, such as live news broadcasts, requires real time captioning. For real time captioning, a stenographer listens to the broadcast and types a shorthand version into a program that converts the shorthand into captions and adds that data to the television signal.

According to the Television Decoder Circuitry Act of 1990, all televisions made in the United States since 1993 must have a built-in caption decoder if their picture tubes are larger than 13 inches. In July 2000, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) mandated sections of industry standard EIA-708-B, "Digital Television ( DTV ) Closed Captioning" into its broadcast regulations. The new rules will make it possible for users to select the size, color, and font of their captions and to select among multiple streams, choosing, for example, a particular language.

[Yusuf B Gursey]

On Saturday, December 26, 2015 at 12:04:52 AM UTC+2, charles wrote:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closed_captioning

Closed captioning (CC) and subtitling are both processes of displaying text on a television, video screen, or other visual display to provide additional or interpretive information. Both are typically used as a transcription of the audio portion of a program as it occurs (either verbatim or in edited form), sometimes including descriptions of non-speech elements. Other uses have been to provide a textual alternative language translation of a presentation's primary audio language that is usually burned-in (or "open") to the video and not selectable (or "closed"). HTML5 defines subtitles as a "transcription or translation of the dialogue ... when sound is available but not understood" by the viewer (for example, dialogue in a foreign language) and captions as a "transcription or translation of the dialogue, sound effects, relevant musical cues, and other relevant audio information ... when sound is unavailable or not clearly audible" (for example, when audio is muted or the viewer is deaf or hard of hearing").[1]

[Yusuf B Gursey]

On Saturday, December 26, 2015 at 12:39:47 AM UTC+2, Yusuf B Gursey wrote:
> On Saturday, December 26, 2015 at 12:04:52 AM UTC+2, charles wrote:
>
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closed_captioning
>
> Closed captioning (CC) and subtitling are both processes of displaying text on a television, video screen, or other visual display to provide additional or interpretive information. Both are typically used as a transcription of the audio portion of a program as it occurs (either verbatim or in edited form), sometimes including descriptions of non-speech elements. Other uses have been to provide a textual alternative language translation of a presentation's primary audio language that is usually burned-in (or "open") to the video and not selectable (or "closed"). HTML5 defines subtitles as a "transcription or translation of the dialogue ... when sound is available but not understood" by the viewer (for example, dialogue in a foreign language) and captions as a "transcription or translation of the dialogue, sound effects, relevant musical cues, and other relevant audio information ... when sound is unavailable or not clearly audible" (for example, when audio is muted or the viewer is deaf or hard of hearing").[1]

The United Kingdom, Ireland, and most other countries do not distinguish between subtitles and closed captions, and use "subtitles" as the general term--the equivalent of "captioning" is usually referred to as "subtitles for the hard of hearing". Their presence is referenced on screen by notation which says "Subtitles", or previously "Subtitles 888" or just "888" (the latter two are in reference to the conventional teletext channel for captions), which is why the term subtitle is also used to refer to the Ceefax-based Teletext encoding that is used with PAL-compatible video. The term subtitle has been replaced with caption in a number of PAL markets that still use Teletext such as Australia and New Zealand that purchase large amounts of imported US material with much of that video having had the US CC logo already superimposed over the start of it. In New Zealand, broadcasters superimpose an ear logo with a line through it that represents "Subtitles for the hard of hearing" even though they are currently referred to as captions. In the UK, modern digital television services have subtitles for the majority of programs, so it is no longer necessary to highlight which have captioning and which do not.

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

Me too.

--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)

[Yusuf B Gursey]

On Friday, December 25, 2015 at 6:29:51 PM UTC+2, Yusuf B Gursey wrote:
> On Friday, December 25, 2015 at 5:53:48 PM UTC+2, Jerry Friedman wrote:
> > On Friday, December 25, 2015 at 10:40:42 AM UTC-5, Yusuf B Gursey wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, December 23, 2015 at 5:19:35 PM UTC+2, Jerry Friedman wrote:
> > > > I'm visiting my mother, which means I'm watching TV (mostly crime and
> > > > espionage thrillers) with the captions on. I've noticed that when a
> > > > character makes a non-verbal noise the caption is sometimes "(scoffs)".
> > > > The noises are often faint, so I can't tell what they are, but I think
> > > > they're often through the nose and are what I'd call a snort (unvoiced)
> > > > or would write "hmph" (partly voiced). Often there's no suggestion of
> > > > mockery.
> > > >
> > > > Have other people noticed this? Am I right in thinking it wasn't
> > > > used a year ago, the last time I visited Mom? Has anyone run into it
> > >
> > > I have used CC for some time (not that I am deaf or hard of hearing) and "scoffs" has always been around.
> >
> > Thanks. I must have missed it on previous visits.
> >
> > > When horses are involved there are a considerable number of words to
> > > describe the various sounds they make.
> > ...
> >
> > I can't think of what you need beyond "whinny" (or "neigh") and "snort".


http://www.sportpolo.com/polo_pony/Sounds.htm


>
> I seem to remember more variety when I watched "Heraldo" (not recommended except for base entertainment).
>
> >
> > --
> > Jerry Friedman

[bill van]

In article <3s7r7btm4eid97tcq...@4ax.com>,

Rich Ulrich <rich....@comcast.net> wrote:

> On Fri, 25 Dec 2015 07:38:40 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"
> <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >I gather it's an upscale version of *24*, which I also never watched. From
> >the
> >excerpts shown on the Emmy shows, I don't see how Claire Danes even got
> >nominated,
> >let alone won several times.
>
> I would not draw that comparison. But I watched only a few
> episodes of "24" before rejecting it for its (apparently)
> enthusiastic celebration of torture and other state immoralities.
> I am judgmental about what I consider as acceptable morality
> in fiction, so I also disagree with those who like "House of Cards"
> and (by Netflix's prediction) "Breaking Bad."

I watched only an episode or two and stopped watching for the same
reason. I wonder if that role led to problems with his father Donald,
who I think remembers his family's roots in Canada's social democratic
movement.

>
> Quite a few of us disagree with your judgment of Claire Danes.
> Claire Danes won a Golden Globe on each of her first four
> nominations, and matching Emmys for all but the first --
> nominated but not winning for "My So-called Life."
>
> I've heard that female chances for Best Actor are favored
> by playing crazy people. Today, in support of that: Danes's
> CIA character is manic-depressive; she won earlier for the TV
> movie role as the famous autistic, Temple Grandin; and her
> first Globe was for the single season as an alienated 15-year-
> old girl (and 15-year-olds are pretty much crazy, either sex).

In addition, consider that while we might like the leading actors in
Homeland, Danes and Mandy Patinkin, the series intends to show us that
U.S. intelligence services are not really on top of things, that they do
not understand the people they are deployed against, and that their
operations often operate on a razor's edge and could as easily end in
disaster as in triumph. It might be that manic-depressive accurately
describes the CIA.
--
bill

[Robin Bignall]

I thought that "Lewis" as a successor to "Morse" wasn't brilliant but it
wasn't a complete flop.
--
Robin Bignall
Herts, England (BrE)

[Robin Bignall]

On Fri, 25 Dec 2015 15:39:21 -0800, bill van <bil...@delete.shaw.ca>
wrote:

>In addition, consider that while we might like the leading actors in
>Homeland, Danes and Mandy Patinkin, the series intends to show us that
>U.S. intelligence services are not really on top of things, that they do
>not understand the people they are deployed against, and that their
>operations often operate on a razor's edge and could as easily end in
>disaster as in triumph. It might be that manic-depressive accurately
>describes the CIA.

How realistic is the series? I've always thought it a bit of a fantasy
that the CIA would employ someone as unstable as Danes' character,
particularly as a station head in a sensitive country.

[Richard Tobin]

In article <3c5a2900-84bf-4819...@googlegroups.com>,

Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:

>> But it doesn't mention the difference between "real-time" subtitling
>> (for live programs) and pre-prepared subtitles, which I thought you
>> were saying was the distinction.

>Of course it does. Real-time programs aren't subtitled (how could they be?),

But that's exactly the question. Here, they're all subtitles. You
say that in the US, the real-time ones aren't while the prepared ones
are, but the Wikipedia article doesn't support that.

Since this is just a question of US usage, I'll leave it now for you
to sort out.

-- Richard

[Janet]

In article <699fe149-246a-49ce...@googlegroups.com>,

Maybe you should try reading the wiki link again.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closed_captioning

Terminology

<quote>

"The term "closed" (versus "open") indicates that the captions are not
visible until activated by the viewer, usually via the remote control or

menu option. "Open", "burned-in", "baked on", or "hard-coded" captions
are visible to all viewers."

<endquote

Got it? DVD's here often have CLOSED captions, ie CAPTIONS OR
SUBTITLES are only visible if activated by the viewer. The remote
control is used to open a range of options for the viewer to select.

Janet.

[Janet]

In article <hlmr7b5fjhi7b46pk...@4ax.com>,
docr...@ntlworld.com says...

UK has had at least two Prime ministers who had bipolar disorder while
in post. (William Pitt and Winston Churchill).

Janet.

[RH Draney]

On 12/25/2015 2:17 PM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>
> Didn't you read the wikipexcerpt provided earlier? DVDs are not CLOSED-CAPTIONED,
> they are SUBTITLED.

Some are both...on more than one occasion I've managed to switch on both
and have them on-screen at the same time long enough to notice slight
differences in what precisely is included in each....r

[Peter T. Daniels]

So you use "subtitle" for our "closed captioning," and "closed captioning"
for our "closed captioning"?