Page 1 of 1

About proof listening...

Posted: January 5th, 2021, 9:46 am
by Tiegrsi
I read the FAQ, but I am still unsure about this...is "normal" proof listening NOT about word accuracy? Is going 'off script' considered a reader interpretation? If we ARE to listen for word accuracy, will the entirety of the reading be posted somewhere specific for reference?

I ask this both as a potential listener and a reader. As a listener I would like to know that what I am hearing is accurate to the story...and as a reader, I would like to know whether adding in a "he said" or "she intoned" here or there when solo reading dialog from multiple characters needs a bit of extra information (for someone listening as opposed to seeing the syntax on a page) would be acceptable.

Re: About proof listening...

Posted: January 5th, 2021, 11:00 am
by TriciaG
As a reader: be as true to the text as you can. No adding or removing text (except for things like footnotes, as they're not a part of the text body). So no, adding "he said" etc. isn't allowed. Readers do the best they can with pauses and maybe different vocal intonations.

As a listener: Standard PL doesn't require reading along with the text source. However, you are supposed to note omissions (if you can catch them!) or repetitions, if you hear any.

There seems to be a contradiction here, but (1) "standard" is the most basic form of PL, and there are other options one can specify by using Special PL instead; (2) we trust our readers to not edit the text; (3) we don't want to put a barrier to PLs that cannot access the text (blind, or listening away from a screen).

Does this help? It's messy, but it works. 8-)

Re: About proof listening...

Posted: January 5th, 2021, 11:36 am
by ColleenMc
I follow along with the text, though many don't. (It helps me stay focused). My rule of thumb is that with regular prooflistening, small word changes that don't change the meaning are okay, like when two words are reversed in a sentence or a slight misread. I can't think of any examples off the top of my head, but something like the text saying "said he" and the reader saying "he said". Or the text describing something as "kelly green" and the reader misses a word and just says "green". Or something in the book is described as a "smoking ruin" and the reader misreads as "smoky ruin."

Basically, I ask myself if I were just listening without the text like most prooflisteners, would I notice the error? Does it change the meaning in any way or make the text harder to understand? If not, then I let it go.

For me, the biggest part of prooflistening is to catch the things that would take an audiobook listener out of the story, like stumbles, repeats, or obtrusive background noises.

Of course, it's different if the request is for close or word perfect prooflistening, which is fortunately pretty rare and a lot more work, generally reserved for things like scripture or other texts where it's critical to exactly duplicate the text.

Colleen

Re: About proof listening...

Posted: January 5th, 2021, 2:08 pm
by Tiegrsi
Thank you both, for your insight!

When I read aloud to my children, I do usually add in "so-and-so said" or "then other so-and-so said" so I will be mindful of that when I try reading at some point in the future.

Colleen, where do you find the text for reading along, if it is not given by the project manager or whoever when you agree to PL? Is there a good website for sourcing materials in the public domain?

Re: About proof listening...

Posted: January 5th, 2021, 6:21 pm
by mightyfelix
The text source for each project will be specified in the first post of the project. And it's important to only use that source as a reader (or proof listener, if you choose to follow along), rather than some other online source or a hard copy you may happen to have. The reason is that different editions might have small (or sometimes not so small!) differences, perhaps with a new and different copyright. We check each source carefully to be sure it's not under copyright, so we don't want to start using another source that has not been checked. :)

Re: About proof listening...

Posted: January 5th, 2021, 9:20 pm
by Tiegrsi
mightyfelix wrote:
January 5th, 2021, 6:21 pm
The text source for each project will be specified in the first post of the project. And it's important to only use that source as a reader (or proof listener, if you choose to follow along), rather than some other online source or a hard copy you may happen to have. The reason is that different editions might have small (or sometimes not so small!) differences, perhaps with a new and different copyright. We check each source carefully to be sure it's not under copyright, so we don't want to start using another source that has not been checked. :)

That makes a lot of sense. Thank you!

Re: About proof listening...

Posted: January 7th, 2021, 9:55 am
by sjmarky
I always follow along with the text. First, it helps keep me focused. Second, sometimes the reader misses or omits text altogether, which might not be obvious. Third, sometimes there are mis-reads significant enough but not obvious during a casual listen that the reader should be flagged.

Re: About proof listening...

Posted: February 13th, 2021, 12:21 am
by HandmadePSK
ColleenMc wrote:
January 5th, 2021, 11:36 am
I follow along with the text, though many don't. (It helps me stay focused). My rule of thumb is that with regular prooflistening, small word changes that don't change the meaning are okay, like when two words are reversed in a sentence or a slight misread. I can't think of any examples off the top of my head, but something like the text saying "said he" and the reader saying "he said". Or the text describing something as "kelly green" and the reader misses a word and just says "green". Or something in the book is described as a "smoking ruin" and the reader misreads as "smoky ruin."

Basically, I ask myself if I were just listening without the text like most prooflisteners, would I notice the error? Does it change the meaning in any way or make the text harder to understand? If not, then I let it go.

For me, the biggest part of prooflistening is to catch the things that would take an audiobook listener out of the story, like stumbles, repeats, or obtrusive background noises.

Of course, it's different if the request is for close or word perfect prooflistening, which is fortunately pretty rare and a lot more work, generally reserved for things like scripture or other texts where it's critical to exactly duplicate the text.

Colleen
Good tips & explanation, thank you! 👍