Glossary of Specialized Terms

 

NOTE: Expressions in bold and followed by an asterisk (e.g. “ASW-HSS project*”) appear in the glossary.

A

Activity of analysis

1) A type of concrete action which serves to denote, name, index, annotate, etc., an object of analysis*.

2) An activity of analysis, either alone or in conjunction with other analytical activities, makes up a procedure of description (including, more specifically, the procedure of free description* and the procedure of controlled description*).

3) Every activity of analysis is identified by its corresponding conceptual term in the meta-lexicon* whose root term is [Procedure of analysis].

Analysis (of an audiovisual corpus)

1) A term denoting one of the two main categories of tasks and activities of work on an audiovisual corpus. The other category is processing* of an audiovisual corpus.

2) The work of analysis involves explicitizing the potential value* of an audiovisual text for a given audience (the analyst* could be this audience). A potential value* may be new information provided about a particular topic, missing or unpublished images, explanations which facilitate better understanding of a fact, etc.

3) We distinguish between four levels of analysis:

i) The most general level is that of the type of analysis/description (among the most commonly recurring types of analysis we can cite the following: metadescription*, paratextual description*, audiovisual description* stricto sensu, thematic description*, pragmatic description* and a series of more specialized types of analysis);

ii) Next comes the level of the task of analysis* (that is, every type of analysis always involves one or more descriptive tasks). In particular, our work pertained to the descriptive tasks making up the thematic description (description of the content)* of an audiovisual text or corpus. Among the most commonly recurring tasks, we can cite, for example, the task of referential description*, that of description of the discourse production*, the task of description of the audiovisual expression (or mise en scène)* and the task of commentary (which must not be confused with the type of analysis “meta-description”);

iii) Every analytical task is made up of one or more procedures of analysis*. In particular, we distinguish two procedures: the procedure of free description* (it is the analyst who enters the information necessary for explicitizing, describing, commentating upon, etc., his object of analysis); the procedure of controlled description* (the analyst uses one or more thesauruses*/micro-thesauruses* to explicitize the object of his analysis);

iv) Finally, a procedure of description is made up of one or more analytical activities* (including, for example, the activity of designation of a knowledge object, denomination of it, textual description of it, location of it in geographical and/or chronological terms, and so on). In turn, every activity of description is defined by one or more schemas of indexing*.

4) A (concrete) analysis of an audiovisual text or corpus is necessarily manifested in a policy lato sensu of analysis.

Analyst (Role of)

1) This term refers to the intellectual work devoted to an audiovisual (or, more generally, textual) corpus: a) identifying a corpus of work (or analysis corpus*); b) locating the relevant passages or “moments” (as regards a given objective) and segmenting (i.e. “extracting” the relevant passages and moments); c) controlled* or free* description* of the passages and indexation per se; d) and finally – if applicable – translation-adaptation of the previously described passages.

2) The role of the analyst is one of several which characterize work in the context of digital archives (or libraries). Other important roles are, for instance: the role of the publisher and the role of the knowledge engineer* (or the “concept designer”).

3) The role of analyst takes a number of rather different forms: simple “day-today” activity of classifying personal archives; the work of the librarian/archivist, classifying and indexing a collection according to predefined criteria; or the work of a specialist (an “expert”) in the field documented by an audiovisual corpus.

4) The role of the analyst requires a number of skills (i.e. knowledge and knowhow), of which the following three must be highlighted: a) textual analysis skills (i.e. the ability to produce a so-called semiotic expert assessment); b) analytical skill (i.e. the ability to produce a so-called referential expert assessment); and c) knowledge and knowhow of the technologies and tools needed to carry out and disseminate an analysis (i.e. always being abreast of technological developments, identifying the techniques and tools which are appropriate to the analysis and making effective use of these techniques and tools to carry out and disseminate the analysis).

5) Given the increasingly obvious importance of identifying, describing, publishing, disseminating and appropriating relevant information in the context of a society which is largely conditioned by a knowledge-based economy, the role of the analyst is now rapidly evolving and tends to include new disciplines and professional skills.

Archive(s)

1) This term is employed, here, in a very broad sense, corresponding to its use in the context of digital archives.

2) An archive is made up of a textual collection which forms an (evolving) space of (potential) knowledge, and therefore also of values, beliefs, savoir-faire, ideologies of “group thinking”, etc. In other words, an archive can be considered a form of textual materialization of a culture, of a frame of reference (to use the words of Charles Taylor [TAY 98]) for a person, a social group, an institution (see [STO 11d]. Thus, an archive fulfills different essential functions in the constitution, maintenance and evolution of an individual or collective identity and of the transmission of that identity. In addition, an archive constitutes one of the most significant resources for the expert activity called cultural (geopolitical, linguistic, social, economic, etc.) analysis and assessment.

3) Adopting a textual and discursive approach (popularized by the expression linguistic turn [CRA 08] and at the root of which stand such academic figures as Michel Foucault, Michel de Certeau or Jacques Derrida), we can say that for its (various) “user communities”, an archive deploys a universe of discourse* (more or less easily identifiable, more or less homogeneous or heterogeneous, more or less general, etc.) in which may be thematized and processed the frame(s) of reference (see above) for the communities in question. Otherwise, if we wish to render explicit the universe of discourse of an archive, we must adopt a certain point of view (i.e. that of the analyst working in the name of “his” user community), explicitize it by means of models of description* which represent the interest and expectations of the analyst and implementing it in the form of interactive descriptive forms belonging to an software tool for analyzing or describing the audiovisual resources of an archive. This, in a few words, is the approach as it was defined and tested in the context of the ASW-HSS project*.

4) Technically speaking, an archive is typically composed of the following elements: i) textual collection (written, visual, acoustic, audiovisual, etc); ii) digital library (structure and management of the textual collection); iii) Web portal (publication space) equipped with interfaces for accessing the collection and various contributions including, in particular, the publications and services of use.

Audiovisual collection

1) The term “audiovisual collection” denotes the entire set of audiovisual data which are available in an audiovisual archive and which (at least in part) “feed” the functionally distinct types of audiovisual corpora* that we may encounter in the working process of audiovisual production-publication.

B

Building blocks of models

1) This term denotes the set of conceptual configurations (of conceptual terms), generic and/or (partially) referenced, which make up the models of description*.

2) The main classes of model building blocks are: i) the schemas of definition of the object of analysis*; ii) the schemas de definition of the procedures of analysis*; iii) the schemas of indexing* stricto sensu, defining an activity of analysis*; the referential schemas (not dealt with in this book); the sequences of description*.

C

Concept (see: conceptual term)

Audiovisual configuration

1) The audiovisual configuration defines the form of expression or mise en scène of a subject thematized and treated in an audiovisual text. Firstly, it encompasses the visual and sound shots and the linearization and synchronization of the two. Secondly, it brings together the various techniques of audiovisual mise en scène: visual techniques (such as framing, point of view, camera movements, choice of visual shots, lighting, etc.) and sound techniques (such as the choice of a sound source, sound framing, etc.). The systematic use of certain techniques to express a specific type of subjects contributes to what is sometimes called a visual (audiovisual) language, peculiar to a given type of audiovisual communication.

2) In technical terms, the audiovisual configuration defines a small library of sequences* and models of description* which the analyst uses either to perform audiovisual description stricto sensu (i.e. description of the visual, sound or audiovisual shots) or to describe the mise en scène or the audiovisual expression of a subject, a theme of discourse.

3) In contrast to the sequences of topical description* and models of thematic description*, the sequences and models of audiovisual description are relatively independent from one domain (object) of knowledge to another, from one audiovisual corpus to another or indeed from one archive to another.

Discursive configuration (of discourse production)

1) The discursive configuration defines the strategies of discourse production around a thematized object to make it into a theme of discourse (of the author) in the strict sense. Thus, we take into consideration the discourse about a thematized object, the point of view of the author (the enunciator), what is assumed to be known or to be new in a given communication context, his/her references to edify his/her point of view on the subject, the level of specialization in the discursive treatment of the thematized object, etc.

2) We distinguish between two types of analysis: analysis of the discourse production around a subject, a topic* (a type of analysis which is extensively dealt with in this book; see Chapter 7 in particular) and discursive description of the audiovisual text (not dealt with in this book). In the former case, as we know, we are interested in the way in which an author approaches a specific subject, how s/he deals with, e.g., the subject “technical culture of the Chavín civilization”: what is s/he interested in? What does s/he assume the addressee of the discourse already knows? Does all the information given originate with that author, or does s/he refer to other sources? etc. On the other hand, discursive analysis of the audiovisual text concerns the identification and description of the type and/or genre of discourse which characterizes a text. Typically, here, one asks such questions as: Is this audiovisual text (in its entirety or such-and-such a specific passage) a narration, a description, an explanation? Is the audiovisual text a didactic discourse, a marketing-style discourse, a scientific discourse? etc.

3) Technically speaking, the description of the discourse production around a subject, a topic (see Chapter 7) is performed with the help of a small set (a small collection) of specialized sequences of description. Similarly to the collection of sequences specializing in audiovisual description, this collection of specialized sequences is also relatively independent from one object/domain of knowledge to another, from one audiovisual corpus to another, or from one archive to another. In other words, it can be used almost exactly as it is for analyzing the discourse production around the most varied of domains of knowledge.

4) Finally, discursive analysis of the audiovisual text (the second type of analysis introduced in point 2 above), is as yet not massively developed, and is presented in the form of a very simple and general model of description made available to interested analysts in the Description Workshop of the ASW Studio*.

Thematic configuration

1) The thematic configuration defines the structure of the audiovisual content and serves for putting in place models of thematic description (or content description), accessible to the analyst via a series of interactive working forms in the ASW Studio Description Workshop*.

2) The thematic configuration is made up of several functionally-specialized types of configurations including, notably, the topical configuration*, the discursive configuration*, the configuration of the audiovisual mise-en-scène* (and verbal mise-en-scène as well – a type of configurations which is not discussed here).

Topical configuration

1) Technically speaking, the topical configuration explicitizes and defines a vision (or theory, not necessarily scientific) of a domain of knowledge which, in the context of our research, is part of the universe of discourse* of an audiovisual archive*.

2) A topical configuration is made up of conceptual terms* (either generic or – partially – instantiated) which are positioned in relation to one another in accordance with specific relations (such as taxonomic specialization, an object of analysis belonging to an object forming a whole, characterization of an analytical object by a property or quality, temporal or spatial location, etc.). In visual terms, a topical configuration is presented as a network or graph whose nodes represent the conceptual terms* and whose endings represent the (orientated) relations.

3) The topical configuration forms a sequence of description* composed of at least two schemas of definition* – a schema defining the object of analysis* and a schema defining the procedure of analysis*. However, a topical configuration may also be composed of a selection of schemas of analytical objects. A very common example is as follows. A topical configuration first identifies the referential knowledge object (e.g. selecting and arranging the two conceptual terms [Civilization] and [Culture] to form a schema such as [Cultural construct of a Civilization]). It then pinpoints that schema spatially and temporally (e.g. selecting the conceptual terms [Geographical region] and [Era] to form a second schema of analytical objects which is commensurate with the first, creating a more complex – and less general – conceptual schema. This complex schema serves the analyst for describing the subjects* relating to the cultural constructs of a civilization in a particular era and a specific geographical region.

4) Topical configurations form the principal input of the first functional type of sequences of analysis* in a model of description*, i.e. sequences which are reserved for describing the subjects* thematized in an audiovisual text* or in one of the parts which interest the analyst.

Corpus (audiovisual)

1) A set of visual, sound, filmic etc. texts of any type/genre, size, editorial readiness… which has a particular function according to the phase of the working process* (of audiovisual production-publishing) in which it is developed and used.

2) In the context of the ASW-HSS project, we distinguish between the field corpus*, the processing corpus* and the processed corpus*, the analysis corpus* and the analyzed corpus*, the publication corpus* and the published corpus*.

3) The procedures to be followed when compiling an audiovisual corpus should be as explicit as possible and defined in the form of guides making up the technical documentation accompanying the working process* (of audiovisual productionpublishing). Indeed, depending on its place and its function in the working process of audiovisual production-publishing, an audiovisual corpus must fulfill a series of expectations and needs and may therefore be appraised in relation to criteria such as empirical scope, internal consistency/weighting, epistemic quality, etc.

Analysis corpus

1) The analysis corpus brings together all the audiovisual data that the analyst has selected for analysis, i.e. a set of activities aimed at explicitizing the potential value* of the corpus (or a given part of the corpus) for a given audience. This work constitutes one of the main stages of the working process* in the context of the ARA program* and is carried out using the ASW Description Workshop*.

2) The analysis corpus may be made up of data taken from different sources: i) data from a single field corpus* (most commonplace) or from a number of field corpora (created by the same person/team or by different actors); ii) data from one or more (physically) processed corpora*; iii) data from other sources (i.e. other audiovisual collections*, etc.); iv) audiovisual documents* forming part of one or more already-published corpora* (on a site such as that of the ARA) and which will be subject to new analyses, re-descriptions, re-interpretations, etc.

3) The analysis corpus, which forms the input of the analysis* stage of the working process of audiovisual production-publishing, must be functionally distinguished from the analyzed corpus, which results from an analysis (description, indexation, etc.).

4) It is also helpful to distinguish the analysis corpus from the processing corpus*, i.e. the corpus of audiovisual data chosen to be subjected to technical or authorial changes to the “appearance” and the linearity of an audiovisual database.

Analyzed corpus

1) All the audiovisual data analyzed (described, indexed, commented upon, translated/adapted, etc.) documenting one or more fields* (an event, a display, a piece of heritage, etc.).

2) The analyzed corpus results from the analysis of audiovisual data, which is one of the main phases of the working process* in the context of the ARA program* and is carried out using the ASW Description Workshop*.

Field corpus

1) All the data collected or produced from a field* dedicated to gathering information to document a scientific or cultural manifestation or “field” research per se (e.g. an archeological excavation, a sociological survey, an anthology of oral expressions as part of an ethno-literary research project, etc.).

2) In the context of the ARA program, the collection of the audiovisual data and the constitution of a field corpus are governed by a set of principles which are expounded in an online document entitled “Collection and preservation of audiovisual data”. This document is available for consultation on the ARA website: http://www.archivesaudiovisualles.fr/EN/about4.asp.

Processed corpus

1) All the audiovisual data derived from the (technical or authorial) processing stage of the working process* of audiovisual production-publishing – audiovisual data documenting one or more fields* (an event, a display, a piece of heritage, etc.)

Processing corpus

1) All the data which have been chosen to be processed by a technician or the author. Technical processing encompasses the activities of “trimming”, physically cleaning the files containing the data collected in the field corpus, improving the visual or sound quality of the files, etc. Authorial processing is mainly concerned with editing the audiovisual data (according to a montage scenario), creating transitions and special effects, post-synchronizing the sound and image tracks, adding voiceover comments, and so on.

2) The data forming part of a processing corpus may belong to one or (or more, this is the most commonly recurring case) field corpora* but they may also come from other audiovisual collections*, or even already processed and/or published data.

3) The processing corpus constitutes one of the two main inputs of the processing/analysis stage of the working process* of audiovisual productionpublishing (the other input is formed by the analysis corpus*).

Publication corpus

1) All the audiovisual data making up the input of the actual publishing phase (one of the main phases of the working process* in the ARA program) and carried out using the ASW Description Workshop*.

2) The relevance of the publication corpus must be evaluated in relation to the objectives of a given publication. In any case, it may be made up of data of a different nature and taken from different sources: i) from only one analyzed corpus* (this is the most common situation in the context of the “normal” activities of the ARA program*); ii) from several analyzed corpora*; iii) from one or more corpora of processed* (but not necessarily analyzed) data; iv) from one or more field corpora* (neither necessarily processed nor analyzed); v) from already published corpora*, etc.

Published corpus

1) All the audiovisual data which are available to a general or specific audience in the form of a chosen genre of publication* (in the ARA program in the form of, e.g. an event site, a themed folder, an interactive video-book, a bilingual folder, etc.).

2) A functional distinction must be drawn between the publication corpus and the published corpus. The publication corpus brings together all the audiovisual data used as input for the process of publication via the ASW Publishing Workshop. However, the publisher/author is free to choose, within the audiovisual publication corpus, a given element that he/she really wants to publish, to the detriment of other items which are publishable but are not chosen by the publisher/author. (However, in another publishing process, the same publisher/author or another person taking on this role may come back to the unpublished publishable items to create a new publication with them…). The published corpus encompasses only those elements which are in fact published online in the form of a given publishing genre*.

D

Audiovisual description (Type of -)

1) Audiovisual description is a specific type of description of an audiovisual corpus which is mainly concerned with the visual, sound and audiovisual shots in an audiovisual text, at the expense of its content. For example, it might look at the different camera angles of a profilmic event, the different framing and camera movements; it might also focus on the sound effects, the soundscapes typical of a given type of scene (e.g. of given places or accompanying a certain social practice, etc.). A systematic audiovisual description leads to what could be called a library of visual and/or acoustic and/or audiovisual motifs, i.e. of sorts of recurring stereotypes which characterize the writing of an audiovisual corpus.

2) This type of analysis must be distinguished from the description of the audiovisual mise en scène (or expression) of a subject, which is a specific task belonging to the thematic (content-based) type of analysis of an audiovisual text.

Controlled description (Procedure of -)

1) Unlike the procedure of free description*, controlled description is a procedure which relies exclusively on a thesaurus* of predefined terms (or “descriptors”) to denote the domain of knowledge* that is addressed in a video, an audiovisual text.

2) The procedure of controlled description is based on several activities of description (each activity being defined in the hierarchical meta-lexicon of conceptual terms* of semiotic analysis – a meta-lexicon which constitutes one of the main ASW metalinguistic resources* required for elaborating models of description*). In this procedure, the only compulsory activity is to select at least one predefined term in the list of such terms in order to identify and possibly classify, the object of the description. Like any other activity of description, this is carried out by way of interactive forms available to the analyst in the ASW Description Workshop*.

Free description (Procedure of -)

1) The procedure of free description is one of the most important procedures of description and along with the controlled description* (by way of a thesaurus*) it constitutes the most central procedure in the ASW-HSS project*.

2) “Free description” means that the analyst provides the appropriate value so that a conceptual term* can adequately represent a thematized domain of knowledge in the form of a topic* in an audiovisual corpus. In controlled description*, these values are predefined in the form of terms or descriptors making up a thesaurus*.

3) The procedure of free description is based on several activities of description (each activity being defined in the hierarchical meta-lexicon of conceptual terms* of semiotic analysis – a meta-lexicon which constitutes one of the ASW metalinguistic resources* required for elaborating models of description*). In this procedure, the only compulsory activity is to enter a minimal (verbal) expression in order to appropriately designate/denominate the domain of knowledge which is dealt with in a video, an audiovisual text. Like any other activity of description, this is carried out by way of interactive forms available to the analyst in the ASW Description Workshop*.

Description of discourse production (Task of -)

1) The description of the discourse production is part of thematic description*. In particular, it is concerned with the discursive framing of a topic*, i.e. with the way in which the author (the enunciator) deals with a chosen topic and transforms it into a theme peculiar to his discourse: his point of view, the mobilization or not of other “voices” on the subject, the chosen level of precision, etc.

2) It forms a specific task within the type of analysis called thematic analysis* or analysis of the content of an audiovisual text or corpus. Other specific tasks are: referential description*, description of the audiovisual expression* or the analyst’s own commentary.

3) The (task of) description of discourse production must be distinguished from the analysis of the (filmic) discourse in the true sense. This latter concerns the elucidation of the speech acts and rhetoric specific to an audiovisual text or corpus. Description of the discourse production, on the other hand, is concerned with explicitizing the specificities of a topic* as a theme in its author’s discourse.

Description of audiovisual mise en scène (expression) (Task of -)

1) The description of the discourse production is part of thematic description*. In particular, it relates to explicitizing the “strategies” of the audiovisual mise-enscène of a topic* selected and transformed into a theme of discourse in an audiovisual text or corpus.

2) It forms a specific task of the type of analysis called thematic analysis* or analysis of the audiovisual content of an audiovisual text or corpus. Other specific tasks are: referential description*, description of the discourse production* around a topic, or the analyst’s own commentary.

3) The description of the audiovisual mise en scène must be distinguished from audiovisual description* stricto sensu. The latter relates primarily to the visual, sound and audiovisual shots of an audiovisual text, at the expense of its content.

Paratextual description (Type of -)

1) Paratextual description is a specific type of description which clarifies the formal identity of an object being analyzed (a video, a segment of video, an image, etc.) i.e. its title, its author(s), its genre, possibly the date and place of publication, etc. It also clarifies issues of rights (copyright, usage rights, etc.) and if need be, the “main topic” to which the analyzed object belongs (leaving the explicitation (per se) of the topic to the thematic description).

2) Paratextual description offers an identification/presentation of an audiovisual object which corresponds to the 15 criteria of description defining the Dublin Core standard.

Pragmatic description (Type of -)

Pragmatic description is a specific type of description which is concerned with explicitly stating the potential uses of the audiovisual text it is dealing with and adapting it, wherever possible (and without processing* (per se) of the “material” object), to the profile and expectations of a given audience. The adaptation may take the form of a translation (literal, summarizing, free…) and/or an intellectual/cultural “reworking” (as is the case, e.g. as part of the popularization of a particularly specialized content so as to make it understandable to a broader audience).

Referential description (Task of -)

1) Referential description is concerned with identifying and denoting the objects or domains of knowledge and with the contexts (spatiotemporal and/or thematic) which are selected in an audiovisual text and which present themselves in the form of topics*.

2) It constitutes a specific task of the type of analysis known as thematic analysis*, or analysis of the audiovisual content of a text or corpus of audiovisual texts.

Thematic description (Type of -)

1) Thematic description is a specific type of description which spells out the topics*, i.e. the content or message of an audiovisual text, i.e. of an audiovisual text or corpus of audiovisual texts.

2) Thematic description encompasses a number of more specialized kinds of description: referential description*, description of the discourse production*, description of the audiovisual mise en scène (or expression), commentary.

3) Thematic description is carried out using a library of models of description* of the content of the audiovisual objects which are supposed to document a given aspect of the domain of knowledge covered by a video-library, a portal, or more often an audiovisual production-publishing program.

4) Obviously, thematic description varies the most between the different domains of knowledge, as opposed to other types of description (paratextual*, audiovisual*, pragmatic*, peritextual, etc.) which are relatively independent from the referential specificities of a given domain. Hence, implementing a systematic thematic description is an immense task in terms of modeling the domain of knowledge to be dealt with, and then defining and implementing a metalanguage of description appropriate to the peculiarities of the domain in question.

Document (Audiovisual) – (audiovisual text)

1) A term denoting an audiovisual object which has in principle been processed, analyzed and published, i.e. an audiovisual object which, by way of a set of activities forming part of the working process* of audiovisual productionpublishing, is given the status and function – quite rightly, and at least in its authors’ eyes – of documenting something, reporting, providing information, knowledge, satisfying curiosity, etc.

2) An audiovisual text is only available to us in the form of a specific publishing genre*. As part of the publication activities of the ARA program*, it is available to us, e.g. in the form of an interactive* video-book, a documentary, a report, a themed folder*, an educational folder* etc.

3) The audiovisual document is one of the “tangible”, “visible” results of the published corpus* (published online in the context of the ARA program).

4) The digital audiovisual document is not necessarily a static, set, definitive audiovisual text. On the contrary, particularly by way of republication*, the audiovisual document may evolve over time and be enriched, change form, etc.

Domain of knowledge/expertise

1) The domain of knowledge is the referential universe which is covered by the metalanguage of description* and, more particularly, the library of models of description* of a given audiovisual collection*.

2) The expression “domain of knowledge/expertise” highlights that we must distinguish between the domain as it is cognitively represented by the knowledge engineer* (domain of knowledge in the sense of a fairly reliable expert assessment, more-or-less universally accepted, etc.) and the real domain which is supposed to correspond to the domain of knowledge in the form of an expert assessment.

3) In the ASW-HSS project, several domains of knowledge have been defined and explained in the form of specific metalanguages of description (also called domain ontologies*) i.e. the domains of knowledge covered by the main experimental workshops of the ASW-HSS project – CCA*, ArkWork*, LHE*, AICH* – and FMSH-ARA.

F

Facet (of meaning)

1) A term which denotes a semantic dimension or, to borrow an expression from Greimas’ structural semantics [GRE 66], a Classeme.

2) A facet defines the range of possible values of a conceptual term* or configuration of conceptual terms.

Field

1) The term “field” designates the phase in the working process* (of audiovisual production-publication) which is dedicated to the collection of audiovisual data documenting either a scientific event (conference, research seminar, etc.), a cultural event (concert, exhibition, etc.) or another type of event (e.g. political, social, etc.), or even a piece of “field” research per se (dedicated, for example, to documenting a cultural patrimony, a social practice, etc.). The “tangible” result of this stage is the field corpus.

2) As part of a program of production-distribution of knowledge heritage (such as the ARA program*), the stage which takes place in the field constitutes one of the crucial moments (a “milestone”) in the working process (of audiovisual production-publication).

Field-work producer

1) One of the main roles in the working process* characterizing the constitution, processing/analysis and publication/diffusion of knowledge heritage. The field-work producer identifies the person or persons in charge of preparing and carrying out a field work* and constituting the corpus* documenting that field work.

2) The role of the field work producer is divided into more specialized roles: duties pertaining to the conception/definition of a field, tasks linked to carrying out a field investigation, technical roles (e.g. a field work producer may act as a cameraman, a sound recordist etc., who ensure the audiovisual recording of a field work).

Bi/multilingual folder

1) The bi/multilingual folder is a publishing genre which is specified and developed to expressly account for the problems of distributing a monolingual audiovisual recording in a knowledge market which is intrinsically multilingual.

2) The bi/multilingual folder offers different versions (reasonably faithful or, on the contrary, abridged, approximate, adapted, simplified, etc.) of an audiovisual recording (created in a given language) in one or more target language(s).

3) This publishing genre was tested by ESCoM* for the ARA program* as part of several French and European R&D projects (in particular see SAPHIR*. There is now a whole series of bilingual folders (French/Spanish; French/English; French/Russian; French/Arabic; etc.) which can be consulted either on the ARA portal* site or on thematically delimited portals.

Educational folder

1) The educational folder is a specific genre of publication which uses/reuses audiovisual recordings (processed or not, analyzed or not) to create educational resources (per se) for either formal or informal education.

2) As a general rule, the educational folder is organized around a series of chapters where each chapter is supposed to represent a phase in the acquisition and appropriation of a certain type of knowledge or know-how. Each chapter contains audiovisual material and a collection of additional information which is useful to the learner or the teacher. The folder itself comprises guides for teachers and learners as well as suggestions of how to test and assess knowledge acquisition.

3) This genre of publication was tested by ESCoM* for the ARA program* as part of the French project SAPHIR*. Today, there is a whole collection of educational folders covering a variety of topics and which may be consulted on the ARA portal* site.

Thematic folder

1) The thematic folder, as its name suggests, brings together different audiovisual contributions on a subject*. Depending on the explicit objectives of communication, the thematic folder may take different forms: a folder which recaps a question, a folder which sparks a debate, a folder about a controversial issue, an awareness-raising folder, etc.

2) This genre of publication was tested by ESCoM* for the ARA program* as part of various French and European R&D projects (in particular, SAPHIR*).

Today, there is a whole collection of educational folders covering a variety of topics and which may be consulted on the ARA portal* site.

Interactive working form

1) The interactive form is the working interface which enables the analyst* (or, depending on the case, the writer/author*, the concept designer, etc.) to use the different models making up the metalanguage* (of description, of publication…) in his work of analysis* (or publishing), dealing with the domain of knowledge/expertise* of a given audiovisual archive.

2) Hence, the ASW Description Workshop* is made up of a series of interactive forms enabling an analyst* to carry out a meta-description*, an audiovisual description*, a thematic description*, etc. The ASW Publishing Workshop* is also made up of interactive forms enabling a writer/author* to upload audiovisual data, choose publishing models, import analyzed corpora in order to publish them, adapt them to a publishing model, etc.

G

Genre of publication

1) A genre of publication is a culturally and historically situated model which lends a text a certain form, a certain “gestalt” which is recognizable by those who have an appropriate skill (reading, comprehension). Generally speaking, a genre of publication may be identified by the simultaneous recourse to a series of criteria such as the content, the narrative (but also formal and physical) organization, the audiovisual mise en scène, etc.

2) The ARA program* uses several genres of publication – in particular the interactive video-book*, the thematic folder*, the bilingual folder, the videolexicon. Each genre of publication is explicitly described. It is converted into a model which the editor-analyst, by way of an interactive form, may envisage publishing* or republishing* a given audiovisual corpus.

K

Knowledge engineer (role of-; also: “Concept designer”)

1) Along with the roles of the analyst* and the writer/author*, this is one of the three main roles which have been identified as part of the ASW-HSS project*.

2) The knowledge engineer (also called “concept designer”) is the role which brings with it the delicate – and difficult – task of defining and creating the models of description* of audiovisual corpora documenting a domain of knowledge/expertise*. If necessary for the development of new models of description*, his work (sometimes) requires making changes to the ASW metalinguistic resources* in the form of local additions or the creation of “user” resources (as opposed to the shared resources).

3) The knowledge engineer is supposed to be perfectly conversant with the metalinguistic resources without which there could be no model of description* or publishing model*, no interactive form* in the Description Workshop* and Publishing Workshop*.

4) However the knowledge engineer is also supposed to be familiar with the techniques of conceptual analysis, description/modeling of knowledge as well as approaches and disciplines such as cognitive sciences, artificial intelligence, semiotics and linguistics in the broader sense. Finally he must be able to liaise, on the one hand, with the people and teams responsible for the technical development of the models of description and the publishing models, and on the other hand with all the participants of a project of collection, analysis and publishing of audiovisual corpora documenting a body of scientific or cultural heritage.

L

Library of models of description

1) The universe of discourse* of an audiovisual archive, i.e. its subjects, themes, discourses, strategies of audiovisual expression etc., can be explicitized using a library of models of description*.

2) A library of library of models of description is made up, as a general rule, of a set of specialized collections of such models. For instance, the library of models of description of the CCA archives (Culture Crossroads Archives) is currently made up of collections of models which allow the analyst to describe audiovisual texts that speak about civilizations, cultural constructs, tangible and intangible cultural heritage, intercultural dynamics or, more specifically, world languages, world music, world cuisine, etc.

3) A library of models of description is evolutive. Depending on the objectives and the interests of the stakeholders in an archive, new collections may be formed, pre-existing collections may be adapted or fixed (i.e. left in the state in which they are at a given moment). Everything here hangs on the policy (scientific, cultural, etc.) adopted to bring an archive to life and facilitate its exploitation for the most diverse of users.

M

Meta-description

1) Meta-description is a specific type of description which enables the analyst to “take the floor”. Thus, for instance, he can further specify the content and objective of his analysis, the value or interest of the objects being analyzed, etc.

2) Meta-description presents itself – on the one hand – as a type of analysis, similar to thematic analysis* or pragmatic analysis* and – on the other – as a specific task of thematic description*. In the former case, the goal of metadescription is to explicitize the content, address issues and the objectives of an analysis (content-based, audiovisual or otherwise) – see [CHE 11a]; in the latter case, it serves the analyst to comment upon (evaluate, criticize, etc.) either a topic being analyzed or the actual analysis of that topic.

Metalanguage of description

1) A structured set of models of description i.e. interactive forms* defining the analyst’s working interface in the ASW Description Workshop*.

2) The semiotic theory of the audiovisual text constitutes the frame of reference for elaborating the ASW metalanguage of description*. Hence, in accordance with this theoretical framework, the metalanguage of description* distinguishes between several functional types of models of description among which: (i) a class of models of description reserved for producing the meta-description itself (clarifying the content, the objectives, the authors, the target audience, etc. of a particular analysis); (ii) a category of models of description reserved for clarifying the paratextual data of the audiovisual objects being analyzed: title of the object, author(s), genre, language, intellectual property, etc.; (iii) a significant category of models dedicated to the analysis of the content itself conveyed by an audiovisual corpus; (iv) a category of models more particularly dedicated to the audiovisual mise-en-scène of the content conveyed by an audiovisual corpus (models which serve for analyzing the visual and acoustic shots); (v) a category of models dedicated to the contextual and linguistic adaptation of an audiovisual corpus. In other words, the ASW metalanguage of description is a generic ontology*, called ASW ontology*.

3) As part of the ASW-HSS project and its different experimental fields, metalanguages of description have been created for six domains of knowledge/ expertise. These correspond to the project’s main experimental workshops. These six domains share all the models of description of type (i), type (ii), type (iv) and type (v). Only type (iii) models of description systematically vary between the six workshops. Thus, each of these workshops has its own models for describing audiovisual content which is adapted to their domain of knowledge/expertise. These metalanguages are what we call domain ontologies* derived from a generic ontology* which is the ASW ontology*.

ASW meta-lexicon

1) The ASW meta-lexicon forms one of the crucial metalinguistic resources which we need in order to elaborate metalanguages of description which are specific to the universe of discourse of such-and-such an archive – metalanguages of description in the form of a library of models of description*. It is a hierarchicallyorganized vocabulary – an ontology – of conceptual terms* (“concepts”) which serve as input when defining the various building blocks* which make up a model of description.

2) The ASW meta-lexicon is, in reality, made up of two mutually complementary meta-lexicons: a) the meta-lexicon which identifies, denotes and classifies into a taxonomic structure, all the analytical objects in the ASW universe of discourse*; b) the meta-lexicon which identifies, denotes and classifies all the analytical activities* we use in order to describe the content of an audiovisual text, the discourse production around it, it audiovisual expression, etc.

ASW micro-thesaurus

1) A micro-thesaurus is composed of a facet* interpreted by a (hierarchical) list of standardized expressions (descriptors).

2) The micro-thesaurus is used by the procedure of controlled description* where it replaces the analyst’s free entry of the minimal expression to appropriately denote a conceptual term or configuration thereof.

Model of collection

1) A model of collection (of audiovisual data, etc.) explicitizes the criteria to be taken into consideration when compiling a field corpus*.

2) Among the most important criteria, we find (e.g.) criteria of empirical coverage (of the referential domain of knowledge), textual and semiotic criteria per se (relating to the types and genres of data to be collected) and paratextual criteria (relating to the formal identity of the data to be collected).

3) The elaboration of models of collection relies on a metalanguage of description* of the domain of knowledge/expertise.

4) Models of collection were defined for the ARA program* in the context of organizing and conducting research interviews (devoted to the research of a guest) which could run to several hours of conversation. Up until 2009, the organization, conduct and filming of these interviews was a priority field for the ARA program*, which therefore was explicitly structured by a model of collection which manifested itself, for the field work producer* (a role including the person or persons leading the interview), in the form of: i) procedures to be followed; ii) tools for collecting and managing the data collected (including the legal documentation accompanying an interview); iii) the script for preparing the interview; iv) the script for conducting the interview; v) the script for analyzing the interview, serving as a direct input for the processing* and actual analysis* of the corpus documenting a specific interview.

Model of description

1) A model of description is a hypothesis of the “best way” to describe a concrete object. It is part of the metalanguage of description* of a domain of knowledge/expertise.

2) A model of description is composed of a set of metalinguistic resources notably including conceptual terms* which are organized into schemas* and sequences*.

3) In the context of the ASW-HSS project, several libraries of models of description have been elaborated and tested. A library of models corresponds to a domain of knowledge/expertise.

4) Besides libraries of models of description which are specific to the domain of knowledge* (such as the LHE Workshop*), a common library of models of description which does not depend on the domain of knowledge, has been identified, defined and realized. It may be used to analyze any audiovisual corpus. These models of description guide paratextual description* of an audiovisual text, its audiovisual description* stricto sensu, and its pragmatic description*.

Model (publishing-)

1) A publishing model expresses a specific genre of publication* with the aid of which a publication corpus* may be published and distributed online. Examples of specific genres of publication are, the interactive video-book*, the thematic folder*, the bilingual folder*, etc.

2) Similarly to the models of description, the publishing models are part of the ASW metalanguage of description where they form a separate library.

3) In the context of the ASW-HSS project, we focused more on developing models of description and less on developing publishing models. Consequently, the current publishing models seem rather rudimentary and frozen.

O

Object (of analysis)

1) The object of analysis is the object, the entity to which an analytical activity* (a description, a commentary, an interpretation etc.) refers.

2) We distinguish between different categories of objects of analysis: i) objects of analysis which are composed of the referents to a domain of knowledge/expertise* which is peculiar to a video-library/a portal; ii) objects which serve for the spatial and temporal localization of the referents; iii) objects of a discursive and enunciative nature serving to give a specific vision to the thematized referents in an audiovisual text; iv) objects for the mise en scène or the audiovisual expression of the thematized referents; and v) objects which serve to carry out a metadiscourse (a comment, an opinion, etc.) either on the act of analysis or on the object of the analysis (the audiovisual text).

Object (audiovisual -) (see: Audiovisual Text)

Ontology (ASW generic -) (see: ASW metalanguage)

Ontologies (ASW domain -)

1) An ASW domain ontology is a metalanguage of description which was developed in order to analyze audiovisual corpora documenting a specific domain of knowledge/expertise.

2) A domain ontology relies on the generic ASW ontology, borrowing some of its relevant conceptual terms, models of description and some parts of the common thesaurus (in addition to its own metalinguistic resources, if necessary). The metalinguistic additions which are specific to a domain form part of a special branch in the meta-lexicon of the ASW conceptual terms, in the ASW models of description and in the ASW common thesaurus.

P

Procedure of analysis

1) A procedure of analysis is a task composed of one or more activities of description (each of these is defined in the metalanguage*, the ASW generic ontology*).

2) In the context of the ASW-HSS project, two basic procedures of analysis (of description) were defined, namely controlled description* and free description*. A third procedure is the composite procedure relying on both the basic ones.

R

Relation (conceptual-)

1) A conceptual relation represents a specific type of link which can be established between objects (of analysis)* and represented by conceptual terms* or concepts*.

2) The conceptual relations form part of the ASW metalanguage* which distinguishes different types of conceptual relations. The most important distinction is made between i) relations which define the links between the objects of a domain of knowledge/expertise and ii) relations which define the links between objects of analysis* and procedures of analysis*.

3) A conceptual relation serves to define the configurations between conceptual terms* forming the ASW metalanguage*. Among the most important type of configurations which constitute the ASW metalanguage, we count the schemas of definition*, sequences of description*, referential schemas, schemas of indexing* per se and, finally the models of description*.

Resource (audiovisual-)

1) A term denoting any audiovisual text which holds a cognitive and practical value* for a given audience. An example of such a value* would be to satisfy one’s curiosity or need for information.

Resources (metalinguistic)

1) A term denoting any element belonging to the ASW metalanguage* and which helps the knowledge engineer in implementing a domain ontology*, i.e. models of description* which are appropriate to a domain of knowledge/expertise*.

S

Schema (conceptual-) of definition

1) The schema of definition is a micro-configuration of conceptual terms* (composed of at least one conceptual term) which, along with other conceptual schemas, constitutes a sequence* of a model of description. The conceptual schema enables us to create relations* (besides the purely taxonomical relations) between two or more conceptual terms*. It forms part of the ASW metalanguage of description.

2) The ASW metalinguistic resources of description* notably comprise three complementary types of conceptual schemas: a) the category of schemas which define the objects of analysis* belonging to the universe of discourse* of an archive; b) the category of schemas which define the procedures (free*, controlled*, mixed, standard or simplified, etc.) of description of an analytical object or topic*, its contextualization, discourse production, audiovisual expression, etc.; c) the category of schemas which fix the referential value of a conceptual term* in advance (for instance, if the referential domain of knowledge is limited to Medieval French literature, the conceptual term [PERIOD] is fixed by the expression <Medieval>, which is then interpreted as appropriate numerical values to represent the chronological boundaries of that era).

Schema of indexing

1) The schema of indexing specifies what the analyst must do when choosing a particular activity which is part of a procedure of analysis*. An activity and, a fortiori, a procedure of analysis may be made up of several schemas of indexing. It is presented as an interactive form* composed of fields, tables and other elements that the analyst has to fill in.

2) The schemas of indexing are part of the ASW metalanguage* where they constitute a library which brings together specialized collections of schemas of linguistic, textual or audiovisual indexing, indexing using a thesaurus, in reference to a standard (such as LOMFR or Dublin Core) and so on.

Sequence

1) A model of description* is composed of several sequences. Each sequence serves to describe/analyze a given type of objects.

2) As part of the ASW-HSS project, we distinguish between four main types of sequences: (i) sequences which serve for the referential description of the object or domain of knowledge thematized in an audiovisual text or corpus; (ii) sequences which serve to describe the discourse production around the object/domain thematized; (iii) sequences serving to describe the verbal expression and/or the audiovisual mise en scène of the a thematized domain; and finally, (iv) sequences serving to better explain the analyst’s point of view, and the content and objectives of the analysis.

3) A sequence is defined by the following two types of schemas of definition*: (i) the schema of definition of the object of analysis* (i.e. the object in the sequence which is subjected to the analysis) and (ii) the schema of definition of the procedure of analysis* (i.e. the methods according to which a given object is analyzed).

Subject

1) A subject, intuitively speaking, is what an audiovisual text “talks about”, or what it “shows”.

2) In the context of our research relating to the collection of the Audiovisual Research Archives* (ARA), we distinguish between: 1) subjects exposed orally and whose author (the speaker or enunciator) is shown visually; and 2) subjects exposed visually (or “audio-visually”). The first type of subjects is represented by recordings of interviews, lectures, addresses, but also readings, declamations, etc. – that is, by audiovisual recordings of an oral discourse. The second type of subjects is represented either by audiovisual captures of situations said to be pro-filmic, or by the recording of mises en scène.

3) In more technical terms, we define the subject as the thematization of a topical configuration* in the text, the topical configuration being, remember, the model explicitizing and defining a vision of a domain of knowledge or expertise which belongs to the universe of discourse* of an audiovisual archive*.

T

Term (conceptual)

1) A conceptual term (sometimes also simply called “concept”) is a metalinguistic expression that designates a given type of objects* (in the ASW-HSS project, we distinguish five specific types of objects).

2) The conceptual terms are part of the ASW metalanguage of description* where they are organized in the form of a hierarchy of concepts. This hierarchy of concepts notably distinguishes between i) conceptual terms representing the objects of analysis* of the ASW domain of expertise and ii) conceptual terms representing the ASW activities and procedures of analysis*.

3) The conceptual terms representing the objects of analysis (first class of conceptual terms) form the “domain of analysis” part of the model of description*, and the conceptual terms representing the procedures of analysis (second class of conceptual terms) form the analytical part (per se) of the models of description*.

Theme (see: Thematic configuration)

Topic (see: Topical configuration

Thesaurus

1) The thesaurus is one of the main resources for controlled description*, as part of the task of analysis* of an audiovisual corpus*.

2) As part of the implementation of the different experimental workshops* of the ASW-HSS project*, first a restricted and very simple thesaurus (countries of the world, temporal periods, languages of the world, authors of French literature, French regions and districts, etc.) was created. Gradually, this earliest thesaurus was complemented by new facets: a facet interprets a dimension of the means of a conceptual term* (or a schema* of conceptual terms) and is interpreted by a hierarchical list of predefined terms (of “descriptors”).

3) The ASW thesaurus is part of the resources of the ASW metalanguage of description* (in the same way as the indexation generated by the analysts by way of the procedure of free description*). In particular, we can distinguish between common thesauruses (i.e. common to the entire ASW universe of discourse) and private thesauruses which are specific to a given domain of knowledge/expertise (for example, like the FMSH-ARA* domain, the AICH* domain possesses its own thesaurus facets).

U

Universe of discourse

1) Adopting a textual and discursive approach (popularized by the expression linguistic turn [CRA 08] and at the root of which stand such academic figures as Michel Foucault, Michel de Certeau or Jacques Derrida), an archive collects, conserves, diffuses, transmits, etc. the discourses of a person, a social group, an institution etc., in the form of all sorts of texts (in our case, in the form of digital audiovisual texts). These discourses may be limited to a very particular domain, but they may also relate to “anything at all” as long as they hold relevance and value for the actor who owns the archive. Together, they still form a “whole” which we call the universe of discourse (of an archive): any new text is integrated into that universe, enriching it and modifying it in a more or less imperceptible (or, on the contrary, “dramatic”) manner. This “whole” presents what some people call the heritage, others the memory, and others the tradition or episteme, the cultural frame of reference of a person or a social group.

2) In more technical terms, the explicitation (always partial and partisan) of the universe of discourse of an archive is done in the form of models of description* using which the analyst attempts to describe and study the texts (in our case, audiovisual texts) in that archive.

V

Value (of an audiovisual text)

1) A term denoting the capacity of an audiovisual text to fill a gap (satisfy a need, a desire, etc.) of information or knowledge among an audience.

2) The analysis* of an audiovisual text consists of explicitly stating this (socalled potential) value of the text for a given audience (the analyst may himself be that audience). If need be, with or without appropriate physical processing, the analyst may conform, i.e. adapt the profile, the authorial identity of the audiovisual text, to the expectations and the needs (desires, sheer curiosity, etc.) of a target audience.

Video-lexicon

1) The video-lexicon is a specific genre of publication of an audiovisual corpus which looks very similar to a traditional thematic dictionary: the thematically delimited chapters of such a dictionary include – in alphabetical order – a list of leading expressions which are defined and exemplified in dedicated articles. A video-lexicon is composed of several thematically delimited “chapters”; each chapter contains a set of leading terms and each leading term constitutes the object of discourse in small audiovisual segments.

2) This genre of publication was tested by ESCoM* for the ARA program* as part of several French and European research projects (in particular see SAPHIR*). Today there are prototypes of video-lexicons on world languages and world cultures, which are distributed on the ARA* portal site.

Video-book (interactive)

1) The interactive video-book is a specific genre of publication of an audiovisual corpus. Its structure shows similarities to a “book” in the conventional sense of the word. It is made up of chapters offering the interested reader the opportunity to navigate through an audiovisual record (which may be several hours in length) by “leafing through” (i.e. as if the reader were leafing through a book…).

2) The interactive video-book is one of the “standard” models of publication of the ARA program*.

W

Working process (of audiovisual production-publication)

1) As part of the ARA program*, the working process facilitating the constitution, publication and distribution of scientific or cultural heritage can be broken down into five main stages: i) preliminary activities prior to a field work lato sensu taking place; ii) field activities (lato sensu) recording and collecting all the data documenting that field; iii) processing and analysis of the audiovisual corpus; iv) audiovisual publication; v) activities which put the finishing touches to the working process.

2) Each phase is composed of a set of specific tasks or activities which are instrumented and described in the technical documentation which accompanies the working process.

Writer/author (role of-)

1) Besides the roles of the field producer*, the analyst* and the knowledge engineer*, the writer/author represents a third role which has been identified, problematized and orchestrated as part of the ASW-HSS project*.

2) The writer/author intervenes during the stage of the publishing (as part of the working process* of audiovisual production-publishing. The analyst and the writer/author may be the same person or the same group, but obviously this is not always the case. Similarly, the role of writer/author may be played by a single person at a given moment, but it may also be played by a group, by the same person or by different people who are distant in time and space.

3) In concrete terms, the writer/author uses the Publishing Workshop* in ASW Studio* in order to: i) constitute his publishing corpus; ii) select and, within the current technical limitations of the ASW Publishing Workshop*, adapt the genre of publication to his needs; iii) prepare his corpus prior to its publication (select the elements to be published, check the metadata, add “new pages”, etc.) and; iv) publish his corpus.