Planning a multilingual project film: language and review responsibilities

1. Describe the audience and the version they need

Start with a particular use. A film for a client presentation and one for a wider public audience may need different explanations even when the language is the same. Ask the person responsible for that audience to confirm the language requirements rather than inferring them from a country name.

NAATI’s certification glossary describes following a translation brief in terms of the subject, type of text, intended readers and purpose. That is a useful reminder to provide context alongside the words. The worksheet below is our own production-planning aid, not a NAATI assessment or certification process.

• Intended audience and use:
• Source language and proposed target language:
• Regional or terminology preferences to confirm:
• Same story, or a different selection of material?
• Destination and person confirming its requirements:
• Person authorised to approve the language brief:

2. Identify every place language appears

Do not count only the interview or narration. Project names, speaker titles, diagrams, labels, opening and closing cards, captions and the surrounding description may also need a decision. Make an inventory against the exact film version being discussed.

For each item, mark whether it should be translated, retained, explained or queried. Give the production team the proposed treatment to assess; text embedded in existing footage may need a different approach from an editable title.

• Item and location in the film:
• Current wording and source version:
• Proposed language treatment:
• Reason to retain any original wording:
• Person confirming names or specialist terms:
• Production question still unresolved:

Use the accessibility requirements worksheet separately to define access needs. A translated subtitle version should not be treated as proof that all caption, description or publishing requirements have been met.

3. Set an approved source before language work begins

Identify which script, transcript or edit is the source for the language work. An interview transcript can contain material that never appears in the approved film. A translation of that transcript may therefore be the wrong starting point for the final version.

Give the source a version and date, and record who approves factual changes. If the source changes after language work starts, identify the affected passages rather than sending a replacement file with no explanation.

• Approved source file or edit reference:
• Source owner and approval status:
• Project facts or names awaiting confirmation:
• Date language work can begin:
• Person who communicates later changes:
• How affected versions will be identified:

4. Explain terms before asking for equivalent wording

Prepare a short terminology note for words whose meaning depends on the project. Explain the concept, provide the approved reference and identify the technical contact. Do not ask a language reviewer to infer an engineering meaning from a word in isolation.

In a fictional project, a speaker says a structure was “commissioned”. Depending on the context, the audience might need to understand that it was ordered, that work was authorised, or that a system underwent a particular process before use. The project owner must first confirm the intended meaning. This example illustrates an ambiguity; it is not a translation recommendation or a description of a Live Images project.

• Term or phrase:
• Intended meaning in this specific passage:
• Approved explanation or reference:
• Names or wording that must remain exact:
• Question for the language specialist:
• Technical contact who can resolve it:

5. Give each reviewer a defined job

Agree who checks language, who checks project facts and who checks the finished viewing experience. A project expert may know the facts without being able to assess the target language. A language reviewer may need the project expert to resolve specialist meaning.

Ask the people doing the work to confirm an appropriate preparation and review process. Do not allocate an unfamiliar language to someone merely because they are available, or treat an automated draft as an approved version.

• Person preparing the translation or language adaptation:
• Person reviewing language and meaning:
• Project fact-check owner:
• Person checking the finished text or audio in context:
• Final approver and how disagreements are resolved:
• Review stage and time required by each person:

6. Review the finished version, then keep versions connected

Approval of a text document does not answer every question about its use in a film. Arrange a review of the actual version, including the relationship between words and pictures, the readability of text and any agreed audio treatment. Let the language and production reviewers identify changes needed for that format.

Keep a record linking each released version to its approved source. If a name, fact or closing message changes later, the owner should be able to identify every affected language version and destination.

• Language version and matching source:
• Text, audio and graphics checked by:
• Open issue and decision owner:
• Approved release file and date:
• Publisher and destination:
• Owner responsible for future updates:

Use the publishing handover checklist to record the approved files and destinations once the language decisions are resolved.