1887
image of An empirical study of temporal variables and their correlations in spoken and sign language relay interpreting
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This study describes the temporal aspects of relay interpreting by a mixed team of spoken and sign language interpreters in order to identify the characteristics of spoken and sign language relay interpreting and to help spoken language interpreters better understand the difference between the two types. The study quantitatively analyzes five time variables (speaking time, word count, ear-voice-span (EVS), tail-to-tail span (TTS), and pause), and their correlations. The temporal aspects of spoken and relay interpretation in sign language are as follows: (1) sign language interpretation requires more words to transfer the same amount of information as spoken language interpretation; (2) sign language interpreters have a shorter EVS than spoken language interpreters; (3) the simultaneity of spoken and relay sign language interpretation is more affected by TTS than by EVS, because spoken language TTS has a high correlation with speech time and word count in sign language interpretation; 4) sign language interpreters actively use the pauses between sentences of spoken language interpreters for target language (TL) production; 5) sign language interpreters produce more words for a shorter period of time than spoken language interpreters.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/babel.00191.yu
2020-10-16
2020-10-27
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. AIIC
  2. AIIC
    AIIC 2014 “Guidelines for spoken language interpreters working in mixed teams”. https://aiic.net/page/6701/guidelines-for-spoken-language-interpreters-working-in-mixed-teams/lang/1
  3. Alapuranen, Marjo-Leea
    2017 English in interpretation to Finnish Sign Language: The forms and functions of chaining sequences in educational interpreting. MA dissertation, Jyväskylä: University of Jyväskylä, Department of Language and Communication Studies.
  4. Barghout, Alma; Lucía Ruiz Rosendo; and Mónica Varela García
    2015 “The influence of speed on omissions in simultaneous interpretation: An experimental study”. Babel61 (3): 305–334. 10.1075/babel.61.3.01bar
    https://doi.org/10.1075/babel.61.3.01bar [Google Scholar]
  5. Barik, Henri
    1975/2002 “Simultaneous interpretation. Qualitative and linguistic data”. InThe Interpreting Studies Reader, ed. byPöchhacker, Franz; and Miriam Shlesinger, 79–91. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Choi, Sangbae
    2010 “Analysis on sign Language simultaneous interpretation processes of Korean Sign Language interpreter at the college center for handicapped students: Focused on H college center for handicapped students”. The Journal of Special Children Education12 (1): 23–45. 10.21075/kacsn.2010.12.1.23
    https://doi.org/10.21075/kacsn.2010.12.1.23 [Google Scholar]
  7. Christoffels, Ingrid; and Annette M. B. De Groot
    2009 “Simultaneous interpreting”. InHandbook of bilingualism: Psycholinguistic approaches, 454–479. Oxford: OUP.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Cokely, Dennis
    1992 “Effects of lag time on interpreter errors”. InSign Language Interpreters and Interpreting, ed. byCokely, Dennis, 39–69. Burtonsville: Linstok Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Déjean Le Féal, Karla
    1990 “Some Thoughts on the Evaluation of Simultaneous”. InInterpreting-yesterday, today, and tomorrow, ed. byBowen, David; and Margareta Bowen, 154–160. Amsterdam: John Benjamin. 10.1075/ata.iv.27lef
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ata.iv.27lef [Google Scholar]
  10. EUD
  11. Gerver, David
    1976 “Empirical studies of simultaneous interpretation: A review and a model”. InTranslation: Applications and research, ed. byBrislin, Richard, 165–207. New York: Gardner Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Grosjean, François; and Collins, Michael David
    1979 “Breathing, pausing and reading”. Phonetica36: 98–114. 10.1159/000259950
    https://doi.org/10.1159/000259950 [Google Scholar]
  13. Grosjean, François; and Harlan, Lane
    1977 “Pauses and syntax in American sign language”. Cognition5 (2): 101–117. 10.1016/0010‑0277(77)90006‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(77)90006-3 [Google Scholar]
  14. Han, Hyun-Hee
    2015 “A comparative study on the development aspect of sign language and spoken language interpreting education”. The Journal of Translation Studies16 (3): 273–310.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. 2016 “Study on Temporal Patterns of Spoken and Sign Languages Relay Interpretation: Based on Case Analysis of Sochi Winter Paralympics Broadcast Interpretation”. Interpreting and Translation Studies20 (4): 189–222.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Kalina, Sylvia
    2012 “Quality in interpreting”. InHandbook of Translation Studies3, ed. byYves Gambier; and Luc van Doorslaer, 134–140. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/hts.3.qua2
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hts.3.qua2 [Google Scholar]
  17. Kellett, Cynthia Jane
    2004 “Intercultural features of English to Italian Sign Language Conference Interpretation: a preliminary study for multimodal corpus analysis”. InDiscourse in Domain specific English, ed. byCandlin, Christopher; and Gotti Maurizio, 127–142. Monographic issue of Textus 17/1.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. 2005 “A multimodal approach in a multilingual context: interpretation from English to Italian to Italian Sign Language”. ESP Across Cultures2: 94–146.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Kim, Chilkwan; and Yun, Beongcheon
    2011/2015Introduction to Sign Language Interpretation. Paju: yswpub.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Kim, Taeuk
    2007 Investigating the Deaf’s Preception about the Sign Language Interpretation System on TV Broadcasting. Unpublished MA dissertation. Cheonan: Korea Nazarene University.
  21. Lederer, Marianne
    1978/2002 “Simultaneous Interpretation–Units of meaning and other features”. InThe Interpreting Studies Reader, ed. byPöchhacker, Franz; and Miriam Shlesinger, 131–140. New York–London: Plenum Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Lee, Taehyung
    2003 “Tail to tail span: A new variable in conference interpreting research”. Forum1 (1): 41–62. 10.1075/forum.1.1.03lee
    https://doi.org/10.1075/forum.1.1.03lee [Google Scholar]
  23. 2006 “A Comparison of Simultaneous Interpretation and Delayed Simultaneous Interpretation from English into Korean”. Meta51 (2): 202–214. 10.7202/013251ar
    https://doi.org/10.7202/013251ar [Google Scholar]
  24. 2009 “A comparative analysis of two time lags in English into Korean simultaneous interpretation”. Interpretation and Translation11 (2): 163–181.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Lucas, Ceil; and Valli, Clayton
    1992Language contact in the American deaf community. Leiden: Brill.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Min, Unju
    2013 “Analysis of the temporal pattern on Simultaneous Interpretation from the Korean Language to Korean Sign Language”. The Journal of Special Children Education15 (4): 427–444. 10.21075/kacsn.2013.15.4.427
    https://doi.org/10.21075/kacsn.2013.15.4.427 [Google Scholar]
  27. Napier, Jemina; Andy, Carmichael; and Andrew, Wiltshire
    2008 “Look-pause-nod: A linguistic case study of a deaf professional and interpreters working together”. InDeaf professionals and designated interpreters: A new paradigm, ed. byPeter C. Hauser; Karen L. Finch; and Angela B. Hauser, 22–42. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Nicodemus, Brenda; and Emmorey, Karen
    2015 “Directionality in ASL-English interpreting: Accuracy and articulation quality in L1 and L2”. Interpreting17 (2): 145–166. 10.1075/intp.17.2.01nic
    https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.17.2.01nic [Google Scholar]
  29. Oléron, Pierre; and Nanpon, Hubert
    1965 “Research into simultaneous translation”. The interpreting studies reader: 43–50.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Olson, Andrea M.; Swabey, Laurie
    2016 “Communication Access for Deaf People in Healthcare Settings: Understanding the Work of American Sign Language Interpreters”. Journal for Healthcare Quality39 (4): 191–199. 10.1097/JHQ.0000000000000038
    https://doi.org/10.1097/JHQ.0000000000000038 [Google Scholar]
  31. Pio, Sonia
    2003 “The relation between ST delivery rate and quality in simultaneous interpretation”. The Interpreters’ Newsletter12: 69–100.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Pöchhacker, Franz
    2004Introducing Interpreting Studies. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203504802
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203504802 [Google Scholar]
  33. Pyoun, Hyewon
    2003 “With focus on relay interpretation: Simultaneous interpretation quality assessment made by professional interpreters”. Interpretation and Translation5 (1): 221–241.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Siple, Linda A.
    1993 “Interpreters’ Use of Pausing in Voice to Sign Transliteration”. Sign Language Studies79: 147–180. 10.1353/sls.1993.0020
    https://doi.org/10.1353/sls.1993.0020 [Google Scholar]
  35. Sunnari, Marianna
    1995 “Processing strategies in simultaneous interpreting: “Saying it all” versus synthesis”. InTopics in interpreting, ed. byTommola, Jorma, 109–119. Turku: University of Turku, Centre for Translation and Interpreting.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Uyechi, Linda Ann N.
    1994 The Geometry of Visual Phonology. Unpublished Doctoral dissertation. Stanford (CA): Stanford University.
  37. Wang, Binhua; and Li, Tao
    2015 “An empirical study of pauses in Chinese-English simultaneous interpreting”. Perspectives23 (1): 124–142. 10.1080/0907676X.2014.948885
    https://doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.2014.948885 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/babel.00191.yu
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/babel.00191.yu
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error