1887
image of Strategic additions in simultaneous interpreting from a signed language into a spoken language
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This quasi-experimental study explored professional Australian Sign Language (Auslan)/English interpreters’ strategic additions when interpreting an Auslan presentation into spoken English in the simultaneous mode. The product analysis involves the researcher and a research assistant identifying and categorizing participants’ strategic additions independently, using a corpus-driven approach. The process analysis entails the researcher analyzing participants’ retrospective interviews to find their motivations for producing strategic additions. The results show that the five most frequent types of strategic additions in this corpus of signed-to-spoken language simultaneous interpretations include explicitation, adding referents to numbers, referring to previous relevant information, adding conjunctions, and elaboration. Striving for optimal relevance appears to be the interpreters’ main motivation for making strategic additions in conference interpreting. The results suggest that professional interpreters are usually user-oriented and make strategic additions, consciously or subconsciously, to enhance the communicative impact of their interpretations.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/tis.23053.wan
2025-05-26
2025-06-24
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Angelelli, Claudia V.
    2012 “Challenges in interpreters’ coordination of the construction of pain.” InCoordinating participation in dialogue interpreting, ed. byClaudio Baraldi and Laura Gavioli, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.102.11ang
    https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.102.11ang [Google Scholar]
  2. Baraldi, Claudio
    2012 “Interpreting as dialogic mediation: The relevance of expansions.” InCoordinating participation in dialogue interpreting, ed. byClaudio Baraldi and Laura Gavioli, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.102.13bar
    https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.102.13bar [Google Scholar]
  3. Best, Brett,
    2016 “From a Koine to Gestalt: Critical points and interpreter strategies in interpretation from International Sign into spoken English.” InInternational Sign: Linguistic, Usage and Status Issues, ed. byRachel Rosenstock and Jemina Napier, –. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press. 10.2307/j.ctv2t5xgp9.11
    https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv2t5xgp9.11 [Google Scholar]
  4. Braun, Sabine
    2017 “What a micro-analytical investigation of additions and expansions in remote interpreting can tell us about interpreter’s participation in a shared virtual space.” Journal of Pragmatics: –. 10.1016/j.pragma.2016.09.011
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2016.09.011 [Google Scholar]
  5. Cohen, Jacob
    1960 “A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales.” Educational and Psychological Measurement(): –. 10.1177/001316446002000104
    https://doi.org/10.1177/001316446002000104 [Google Scholar]
  6. Cokely, Dennis
    1992Interpretation: A sociolinguistic model. Burtonsville, MD: Linstok Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. ELAN (Version 6.5) [Computer software]
    ELAN (Version 6.5) [Computer software] 2022 Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, The Language Archive. Retrieved fromhttps://archive.mpi.nl/tla/elan
  8. Gallai, Fabrizio
    2023Relevance Theory in Translation and Interpreting: A Cognitive-Pragmatic Approach. New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9781003183969
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003183969 [Google Scholar]
  9. Gile, Daniel
    2009Basic Concepts and Models for Interpreter and Translator Training. Rev. ed.Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.8
    https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.8 [Google Scholar]
  10. Gumul, Ewa
    2006 “Explicitation in simultaneous interpreting: A strategy or a by-product of language mediation?” Across Languages and Cultures(): –. 10.1556/Acr.7.2006.2.2
    https://doi.org/10.1556/Acr.7.2006.2.2 [Google Scholar]
  11. 2008 “Explicitation in simultaneous interpreting — The quest for optimal relevance.” InRelevant Worlds: Current Perspectives on Language, Translation and Relevance Theory, ed. byEwa Waáaszewska , –. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. 2017 “Explicitation and directionality in simultaneous interpreting.” Linguistica Silesiana: –.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. 2025 “Explicitation and cognition.” InThe Routledge Handbook of Interpreting and Cognition, ed. byChristopher D. Mellinger, –. New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9780429297533‑25
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429297533-25 [Google Scholar]
  14. Jacobsen, Bente
    2002 Pragmatic meaning in court interpreting: An empirical study in consecutively interpreted question-answer dialogues. Unpublished doctoral disseration, The Aarhus School of Business, Denmark.
  15. Janzen, Terry, and Donna Korpiniski
    2005 “Ethics and professionalism in interpreting.” InTopics in Signed Language Interpreting: Theory and Practice, ed. byTerry Janzen, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.63.11jan
    https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.63.11jan [Google Scholar]
  16. Johnston, Trevor, and Adam Schembri
    2007Australian Sign Language (Auslan): An introduction to sign language linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511607479
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511607479 [Google Scholar]
  17. Lawrence, Shelley
    2003 “Interpreter discourse: English to ASL expansion.” InMapping our course: A collaborative venture. Proceedings of the Tenth National Convention of the Conference of Interpreter Trainers, ed. byElizabeth A. Winston, –. Conference of Interpreter Trainers.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Leeson, Lorraine
    2005 “Making the effort in simultaneous interpreting: Some considerations for signed language interpreters.” InTopics in Signed Language Interpreting: Theory and Practice, ed. byTerry Janzen, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.63.07lee
    https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.63.07lee [Google Scholar]
  19. Major, George, and Jemina Napier
    2012 “Interpreting and knowledge mediation in the healthcare setting: What do we really mean by ‘accuracy’?” Linguistica Antverpiensia, New Series — Themes in Translation Studies: –. 10.52034/lanstts.v11i.304
    https://doi.org/10.52034/lanstts.v11i.304 [Google Scholar]
  20. McDermid, Campbell
    2014 “Cohesion in English to ASL simultaneous interpreting.” Translation and Interpreting(): –. 10.12807/ti.106201.2014.a05
    https://doi.org/10.12807/ti.106201.2014.a05 [Google Scholar]
  21. McKee, Rachel, and Jemina Napier
    2002 “Interpreting into International Sign pidgin: An analysis.” Journal of Sign Language and Linguistics(): –. 10.1075/sll.5.1.04mck
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sll.5.1.04mck [Google Scholar]
  22. Merlini, Raffaela, and Roberta Favaron
    2005 “Examining the “voice of interpreting” in speech pathology.” Interpreting(): –. 10.1075/intp.7.2.07mer
    https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.7.2.07mer [Google Scholar]
  23. Napier, Jemina
    2004 “Interpreting omissions: A new perspective.” Interpreting(): –. 10.1075/intp.6.2.02nap
    https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.6.2.02nap [Google Scholar]
  24. Peng, Gracie
    2015 “Coherence.” InRoutledge Encyclopedia of Interpreting Studies, ed. byFranz Pöchhacker, –. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Pointurier-Pournin, Sophie
    2015 “Sign language interpreting, challenges, tactics, and efforts.” InMind Tricks: Our Brain is the Limit. Cognitive Processes in Sign Language Interpreting, ed. bySarah Bown, Kristiaan Dekesel and Christopher Stone, –. EFSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Setton, Robin
    2015 “Relevance theory.” InRoutledge Encyclopedia of Interpreting Studies, ed. byFranz Pöchhacker, –. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Shlesinger, Miriam
    1995 “Shifts in cohesion in simultaneous interpreting.” The Translator(): –. 10.1080/13556509.1995.10798957
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13556509.1995.10798957 [Google Scholar]
  28. Sperber, Dan, and Deirdre Wilson
    1995Relevance: Communication and Cognition. 2nd ed.Oxford: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Stone, Christopher
    2009Toward a Deaf Translation Norm. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press. 10.2307/j.ctv2rcng24
    https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv2rcng24 [Google Scholar]
  30. Tang, Fang
    2018Explicitation in Consecutive Interpreting. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.135
    https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.135 [Google Scholar]
  31. Wadensjö, Cecilia
    1999 “Telephone interpreting and the synchronization of talk in social interaction.” The Translator(): –. 10.1080/13556509.1999.10799043
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13556509.1999.10799043 [Google Scholar]
  32. 1998Interpreting as Interaction. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Wang, Jihong, Jemina Napier, Della Goswell, and Andy Carmichael
    2015 “The design and application of rubrics to assess signed language interpreting performance.” The Interpreter and Translator Trainer(): –. 10.1080/1750399X.2015.1009261
    https://doi.org/10.1080/1750399X.2015.1009261 [Google Scholar]
  34. Wang, Jihong, and Jing Fang
    2019 “Accuracy in telephone interpreting and on-site interpreting: A comparative study.” Interpreting(): –. 10.1075/intp.00019.wan
    https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.00019.wan [Google Scholar]
  35. Wang, Jihong
    2021Simultaneous Interpreting from a Signed Language into a Spoken Language: Quality, Cognitive Overload, and Strategies. New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9780367815769
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780367815769 [Google Scholar]
  36. Wehrmeyer, Ella
    2021 “Additions in simultaneous signed interpreting: A corpus-driven grounded study.” Translation and Interpreting Studies(): –. 10.1075/tis.18053.weh
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tis.18053.weh [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/tis.23053.wan
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