Pub Date : 2018-12-22DOI: 10.7146/HJLCB.V0I58.111682
Zofia Ziemann
The paper discusses the role of (perceived) translator profile in the current promotion and reception of three competing English translations of fiction by the modernist Polish-Jewish author Bruno Schulz (1892–1942): Celina Wieniewska’s 1963/1978 canonical version, John Curran Davis’s ca. 2005–2010 online fan retranslation, and Madeline Levine’s retranslation, publicized since 2012 and forthcoming in 2018. Based on a para- and extratextual analysis of the discourse around these versions, combined with archive research into translator history, it explores the ways in which the translator’s profile is used to promote the translation and develop or support opinions about it. Wieniewska’s personal background, difficult to access due to the invisibility of the ‘historical’ translator, has been ignored by readers and critics, even though it would help understand her choice of translation strategy and thus make the recent criticism of her translation more informed. Conversely, in the case of Davis and Levine, not only are the retranslators visible to the extent that they actively promote their work themselves, but also judgments are passed, boundaries drawn and distinctions made based on their profiles rather than their performance: their work has been assessed to a large extent without reference to their actual translation choices. The retranslators’ lives – educational background, affiliation, professional experience – all turn out to play a major role in the critical discourse around their work, replacing the reading or, in the extreme case of Levine’s yet unpublished translation, even the very existence of the translated text.
{"title":"Translator Profile in the Discourse around Translation: Promotion and Reception of the English Translations of the Fiction of Bruno Schulz","authors":"Zofia Ziemann","doi":"10.7146/HJLCB.V0I58.111682","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7146/HJLCB.V0I58.111682","url":null,"abstract":" \u0000 The paper discusses the role of (perceived) translator profile in the current promotion and reception of three competing English translations of fiction by the modernist Polish-Jewish author Bruno Schulz (1892–1942): Celina Wieniewska’s 1963/1978 canonical version, John Curran Davis’s ca. 2005–2010 online fan retranslation, and Madeline Levine’s retranslation, publicized since 2012 and forthcoming in 2018. Based on a para- and extratextual analysis of the discourse around these versions, combined with archive research into translator history, it explores the ways in which the translator’s profile is used to promote the translation and develop or support opinions about it. Wieniewska’s personal background, difficult to access due to the invisibility of the ‘historical’ translator, has been ignored by readers and critics, even though it would help understand her choice of translation strategy and thus make the recent criticism of her translation more informed. Conversely, in the case of Davis and Levine, not only are the retranslators visible to the extent that they actively promote their work themselves, but also judgments are passed, boundaries drawn and distinctions made based on their profiles rather than their performance: their work has been assessed to a large extent without reference to their actual translation choices. The retranslators’ lives – educational background, affiliation, professional experience – all turn out to play a major role in the critical discourse around their work, replacing the reading or, in the extreme case of Levine’s yet unpublished translation, even the very existence of the translated text.","PeriodicalId":38609,"journal":{"name":"Hermes (Denmark)","volume":"58 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83901709","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-12-21DOI: 10.7146/HJLCB.V0I58.111658
Paola Gentile
This paper aims to analyse the differences between female and male conference interpreters’ self-perceived status. Several studies (Angelelli 2004; Katan 2011; Zwischenberger 2011) indicate that women make up most of the professionals working in the translational professions, but little academic attention has been devoted to the question as to whether female and male interpreters have different attitudes towards their profession and their self-perceived status. Sociological studies on feminised professions suggest that women are generally underestimated in the workplace, which leads to them to perceive their status as lower compared to their male colleagues (Cortina/San Román 2006). To test whether this phenomenon was experienced by conference interpreters as well, the responses of a world survey (n = 805) were analysed, with a special focus on interpreters’ self-perception of the status, prestige and social value of their profession. The results showed that, when asked to evaluate their self-perceived status, there were hardly any differences between the scores obtained by female and male interpreters. However, major differences emerged when men and women expressed their opinions on the way they think their work is seen by laypeople, showing that female interpreters perceive their status as far lower than their male counterparts do.
本文旨在分析女性和男性会议口译员自我认知地位的差异。几项研究(Angelelli 2004;许许2011;Zwischenberger(2011)的研究表明，女性在翻译行业中占大多数，但关于男女口译员对其职业和自我认知地位是否有不同的态度这一问题，学术界的关注很少。对女性化职业的社会学研究表明，女性在工作场所通常被低估，这导致她们认为自己的地位低于男同事(Cortina/San Román 2006)。为了检验会议口译员是否也经历过这种现象，我们分析了一项世界调查(n = 805)的回答，特别关注口译员对其职业的地位、声望和社会价值的自我认知。结果表明，当被要求评估他们的自我感知状态时，男女口译员的得分几乎没有差异。然而，当男性和女性表达他们认为外行人看待自己工作的方式时，主要差异出现了，这表明女性口译员认为自己的地位远低于男性同行。
{"title":"Through Women’s Eyes. Conference Interpreters’ Self-Perceived Status in a Gendered Perspective","authors":"Paola Gentile","doi":"10.7146/HJLCB.V0I58.111658","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7146/HJLCB.V0I58.111658","url":null,"abstract":"This paper aims to analyse the differences between female and male conference interpreters’ self-perceived status. Several studies (Angelelli 2004; Katan 2011; Zwischenberger 2011) indicate that women make up most of the professionals working in the translational professions, but little academic attention has been devoted to the question as to whether female and male interpreters have different attitudes towards their profession and their self-perceived status. Sociological studies on feminised professions suggest that women are generally underestimated in the workplace, which leads to them to perceive their status as lower compared to their male colleagues (Cortina/San Román 2006). To test whether this phenomenon was experienced by conference interpreters as well, the responses of a world survey (n = 805) were analysed, with a special focus on interpreters’ self-perception of the status, prestige and social value of their profession. The results showed that, when asked to evaluate their self-perceived status, there were hardly any differences between the scores obtained by female and male interpreters. However, major differences emerged when men and women expressed their opinions on the way they think their work is seen by laypeople, showing that female interpreters perceive their status as far lower than their male counterparts do. ","PeriodicalId":38609,"journal":{"name":"Hermes (Denmark)","volume":"3 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81987784","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-12-21DOI: 10.7146/hjlcb.v0i58.111661
Volga Yılmaz-Gümüş
This study sets out to describe the state of the translation (not interpreting) profession in Turkey, approached by means of indicators based on professionalization (university-based translator training, legal instruments introduced to regulate the market, and professional associations) and solidity of the profession (proportion of men vs. women, translation graduates working as translators, freelance vs. in-house translators, and commitment to the profession). The indicators are investigated by analyzing documents (such as Regulation on the Public Notary, the National Occupational Standards for translators and interpreters, and the Prime Ministry’s report on the translation profession in Turkey), as well as survey and interview data gathered from the graduates of university translation programs, representing freelancers, in-house translators, and language teachers. The increasing number of university-based translation programs, legal instruments and translator associations suggests that continuous attempts have been made to enhance the degree of professionalization in translation. On the other hand, quantitative analyses of a survey administered to translation graduates indicate that the proportion of female translators is overwhelmingly high, that graduates tend to work as freelance translators, but freelancing is mostly not their main role, and that the graduates mostly have a positive perception of training, but do not feel prepared to enter the market after graduation. The findings of document and empirical analyses show that all traits of an established profession are still not present in translation while significant steps have been taken on the way to solidity and professionalization.
{"title":"Solidity and Professionalization of Translation: Turkey as a Case in Point","authors":"Volga Yılmaz-Gümüş","doi":"10.7146/hjlcb.v0i58.111661","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7146/hjlcb.v0i58.111661","url":null,"abstract":" \u0000 This study sets out to describe the state of the translation (not interpreting) profession in Turkey, approached by means of indicators based on professionalization (university-based translator training, legal instruments introduced to regulate the market, and professional associations) and solidity of the profession (proportion of men vs. women, translation graduates working as translators, freelance vs. in-house translators, and commitment to the profession). The indicators are investigated by analyzing documents (such as Regulation on the Public Notary, the National Occupational Standards for translators and interpreters, and the Prime Ministry’s report on the translation profession in Turkey), as well as survey and interview data gathered from the graduates of university translation programs, representing freelancers, in-house translators, and language teachers. The increasing number of university-based translation programs, legal instruments and translator associations suggests that continuous attempts have been made to enhance the degree of professionalization in translation. On the other hand, quantitative analyses of a survey administered to translation graduates indicate that the proportion of female translators is overwhelmingly high, that graduates tend to work as freelance translators, but freelancing is mostly not their main role, and that the graduates mostly have a positive perception of training, but do not feel prepared to enter the market after graduation. The findings of document and empirical analyses show that all traits of an established profession are still not present in translation while significant steps have been taken on the way to solidity and professionalization. ","PeriodicalId":38609,"journal":{"name":"Hermes (Denmark)","volume":"3 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87166537","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-12-21DOI: 10.7146/HJLCB.V0I58.111674
T. Tuominen
In recent years, the Finnish subtitling field has undergone significant changes, which have caused instability in subtitlers’ working conditions. Subtitlers have responded to these changes by working together towards a more unified professional community. One important means in these efforts has been an active online presence consisting of, among other things, a website and a blog. The subtitlers’ online presence could be characterised as an element of a “professional project” (Tyulenev 2014: 68–69), an attempt to institutionalise the profession and to search for social recognition. One aspect of a professional project is to draw the boundaries of the profession and to determine criteria for acceptance into the professional community. The definition of professional boundaries is a recurrent theme on the Finnish subtitlers’ website and blog. The subtitlers’ case therefore provides an enlightening example of how a heterogeneous professional field can attempt to improve its standing by determining its own boundaries. This article will explore how Finnish subtitlers define the boundaries of their profession on their website and blog, what criteria they present for inclusion in their professional community, and how exclusion from the community is expressed. The analysis will demonstrate that a number of professional practices, such as adherence to local subtitling traditions, are used as a way of determining the behaviour of a professional subtitler. As a consequence, the definition of professional boundaries emerges as a central argument in the subtitlers’ professional project, becoming a strategy for unifying the subtitlers’ community and advocating for a more stable status.
{"title":"Negotiating the Boundaries of Professional Subtitling. The Case of Finnish Subtitlers and Their Online Community","authors":"T. Tuominen","doi":"10.7146/HJLCB.V0I58.111674","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7146/HJLCB.V0I58.111674","url":null,"abstract":" \u0000 In recent years, the Finnish subtitling field has undergone significant changes, which have caused instability in subtitlers’ working conditions. Subtitlers have responded to these changes by working together towards a more unified professional community. One important means in these efforts has been an active online presence consisting of, among other things, a website and a blog. The subtitlers’ online presence could be characterised as an element of a “professional project” (Tyulenev 2014: 68–69), an attempt to institutionalise the profession and to search for social recognition. One aspect of a professional project is to draw the boundaries of the profession and to determine criteria for acceptance into the professional community. The definition of professional boundaries is a recurrent theme on the Finnish subtitlers’ website and blog. The subtitlers’ case therefore provides an enlightening example of how a heterogeneous professional field can attempt to improve its standing by determining its own boundaries. This article will explore how Finnish subtitlers define the boundaries of their profession on their website and blog, what criteria they present for inclusion in their professional community, and how exclusion from the community is expressed. The analysis will demonstrate that a number of professional practices, such as adherence to local subtitling traditions, are used as a way of determining the behaviour of a professional subtitler. As a consequence, the definition of professional boundaries emerges as a central argument in the subtitlers’ professional project, becoming a strategy for unifying the subtitlers’ community and advocating for a more stable status.","PeriodicalId":38609,"journal":{"name":"Hermes (Denmark)","volume":"16 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79301812","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-12-21DOI: 10.7146/HJLCB.V0I58.111673
M. Ruokonen
In most countries, there are no restrictions on who is allowed to work as a translator, apart from the context of legally valid or authorised translations. Nevertheless, the significance of authorisation for translator status has hardly been studied, apart from Dam/Zethsen (2009, 2010). This article investigates how authorisation affects Finnish translators’ status perceptions, and whether they believe that the profession should be protected further, and if so, how and why. The data come from a survey conducted in 2014 with 450 respondents (business, literary and audio-visual translators), based on Dam/Zethsen’s questionnaires and expanded and adapted for the Finnish context. The analysis is partly quantitative and statistical, partly a qualitative thematic analysis of the respondents’ open comments. Statistically, authorisation produced no significant differences in the respondents’ status perceptions. Similarly, in open questions on factors affecting translator status and measures that should be taken, few respondents mentioned authorisation or other professional boundaries. Nevertheless, when asked whether the profession should be protected, almost 60% of the respondents, particularly business translators who had attended translator training, advocated some form of protection, although they also emphasised that there should be flexibility to allow for translators with different backgrounds. The respondents were also more prone to call for protection if they held authorisation themselves, which may suggest that they feel authorisation does carry some value.
{"title":"To Protect or Not to Protect: Finnish Translators’ Perceptions on Translator Status and Authorisation","authors":"M. Ruokonen","doi":"10.7146/HJLCB.V0I58.111673","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7146/HJLCB.V0I58.111673","url":null,"abstract":" \u0000 In most countries, there are no restrictions on who is allowed to work as a translator, apart from the context of legally valid or authorised translations. Nevertheless, the significance of authorisation for translator status has hardly been studied, apart from Dam/Zethsen (2009, 2010). This article investigates how authorisation affects Finnish translators’ status perceptions, and whether they believe that the profession should be protected further, and if so, how and why. The data come from a survey conducted in 2014 with 450 respondents (business, literary and audio-visual translators), based on Dam/Zethsen’s questionnaires and expanded and adapted for the Finnish context. The analysis is partly quantitative and statistical, partly a qualitative thematic analysis of the respondents’ open comments. Statistically, authorisation produced no significant differences in the respondents’ status perceptions. Similarly, in open questions on factors affecting translator status and measures that should be taken, few respondents mentioned authorisation or other professional boundaries. Nevertheless, when asked whether the profession should be protected, almost 60% of the respondents, particularly business translators who had attended translator training, advocated some form of protection, although they also emphasised that there should be flexibility to allow for translators with different backgrounds. The respondents were also more prone to call for protection if they held authorisation themselves, which may suggest that they feel authorisation does carry some value. ","PeriodicalId":38609,"journal":{"name":"Hermes (Denmark)","volume":"46 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77592706","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-12-21DOI: 10.7146/HJLCB.V0I58.111655
Elin Svahn, M. Ruokonen, Leena Salmi
-
-
{"title":"Boundaries Around, Boundaries Within: Introduction to the Thematic Section on the Translation Profession, Translator Status and Identity","authors":"Elin Svahn, M. Ruokonen, Leena Salmi","doi":"10.7146/HJLCB.V0I58.111655","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7146/HJLCB.V0I58.111655","url":null,"abstract":"<jats:p>-</jats:p>","PeriodicalId":38609,"journal":{"name":"Hermes (Denmark)","volume":"19 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89961503","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-06-11DOI: 10.7146/HJLCB.V0I57.106203
Gregory M. Shreve
The observable activity of translation, the series of text comprehension and text production bursts we identify as translation, is the result of the activation of complex underlying cognitive systems. In the conduct of research it is often useful to approach such complex systems using a ‘levels of explanation’ framework. This paper considers David Marr’s (1982) three levels of explanation as they might apply to understanding translation and translation expertise more robustly. In cognitive translation studies to date, we have not really extended our understanding of expertise much past the second (algorithmic/representational) level in Marr’s scheme; we have failed to grapple as effectively as we might with the problem of how the second generation computationalist expertise constructs we adopted almost twenty years ago could be integrated with, for instance, connectionist neural network models of the mind, creating a third generation of expertise models. This paper offers some frameworks laying out how that end might be achieved using, for instance, symbolic connectionism and implementational connectivism. Further, it argues that given the overtly symbolic nature of translation language processing, cognitively-oriented translation scholars are uniquely suited to benefit from approaches that bridge the divide between symbol processing models and connectionist ones.
{"title":"Levels of Explanation and Translation Expertise","authors":"Gregory M. Shreve","doi":"10.7146/HJLCB.V0I57.106203","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7146/HJLCB.V0I57.106203","url":null,"abstract":"The observable activity of translation, the series of text comprehension and text production bursts we identify as translation, is the result of the activation of complex underlying cognitive systems. In the conduct of research it is often useful to approach such complex systems using a ‘levels of explanation’ framework. This paper considers David Marr’s (1982) three levels of explanation as they might apply to understanding translation and translation expertise more robustly. In cognitive translation studies to date, we have not really extended our understanding of expertise much past the second (algorithmic/representational) level in Marr’s scheme; we have failed to grapple as effectively as we might with the problem of how the second generation computationalist expertise constructs we adopted almost twenty years ago could be integrated with, for instance, connectionist neural network models of the mind, creating a third generation of expertise models. This paper offers some frameworks laying out how that end might be achieved using, for instance, symbolic connectionism and implementational connectivism. Further, it argues that given the overtly symbolic nature of translation language processing, cognitively-oriented translation scholars are uniquely suited to benefit from approaches that bridge the divide between symbol processing models and connectionist ones.","PeriodicalId":38609,"journal":{"name":"Hermes (Denmark)","volume":"20 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85886946","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-06-11DOI: 10.7146/hjlcb.v0i57.106192
Ricardo Muñoz Martín, Celia Martín de León
The Monitor Model fosters a view of translating where two mind modes stand out and alternate when trying to render originals word-by-word by default: shallow, uneventful processing vs problem solving. Research may have been biased towards problem solving, often operationalized with a pause of, or above, 3 seconds. This project analyzed 16 translation log files by four informants from four originals. A baseline minimal pause of 200 ms was instrumental to calculate two individual thresholds for each log file: (a) A low one – 1.5 times the median pause within words – and (b) a high one – 3 times the median pause between words. Pauses were then characterized as short (between 200 ms and the lower threshold), mid, and long (above the higher threshold, chunking the recorded activities in the translation task into task segments), and assumed to respond to different causes. Weak correlations between short, mid and long pauses were found, hinting at possible different cognitive processes. Inferred processes did not fall neatly into categories depending on the length of possibly associated pauses. Mid pauses occurred more often than long pauses between sentences and paragraphs, and they also more often flanked information searches and even problem-solving instances. Chains of proximal mid pauses marked cases of potential hesitations. Task segments tended to happen within 4–8 minute cycles, nested in a possible initial phase for contextualization, followed by long periods of sustained attention. We found no evidence for problem-solving thresholds, and no trace of behavior supporting the Monitor Model.
{"title":"Fascinatin’ Rhythm – and Pauses in Translators’ Cognitive Processes","authors":"Ricardo Muñoz Martín, Celia Martín de León","doi":"10.7146/hjlcb.v0i57.106192","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7146/hjlcb.v0i57.106192","url":null,"abstract":"The Monitor Model fosters a view of translating where two mind modes stand out and alternate when trying to render originals word-by-word by default: shallow, uneventful processing vs problem solving. Research may have been biased towards problem solving, often operationalized with a pause of, or above, 3 seconds. This project analyzed 16 translation log files by four informants from four originals. A baseline minimal pause of 200 ms was instrumental to calculate two individual thresholds for each log file: (a) A low one – 1.5 times the median pause within words – and (b) a high one – 3 times the median pause between words. Pauses were then characterized as short (between 200 ms and the lower threshold), mid, and long (above the higher threshold, chunking the recorded activities in the translation task into task segments), and assumed to respond to different causes. Weak correlations between short, mid and long pauses were found, hinting at possible different cognitive processes. Inferred processes did not fall neatly into categories depending on the length of possibly associated pauses. Mid pauses occurred more often than long pauses between sentences and paragraphs, and they also more often flanked information searches and even problem-solving instances. Chains of proximal mid pauses marked cases of potential hesitations. Task segments tended to happen within 4–8 minute cycles, nested in a possible initial phase for contextualization, followed by long periods of sustained attention. We found no evidence for problem-solving thresholds, and no trace of behavior supporting the Monitor Model. ","PeriodicalId":38609,"journal":{"name":"Hermes (Denmark)","volume":"27 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77174603","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-06-11DOI: 10.7146/HJLCB.V0I57.106193
Elisabet Tiselius
Sign language interpreting of dialogues shares many features with the interpreting of dialogues between non-signed languages. We argue that from a cognitive perspective in dialogue interpreting, despite some differences between the two types of interpreting, sign language interpreters use many of the same processes and handle similar challenges as interpreters between non-signed languages. We report on a first exploration of process differences in sign language interpreting between three novice and three experienced Swedish Sign Language interpreters. The informants all interpreted the same dialogue and made a retrospection of their interpreting immediately after the task. Retrospections were analyzed using tools for identifying reported processing problems, instances of monitoring, and strategy use (see Ivanova 1999). Furthermore, the interpreting products (both into Swedish Sign Language and into Swedish) and their differences were qualitatively analyzed. The results indicate that there are differences between the two groups, both in terms of the retrospective reports and in terms of the interpreting product. As expected, monitoring seems to be a factor determined by experience. The experienced interpreters seemed to have more efficient ways of handling turn taking and the internalization of new vocabulary. The study also concludes that to use instruments devised for simultaneous conference interpreting (Ivanova 1999; Tiselius 2013), the instruments need to be adapted to the dialogue setting, even though in the case of sign language interpreting the simultaneous interpreting technique is used even in dialogue interpreting.
{"title":"Exploring Cognitive Aspects of Competence in Sign Language Interpreting of Dialogues: First Impressions","authors":"Elisabet Tiselius","doi":"10.7146/HJLCB.V0I57.106193","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7146/HJLCB.V0I57.106193","url":null,"abstract":"Sign language interpreting of dialogues shares many features with the interpreting of dialogues between non-signed languages. We argue that from a cognitive perspective in dialogue interpreting, despite some differences between the two types of interpreting, sign language interpreters use many of the same processes and handle similar challenges as interpreters between non-signed languages. We report on a first exploration of process differences in sign language interpreting between three novice and three experienced Swedish Sign Language interpreters. The informants all interpreted the same dialogue and made a retrospection of their interpreting immediately after the task. Retrospections were analyzed using tools for identifying reported processing problems, instances of monitoring, and strategy use (see Ivanova 1999). Furthermore, the interpreting products (both into Swedish Sign Language and into Swedish) and their differences were qualitatively analyzed. The results indicate that there are differences between the two groups, both in terms of the retrospective reports and in terms of the interpreting product. As expected, monitoring seems to be a factor determined by experience. The experienced interpreters seemed to have more efficient ways of handling turn taking and the internalization of new vocabulary. The study also concludes that to use instruments devised for simultaneous conference interpreting (Ivanova 1999; Tiselius 2013), the instruments need to be adapted to the dialogue setting, even though in the case of sign language interpreting the simultaneous interpreting technique is used even in dialogue interpreting.","PeriodicalId":38609,"journal":{"name":"Hermes (Denmark)","volume":"27 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85455280","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-06-11DOI: 10.7146/HJLCB.V0I57.106206
Saeed Ameri, M. Khoshsaligheh
For more than seven decades, dubbing has been the dominant professional modality for overcoming language barriers in foreign movies and TV series in Iran and has been revered as a national art. Although limited, some recent work has explored Persian dubbing reception and to continue this endeavor, this study attempts to offer further insights into how the Iranian viewers perceive dubbing, translation for dubbing and what they expect from dubbing. More precisely, the study aims at examining how the Iranian audiences view dubbing and particularly its agents and translation. To these ends, a questionnaire including open and closed items was designed. The overall results revealed that translation quality was considered considerably less important than the technical issues related to the dubbing production, such as voice-acting and synchronization. The findings also suggested that the performance of dubbing actors and dubbing directors was regarded more important than the contribution of translators. Overall, these findings seemed to indicate that the Iranian viewers’ appreciation of a dubbed program is mainly guided by non-translation issues including the performance of the dubbing actors and the accuracy of the relevant synchronizations.
{"title":"Exploring the Attitudes and Expectations of Iranian Audiences in Terms of Professional Dubbing into Persian","authors":"Saeed Ameri, M. Khoshsaligheh","doi":"10.7146/HJLCB.V0I57.106206","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7146/HJLCB.V0I57.106206","url":null,"abstract":"For more than seven decades, dubbing has been the dominant professional modality for overcoming language barriers in foreign movies and TV series in Iran and has been revered as a national art. Although limited, some recent work has explored Persian dubbing reception and to continue this endeavor, this study attempts to offer further insights into how the Iranian viewers perceive dubbing, translation for dubbing and what they expect from dubbing. More precisely, the study aims at examining how the Iranian audiences view dubbing and particularly its agents and translation. To these ends, a questionnaire including open and closed items was designed. The overall results revealed that translation quality was considered considerably less important than the technical issues related to the dubbing production, such as voice-acting and synchronization. The findings also suggested that the performance of dubbing actors and dubbing directors was regarded more important than the contribution of translators. Overall, these findings seemed to indicate that the Iranian viewers’ appreciation of a dubbed program is mainly guided by non-translation issues including the performance of the dubbing actors and the accuracy of the relevant synchronizations.","PeriodicalId":38609,"journal":{"name":"Hermes (Denmark)","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89502573","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：