Pub Date : 2014-04-02DOI: 10.12807/TI.106201.2014.A01
Brenda Nicodemus, L. Swabey, C. Moreland
In this study we examine linguistic features produced by interpreters and deaf bilingual physicians when translating medication instructions from English into American Sign Language (ASL). In the U.S. healthcare system, signed language interpreters are frequently called upon to facilitate communication between deaf individuals who use ASL and their non-signing physicians. A small but growing number of deaf individuals are now pursuing medical training, creating a situation in which deaf patients can communicate in ASL with their healthcare providers. Numerous practical and perceptual barriers affect patients' medication intake behaviors, including comprehension, memory of instructions, and language differences between physicians and patients. Research indicates that language concordance increases patients' compliance to prescription treatment. It follows that direct communication in ASL between deaf patients and deaf physicians will positively impact treatment compliance of patients and may result in better recall of medical instructions. We examined the linguistic features used in English to ASL translations of two medication directions as produced by experienced ASL-English interpreters (n=3) and deaf bilingual physicians (n=3). Results showed the absence of a standard approach for translating medication directions into ASL; however, both groups incorporated the same linguistic devices to promote emphasis within the translation, including repetition, emphatic lexical signs, and prosodic markers, presumably to promote recall of key concepts by deaf patients. Lexical variability in the translations is discussed, as well as information gaps between the ASL and English versions of the medication instructions. The results hold implications for healthcare professionals, interpreters, and interpreter educators for building effective communication for deaf patients.
{"title":"Conveying medication prescriptions in American Sign Language: Use of emphasis in translations by interpreters and deaf physicians","authors":"Brenda Nicodemus, L. Swabey, C. Moreland","doi":"10.12807/TI.106201.2014.A01","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.12807/TI.106201.2014.A01","url":null,"abstract":"In this study we examine linguistic features produced by interpreters and deaf bilingual physicians when translating medication instructions from English into American Sign Language (ASL). In the U.S. healthcare system, signed language interpreters are frequently called upon to facilitate communication between deaf individuals who use ASL and their non-signing physicians. A small but growing number of deaf individuals are now pursuing medical training, creating a situation in which deaf patients can communicate in ASL with their healthcare providers. Numerous practical and perceptual barriers affect patients' medication intake behaviors, including comprehension, memory of instructions, and language differences between physicians and patients. Research indicates that language concordance increases patients' compliance to prescription treatment. It follows that direct communication in ASL between deaf patients and deaf physicians will positively impact treatment compliance of patients and may result in better recall of medical instructions. We examined the linguistic features used in English to ASL translations of two medication directions as produced by experienced ASL-English interpreters (n=3) and deaf bilingual physicians (n=3). Results showed the absence of a standard approach for translating medication directions into ASL; however, both groups incorporated the same linguistic devices to promote emphasis within the translation, including repetition, emphatic lexical signs, and prosodic markers, presumably to promote recall of key concepts by deaf patients. Lexical variability in the translations is discussed, as well as information gaps between the ASL and English versions of the medication instructions. The results hold implications for healthcare professionals, interpreters, and interpreter educators for building effective communication for deaf patients.","PeriodicalId":44242,"journal":{"name":"Translation & Interpreting-The International Journal of Translation and Interpreting","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2014-04-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85258361","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 : 2014-01-01DOI: 10.12807/TI.106201.2014.A09
C. B. Roy, M. Metzger
Introduction (1) One of the things often said about interpreting as an academic endeavour is that it is multi-disciplinary or inter-disciplinary, meaning that it can be studied from a variety of disciplines--sociology, anthropology, psychology, linguistics and/or a mix of these disciplines. It is also said that interpreting is cross-disciplinary, meaning a researcher can use frameworks, theories, methodologies, or analysis from more than one discipline to study different facets of interpreting. We would like to suggest how it is that sociolinguistics is already multi, cross- and interdisciplinary and, given its focus on both linguistic matters and social ones, is perhaps the most valuable way to study interpreting, whether in spoken language combinations or signed language (SL) combinations. In this article, however, we focus on studies in SL interpreting. Sociolinguistics includes an array of approaches that can answer many kinds of questions about human interaction. Sociolinguistics does not focus on language as an abstract system, but rather on language in use--how humans conceptualize particular meanings or select among the possibilities of meaning in their everyday lives just as interpreters select among the possibilities of meaning intended by others. Studying how interpreters do what they do requires a rigorous analysis of linguistic form and function with the awareness that producing and understanding communication are matters of human feeling and human interaction--this is sociolinguistics. The founding fathers of sociolinguistics, Dell Hymes and John Gumperz (1972) argued that language can only be studied and understood from within the active social and communicative situation in which it is embedded. This means that they believed that to truly understand human communication, language behaviour should be studied when captured in real events with real people doing real and genuine talk to meet their own communicative goals. While sociolinguistics borrows both theoretical constructs and methodological approaches primarily from linguistics, anthropology and sociology, one can now find studies in a multitude of disciplines that while not labelling themselves sociolinguistics are so in nature, all blending together to study human behaviour, most of which is revealed in the use of language. Sociolinguistic approaches and methodologies are then well suited to interpreting studies, precisely because interpreting involves such a complex array of language and social behaviour. Interpreters perform intentional sociolinguistic analyses, and reflect tacit, sociolinguistic knowledge as they engage in the task of interpreting. In this sense, not only is the sociolinguistic context a relevant aspect of interpretation as a profession, but also the larger sociolinguistic context in which interpreters work. Each interpreted interaction undertaken by a professional interpreter is situated within communities that harbor their own unique multilingual, biling
{"title":"Researching signed language interpreting research through a sociolinguistic lens","authors":"C. B. Roy, M. Metzger","doi":"10.12807/TI.106201.2014.A09","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.12807/TI.106201.2014.A09","url":null,"abstract":"Introduction (1) One of the things often said about interpreting as an academic endeavour is that it is multi-disciplinary or inter-disciplinary, meaning that it can be studied from a variety of disciplines--sociology, anthropology, psychology, linguistics and/or a mix of these disciplines. It is also said that interpreting is cross-disciplinary, meaning a researcher can use frameworks, theories, methodologies, or analysis from more than one discipline to study different facets of interpreting. We would like to suggest how it is that sociolinguistics is already multi, cross- and interdisciplinary and, given its focus on both linguistic matters and social ones, is perhaps the most valuable way to study interpreting, whether in spoken language combinations or signed language (SL) combinations. In this article, however, we focus on studies in SL interpreting. Sociolinguistics includes an array of approaches that can answer many kinds of questions about human interaction. Sociolinguistics does not focus on language as an abstract system, but rather on language in use--how humans conceptualize particular meanings or select among the possibilities of meaning in their everyday lives just as interpreters select among the possibilities of meaning intended by others. Studying how interpreters do what they do requires a rigorous analysis of linguistic form and function with the awareness that producing and understanding communication are matters of human feeling and human interaction--this is sociolinguistics. The founding fathers of sociolinguistics, Dell Hymes and John Gumperz (1972) argued that language can only be studied and understood from within the active social and communicative situation in which it is embedded. This means that they believed that to truly understand human communication, language behaviour should be studied when captured in real events with real people doing real and genuine talk to meet their own communicative goals. While sociolinguistics borrows both theoretical constructs and methodological approaches primarily from linguistics, anthropology and sociology, one can now find studies in a multitude of disciplines that while not labelling themselves sociolinguistics are so in nature, all blending together to study human behaviour, most of which is revealed in the use of language. Sociolinguistic approaches and methodologies are then well suited to interpreting studies, precisely because interpreting involves such a complex array of language and social behaviour. Interpreters perform intentional sociolinguistic analyses, and reflect tacit, sociolinguistic knowledge as they engage in the task of interpreting. In this sense, not only is the sociolinguistic context a relevant aspect of interpretation as a profession, but also the larger sociolinguistic context in which interpreters work. Each interpreted interaction undertaken by a professional interpreter is situated within communities that harbor their own unique multilingual, biling","PeriodicalId":44242,"journal":{"name":"Translation & Interpreting-The International Journal of Translation and Interpreting","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2014-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83268506","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 : 2013-07-28DOI: 10.12807/TI.105202.2013.A03
Isabelle Lin, F. Chang, Feng-Lan Kuo
Accent is known to cause comprehension difficulty, but empirical interpreting studies on its specific impact have been sporadic. According to Mazzetti (1999), an accent is composed of deviated phonemics and prosody, both discussed extensively in the TESL discipline. The current study seeks to examine, in the interpreting setting, the applicability of Anderson-Hsieh, Johnson and Koehler's (1992) finding that deviated prosody hinders comprehension more than problematic phonemics and syllable structure do. Thirty-seven graduate-level interpreting majors, assigned randomly to four groups, rendered four versions of a text read by the same speaker and then filled out a questionnaire while playing back their own renditions. Renditions were later rated for accuracy by two freelance interpreters, whereas the questionnaires analysed qualitatively. Results of analyses indicated that 1) both phonemics and prosody deteriorated comprehension, but prosody had a greater impact; 2) deviated North American English post-vowel /r/, intonation and rhythm were comprehension problem triggers. The finding may be of use to interpreting trainers, trainees and professionals by contributing to their knowledge of accent.
{"title":"The Impact of Non-Native Accented English on Rendition Accuracy in Simultaneous Interpreting","authors":"Isabelle Lin, F. Chang, Feng-Lan Kuo","doi":"10.12807/TI.105202.2013.A03","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.12807/TI.105202.2013.A03","url":null,"abstract":"Accent is known to cause comprehension difficulty, but empirical interpreting studies on its specific impact have been sporadic. According to Mazzetti (1999), an accent is composed of deviated phonemics and prosody, both discussed extensively in the TESL discipline. The current study seeks to examine, in the interpreting setting, the applicability of Anderson-Hsieh, Johnson and Koehler's (1992) finding that deviated prosody hinders comprehension more than problematic phonemics and syllable structure do. Thirty-seven graduate-level interpreting majors, assigned randomly to four groups, rendered four versions of a text read by the same speaker and then filled out a questionnaire while playing back their own renditions. Renditions were later rated for accuracy by two freelance interpreters, whereas the questionnaires analysed qualitatively. Results of analyses indicated that 1) both phonemics and prosody deteriorated comprehension, but prosody had a greater impact; 2) deviated North American English post-vowel /r/, intonation and rhythm were comprehension problem triggers. The finding may be of use to interpreting trainers, trainees and professionals by contributing to their knowledge of accent.","PeriodicalId":44242,"journal":{"name":"Translation & Interpreting-The International Journal of Translation and Interpreting","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2013-07-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78829386","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 : 2013-07-25DOI: 10.12807/TI.105202.2013.A05
Kenny Wang, Chong Han
The study probes into translation students’ perception of the value of online peer feedback in improving translation skills. Students enrolled in a translation degree in Australia translated a 250-word text on two separate occasions. On each occasion, the students were given another fellow student’s translation of the same text to mark and provide anonymous peer feedback. The original translations from all the students, together with any peer feedback, were uploaded onto an online forum. The students were encouraged to download their own translation to review the peer feedback in it. They were also encouraged to download and peruse other students’ peer reviewed translations for comparison. Upon completion of the project, the students were surveyed about their perceptions and appreciation of their engagement in the process in the following three capacities: (i) as a feedback provider, (ii) as a feedback recipient, and (iii) as a peruser of other students’ work and the peer feedback therein. Results suggest that translation students appreciate online peer feedback as a valuable activity that facilitates improvement. The students found receiving peer feedback on their own translation especially rewarding, as it offered alternative approaches and perspectives on tackling linguistic/translation issues. In comparing the three capacities, students perceived reviewing feedback on their own work and perusing other students’ work as more beneficial than engaging in giving feedback to others.
{"title":"Accomplishment in the Multitude of Counsellors: Peer Feedback in Translation Training","authors":"Kenny Wang, Chong Han","doi":"10.12807/TI.105202.2013.A05","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.12807/TI.105202.2013.A05","url":null,"abstract":"The study probes into translation students’ perception of the value of online peer feedback in improving translation skills. Students enrolled in a translation degree in Australia translated a 250-word text on two separate occasions. On each occasion, the students were given another fellow student’s translation of the same text to mark and provide anonymous peer feedback. The original translations from all the students, together with any peer feedback, were uploaded onto an online forum. The students were encouraged to download their own translation to review the peer feedback in it. They were also encouraged to download and peruse other students’ peer reviewed translations for comparison. Upon completion of the project, the students were surveyed about their perceptions and appreciation of their engagement in the process in the following three capacities: (i) as a feedback provider, (ii) as a feedback recipient, and (iii) as a peruser of other students’ work and the peer feedback therein. Results suggest that translation students appreciate online peer feedback as a valuable activity that facilitates improvement. The students found receiving peer feedback on their own translation especially rewarding, as it offered alternative approaches and perspectives on tackling linguistic/translation issues. In comparing the three capacities, students perceived reviewing feedback on their own work and perusing other students’ work as more beneficial than engaging in giving feedback to others.","PeriodicalId":44242,"journal":{"name":"Translation & Interpreting-The International Journal of Translation and Interpreting","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2013-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86119290","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 : 2013-04-05DOI: 10.12807/TI.105201.2013.A11
A. Chan
The market for translation services provided by individuals is currently characterized by significant uncertainty because buyers lack clear ways to identify qualified providers from amongst the total pool of translators. Certification and educational diplomas both serve to reduce the resulting information asymmetry, but both suffer from potential drawbacks: translator training programs are currently oversupplying the market with graduates who may lack the specific skills needed in the market and no certification program enjoys universal recognition. In addition, the two may be seen as competing means of establishing qualification. The resulting situation, in which potential clients are uncertain about which signal to trust, is known as a signal jam . In order to overcome this jam and provide more consistent signaling, translator-training programs and professional associations offering certification need to collaborate more closely to harmonize their requirements and deliver continuing professional development (CPD) that help align the outcomes from training and certification.
{"title":"Signal jamming in the translation market and the complementary roles of certification and diplomas in developing multilateral signaling mechanisms","authors":"A. Chan","doi":"10.12807/TI.105201.2013.A11","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.12807/TI.105201.2013.A11","url":null,"abstract":"The market for translation services provided by individuals is currently characterized by significant uncertainty because buyers lack clear ways to identify qualified providers from amongst the total pool of translators. Certification and educational diplomas both serve to reduce the resulting information asymmetry, but both suffer from potential drawbacks: translator training programs are currently oversupplying the market with graduates who may lack the specific skills needed in the market and no certification program enjoys universal recognition. In addition, the two may be seen as competing means of establishing qualification. The resulting situation, in which potential clients are uncertain about which signal to trust, is known as a signal jam . In order to overcome this jam and provide more consistent signaling, translator-training programs and professional associations offering certification need to collaborate more closely to harmonize their requirements and deliver continuing professional development (CPD) that help align the outcomes from training and certification.","PeriodicalId":44242,"journal":{"name":"Translation & Interpreting-The International Journal of Translation and Interpreting","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2013-04-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80107773","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 : 2013-04-03DOI: 10.12807/TI.105201.2013.A02
J. Hlavac
This article provides an overview of the process by which potential translators and interpreters demonstrate minimum standards of performance to warrant official or professional recognition of their ability to translate or interpret and to practise professionally – commonly known as ‘certification’. Certification can be awarded by governmental or professional authorities on the basis of testing, completed training, presentation of previous relevant experience and/or recommendations from practising professionals. Certification can be awarded by a single authority for all types of translation and interpreting, or by authorities that specialise in a particular mode or type of inter-lingual transfer. This article compares certification procedures in 21 countries to present a cross-national perspective of how (and if) certification is awarded and which features and requirements are contained in it. Comparison reveals that the pragmatic, needs-based and socially focussed policies of translation and interpreting services in some New World countries such as Australia, Canada, US has led to the establishment of certification programs. In other, typically European and East Asian countries, a demonstration of minimum standards is provided through lengthy training, commonly as part of a university post-graduate degree where translation and interpreting performance is principally required for high-level political, business or literary interaction. In such countries, ‘certification’ may be a term reserved for a restricted type of performance, eg. court interpreting. Parallels are drawn between the procedures and conventions employed in various countries and how common elements may form a basis for greater cross-national equivalence and comparability.
{"title":"A Cross-National Overview of Translator and Interpreter Certification Procedures","authors":"J. Hlavac","doi":"10.12807/TI.105201.2013.A02","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.12807/TI.105201.2013.A02","url":null,"abstract":"This article provides an overview of the process by which potential translators and interpreters demonstrate minimum standards of performance to warrant official or professional recognition of their ability to translate or interpret and to practise professionally – commonly known as ‘certification’. Certification can be awarded by governmental or professional authorities on the basis of testing, completed training, presentation of previous relevant experience and/or recommendations from practising professionals. Certification can be awarded by a single authority for all types of translation and interpreting, or by authorities that specialise in a particular mode or type of inter-lingual transfer. This article compares certification procedures in 21 countries to present a cross-national perspective of how (and if) certification is awarded and which features and requirements are contained in it. Comparison reveals that the pragmatic, needs-based and socially focussed policies of translation and interpreting services in some New World countries such as Australia, Canada, US has led to the establishment of certification programs. In other, typically European and East Asian countries, a demonstration of minimum standards is provided through lengthy training, commonly as part of a university post-graduate degree where translation and interpreting performance is principally required for high-level political, business or literary interaction. In such countries, ‘certification’ may be a term reserved for a restricted type of performance, eg. court interpreting. Parallels are drawn between the procedures and conventions employed in various countries and how common elements may form a basis for greater cross-national equivalence and comparability.","PeriodicalId":44242,"journal":{"name":"Translation & Interpreting-The International Journal of Translation and Interpreting","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2013-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74036135","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}
In this paper, I will claim that if it is to be meaningful, the interface between research and practice must draw upon the intuitions that practitioners bring with them into the research setting, on the one hand, and upon the methods of rigorous scientific inquiry, on the other. The paper describes ways in which this interface has evolved in the area of Interpreting Studies, as reflected in the past ten issues (2004 – 2008) of the journal Interpreting. Discussion of this interface is not new, of course, but the inter-relationship between the academic investigation of interpreting and the practitioner’s experiences merits being reviewed periodically, in light of new developments, both in Interpreting Studies and in the practice of interpreting. The paper includes an overview of this inter-relationship, based on a corpus comprising ten issues of the journal.
{"title":"Crossing the divide: What researchers and practitioners can learn from one another","authors":"Miriam Shlesinger","doi":"10.12807/T","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.12807/T","url":null,"abstract":"In this paper, I will claim that if it is to be meaningful, the interface between research and practice must draw upon the intuitions that practitioners bring with them into the research setting, on the one hand, and upon the methods of rigorous scientific inquiry, on the other. The paper describes ways in which this interface has evolved in the area of Interpreting Studies, as reflected in the past ten issues (2004 – 2008) of the journal Interpreting. Discussion of this interface is not new, of course, but the inter-relationship between the academic investigation of interpreting and the practitioner’s experiences merits being reviewed periodically, in light of new developments, both in Interpreting Studies and in the practice of interpreting. The paper includes an overview of this inter-relationship, based on a corpus comprising ten issues of the journal.","PeriodicalId":44242,"journal":{"name":"Translation & Interpreting-The International Journal of Translation and Interpreting","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2009-04-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"72369821","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：