Chapter published in:Linking up with Video: Perspectives on interpreting practice and research
Edited by Heidi Salaets and Geert Brône
[Benjamins Translation Library 149] 2020
► pp. 203–233
Eye-tracking in interpreter-mediated talk
From research to practice
A starting point for a multimodal analysis of interpreter-mediated interaction is the discussion on the pros and cons of new technologies especially for new forms of distant, remote or offsite interpreting. More specifically, in this contribution is argued that empirical multimodal analyses of participants’ and interpreters’ behavior in real-life interpreting settings may provide much-needed groundwork that helps to fuel this discussion. As one of the most central points of criticism raised by interpreting practitioners is that distant forms of interpreting lack certain characteristics that are typical for on-site or face-to-face interpreting (i.e. distant solutions are not true-to-life, Van Rotterdam & van den Hoogen 2011). It becomes increasingly important to pinpoint what these typical and natural characteristics are. Empirically grounded insights into these characteristics may then, in a research-technology-application loop, feed into innovative technologies, rendering novel interpreting solutions that are more true-to-life.In this empirical analysis we focus on one specific phenomenon that has received increased attention in the recent literature in multimodal interaction analysis as well as interpreting studies, viz. eye gaze as a semiotic resource employed by speakers as well as hearers. The main questions here are how interpreters typically manage the turn-taking process in real-life interaction, among others by means of gaze, and how important visual access is to the co-participants for a smooth exchange. In order to answer the research questions, the researchers make use of eye-tracking technology to gain detailed information on interpreters’ and primary participants’ gaze behavior.
Published online: 13 January 2020
Bavelas, Janet., Linda Coates, and Trudy Johnson
Braun, Sabine, and L. Judith Taylor
Brenger, Bela, and Irene Mittelberg
Brône, Geert, Bert Oben , Annelies Jehoul , Jelena Vranjes, and, Kurt Feyaerts
Clayman, Steven E.
Clark, Herbert, and Susan Brennan
Davitti, Elena, and Sergio Pasquandrea
Ellis, S. Ronald
2004 “Videoconferencing in refugee hearings.” Ellis Report to the Immigration and Refugee Board Audit and Evaluation Committee. http://www.irb-cisr.gc.ca/Eng/transp/ReviewEval/Pages/Video.aspx.
Englund Dimitrova, Birgitta
Esteban Causo, Jose
Ford, Cecilia, Barbara Fox, and A. Sandra Thompson
Gerwing, Jennfer, & Bavelas Janet
Holler, Judith, Kobin H.,Kendrick, Marisa Casillas, and Stephen, C. Levinson
Holler, Judith, and Kobin. H. Kendrick
Lerner, Gene. H.
Llewellyn-Jones, Peter, and Robert. G. Lee
Licoppe, Christian, and Clair-Antoine Veyrier
Linell, Per, Linda Jönsson, and Cecilia Wadensjö
Merlini, Raffaela, and Roberta Favaron
Mondada, Lorenza 2013 “Video as a tool in the social sciences.” In Body – Language – Communication: An International Handbook on Multimodality in Human Interaction , Vol. 1, ed. by Cornelia Müller, Alan Cienki, Ellen Fricke, Silva H. Ladewig, David McNeill, and Sedinha Teßendorf, 982–992. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
2003 “Remote interpreting: assessment of human factors and performance parameters’” Communicate! Summer 2003. Available at http://www.aiic.net/ViewPage.cfm/article879.htm.
Oben, Bert, and Geert Brône
Pitsch Karola, Bernhard-Andreas Brüning, Christian Schnier, Holger Dierker, and Sven Wachsmuth
2010 Linking conversation analysis and motion capturing: How to robustly track multiple participants. In Proceedings of the LREC Workshop on Multimodal Corpora: Advances in Capturing, Coding and Analyzing Multimodality (MMC 2010), ed. by : Michael Kipp, Jean-Claude Martin, Patrizia Paggio, and Dirk Heylen, 63–69.
Price, Erika, Eliseo Pérez-Stable, Dana Nickleach, Monica López, and Leah Karliner
Roziner, Ilan, and Miriam Shlesinger
Sacks, Harvey, Emanuel A. Schegloff, and Gail Jefferson
Selting, Margaret. et al.
2009.“Gesprächsanalytisches Transkriptionssystem 2 (GAT 2).” Gesprächsforschung – Online-Zeitschrift zur verbalen Interaktion 10: 353–402. [http://www.gespraechsforschung-ozs.de/heft2009/px-gat2.pdf]
Sloetjes, Han, and Peter Wittenburg
Stivers, Tania and Federico Rossano
Vandemoortele, Sarah, Stijn De Beugher, Geert Brône, Kurt Feyaerts, Toon Goedemé, Thomas De Baets, and Stijn Vervliet
Vranjes, Jelena, Geert Brône, and Kurt Feyaerts
Vranjes, Jelena, Hanneke Bot, Kurt Feyaerts, and Geert Brône
Vranjes, Jelena, Hanneke Bot , Kurt Feyaerts, and Geert Brône