Article published in:
Handbook of Translation Studies: Volume 5
Edited by Yves Gambier and Luc van Doorslaer
[Handbook of Translation Studies 5] 2021
► pp. 151157
References

References

Bühler, Hildegund
1985 “Conference interpreting ‒ a multichannel communication phenomenon.” Meta 30 (1): 49–54. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chmiel, Agnieszka, Przemysław Janikowski, and Agnieszka Lijewska
2020 “Multimodal processing in simultaneous interpreting with text: Interpreters focus more on the visual than the auditory modality.” Target 32 (1): 37–58. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Davitti, Elena
2019 “Methodological explorations of interpreter-mediated interaction: Novel insights from multimodal analysis.” Qualitative Research 19 (1): 7–29. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Davitti, Elena, and Sergio Pasquandrea
2017 “Embodied participation: What multimodal analysis can tell us about interpreter-mediated encounters in pedagogical settings.” Journal of Pragmatics 107: 105–128. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Herbert, Jean
1952The Interpreter’s Handbook: How to Become a Conference Interpreter. Geneva: Georg.Google Scholar
Kaindl, Klaus
2020 “A theoretical framework for a multimodal conception of translation.” In Translation and Multimodality: Beyond Words, ed. by Monica Boria, Ángeles Carreres, María Noriega-Sánchez, and Marcus Tomalin, 49–70. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Kirchhoff, Hella
1976 “Das dreigliedrige, zweisprachige Kommunikationssystem Dolmetschen.” Le langage et l’homme 31: 21–27.Google Scholar
Kress, Gunther, and Theo van Leeuwen
2001Multimodal Discourse: The Modes and Media of Contemporary Communication. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Krystallidou, Demi
2016“Investigating the interpreter’s role(s): The A.R.T. framework.” Interpreting 18 (2): 172–197. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Licoppe, Christian, and Clair-Antoine Veyrier
2020 “The interpreter as a sequential coordinator in courtroom interaction: ‘Chunking’ and the management of turn shifts in extended answers in consecutively interpreted asylum hearings with remote participants.” Interpreting 22 (1): 56–86. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pasquandrea, Sergio
Co-constructing dyadic sequences in healthcare interpreting: A multimodal account.” New Voices in Translation Studies 8: 132–157.
Poyatos, Fernando
1983 “Language and nonverbal systems in the structure of face-to-face interaction.” Language & Communication 3 (2): 129–140. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1987/2002 “Nonverbal communication in simultaneous and consecutive interpretation: A theoretical model and new perspectives.” In The Interpreting Studies Reader, ed. by Franz Pöchhacker, and Miriam Shlesinger, 235–246. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Seeber, Kilian G.
2012 “Multimodal input in simultaneous interpreting: An eye-tracking experiment.” In Translation Studies: Old and New Types of Translation in Theory and Practice, ed. by Lew N. Zybatow, Alena Petrova, and Michael Ustaszewski, 341–347. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Shlesinger, Miriam
1994 “Intonation in the production and perception of simultaneous interpretation.” In Bridging the Gap: Empirical Research in Simultaneous Interpretation, ed. by Sylvie Lambert, and Barbara Moser-Mercer, 225–236. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Vranjes, Jelena, Hanneke Bot, Kurt Feyaerts, and Geert Brône
2019 “Affiliation in interpreter-mediated therapeutic talk: On the relationship between gaze and head nods.” Interpreting 21 (2): 220–244. CrossrefGoogle Scholar

Further essential reading

Pöchhacker, Franz
2020 “ ‘Going video’: Mediality and multimodality in interpreting.” In Linking Up with Video: Perspectives on Interpreting Practice and Research, ed. by Heidi Salaets, and Geert Brône, 13–45. CrossrefGoogle Scholar