Cover not available
Article published In:
Signed Language Interpreting and Translation
Edited by Laurie Swabey and Brenda Nicodemus
[Translation and Interpreting Studies 13:1] 2018
► pp. 71–86

Name pronunciation strategies of ASL-Spanish-English trilingual interpreters during mock video relay service calls

| University of Texas at Austin
This study investigates the ways in which trilingual (American Sign Language, English, and Spanish) interpreters pronounce names that commonly appear with either English or Spanish phonology. Twenty trilingual interpreters interpreted an ASL mock videophone call into English of a Deaf caller attempting to leave a message for the Social Security Administration. Results suggest that self-reported strategies for pronouncing Spanish-influenced names generally do not align with observed behavior. Instead, a relationship was noted between reported language proficiency and pronunciation; their dominant language influenced their pronunciations. Those interpreters who report a “balanced proficiency,” however, patterned differently. The results are contextualized using Gile’s Sequential Model of translation and Effort Model of simultaneous interpreting.
Keywords: trilingual, Effort Model, Sequential Model, pronunciation, fidelity, identity
Article outline
  • Introduction
  • Name pronunciation and Gile’s models
  • Method
  • Results
  • Discussion
  • Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 2 March 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/tis.00005.tre
References
Cary, Edmond
1985 Comment faut-il traduire? [How to Translate]. Lille: Presses Universitaires de Lille.Google Scholar
Filippi, Roberto, Tehmis Karaminis, and Michael S. C. Thomas
2014 “Language switching in bilingual production: Empirical data and computational modeling.” Bilingualism, Language and Cognition 17 (2): 294–315. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Flege, James E., Ian R. A. Mackay, and Thorston Piske
2002 “Assessing bilingual dominance.” Applied Psycholinguistics 23 (4): 567–598. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fricke, Melinda, Judith F. Kroll, and Paola E. Dussias
2016 “Phonetic variation in bilingual speech: A lens for studying the production-comprehension link.” Journal of Memory and Language 89 (1): 110–137. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2017 “The Effort Models and Gravitational Model: Clarifications and Update.” Presentation for the Conference Interpreting Research Information Network 16 February 2017 [URL]. Last accessed 31 July 2017.
Goldrick, Mathew, Elin Runnqvist, and Albert Costa
2014 “Language switching makes pronunciation less nativelike.” Psychological Science 25 (4): 1031–1036. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Laham, Simon M., Peter Koval, and Adam L. Alter
2012 “The name-pronunciation effect: Why people like Mr. Smith more than Mr. Colquhoun.” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 48 (3): 752–756. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Quinto-Pozos, David, Kristie Casanova de Canales, and Rafael Treviño
2010 “Trilingual Video Relay Service Interpreting in the United States.” In Interpreting in Multilingual, Multicultural Contexts, ed. by Rachel L. McKee and Jeffrey Davis, 28–54. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar
Ramirez, Tanisha L., and Zeba Blay
2016 “Why people are using the term ‘Latinx.’” HuffPost, July 5 2016 [URL]. Last accessed 21 October 2017.
Vítores, David F.
2015 El español: una lengua viva. Informe 2015. [Spanish: A living language. 2015 Report]. Departamento de Comunicación Digital, Instituto Cervantes.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

Warnicke, Camilla & Sarah Granberg
2022. Interpreter-mediated interactions between people using a signed respective spoken language across distances in real time: a scoping review. BMC Health Services Research 22:1 DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 1 december 2023. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.