Article in:
Translation and Interpreting Studies: Online-First Articles

Additions in simultaneous signed interpreting

A corpus-driven grounded study

| North-West University
Until now, investigations of strategies used by signed language interpreters in the simultaneous mode have been sporadic and restricted to analyses of short transcripts. This article presents the first corpus-driven exploration of interpreter additions in news broadcasts simultaneously interpreted into South African Sign Language. Using grounded theory, it explores the types of additions made, the reasons for their production, and their downstream consequences. The results show that interpreters mainly add discourse markers, linguistic extrapolations such as filling in ellipsis and obvious co-text, repetitions, contextual information, and to a lesser extent, second translations, pragmatic markers, and new information. However, the cost is high as additions often result in concomitant omissions and occasional incoherence. From the results, a model is extrapolated to explain additions in terms of the interpreter’s perceived roles and status in the Deaf community.
Keywords: additions, explicitation, sign language interpreting, corpus-driven interpreting studies, grounded theory, South African Sign Language
Published online: 07 September 2020
https://doi.org/10.1075/tis.18053.weh
References

References

Angelelli, Claudia
2004 Medical Interpreting and Cross-cultural Communications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Anthony, Lawrence
2018 AntConc (software) Version 3.5.7 (Windows). www​.laurenceanthony​.net​/software​/antconc/. Last accessed 21 January 2020.
Barik, Henri
1994 “A description of various types of omissions, additions and errors of translation encountered in simultaneous interpretation.” In Bridging the Gap: Empirical Research in Simultaneous Interpretation, ed. by Sylvie Lambert and Barbara Moser-Mercer. 121–137. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bartłomiejczyk, Magdalena
2006 “Strategies of simultaneous interpreting and directionality.” Interpreting 8 (2): 149–174. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Baumgarten, Nicole, Bernd Meier, and Demet Özçetin
2008 “Explicitness in translation and interpreting: A critical review and some empirical evidence (of an elusive concept).” Across Languages and Cultures 9 (2): 177–203. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Braun, Sabine
2017 “What a micro-analytical investigation of additions and expansions in remote interpreting can tell us about interpreters’ participation in a shared virtual space.” Journal of Pragmatics 107: 165–177. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chernov, Ghelly
2004 Inference and Anticipation in Simultaneous Interpreting. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cokely, Denis
1992 Interpretation: A Sociolinguistic Model. Burtonsville, MD: Linstock Press.Google Scholar
Corbin, Juliet and Anselm Strauss
2014 Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. 4th edition. Thousand Oaks: Sage. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dose, Stephanie
2010 Patterns of Growing Standardization and Interference in Interpreted German Discourse. Pretoria: University of South Africa. MA dissertation. http://​hdl​.handle​.net​/10500​/4710. Last accessed 21 January 2020.
Gile, Daniel
1995 Basic Concepts and Models for Interpreter and Translator Training. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gumul, Ewa
2006 “Explicitation in simultaneous interpreting: A strategy or a byproduct of language mediation?” Across Languages and Cultures 7 (2): 171–190. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2017 “Explicitation and directionality in simultaneous interpreting.” Linguistica Silesiana 38: 311–329.Google Scholar
Jacobsen, Bente
2003 “Pragmatics in court interpreting: Additions.” In Critical Link 3: Interpreters in the Community, ed. by Louise Brunette, et al.. 223–238. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Johnston, Trevor
2010 “Transcription and annotation in the creation of signed language corpora.” International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 15 (1): 106–131. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kajzer-Wietrzny, Marta
2018 “Interpretese vs. non-native language use: The case of optional that .” In Making Way in Corpus-Based Interpreting Studies, ed. by Mariachiara Russo, Claudio Bendazzoli, and Bart Defrancq. 97–113. Singapore: Springer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kia, Mehdi and Helen Ouliaeinia
2016 “Explicitation across literary genres: Evidence of a strategic device?” Translation & Interpreting 8 (2): 82–95. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Klaudy, Kalina
2009 “Explicitation.” In Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies, 2nd edition, ed. by Mona Baker and Gabriela Saldanha. 104–108. London: Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kohn, Kurt and Sylvia Kalina
1996 “The strategic dimension of interpreting.” Meta 41 (1): 118–138. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Krüger, Ralph
2013 “A cognitive linguistic perspective on explicitation and implicitation in scientific and technical translation.” Trans-kom. Journal of Translation and Technical Communication Research 6 (2): 285–314.Google Scholar
Leeson, Lorraine
2005 “Making the effort in simultaneous interpreting: Some considerations for signed language interpreters.” In Topics in Signed Language Interpreting: Theory and Practice, ed. by Terry Janzen. 51–68. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Merlini, Raffaela
2015 “Dialogue interpreting.” In The Routledge Encyclopedia of Interpreting Studies, ed. by Franz Pöchhacker. 102–103. London: Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Merlini, Raffaela and Roberta Favaron
2005 “Examining the ‘voice of interpreting’ in speech pathology.” Interpreting 7 (2): 263–302. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Moser-Mercer, Barbara, Alexander Künzli, and Marina Korac
1998 “Prolonged turns in interpreting: effects on quality, physiological and psychological stress (pilot study).” Interpreting 3 (1): 47–64. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pym, Anthony
2005 “Explaining explicitation.” In New Trends in Translation Studies: In Honour of Kinga Klaudy, ed. by Krisztina Károly and Ágota Fóris. 29–43. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar
Russo, Mariachiara
2018 “Speaking patterns and gender in European Parliament Interpreting Corpus: A quantitative study as a premise for qualitative investigations.” In Making Way in Corpus-based Interpreting Studies, ed. by Mariachiara Russo, Claudio Bendazzoli, and Bart Defrancq. 115–131. Singapore: Springer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sandler, Wendy
2010 “Prosody and syntax in sign languages.” Transactions of the Philological Society 108 (3): 298–328. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schreiber, Michael
1993 Übersetzung und Bearbeitung: zur Differenzierung und Abgrenzung des Übersetzungsbegriffs. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Shlesinger, Miriam
2008 “Towards a definition of interpretese: An intermodal, corpus-based study.” In Efforts and Models in Interpreting and Translation Research: A Tribute to Daniel Gile, ed. by Gyde Hansen, Andrew Chesterman, and Heidrun Gerzymisch-Arbogast. 237–253. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Stone, Christopher
2009 Towards a Deaf Translation Norm. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar
Stratiy, Angela
2005 “Best practices in interpreting: A deaf community perspective.” In Topics in Signed Languages and Interpreting: Theory and Practice, ed. by Terry Janzen. 231–250. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tang, Fang
2018 Explicitation in Consecutive Interpreting. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Toury, Gideon
1995 Descriptive Translation Studies – and Beyond. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2012 Descriptive Translation Studies – and Beyond. Revised Edition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Van Besien, Fred and Chris Meuleman
2004 “Dealing with speakers’ errors and speakers’ repairs in simultaneous interpreting.” The Translator 10 (1): 59–81. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Van Besien, Fred
1999 “Anticipation in simultaneous interpretation.” Meta 44 (2): 250–259. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Venuti, Lawrence
1995 The Translator’s Invisibility: A History of Translation. London: Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Vinay, Jean-Paul and Jean Darbelnet
1958/1995 Comparative Stylistics of French and English: A Methodology for Translation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wadensjö, Cecilia
1998 Interpreting as Interaction. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Wehrmeyer, Ella
2014a “Introducing grounded theory into translation studies.” SALALS 32 (3): 373–387. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2014b “Eye tracking deaf and hearing viewing of sign language interpreted news broadcasts.” JEMR 7 (1,3): 1–16. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2015 “An annotation system for signed language interpreting corpora.” Hermeneus 17: 279–318.Google Scholar
2019 “A corpus for signed language research.” Interpreting 21 (1): 62–90. CrossrefGoogle Scholar