Cover not available
Part of
Reception Studies and Audiovisual Translation
Edited by Elena Di Giovanni and Yves Gambier
[Benjamins Translation Library 141] 2018
► pp. 253–276

Chapter 12
Media interpreting

From user expectations to audience comprehension

This chapter offers a thorough conceptual analysis of media interpreting as a form of audiovisual translation, with special reference to interpreting performed for broadcast mass media programs, especially on television. Based on criteria such as interpreting modes, language modality and communicative scenarios, a fourfold (proto)typology of media interpreting is proposed as a framework for the presentation of reception-oriented studies. Following a review of the evolution of reception-oriented research on media interpreting, with special attention to methodological approaches, two main lines of work are identified: research on media users’ expectations and assessment of interpreted audiovisual content, and studies on media accessibility for deaf viewers through signed language interpreting. Relevant research designs are exemplified in an effort to highlight promising avenues for future studies.
Keywords: TV interpreting, interpreting mode, user expectations, accessibility, simultaneous interpreting, conference interpreting, signed language interpreting
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Media interpreting as audiovisual translation
    • 2.1Practices
    • 2.2Distinctions
      • 2.2.1Interpreting vs translation
      • 2.2.2Types of media interpreting
  • 3.Research
    • 3.1Overview
    • 3.2Approaches
    • 3.3User expectations and assessment
    • 3.4Media accessibility and comprehension
    • 3.5Examples
      • 3.5.1Quality criteria and assessment
      • 3.5.2Preferences and comprehension
  • 4.Conclusions and outlook
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 15 June 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.141.13poc
References (48)
References
Amato, Amalia. 2002. “Interpreting Legal Discourse on TV: Clinton’s Deposition with the Grand Jury”. In Perspectives on Interpreting, ed by Giuliana Garzone, Peter Mead, and Maurizio Viezzi, 269–290. Bologna: CLUEB.Google Scholar
Baigorri-Jalón, Jesús. 2004. Interpreters at the United Nations: A History. Salamanca: Ediciones Universidad de Salamanca.Google Scholar
Buck, Vincent, and Tsuruta, Chikako. 2012. “Exploring Media Interpreting”. Communicate! The AIIC Webzine, March 2012. [URL] (accessed 30 December 2016).Google Scholar
Bühler, Hildegund. 1986. “Linguistic (Semantic) and Extra-linguistic (Pragmatic) Criteria for the Evaluation of Conference Interpretation and Interpreters”. Multilingua 5 (4): 231–235.Google Scholar
Castillo Ortiz, Pedro Jesús. 2015a. Interpreting in the Media: Organisational, Interactional and Discursive Aspects of Dialogue Interpreting in Radio Settings. A Study of Spain’s Radio 3. PhD thesis, Heriot-Watt University.Google Scholar
Castillo, Pedro. 2015b. “Interpreting for the Mass Media”. In The Routledge Handbook of Interpreting, ed by Holly Mikkelson, and Renée Jourdenais, 280–301. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
CBS 1939. “Adolf Hitler on Poland, H V Kaltenborn Translation, September 22, 1939”. [URL] (accessed 30 December 2016).
Chiaro, Delia. 2002. “Linguistic Mediation on Italian Television: When the Interpreter is not an Interpreter: A Case Study”. In Interpreting in the 21st Century: Challenges and Opportunities, ed by Giuliana Garzone, and Maurizio Viezzi, 215–225. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dal Fovo, Eugenia. 2011. “Through the CorIT Looking Glass and what MA Students Found there”. The Interpreters’ Newsletter No. 16: 1–20.Google Scholar
. 2015. “Talk Show Interpreting”. In Routledge Encyclopedia of Interpreting Studies, ed by Franz Pöchhacker, 408–410. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Di Giovanni, Elena. 2016. “Reception Studies in Audiovisual Translation Research: The Case of Subtitling at Film Festivals”. Trans-kom 9 (1): 58–78.Google Scholar
Elsagir, Ina M. 1999. Die Beurteilung von Dolmetschleistungen im Fernsehen aus Zuschauersicht: Eine empirische Untersuchung. Diploma thesis, University of Heidelberg.Google Scholar
2000. “Anforderungen an Dolmetschleistungen im Fernsehen aus Zuschauersicht: eine Fallstudie. In Dolmetschen: Theorie, Praxis, Didaktik, ed by Sylvia Kalina, Silke Buhl, and Heidrun Gerzymisch-Arbogast, 107–123. St. Ingbert: Röhrig.Google Scholar
Falbo, Caterina. 2012. “CorIT (Italian Television Interpreting Corpus): Classification Criteria”. In Breaking Ground in Corpus-based Interpreting Studies, ed by Francesco Straniero Sergio, and Caterina Falbo, 155–185. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gambier, Yves. 2003. “Introduction. Screen Transadaptation: Perception and Reception”. The Translator 9 (2): 171–189. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gambier, Yves, and Ramos Pinto, Sara. 2016. “Introduction”. Target 28 (2): 185–191.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jääskeläinen, Riitta. 2003. “Who Said What? A Pilot Study of the Host’s Interpreting Performance on Finnish Breakfast Television”. The Translator 9 (2): 307–323. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kade, Otto. 1968. Zufall und Gesetzmäßigkeit in der Übersetzung. Leipzig: Verlag Enzyklopädie.Google Scholar
Katan, David, and Straniero Sergio, Francesco. 2003. “Submerged Ideologies in Media Interpreting”. In Apropos of Ideology, ed by Maria Calzada Pérez, 131–144. Manchester: St Jerome.Google Scholar
Kellett Bidoli, Cynthia J., and Sala, Rita. 2011. “Interpreting Conflict from Speech to Sign on Italian Television”. The Interpreters’ Newsletter No. 16: 199–226.Google Scholar
Kurz, Ingrid. 1985. “Zur Rolle des Sprachmittlers im Fernsehen”. In Proceedings. Xth World Congress of FIT, ed by Hildegund Bühler, 213–215. Vienna: Wilhelm Braumüller.Google Scholar
. 1990. “Overcoming Language Barriers in European Television”. In Interpreting – Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow, ed by David Bowen, and Margareta Bowen, 168–175. Binghamton, NY: SUNY. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1993. “Conference Interpretation: Expectations of Different User Groups”. The Interpreters’ Newsletter No. 5: 13–21.Google Scholar
. 2002. “Physiological Stress Responses During Media and Conference Interpreting”. In Interpreting in the 21st Century: Challenges and Opportunities, ed by Giuliana Garzone, and Maurizio Viezzi, 195–202. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2007. “The Evolution of Media Interpreting: Challenges and Changes”. In The 7th International Conference on Translation and Interpretation Studies: Translation & Mass Media Today”, 63–74. Seoul: Interpreting and Translation Research Institute, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies.Google Scholar
Kurz, Ingrid, and Pöchhacker, Franz. 1995. “Quality in TV Interpreting”. Translatio: Nouvelles de la FIT – FIT Newsletter N.s. 14 (3/4): 350–358.Google Scholar
Liu, Minhua. 2016. “Putting the Horse Before the Cart: Righting the Experimental Approach in Interpreting Studies”. In Addressing Methodological Challenges in Interpreting Studies Research, ed by Claudio Bendazzoli, and Claudia Monacelli, 87–105. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Mack, Gabriele. 2002. “New Perspectives and Challenges for Interpretation: The Example of Television”. In Interpreting in the 21st Century: Challenges and Opportunities, ed by Giuliana Garzone, and Maurizio Viezzi, 203–213. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Marschark, Marc, Sapere, Patricia, Convertino, Carol, Seewagen, Rose-Marie, and Maltzen, Heather. 2004. “Comprehension of Sign Language Interpreting: Deciphering a Complex Task Situation”. Sign Language Studies 4 (4): 345–368. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nishiyama, Sen. 1988. “Simultaneous Interpreting in Japan and the Role of Television: A Personal Narration”. Meta 33 (1): 64–69. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pöchhacker, Franz. 1997. “Clinton Speaks German: A Case Study of Live Broadcast Simultaneous Interpreting”. In Translation as Intercultural Communication, ed by Mary Snell-Hornby, Zuzana Jettmarová, and Klaus Kaindl, 207–216. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2007. “Coping with Culture in Media Interpreting”. Perspectives: Studies in Translatology 15 (2): 123–142. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Robson, Colin. 1993. Real World Research: A Resource for Social Scientists and Practitioner-Researchers. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Russo, Mariachiara. 2005. “Simultaneous Film Interpreting and Users’ Feedback”. Interpreting 7 (1): 1–26. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2015. “Film Interpreting”. In Routledge Encyclopedia of Interpreting Studies, ed by Franz Pöchhacker, 163–164. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Schrøder, Kim, Drotner, Kirsten, Kline, Stephen, and Murray, Catherine. 2003. Researching Audiences. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Schwarnthorer, Michaela. 2010. Mediendolmetschen aus Zuschauer- und Zuhörersicht am Beispiel der Amtsantrittsrede von Präsident Obama. Master’s thesis, University of Vienna.Google Scholar
Signoret, Simone. 1978. Nostalgia Isn’t What It Used to Be. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Steiner, Ben. 1998. “Signs from the Void: The Comprehension and Production of Sign Language on Television”. Interpreting 3 (2): 99–146. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Straniero Sergio, Francesco. 2012. “‘You Are Not Too Funny’: Challenging the Role of the Interpreter on Italian Talkshows”. In Coordinating Participation in Dialogue Interpreting, ed by Claudio Baraldi, and Laura Gavioli, 71–98. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Straniero Sergio, Francesco, and Falbo, Caterina (eds). 2012. Breaking Ground in Corpus-based Interpreting Studies. Frankfurt: Peter Lang. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Swabey, Laurie, Nicodemus, Brenda, Taylor, Marty M., and Gile, Daniel. 2016. “Lexical Decisions and Related Cognitive Issues in Spoken and Signed Language Interpreting: A Case Study of Obama’s Inaugural Address”. Interpreting 18 (1): 34–56.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tsuruta, Chikako. 2015. “News Interpreting”. In Routledge Encyclopedia of Interpreting Studies, ed by Franz Pöchhacker, 276–277. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Wadensjö, Cecilia. 2008. “In and Off the Show: Co-constructing ‘Invisibility’ in an Interpreter-mediated Talk Show Interview”. Meta 53 (1): 184–203. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wehrmeyer, Ella. 2015. “Comprehension of Television News Signed Language Interpreters: A South African Perspective”. Interpreting 17 (2): 195–225. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Xiao, Xiaoyan, and Li, Feiyan. 2013. “Sign Language Interpreting on Chinese TV: A Survey on User Perspectives”. Perspectives: Studies in Translatology 21 (1): 100–116. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Xiao, Xiaoyan, Chen, Xiaoyan, and Palmer, Jeffrey Levi. 2015. “Chinese Deaf Viewers’ Comprehension of Sign Language Interpreting on Television: An Experimental Study”. Interpreting 17 (1): 91–117. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (8)

Cited by eight other publications

Arzık-Erzurumlu, Özüm & Gamze Yilmaz
2023. From remote control to tweets. Interpreting. International Journal of Research and Practice in Interpreting 25:1 ► pp. 27 ff. DOI logo
Grbić, Nadja
2023. Who is an interpreter?. In Introducing New Hypertexts on Interpreting (Studies) [Benjamins Translation Library, 160], ► pp. 148 ff. DOI logo
Kadric, Mira & Katia Iacono
2023. Interpreting in a project network. In Introducing New Hypertexts on Interpreting (Studies) [Benjamins Translation Library, 160], ► pp. 168 ff. DOI logo
Pöchhacker, Franz
2023. Pioneering interpreting studies. Interpreting. International Journal of Research and Practice in Interpreting 25:2 ► pp. 159 ff. DOI logo
Yan, Jackie Xiu & Kangte Luo
2023. Audio description and interpreting training: a comparison of assessment criteria from the perspective of learners. Perspectives 31:6 ► pp. 1049 ff. DOI logo
Yan, Jackie Xiu & Kangte Luo
2024. Assessment criteria in audio describer training: An investigation of learner perceptions in a university interpreting programme in Hong Kong of China. Interpreting and Society 4:1 ► pp. 26 ff. DOI logo
Yang, Yuhong
2023. “Feel sorry for Miss translator!!!”. Interpreting. International Journal of Research and Practice in Interpreting 25:1 ► pp. 61 ff. DOI logo
Valdeón, Roberto A.
2021. Perspectives on interpreting. Perspectives 29:4 ► pp. 441 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 27 july 2024. 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.