Cover not available
Part of
Linking up with Video: Perspectives on interpreting practice and research
Edited by Heidi Salaets and Geert Brône
[Benjamins Translation Library 149] 2020
► pp. 13–45

Chapter 1
“Going video”

Mediality and multimodality in interpreting

This chapter explores the link between interpreting and video mainly by engaging in a conceptual analysis drawing on insights from social semiotics and communication studies. Departing from an understanding of speech as a semiotic mode in the oral-aural modality, the development of interpreting practices since the early twentieth century is reviewed with respect to the use of technology as a sign-conveying medium. Special emphasis is given to the introduction of “telephonic” interpreting and its implications for “visibility” in interpreter-mediated communication before the introduction of audiovisual transmission systems. Based on the examination of some existing models of multimodal language use, and further theoretical reflection, a conceptual framework is suggested to account more explicitly for different medium-based forms of interpreting and for the communicative dynamics shaped by the mediality of these practices. On this foundation, video is discussed as a technological medium supporting novel professional practices as well as research approaches.
Article outline
  • Introduction
  • Basic concepts and professional practices
    • Modes, media and (multi)modality in mediation
    • Mediality and visibility in interpreting
  • Media and modalities: Toward a multimodal model
    • A hierarchical network of modes
    • Modeling productive and receptive processes in mediated interaction
  • Video in interpreting practice and research
    • Video
    • Practice: From telephonic to televisual
    • Research: Video-based analysis of a multimodal practice
  • Conclusion
  • References
Published online: 13 January 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.149.02poc
References (65)
References
Anderson, Linda. 1994. “Simultaneous interpretation: Contextual and translation aspects.” In Bridging the Gap: Empirical Research in Simultaneous Interpretation, ed. by Sylvie Lambert, and Barbara Moser-Mercer, 101–120. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Angelelli, Claudia V. 2015. “Invisibility.” In Routledge Encyclopedia of Interpreting Studies, ed by Franz Pöchhacker, 214–215. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Baigorri-Jalón, Jesús. 2004. Interpreters at the United Nations: A History (trans. Anne Barr). Salamanca: Ediciones Universidad de Salamanca.Google Scholar
. 2014. From Paris to Nuremberg: The Birth of Conference Interpreting. Translated by Holly Mikkelson, and Barry S. Olsen. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Balzani, Maurizio. 1990. “Le contact visuel en interprétation simultanée: résultats d’une expérience (Français – Italien).” In Aspects of Applied and Experimental Research on Simultaneous Interpretation, ed. by Laura Gran, and Christopher Taylor, 93–100. Udine: Campanotto.Google Scholar
Bates, Charlotte. 2015. “Introduction: Putting things in motion.” In Video Methods: Social Science Research in Motion, ed. by Charlotte Bates, 1–9. New York/London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Beaugrande, Robert de, and Dressler, Wolfgang U.. 1981. Introduction to Text Linguistics. London: Longman. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Birdwhistell, Ray L. 1970. Kinesics and Context: Essays on Body Motion Communication. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Bohle, Ulrike. 2014. “Contemporary classification systems.” In Body – Language – Communication: An International Handbook on Multimodality in Human Interaction, ed. by Cornelia Müller, Alan Cienki, Ellen Fricke, Silvia H. Ladewig, David McNeill, and Sedinha Teßendorf, 1453–1461. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Braun, Sabine. 2015a. “Remote interpreting.” In Routledge Encyclopedia of Interpreting Studies, ed. by Franz Pöchhacker, 346–348. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
. 2015b. “Videoconference interpreting.” In Routledge Encyclopedia of Interpreting Studies, ed. by Franz Pöchhacker, 437–439. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Braun, Sabine, and Judith L. Taylor (eds). 2012. Videoconference and Remote Interpreting in Criminal Proceedings. Cambridge/Antwerp: Intersentia.Google Scholar
Bühler, Hildegund. 1980. “Translation und nonverbale Kommunikation.” In Semiotik und Übersetzen, ed. by Wolfram Wilss, 43–53. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.Google Scholar
. 1985. “Conference interpreting – a multichannel communication phenomenon.” Meta 30 (1): 49–54. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chandler, Daniel, and Rod Munday (eds). 2016. A Dictionary of Media and Communication, 2nd edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Danesi, Marcel. 2013. Encyclopedia of Media and Communication. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2015. “Integrating multimodality in the study of dialogue interpreting.” Accessed January 26, 2017. [URL].Google Scholar
Gerver, David. 1971. “Aspects of Simultaneous Interpretation and Human Information Processing,” PhD. diss., Oxford University.Google Scholar
Gerver, David, and Wallace H. Sinaiko (eds). 1978. Language Interpretation and Communication. New York/London: Plenum Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
ISO. 2016a. ISO 2603:2016: Simultaneous Interpreting – Permanent Booths – Requirements. Geneva: International Organization for Standardization.Google Scholar
. 2016b. ISO 20109:2016: Simultaneous Interpreting – Equipment – Requirements. Geneva: International Organization for Standardization.Google Scholar
. 2017. ISO/FDIS 20108: Simultaneous Interpreting – Quality and Transmission of Sound and Image Input – Requirements (under development). Geneva: International Organization for Standardization.Google Scholar
Jakobson, Roman. 1959/2000. “On linguistic aspects of translation.” In The Translation Studies Reader, ed. by Lawrence Venuti, 113–118. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Jewitt, Carey (ed.). 2014. The Routledge Handbook of Multimodal Analysis, 2nd edn. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Johnston, Donald H. (ed.). 2003. Encyclopedia of International Media and Communications. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Jumpelt, R. Walter. 1985. “The conference interpreter’s working environment under the new ISO and IEC standards.” Meta 30 (1): 82–90. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kendon, Adam. 2004. Gesture: Visible Action as Utterance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Klug, Nina-Maria, and Hartmut Stöckl (eds). 2016. Handbuch Sprache im multimodalen Kontext. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kress, Gunther. 2010. Multimodality: A Social Semiotic Approach to Contemporary Communication. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
. 2014. “What is a mode?” In The Routledge Handbook of Multimodal Analysis, 2nd edn, ed. by Carey Jewitt, 60–75. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Kress, Gunther, and Theo van Leeuwen. 2001. Multimodal 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. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lang, Ranier. 1978. “Behavioural aspects of liaison interpreters in Papua New Guinea: Some preliminary observations.” In Language Interpretation and Communication, ed. by David Gerver, and H. Wallace Sinaiko, 231–244. New York/London: Plenum Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Linell, Per. 2005. The Written Language Bias in Linguistics: Its Nature, Origins and Transformations. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
McNeill, David. 2000. “Introduction.” In Language and Gesture, ed. by David McNeill, 1–10. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Merriam-Webster. 2017. “Immediate.” Accessed January 18, 2017. [URL] (accessed 18 January 2017).Google Scholar
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.Google Scholar
Müller, Cornelia. 2013. “Introduction.” 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, 1–6. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Müller, Cornelia, Alan Cienki, Ellen Fricke, Silva H. Ladewig, David McNeill, and Sedinha Teßendorf (eds). 2013. Body – Language – Communication: An International Handbook on Multimodality in Human Interaction , Vol. 1. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Müller, Cornelia, Alan Cienki, Ellen Fricke, Silva H. Ladewig, David McNeill, and Jana Bressem (eds). 2014. Body – Language – Communication: An International Handbook on Multimodality in Human Interaction , Vol. 2. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Nishiyama, Sen. 1988. “Simultaneous interpreting in Japan and the role of television: A personal narration.” Meta 33 (1): 64–69. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Norris, Sigrid. 2012. “Editor’s introduction.” Multimodal Communication 1 (1): 3–4. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ozolins, Uldis. 2016. “The myth of the myth of invisibility?” Interpreting 18 (2): 273–284. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pöchhacker, Franz. 2010. “Media interpreting.” In Handbook of Translation Studies, Vol. 1, ed. by Yves Gambier, and Luc van Doorslaer, 224–226. John Benjamins: Amsterdam. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2015. “Interpreting.” In Routledge Encyclopedia of Interpreting Studies, ed. by Franz Pöchhacker, 198–200. London/New York: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pöchhacker, Franz, and Miriam Shlesinger (eds). 2002. The Interpreting Studies Reader. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Poyatos, Fernando. 1983. “Language and nonverbal systems in the structure of face-to-face interaction.” Language & Communication 3 (2): 129–140. DOI logoGoogle 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/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
. 1997. “The reality of multichannel verbal–nonverbal communication in simultaneous and consecutive interpretation.” In Nonverbal Communication and Translation: New Perspectives and Challenges in Literature, Interpretation and the Media, ed. by Fernando Poyatos, 249–282. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2002. Nonverbal Communication Across Disciplines. Volume II: Paralanguage, Kinesics, Silence, Personal and Environmental Interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Rennert, Sylvi. 2015. “Visual access.” In Routledge Encyclopedia of Interpreting Studies, ed. by Franz Pöchhacker, 439–440. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Roziner, Ilan, and Miriam Shlesinger. 2010. “Much ado about something remote: Stress and performance in remote interpreting.” Interpreting 12 (2): 214–247. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schmitz, Ulrich. 2016. “Multimodale Texttypologie.” In Handbuch Sprache im multimodalen Kontext, ed. by Nina-Maria Klug, and Hartmut Stöckl, 327–347. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schönherr, Beatrix. 2014. “Categories and functions of posture, gaze, face, and body movements.” In Body – Language – Communication: An International Handbook on Multimodality in Human Interaction , ed. by Cornelia Müller, Alan Cienki, Ellen Fricke, Silva H. Ladewig, David McNeill, and Sedinha Teßendorf, 1333–1341. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Shannon, Claude E., and Warren Weaver. 1949. The Mathematical Theory of Communication. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Shaw, Sherry. 2015. “Interpreting for deafblind persons.” In Routledge Encyclopedia of Interpreting Studies, ed. by Franz Pöchhacker, 200–201. London/New York: Routledge.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
Stöckl, Hartmut. 2004. “In between modes: Language and image in printed media.” In Perspectives on Multimodality, ed. by Eija Ventola, Charles Cassily, and Martin Kaltenbacher, 9–30. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Toury, Gideon. 1995. Descriptive Translation Studies – and Beyond. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ventola, Eija, Charles Cassily, and Martin Kaltenbacher (eds). 2004. Perspectives on Multimodality. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wadensjö, Cecilia. 1998. Interpreting as Interaction. London/New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Watson, James, and Anne Hill. 2015. Dictionary of Media and Communication Studies, 9th edn. New York/London: Bloomsbury Academic.Google Scholar
Cited by (11)

Cited by 11 other publications

Farag, Rahaf & Bernd Meyer
2024. Coordination in telephone-based remote interpreting. Interpreting. International Journal of Research and Practice in Interpreting 26:1 ► pp. 80 ff. DOI logo
Salaets, Heidi & Katalin Balogh
2023. Are interpreters and interpreting technology ready for the post-Covid era?. In Introducing New Hypertexts on Interpreting (Studies) [Benjamins Translation Library, 160], ► pp. 254 ff. DOI logo
Zhang Xiaojun, Gloria Corpas Pastor & Jing Zhang
2023. Chapter 7. Videoconference interpreting goes multimodal. In Interpreting Technologies – Current and Future Trends [IVITRA Research in Linguistics and Literature, 37], ► pp. 169 ff. DOI logo
Bahadır-Berzig, Şebnem
2022. Von dolmetschenden Kabinen zu gebärdenden Avataren. In Re-Thinking Translator Education [Sprachen lehren – Sprachen lernen, ], ► pp. 255 ff. DOI logo
Chwalczuk, Monika
2022. Construction of Shared Semantic Spaces through Gestures in Interpreter-Mediated Psychotherapy Sessions. VISUAL REVIEW. International Visual Culture Review / Revista Internacional de Cultura Visual 9:2 ► pp. 207 ff. DOI logo
Krasnopeeva, Ekaterina S. & Svetlana S. Kraeva
2022. Interpreter adaptation in hybrid ecology: the case of video-mediated commissioning of equipment. Tyumen State University Herald. Humanities Research. Humanitates 8:2 ► pp. 6 ff. DOI logo
Rodríguez Hernández, Laura G.
2022. Cross-cultural aspects of Russian and Latin American idioms. Tyumen State University Herald. Humanities Research. Humanitates 8:2 ► pp. 24 ff. DOI logo
Šveda, Pavol & Martin Djovčoš
2022. Translation and interpretation in the time of the COVID-19 pandemic. STRIDON: Studies in Translation and Interpreting 2:2 ► pp. 25 ff. DOI logo
Krasnopeyeva, E. S.
2021. Distance Interpreting: Terminology, Taxonomy, and Key Directions of Research. Nauchnyi dialog :11 ► pp. 143 ff. DOI logo
Pöchhacker, Franz
2021. Multimodality in interpreting. In Handbook of Translation Studies [Handbook of Translation Studies, 5], ► pp. 152 ff. DOI logo
Pöchhacker, Franz
2022. Relay interpreting. Target. International Journal of Translation Studies 34:3 ► pp. 489 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 28 june 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.