Cover not available
Part of
Introducing New Hypertexts on Interpreting (Studies): A tribute to Franz Pöchhacker
Edited by Cornelia Zwischenberger, Karin Reithofer and Sylvi Rennert
[Benjamins Translation Library 160] 2023
► pp. 254–276

Are interpreters and interpreting technology ready for the post-Covid era?

 | KU Leuven, Antwerp Campus, Belgium
 | KU Leuven, Antwerp Campus, Belgium
From its onset in early 2020, the Covid-19 (hereafter Covid) crisis has uncovered both the insecurity about new technologies and their flexibility. In this chapter, we will attempt to provide a non-exhaustive map of the field of interpreting technology in different settings, of research on these new technologies and research using them. Tools and resources that enhance an interpreter’s performance will also be discussed as part of technological evolution, while the final question to be answered is whether “interpreters [can] survive in an AI-dominated world” (Downie 2020). This contribution wants to be a call to do more large-scale research and to inform future interpreters better about technological development and opportunities in the classroom.
Keywords: interpreting technology, terminology, conference interpreting, dialogue interpreting, sign language interpreting (SLI), interpreting technology research, interpreting technology training, (in)visibility, cognitive load
Article outline
  • Introduction
  • 1.Preparation: The conference interpreter’s context
  • 2.Preparation: The sign language interpreter’s (SLI) and the dialogue interpreter’s context
  • 3.Technology used during an interpreter’s performance
    • 3.1Telephone interpreting in dialogue interpreting
    • 3.2Technology use in conference interpreting
    • 3.3Dialogue interpreting
  • 4.Training & research
  • Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 14 April 2023
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.160.13sal
References (100)
References
Angelelli, Claudia V., and Jonathan M. Ross. 2021. “Contextual Diversity in Telephone Interpreting: Voices from Healthcare Interpreters in Scotland.” Linguistica Antverpiensia, New Series: Themes in Translation Studies 20: 74–93. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Antonini, Rachele, Letizia Cirillo, Linda Rossato, and Ira Torresi, I. (eds). 2017. Non-Professional Interpreting and Translation. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baigorri-Jalón, Jesús. 2004. Interpreters at the United Nations. A History. Translated by Anne Barr. Salamanca: Ediciones Universidad de Salamanca.Google Scholar
. 2015. “The History of the Interpreting Profession”. In The Routledge Handbook of Interpreting, ed. by Holly Mikkelson, and Renée Jourdenais, 11–28. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Baxter, Robert N. 2016. “Exploring the Possible Effects of Visual Presentations on Synchronicity and Lag in Simultaneous Interpreting”. Sendebar 27: 9–23.Google Scholar
. 2014. “Comparing Traditional and Remote Interpreting in Police Settings: Quality and Impact Factors.” In Traduzione e interpretazione per la società e le istituzioni, ed. by Maurizio Viezzi, and Caterina Falbo, 161–176. Trieste: Edizioni Università di Trieste.Google Scholar
. 2015a. “Remote Interpreting.” In Routledge Encyclopedia of Interpreting Studies, ed. by Franz Pöchhacker, 346–348. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
. 2015b. “Remote Interpreting.” In Routledge Handbook of Interpreting, ed.by Holly Mikkelson, and Renée Jourdenais, 352–367. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
. 2016. “The European AVIDICUS projects: Collaborating to assess the viability of video-mediated interpreting in legal proceedings.” European Journal of Applied Linguistics 4 (1): 173–180. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2020. “‘You Are Just a Disembodied Voice Really’: Perceptions of Video Remote Interpreting by Legal Interpreters and Police Officers.” In Linking Up with Video. Perspectives on Interpreting Practice and Research, ed.by Heidi Salaets, and Geert Brône, 47–78. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Braun, Sabine, and Judith L. Taylor. 2012. Videoconferences and Remote Interpreting in Criminal Proceedings. Cambridge/Antwerp: Intersentia.Google Scholar
Buchanan, Robert A. 2020. “History of Technology.” Encyclopaedia Britannica. Accessed November 18, 2020. [URL]
Bucher, Hans-Juergen, and Philipp, Niemann. 2012. “Visualizing Science: The Reception of Powerpoint Presentations.” Visual Communication 11 (3): 283–306. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chan, Sin-wai (ed.). 2015. Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Technology. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Cheng, Qianya. 2015. “Examining the Challenges for Telephone Interpreters in New Zealand.” Unpublished master’s thesis, Auckland University of Technology. [URL]
Constable, Andrew. 2015. “Distance Interpreting: A Nuremberg Moment for Our Time?” AIIC 2015 Assembly Day 3: Debate on Remote January 18, 2015. [URL]
Corpas Pastor, Gloria, and Isabel Durán-Muñoz (eds). 2018. Trends in E-Tools and Resources for Translators and Interpreters. Leiden/Boston: Brill Rodopi. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Costa, Hernani, Gloria Corpas Pastor, and Isabel Durán-Muñoz. 2018. “Assessing Terminology Management Systems for Interpreters.” In Trends in E-Tools and Resources for Translators and Interpreters, ed. by Gloria Corpas Pastor, and Isabel Durán-Muñoz, 57–84. Leiden/Boston: Brill Rodopi.Google Scholar
Crenicean, Oana. (2016). “Visual Aids in SI: Help or Hindrance? A Study of Simultaneous Interpreters’ Performance in the Presence of Dual Input.” Master’s dissertation, London Metropolitan University. [URL]
Davitti, Elena, and Sergio Pasquandrea. 2017. “Embodied Participation: What Multimodal Analysis Can Tell Us about Interpreter-Mediated Encounters in Pedagogical Settings.” Elsevier Journal of Pragmatics 107: 105–128. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
de Boe, Esther. 2020. “Remote Interpreting in Dialogic Settings: A Methodological Framework for Investigating the Impact of Telephone and Video Interpreting on Quality in Healthcare Interpreting.” In Linking Up with Video. Perspectives on Interpreting Practice and Research, ed. by Heidi Salaets, and Geert Brône, 79–105. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Devaux, Jerôme. 2018. “Technologies and role-space: how videoconference interpreting affects the court interpreter’s perception of her role.” In Interpreting and technology, ed.by Claudio Fantinuoli, 91–117. Berlin: Language Science Press.Google Scholar
Downie, Jonathan. 2020. Interpreters vs Machines. Can Interpreters Survive in an AI-Dominated World? London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Fantinuoli, Claudio. 2006. “Specialized Corpora from the Web for Simultaneous Interpreters.” In Wacky! Working Papers on the Web as Corpus, ed. by Marco Barone, and Silvia Bernardini, 173–190. Bologna: GEDIT.Google Scholar
. 2012. “InterpretBank – Design and Implementation of a Terminology and Knowledge Management Software for Conference Interpreters.” PhD diss., University of Mainz.
. 2016. “InterpretBank Redefining Computer-Assisted Interpreting Tools.” In Proceedings of the 38th Conference Translating and the Computer, 42–52, London, UK, November 17–18, 2016. AsLing.Google Scholar
. 2017. “Computer-Assisted Preparation in Conference Interpreting.” Translation & Interpreting 9 (2): 24–37. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fantinouli, Claudio (ed.). 2018a. Interpreting and Technology. Translation and Multilingual Natural Language Processing 11. Berlin: Language Science Press.Google Scholar
Fantinuoli, Claudio. 2018b. “Computer-Assisted Interpreting: Challenges and Future Perspectives.” In Trends in E-Tools and Resources for Translators and Interpreters, ed. by Gloria Corpas Pastor, and Isabel Durán-Muñoz, 153–174. Leiden: Brill Rodopi.Google Scholar
Gentile, Adolfo. 2015. “Australia.” In Routledge Encyclopedia of Interpreting Studies, ed.by Franz Pöchhacker, 26–29. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Gile, Daniel. 1999. “Testing the Effort Models’ Tightrope Hypothesis in Simultaneous Interpreting – a Contribution.” Hermes: Journal of Linguistics 23: 153–172.Google Scholar
. 2009. Basic Concepts and Models for Interpreter and Translator Training. Rev. ed. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hale, Sandra. 2007. Community Interpreting. London: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kalina, Silvia, and Klaus Ziegler. 2015. “Technology”. In Routledge Encyclopedia of Interpreting Studies, ed. by Franz Pöchhacker, 410–412. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Kelly, Nataly, and Franz Pöchhacker. 2015. “Telephone Interpreting.” In Routledge Encyclopedia of Interpreting Studies, ed. by Franz Pöchhacker, 412–415. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Klammer, Martina, and Franz Pöchhacker. 2021. “Video Remote Interpreting in Clinical Communication: A Multimodal Analysis.” Patient Educ Couns 104 (12): 2867–2876. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Koller, Myriam, and Franz Pöchhacker. 2018. “’The Work and Skills’: A Profile of First-Generation Video Remote Interpreters.” In Here or There. Research on Interpreting via Video Link, ed. by Jemina Napier, Robert Skinner, and Sabine Braun, 89–110. Washington DC: Gallaudet UP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kroesen, Denise. 2018. “Simultaneous Interpreting with Visual Input: A Preliminary Mixed-Methods Study into the Challenges of Multimodal Input in PowerPoint-Supported Speeches.” Unpublished master’s thesis, University of Antwerp. [URL]
Krystallidou, Demi. 2020. “Going Video: Understanding Interpreter-Mediated Clinical Communication through the Video Lens.” In Linking Up with Video. Perspectives on Interpreting Practice and Research, ed. by Heidi Salaets, and Geert Brône, 181–202. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Krystallidou, Demi, and Peter Pype. 2018. “How Interpreters Influence Patient Participation in Medical Consultations: The Confluence of Verbal and Nonverbal Dimensions of Interpreter-Mediated Clinical Communication.” Patient Education & Counseling 101 (10): 1804–1813. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leroy, Inez. 2018. “Een onderzoek naar de invloed van een PPT op een simultane vertolking.” Unpublished master’s thesis, KU Leuven, Antwerp Campus.
Mackiewicz, Jo. 2008. “Comparing PowerPoint Experts’ and University Students’ Opinions about PowerPoint Presentations.” Journal of Technical Writing and Communication 38 (2): 149–165. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mellinger, Chris D., and Nike Pokorn. 2018. “Community Interpreting, Translation, and Technology. Introduction.” Translation and Interpreting Studies 13 (3): 337–341. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Moser-Mercer, Barbara. 1992. “Banking on Terminology: Conference Interpreters in the Electronic Age.” Meta 37 (3): 507–522. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2003. “Remote Interpreting: Assessment of Human Factors and Performance Parameters. Joint Project International Telecommunication Union (ITU)-Ecole de Traduction et d’Interpretation, Université de Genève (ETI).” AIIC. [URL]
. 2005. “Remote Interpreting: Issues of Multi-Sensory Integration in a Multilingual Task.” Meta 50 (2): 727–738. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2015. “The ABCs of Technology.” Keynote-Address at the InDialog II Conference, Berlin, November 21–22, 2015. [URL]
Mouzourakis, Panayotis. 2003. “That Feeling of Being There: Vision and Presence in Remote Interpreting.” [URL]. [URL]
. 2006. “Remote Interpreting: A Technical Perspective on Recent Experiments.” Interpreting 8 (1): 45–66. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Napier, Jemina, Robert Skinner, and Sabine Braun (eds). 2018. Here or There. Research on Interpreting via Video Link. Washington DC: Gallaudet UP.Google Scholar
Ozolins, Uldis. 2011. “Telephone Interpreting: Understanding Practice and Identifying Research Needs.” Translation & Interpreting 3 (2): 33–47.Google Scholar
. 2016. “The Myth of the Myth of Invisibility?” Interpreting 18 (2): 273–284. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pöchhacker, Franz. 2013. “Teaching Interpreting/Training Interpreters.” In Handbook of Translation Studies. Vol. 4, ed. by Yves Gambier, and Luc van Doorslaer, 174–180. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(ed.). 2015. Routledge Encyclopedia of Interpreting Studies. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2016. Introducing Interpreting Studies. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 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. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pöllabauer, Sonia. 2017. “Terminology in Public Service Interpreting.” In Non-Professional Interpreting and Translation. State of the Art and Future of an Emerging Field of Research, ed. by Rachele Antonini, Letizia Cirillo, Linda Rossato, and Ira Torresi, 131–155. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rennert, Sylvi. 2008. “Visual Input in Simultaneous Interpreting.” Meta 531: 204–217. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2015. „Visual Access.” In Routledge Encyclopedia of Interpreting Studies, ed. by Franz Pöchhacker, 439–440. London: 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
Sainsbury, Christopher. 2020. “The Impact of Lexical Density in Simultaneous Interpreting of Slide Presentations: A Replication.” Unpublished master’s thesis, University of Geneva. [URL]
Seeber, Kilian G. 2011. “Cognitive Load in Simultaneous Interpreting: Existing Theories – New Models.” Interpreting 13 (2): 176–204. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2012. “Multimodal Input in Simultaneous Interpreting: An Eye-Tracking Experiment.” In Translation Studies: Old and New Types of Translation in Theory and Practice. Proceedings of the 1st International Conference TRANSLATA “Translation & Interpreting Research: Yesterday – Today – Tomorrow”, Innsbruck, May 12–14, 2011, ed. by Lew Zybatow, Alena Petrova, and Michael Ustaszweski, 341–347. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
2013. “Cognitive Load in Simultaneous Interpreting: Measures and Methods.” Target 25 (1): 18–32. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2015a. “Cognitive Approaches.” In Routledge Encyclopedia of Interpreting Studies, ed. by Franz Pöchhacker, 56–60. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
2015b. “Cognitive Load.” In Routledge Encyclopedia of Interpreting Studies, ed. by Franz Pöchhacker, 60–61. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Seeber, Kilian G., Laura Keller, Rhona Amosand, and Sophie Hengl, S. 2019. ʺExpectations vs. Experience. Attitudes towards Video Remote Conference Interpreting.” Interpreting 21 (2): 270–304. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2019. ʺExpectations vs. Experience. Attitudes towards Video Remote Conference Interpreting.” Interpreting 21 (2): 270–304. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Skinner, Robert. 2020. “Approximately There. Positioning Video-Mediated Interpreting in Frontline Police Services.” PhD diss., Heriot-Watt University. [URL]
Šveda, Pavol. 2015. “Accompanying Visual Presentation in Simultaneous Interpretation Training.” ResearchGate. Accessed July 11, 2021. [URL]
Theys, Laura, Lise Nuyts, Peter Pype, Willem Pype, Cornelia Wermuth, and Demi Krystallidou. 2021. “The Empathic Communication Analytical Framework (ECAF): A Multimodal Perspective on Empathic Communication in Interpreter-Mediated Consultations.” Linguistica Antverpiensia, New Series: Themes in Translation Studies 20: 159–185. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tripepi Winterhingham, Sarah. 2010. “The Usefulness of ICTs in Interpreting Practice.” The Interpreters’ Newsletter 15: 87–99.Google Scholar
Vranjes, Jelena, Hanneke Bot, Kurt Feyaerts, and Geert Brône. 2018. “Displaying Recipiency in an Interpreter-Mediated Dialogue: An Eye-Tracking Study.” In Eye-Tracking in Interaction. Studies on the Role of Eye Gaze in Dialogue, ed. by Bert Oben, and Geert Brône, 301–322. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vranjes, Jelena, and Geert Brône. 2020. “Eye-Tracking in Interpreter-Mediated Talk: From Research to Practice.” In Linking Up with Video: Perspectives on Interpreting Practice and Research, ed. by Heidi Salaets, and Geert Brône, 203–234. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zhangminzi, Shao, and Chai Mingjiong. 2021. “The Effect of Cognitive Load on Simultaneous Interpreting Performance: An Empirical Study at the Local Level”. Perspectives 29 (5): 778–794. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ziegler, Klaus, and Sebastiano Gigliobianco. 2018. “Present? Remote? Remotely present! New Technological Approaches to Remote Simultaneous Conference Interpreting.” In Interpreting and Technology. Translation and Multilingual Natural Language Processing 11, ed. by Claudio Fantinuoli, 119–139. Berlin: Language Science Press.Google Scholar
Links
AIIC TFDI (AIIC Task Force Distance Interpreting) [URL]
AIIC Research Grant [URL]
Auslan Signbank [URL]
AVIDICUS Projects [URL]
Blue Horizon [URL])
CAPPisco [URL]
Community Interpreting in Dialogue With Technology, 20–21 Nov 2015, Berlin, Germany. [URL]
Cross-Cultural Communications [URL]
E-Justice Portal [URL]
Encyclopedia Britannica [URL]
GoReact [URL]
InZone Platform (University of Geneva) [URL]
Non-Professional Interpreting [URL]
NPIT6: Non-professional Interpreting and Translation Conference 6, Nicosia 25–27 May 2023. For reference to all five previous conferences see: [URL]
Portal for Online and Blended Learning (University of Geneva) [URL]
Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the Implementation of Directive 2010/64/EU [URL]
Shift Project (Shaping the Interpreters of the Future and of Today) [URL]
SmarTerp (Remote Simultaneous Interpreting powered by Artificial Intelligence) [URL]
VIP (Voice-text integrated System for Interpreters) [URL]
Mentioned ISO standards
ISO/TC37 Language and terminology (work in progress).
ISO 20228(Interpreting services – Legal interpreting – Requirements).
ISO 21998 (Interpreting services – Healthcare interpreting – Requirements and recommendations).