Article published In:
Interpreting
Vol. 25:1 (2023) ► pp.6186
References
Antonini, R., Cirillo, L., Rossato, L. & Torresi, I.
(Eds.) (2017) Non-professional interpreting and translation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bühler, H.
(1986) Linguistic (semantic) and extra-linguistic (pragmatic) criteria for the evaluation of conference interpretation and interpreters. Multilingua 5 (4), 231–235.Google Scholar
Chen, Y., Gao, Q., Yuan, Q. & Tang, Y.
(2019) Facilitating students’ interaction in MOOCs through timeline-anchored discussion. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction 35 (19), 1781–1799. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chiaro, D.
(2002) Linguistic mediation on Italian television. When the interpreter is not an interpreter: A case study. In G. Garzone & M. Viezzi (Eds.), Interpreting in the 21st century: Challenges and opportunities. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 215–225. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cohen, J.
(2006) Audience identification with media characters. In J. Bryant & P. Vorderer (Eds.), Psychology of entertainment. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 266–286.Google Scholar
Collados Aís, A.
(1998) La evaluación de la calidad en interpretación simultánea. La importancia de la comunicación no verbal. Granada: Editorial Comares.Google Scholar
Di Giovanni, E.
(2014) Visual and narrative priorities of the blind and non-blind: Eye tracking and audio description. Perspectives 22 (1), 136–153. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Edwards, R., Temple, B. & Alexander, C.
García Becerra, O.
(2015) Survey research on quality expectations in interpreting: The effect of method of administration on subjects’ response rate. Meta 60 (3), 542–556. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gerver, D.
(1972) Simultaneous interpretation and human information processing. Social Science Report, HR 566/1, London.Google Scholar
Hartmann, T.
(2008) Parasocial interaction and paracommunication with new media characters. In E. A. Konijn, S. Utz, M. Tanis & S. B. Barnes (Eds.), Mediated interpersonal communication. New York/London: Routledge, 177–199.Google Scholar
Horton, D. & Wohl, R.
(1956) Mass communication and para-social interaction: Observation on intimacy at a distance. Psychiatry 19 1, 215–229. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Klimmt, C., Hartmann, T. & Schramm, H.
(2006) Parasocial interactions and relationships. In J. Bryant & P. Vorderer (Eds.), Psychology of entertainment. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 291–313.Google Scholar
Kurz, I.
(1993) Conference interpretation: Expectations of different user groups. The Interpreters’ Newsletter 5 1, 13–21.Google Scholar
Kurz, I. & Pöchhacker, F.
(1995) Quality in TV interpreting. Translatio: Nouvelles de la FIT–FIT Newsletter N.s. 14 (3/4), 350–358.Google Scholar
Leng, J., Zhu, J., Wang, X. & Gu, X.
(2016) Identifying the potential of Danmaku Video from eye gaze data. Paper presented at 2016 IEEE 16th International Conference on Advanced Learning technologies. DOI logo
Ma, Z. & Ge, J.
(2014) Analysis of Japanese animation’s overlaid comment (danmu): A perspective of parasocial interaction. Chinese Journal of Journalism and Communication 8 1, 116–130.Google Scholar
Mack, G. & Cattaruzza, L.
(1995) User surveys in simultaneous interpretation: A means of learning about quality and/or raising some reasonable doubts. In J. Tommola (Ed.), Topics in interpreting, Turku: University of Turku, 51–68.Google Scholar
Moser, P.
(1996) Expectations of users of conference interpretation. Interpreting 1 (2), 145–178. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pöchhacker, F.
(2018) Media interpreting: From user expectations to audience comprehension. In E. Di Giovanni & Y. Gambier (Eds.), Reception studies and audiovisual translation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 253–276. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Reuters
(2019) Swimming: Sun Yang hearing faces translation problems. [URL] (accessed 22 February 2021).
Russo, M.
(2005) Simultaneous film interpreting and users’ feedback. Interpreting 7 (1), 1–26. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Saito, Y. & Yuko, M.
(2011) Proposal and evaluation of an algorithm for video advertisement insertion based on audience comments. Journal of Information Processing Society of Japan 52 (2), 520–528.Google Scholar
Schramm, H. & Hartmann, T.
(2008) The PSI-Process Scales: A new measure to assess the intensity and breadth of parasocial processes. Communications 33 1, 385–401. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shen, Y., Chan, C. H. & Hung, I. W.
(2014) Let the comments fly: The effects of flying commentary presentation on consumer judgment. Paper presented at Thirty Fifth International Conference on Information Systems, Auckland 2014.
Vuorikoski, A. R.
(1993) Simultaneous interpretation – user experience and expectation. In C. Picken (Ed.), Translation – the vital link. Proceedings of the XIIIth World Congress of FIT (Vol. 1), London: Institute of Translation and Interpreting, 317–327.Google Scholar
Wadensjö, C.
(1998) Interpreting as interaction. London/New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Xiao, X., Chen, X. & Palmer, J. L.
Xinhua
(2019) Chinese fans complain about poor translation in Sun Yang hearing. [URL] (accessed 22 February 2021).
Yang, Y.
(2020) The danmaku interface on Bilibili and the recontextualised translation practice: A semiotic technology perspective. Social Semiotics 30 (2), 254–273. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2021a)  Danmaku subtitling: An exploratory study of a new grassroots translation practice on Chinese video-sharing websites. Translation Studies 14 (1), 1–17. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2021b) Making sense of the “raw meat”: A social semiotic interpretation of user translation on the danmu interface. Discourse, Context & Media 441, 100550. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2022) Participatory viewers’ engagement with the dual translation problem on the danmu interface: A social semiotic case study. Text & Talk online first 30 May 2022.Google Scholar
Zillman, D.
(2006) Empathy: Affective reactivity to others’ emotional experiences. In J. Bryant & P. Vorderer (Eds.), Psychology of entertainment. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 223–265.Google Scholar