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

Interpreting is interpreting

Why we need to leave behind interpreting settings to discover Comparative Interpreting Studies

| Independent Researcher
This article argues that the use of interpreting settings as theoretical categories is no longer empirically sound. Instead, research should focus on the commonalities of all interpreting practice. This move is viewed as an enabling shift for the creation of Comparative Interpreting Studies, a strand dedicated to considering interpreting as a global practice. After discussing the rationale for the current use of interpreting settings as analytical categories, evidence from a variety of existing settings is used to illustrate the commonalities between all instances of interpreting and the fuzziness of the boundaries between these settings. It is argued that using interpreting settings leads to silo thinking, where researchers focus on research in the setting in which they are working, even when findings from other settings can be applied. The article ends with a discussion of the theoretical and practical potential of this move including the power of a comparative approach.
Keywords: interpreting studies, interpreting settings, comparative interpreting studies, categorization, interpreting theory, interpreting research methods
Published online: 06 July 2020
https://doi.org/10.1075/tis.20006.dow
References

References

Alexieva, Bistra
1997 “A typology of interpreter-mediated events.” The Translator 3 (2): 153–174. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Al-Zahran, Aladdin
2007 “The consecutive conference interpreter as intercultural mediator: A cognitive-pragmatic approach to the interpreter’s role.” Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Salford, UK. http://​usir​.salford​.ac​.uk​/2060/
Angelelli, Claudia
2004a Revisiting the Interpreter’s Role: A Study of Conference, Court, and Medical Interpreters in Canada, Mexico, and the United States. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2004b Medical Interpreting and Cross-Cultural Communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Angermeyer, Philipp Sebastian
2015 Speak English or What?: Codeswitching and Interpreter Use in New York City Courts. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Antonini, Rachele
2016 “Caught in the middle: Child language brokering as a form of unrecognised language service.” Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 37 (7): 710–725. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Apter, Emily
2003 “Global translatio: The ‘invention’ of comparative literature, Istanbul, 1933.” Critical Inquiry 29 (2): 253–281. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Beaton, Morven
2007 “Intertextuality and ideology in interpreter-mediated communication: The case of the European Parliament.” Unpublished PhD Thesis, Heriot-Watt University. http://​www​.ros​.hw​.ac​.uk​/handle​/10399​/2028
Bendazzoli, Claudio, and Annalisa Sandrelli
2009 “Corpus-based interpreting studies: Early work and future prospects.” Revista tradumàtica 7. www​.fti​.uab​.cat​/tradumatica​/revista​/num7​/articles​/08​/08​.pdf
Berk-Seligson, Susan
2002 “The Miranda warnings and linguistic coercion: The role of footing in the interrogation of a limited-English speaking murder suspect.” In Language in the Legal Process, ed. by Janett Cotterill, 127–143. Basingstoke: Palgrave. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Braun, Sabine, and Judith Taylor
2012 “Video-mediated interpreting: An overview of current practice and research.” In Videoconference and Remote Interpreting in Criminal Proceedings, ed. by Sabine Braun and Judith Taylor, 33–68. Antwerp: Intersential.Google Scholar
Chesterman, A.
2008 “The status of interpretive hypotheses.” In Efforts and Models in Interpreting and Translation Research, ed. by Gyde Hansen, Andrew Chesterman, and Heidrun Gerzymisch-Arbogast, 49–62. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Clifford, Andrew
2004 “Is fidelity ethical? The social role of the healthcare interpreter.” TTR: Traduction, Terminologie, Rédaction 17 (2): 89–114. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Collard, Camille and Bart Defrancq
2019 “Predictors of ear-voice span: A corpus-based study with special reference to sex.” Perspectives 27 (3): 431–454. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dean, Robyn K. and Robert Q. Pollard
2006 “From best practice to best practice process: Shifting ethical thinking and teaching.” In A New Chapter in Interpreter Education: Accreditation, Research and Technology: Proceedings of the 16th National Convention of the Conference of Interpreter Trainers, Monmouth, OR: CIT, ed. by Elisa M. Maroney, 119–32. San Diego.Google Scholar
2009 “ ‘I don’t think we’re supposed to be talking about this”: Case conferencing and supervision for interpreters.” VIEWS 26(4).Google Scholar
Diriker, Ebru
2004 De-/Re-Contextualizing Conference Interpreting: Interpreters in the Ivory Tower? Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Downie, Jonathan
2014 “Towards a homiletic of sermon interpreting.” Journal of the Evangelical Homiletics Society 14 (2): 62–69.Google Scholar
Eraslan, Seyda
2011 “International knowledge transfer in Turkey: The consecutive interpreter’s role in context.” Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Tarragona, Spain: Rovira i Virgili University.Google Scholar
Ghignoli, Alessandro and María Gracia Torres Díaz
2015 “Interpreting performed by professionals of other fields: The case of sports commentators.” In Non-Professional Interpreting and Translating in the Media, ed. by Rachele Antonini and Chiara Bucaria, 193–208. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Gile, D.
1989 “Les flux d’information dans les réunions interlinguistiques et l’interprétation de conférence : Premières observations.” Meta 34 (4): 649–660. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hatim, Basil and Ian Mason
1997 The Translator as Communicator. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
He, He, Jordan Boyd-Graber, and Hal Daumé III
2016 “Interpretese vs. translationese: The uniqueness of human strategies in simultaneous interpretation.” In Proceedings of the 2016 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, ed. by Kevin Knight, Ani Nenkova, and Owen Rambow, 971–976. ACL.Google Scholar
Hlavac, Jim
2012 “Sociolinguistic profiles of users and providers of lay and professional interpreting services: The experiences of a recently-arrived Iraqi language community in Melbourne.” Translation & Interpreting 3 (2): 1–32.Google Scholar
Hokkanen, Sari
2012 “Simultaneous church interpreting as service.” The Translator: Studies in Intercultural Communication 18 (2): 291–309. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2016 “To serve and to experience: An autoethnographic study of simultaneous church interpreting.” Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Tampere, Finland.Google Scholar
Karlik, Jill
2010 “Interpreter-mediated scriptures: Expectation and performance.” Interpreting 12 (2): 160–85. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kaufmann, Francine
2005 “Contribution à l’histoire de l’interprétation consécutive : Le metourguemane dans les synagogues de l’Antiquité.” Meta 50 (3): 972–86. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Killman, Jeffrey
2020 “Interpreting for asylum seekers and their attorneys: The challenge of agency.” Perspectives 28 (1): 73–89. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kurz, Ingrid
1993 “Conference interpretation: Expectations of different user groups.” The Interpreters’ Newsletter 5: 13–21.Google Scholar
1994 “What do different user groups expect from a conference interpreter?” The Jerome Quarterly 9 (2): 3–7.Google Scholar
Luchner, Carmen Delgado, and Leïla Kherbiche
2018 “Without fear or favour?: The positionality of ICRC and UNHCR interpreters in the humanitarian field.” Target 30 (3): 408–29. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Martínez-Gómez, Aída
2015 “Invisible, visible or everywhere in between? Perceptions and actual behaviours of non-professional interpreters and interpreting users.” The Interpreters’ Newsletter 20: 175–94.Google Scholar
Mason, Ian
(ed) 2001 Triadic Exchanges: Studies in Dialogue Interpreting. Manchester: St. Jerome.Google Scholar
Mathews, Elizabeth S.
2011 “ ‘No sign language if you want to get him talking’: Power, transgression/resistance, and discourses of d/Deafness in the Republic of Ireland.” Population Space & Place 17 (4): 361. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mellinger, Christopher D. and Thomas A. Hanson
2018 “Interpreter traits and the relationship with technology and visibility.” Translation and Interpreting Studies 13 (3): 366–392. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Merlini, Raffaela and Roberta Favaron
2003 “Community interpreting: Re-conciliation through power management.” The Interpreters’ Newsletter 12: 205–29.Google Scholar
Mikkelson, Holly
1999 “Interpreting is interpreting – Or is it?” Presented at the GSTI 30th Anniversary Conference .
Mizuno, Makiko
2006 “The history of community interpreting studies in Japan.” Linguistica Antverpiensia 5.Google Scholar
Moretti, Franco
2000 “Conjectures on world literature.” New Left Review 1: 54–68.Google Scholar
Napier, Jemina
2017 “Not just child’s play: Exploring bilingualism and language brokering as a precursor to the development of expertise as a professional sign language interpreter.” In Non-Professional Interpreting and Translation: State of the Art and Future of an Emerging Field of Research, ed. by Rachele Antonini et al., 381–410. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ozolins, Uldis
2016 “The myth of the myth of invisibility?” Interpreting 18 (2): 273–84. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Phelan, Mary and Mayte Martín
2010 “Interpreters and cultural mediators – Different but complementary roles.” Translocations 6 (1).Google Scholar
Pöchhacker, Franz
1995 “Simultaneous interpreting: A functionalist perspective.” Hermes, Journal of Linguistics 14: 31–53.Google Scholar
2004 Introducing Interpreting Studies. London: Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2009 “Conference interpreting surveying the profession.” Translation and Interpreting Studies 4 (2): 172–86. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pokorn, Nike K. and Tamara Mikolič Južnič
2020 “Community interpreters versus intercultural mediators. Is it really all about ethics?” Translation and Interpreting Studies 15 (1): 81–108. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pym, Anthony
1999 “ ‘Nicole slapped Michelle.’” The Translator 5 (2): 265–83. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rayman, Jennifer
2007 “Visions of equality: Translating power in a deaf sermonette.” The Sign Language Translator and Interpreter 1 (1): 73–114.Google Scholar
Rothman, E. Natalie
2009 “Interpreting dragomans: Boundaries and crossings in the early modern Mediterranean.” Comparative Studies in Society and History 51 (4): 771–800. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Roy, Cynthia B.
1992 “A sociolinguistic analysis of the interpreter’s role in simultaneous talk in a face-to-face interpreted dialogue.” Sign Language Studies 74: 21–61. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1999 Interpreting as a Discourse Process. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Shlesinger, Miriam
1995 “Shifts in cohesion in simultaneous interpreting.” The Translator 1 (2): 193–214. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1998 “Corpus-based interpreting studies as an offshoot of corpus-based translation studies.” Meta 43 (4): 486–493. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Turner, Graham H.
2005 “Towards real interpreting.” In Sign Language Interpreting and Interpreter Education: Directions for Research and Practice, ed. by Marc Marschark, Rico Peterson, and Elizabeth A. Winston, 253–65. New York: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tyulenev, Sergey and Binghan Zheng
2017 “Introduction: Toward comparative translation and interpreting studies.” Translation and Interpreting Studies 12 (2): 197–212. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Verrept, Hans
2008 “Intercultural mediation at Belgian hospitals.” In Crossing Borders in Community Interpreting. Definitions and Dilemmas, ed. by Carmen Valero Garcés and Anne Martin, 187–202. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Vigouroux, C. B.
2010 “Double-mouthed discourse: Interpreting, framing, and participant roles.” Journal of Sociolinguistics 14 (3): 341–369. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Vuorikoski, A. R.
1998 “User responses to simultaneous interpreting.” In Unity in Diversity? Current Trends in Translation Studies, ed. by Lynne Bowker, et al., 184–197. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Wadensjö, Cecilia
1992 Interpreting as Interaction: On Dialogue-Interpreting in Immigration Hearings and Medical Encounters. Linköping University.Google Scholar
Wilcox, Sherman and Barbara Shaffer
2005 “Towards a cognitive model of interpreting.” In Topics in Signed Languages Interpreting: Theory and Practice, ed. by Terry Janzen, 27–50. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wurm, Svenja
2010 “Translation across modalities: The practice of translating written text into recorded signed language: An ethnographic case study.” Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, Scotland. www​.ros​.hw​.ac​.uk​/handle​/10399​/2407
Zwischenberger, Cornelia
2015 “Simultaneous conference interpreting and a supernorm that governs it all.” Meta 60 (1): 90–111. CrossrefGoogle Scholar