Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-8bbf57454-z2jr4 Total loading time: 0.319 Render date: 2022-01-25T03:30:25.877Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }

Ear–voice span and pauses in intra- and interlingual respeaking: An exploratory study into temporal aspects of the respeaking process

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 May 2017

AGNIESZKA CHMIEL
Affiliation:
Uniwersytet im Adama Mickiewicza w Poznaniu
AGNIESZKA SZARKOWSKA*
Affiliation:
Uniwersytet Warszawski and University College London
DANIJEL KORŽINEK
Affiliation:
Polsko-Japonska Wyzsza Szkola Technik Komputerowych w Warszawie
AGNIESZKA LIJEWSKA
Affiliation:
Uniwersytet im Adama Mickiewicza w Poznaniu
ŁUKASZ DUTKA
Affiliation:
Uniwersytet Warszawski
ŁUKASZ BROCKI
Affiliation:
Polsko-Japonska Wyzsza Szkola Technik Komputerowych w Warszawie
KRZYSZTOF MARASEK
Affiliation:
Polsko-Japonska Wyzsza Szkola Technik Komputerowych w Warszawie
*
ADDRESS FOR CORRESPONDENCE Agnieszka Szarkowska, Instytut Lingwistyki Stosowanej, Uniwersytet Warszawski, Dobra 55, Warszawa 00-312, Poland. E-mail: a.szarkowska@uw.edu.pl

Abstract

Respeaking involves producing subtitles in real time to make live television programs accessible to deaf and hard of hearing viewers. In this study we investigated how the type of material to be respoken affects temporal aspects of respeaking, such as ear–voice span and pauses. Given the similarities between respeaking and interpreting (time constraints) and between interlingual respeaking and translation (interlingual processing), we also tested whether previous interpreting and translation experience leads to a smaller delay or lesser cognitive load in respeaking, as manifested by a smaller number of pauses. We tested 22 interpreters, 23 translators, and a control group of 12 bilingual controls, who performed interlingual (English to Polish) and intralingual (Polish to Polish) respeaking of five video clips with different characteristics (speech rate, number of speakers, and scriptedness). Interlingual respeaking was found to be more challenging than the intralingual one. The temporal aspects of respeaking were affected by clip type (especially in interpreters). We found no clear interpreter or translator advantage over the bilingual controls across the respeaking tasks. However, interlingual respeaking turned out to be too difficult for many bilinguals to perform at all. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to examine temporal aspects of respeaking as modulated by the type of materials and previous interpreting/translation experience. The results develop our understanding of temporal aspects of respeaking and are directly applicable to respeaker training.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adamowicz, A. (1989). The role of anticipation in discourse: Text processing in simultaneous interpreting. Polish Psychological Bulletin, 20, 153160.Google Scholar
Adrian, R. (2013). Talking television: Viewer identification of unscripted conversation and scripted television dialogue and their corresponding features (Unpublished bachelor's thesis, University of Groningen).Google Scholar
Baayen, R. H. (2008). Analyzing linguistic data: A practical introduction to statistics using R. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barik, H. (1973). Simultaneous interpretation: Temporal and quantitative data. Language and Speech, 16, 237.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bartłomiejczyk, M. (2006). Strategies of simultaneous interpreting and directionality. Interpreting, 8, 149174. doi:10.1075/intp.8.2.03bar CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartłomiejczyk, M. (2015). Wprowadzenie do tłumaczenia symultanicznego. In Chmiel, A. & Janikowski, P. (Eds.), Dydaktyka tłumaczenia ustnego (pp. 207226). Katowice, Poland: Stowarzyszenie Inicjatyw Wydawniczych.Google Scholar
Bates, D. (2013). Linear mixed model implementation in lme4. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin–Madison.Google Scholar
Benesty, J., Sondhi, M. M., & Huang, Y. (2007). Springer handbook of speech processing. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Boersma, P. (2002). Praat, a system for doing phonetics by computer. Glot International, 5, 341345.Google Scholar
Boulianne, G., Beaumont, J.-F., Boisvert, M., Brousseau, J., Cardinal, P., Chapdelaine, C., . . . Dumuchel, P. (2009). Shadow speaking for real-time closed-captioning of TV broadcasts in French. In Matamala, A. & Orero, P. (Eds.), Listening to subtitles: Subtitles for the deaf and hard of hearing (pp. 191208). Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Brocki, Ł., Marasek, K., & Koržinek, D. (2012). Multiple model text normalization for the Polish language. In Chen, L., Felfernig, S., Liu, J., & Raś, Z. W. (Eds.), Foundations of intelligent systems (pp. 143148). Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bros-Brann, E. (1994). Interpreting live on television: Some examples taken from French television. Unpublished manuscript, AIIC Technical Committee.Google Scholar
Cecot, M. (2001). Pauses in simultaneous interpretation: A contrastive analysis of professional interpreters’ performances. Interpreters’ Newsletter, 11, 6385.Google Scholar
Chen, L., Liu, Y., Harper, M., Maia, E., & Mcroy, S. (2004). Evaluating factors impacting the accuracy of forced alignments in a multimodal corpus. Paper presented at LREC, Lisbon.Google Scholar
Chernov, G. V. (1994). Message redundancy and message anticipation in simultaneous interpreting. In Lambert, S. & Moser-Mercer, B. (Eds.), Bridging the gap: Empirical research in simultaneous interpretation (pp. 139154). Philadelphia, PA: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chmiel, A. (2015). Przetwarzanie w tłumaczeniu symultanicznym. In Chmiel, A. & Janikowski, P. (Eds.), Dydaktyka tłumaczenia ustnego (pp. 227247). Katowice, Poland: Stowarzyszenie Inicjatyw Wydawniczych.Google Scholar
Christoffels, I. K., & de Groot, A. M. B. (2004). Components of simultaneous interpreting: Comparing interpreting with shadowing and paraphrasing. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 7, 227240. doi:10.1017/S1366728904001609 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christoffels, I. K., de Groot, A. M. B., & Kroll, J. F. (2006). Memory and language skills in simultaneous interpreters: The role of expertise and language proficiency. Journal of Memory and Language, 54, 324345. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2005.12.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Defrancq, B. (2015). Corpus-based research into the presumed effects of short EVS. Interpreting, 17, 2645. doi:10.1075/intp.17.1.02def CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Díaz-Galaz, S., Padilla, P., & Bajo, M. T. (2015). The role of advance preparation in simultaneous interpreting: A comparison of professional interpreters and interpreting students. Interpreting, 17, 125. doi:10.1075/intp.17.1.01dia CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donato, V. (2003). Strategies adopted by student interpreters in SI: A comparison between the English-Italian and the German-Italian language-pairs. Interpreters’ Newsletter, 12, 101134.Google Scholar
Eugeni, C. (2008a). Respeaking the TV for the deaf: For a real special needs-oriented subtitling. Studies in English Language and Literature, 21, 3747.Google Scholar
Eugeni, C. (2008b). A sociolinguistic approach to real-time subtitling: Respeaking vs. shadowing and simultaneous interpreting. English in International Deaf Communication, 72, 357382.Google Scholar
Gambier, Y. (2003). Introduction. Translator, 9, 171189. doi:10.1080/13556509.2003.10799152 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garnham, A. (1985). Psycholinguistics: Central topics. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Gerver, D. (1969). Effects of grammaticalness, presentation rate, and message length on auditory short-term memory. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 21, 203208. doi:10.1080/14640746908400214 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gile, D. (2009). Basic concepts and models for interpreter and translator training. Philadelphia, PA: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goffman, E. (1981). Forms of talk. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Goldman-Eisler, F. (1958). The predictability of words in context and the length of pauses in speech. Language and Speech, 1, 226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldman-Eisler, F. (1972). Segmentation of input in simultaneous translation. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 1, 127140. doi:10.1007/BF01068102 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goldman-Eisler, F., Dechert, H. W., & Raupach, M. (1980). Temporal variables in speech: Studies in honour of Frieda Goldman-Eisler. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Gorszczyńska, P. (2015). Produkcja w tłumaczeniu symultanicznym. In Chmiel, A. & Janikowski, P. (Eds.), Dydaktyka tłumaczenia ustnego (pp. 248288). Katowice, Poland: Stowarzyszenie Inicjatyw Wydawniczych.Google Scholar
Jelinek, F. (1997). Statistical methods for speech recognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Jones, R. (2002). Conference interpreting explained (2nd ed.). Manchester: St. Jerome.Google Scholar
Jurafsky, D., & Martin, A. (2008). Speech and language processing: An introduction to natural language processing, computational linguistics, and speech recognition. New York: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Kade, O. (1967). Zu einigen Besonderheiten des Simultandolmetschens. Fremdsprachen, 11, 817.Google Scholar
Kade, O., & Cartellieri, C. (1971). Some methodological aspects of simultaneous interpreting. Babel, 17, 1216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Katsamanis, A., Black, M., Georgiou, P. G., Goldstein, L., & Narayanan, S. (2011). SailAlign: Robust long speech-text alignment. Paper presented at the Workshop on New Tools and Methods for Very-Large Scale Phonetics Research, University of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA.Google Scholar
Kurz, I. (2002). Physiological stress responses during media and conference interpreting. In Garzone, G. & Viezzi, M. (Eds.), Interpreting in the 21st century (pp. 195202). Philadelphia, PA: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lamberger-Felber, H. (2001). Text-oriented research into interpreting: Examples from a case-study. Hermes, 26, 3963.Google Scholar
Lambourne, A. (2006). Subtitle respeaking: A new skill for a new age. Intralinea, 8.Google Scholar
Lederer, M. (1978). Simultaneous interpretation: Units of meaning and other features. In Gerver, D. & Sinaiko, H. W. (Eds.), Language interpretation and communication (pp. 323332). New York: Plenum Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lederer, M. (1981). La traduction simultanée: Expérience et théorie. Paris: Minard.Google Scholar
Lee, T.-H. (2002). Ear voice span in English into Korean simultaneous interpretation. Meta, 47, 596606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levenshtein, V. I. (1966). Binary codes capable of correcting deletions, insertions, and reversals. Soviet Physics Doklady, 10, 707710.Google Scholar
Luyckx, B., Delbeke, T., Van Waes, L., Leijten, M., & Remael, A. (2010). Live subtitling with speech recognition causes and consequences of text reduction. Across Languages and Cultures, 14, 1546.Google Scholar
Marsh, A. (2004). Simultaneous interpreting and respeaking: A comparison (Unpublished master's thesis, University of Westminster, London).Google Scholar
Marsh, A. (2006). Respeaking for the BB. Intralinea, 8.Google Scholar
Mazza, C. (2001). Numbers in simultaneous interpretation. Interpreters’ Newsletter, 11, 87104.Google Scholar
Mead, P. (2000). Control of pauses by trainee interpreters in their A and B languages. Interpreters’ Newsletter, 10, 89102.Google Scholar
Mikul, C. (2014). Caption quality: Approaches to standards and measurement. Sydney: Media Access Australia. Retrieved from https://mediaaccess.org.au/research-policy/white-papers/caption-quality-international-approaches-to-standards-and-measurement Google Scholar
Myers, E. W. (1986). AnO (ND) difference algorithm and its variations. Algorithmica, 1, 251266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ofcom. (2015). Measuring live subtitling quality: Results from the fourth sampling exercise. Retrieved from http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/market-data-research/other/tv-research/live-subtitling/sampling_results_4/ Google Scholar
Oléron, P., & Nanpon, H. (2002). Research into simultaneous translation. In Pöchhacker, F. & Shlesinger, M. (Eds.), The interpreting studies reader (pp. 4350). London: Routledge. (Original work published 1965)Google Scholar
Paneth, E. (1957). An investigation into conference interpreting (with special reference to the training of the interpreter). (Unpublished master's thesis, University of London Institute of Education).Google Scholar
Piccaluga, M., Nespoulous, J.-L., & Harmegnies, B. (2005). Disfluencies as a window on cognitive processing: An analysis of silent pauses in simultaneous interpreting. Paper presented at DiSS’05, Disfluency in Spontaneous Speech Workshop, Aix-en-Provence, France.Google Scholar
Pignataro, C. (2011). Skilled-based and knowledge-based strategies in television interpreting. Interpreters’ Newsletter, 16, 8198.Google Scholar
Pöchhacker, F. (2004). Introducing interpreting studies. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Pöchhacker, F. (2010). Media interpreting. In Gambier, Y. & van Doorslaer, L. (Eds.), Handbook of translation studies (Vol. 1, pp. 224226). Philadelphia, PA: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quaglio, P. (2009). Television dialogue: The sitcom Friends vs. natural conversation. Philadelphia, PA: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rabiner, L. R. (1989). A tutorial on hidden Markov models and selected applications in speech recognition. Paper presented at the 1989 IEEE Conference.Google Scholar
Räsänen, O. J., Laine, U. K., & Altosaar, T. (2009). An improved speech segmentation quality measure: The r-value. Paper presented at the 2009 Interspeech conference.Google Scholar
Development Core Team, R. (2010). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.Google Scholar
Remael, A. (2008). Screenwriting, scripted and unscripted language: What do subtitlers need to know? In Diaz-Cintas, J. (Ed.), The didactics of audiovisual translation (pp. 5767). Philadelphia, PA: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Romero-Fresco, P. (2011). Subtitling through speech recognition: Respeaking. Manchester: St. Jerome.Google Scholar
Romero-Fresco, P. (2012). Respeaking in translator training curricula: Present and future prospects. Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 6, 91112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Russo, M. (2005). Simultaneous film interpreting and users' feedback. Interpreting, 7, 126. doi:10.1075/intp.7.1.02rus CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schweda-Nicholson, N. (1987). Linguistic and extra-linguistic aspects of simultaneous interpretation. Applied Linguistics, 8, 194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sergio, F. S. (2013). Media interpreting. In Chapelle, C. A. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of applied linguistics. London: Wiley–Blackwell.Google Scholar
Setton, R. (1999). Simultaneous interpretation: A cognitive-pragmatic analysis. Philadelphia, PA: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shlesinger, M. (1994). Intonation in the production and perception of simultaneous interpretation. In Lambert, S. & Moser-Mercer, B. (Eds.), Bridging the gap: Empirical research in simultaneous interpretation (pp. 225236). Philadelphia, PA: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Timarová, Š., Čeňková, I., & Meylaerts, R. (2015). Simultaneous interpreting and working memory capacity. In Ferreira, A. & Schwieter, J. W. (Eds.), Psycholinguistic and cognitive inquiries into translation and interpreting (pp. 101126). Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Timarová, Š., Čeňková, I., Meylaerts, R., Hertog, E., Szmalec, A., & Duyck, W. (2014). Simultaneous interpreting and working memory executive control. Interpreting, 16, 139168. doi:10.1075/intp.16.2.01tim CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Timarová, Š., Dragsted, B., & Hansen, I. G. (2011). Time lag in translation and interpreting: A methodological exploration. In Alvstad, C., Hild, A., & Tiselius, E. (Eds.), Methods and strategies of process research: Integrative approaches in translation studies (pp. 121146). Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tissi, B. (2000). Silent pauses and disfluencies in simultaneous interpretation: A descriptive analysis. Interpreters’ Newsletter, 10, 103127.Google Scholar
Tóth, A. (2011). Speech disfluencies in simultaneous interpreting: A mirror on cognitive processes. SKASE Journal of Translation and Interpretation, 5, 2331.Google Scholar
Tóth, A. (2013). The study of pauses and hesitations in conference interpreters’ target language output (Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Eötvös Lorańd University, Budapest).Google Scholar
Warren, P. (2013). Introducing psycholinguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
3
Cited by

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Ear–voice span and pauses in intra- and interlingual respeaking: An exploratory study into temporal aspects of the respeaking process
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Ear–voice span and pauses in intra- and interlingual respeaking: An exploratory study into temporal aspects of the respeaking process
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Ear–voice span and pauses in intra- and interlingual respeaking: An exploratory study into temporal aspects of the respeaking process
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *