Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T09:24:51.520Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

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 ,
AGNIESZKA SZARKOWSKA ,
DANIJEL KORŽINEK ,
AGNIESZKA LIJEWSKA ,
ŁUKASZ DUTKA ,
ŁUKASZ BROCKI  and
KRZYSZTOF MARASEK
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: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

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
Information
Applied Psycholinguistics , Volume 38 , Issue 5 , September 2017 , pp. 1201 - 1227
Check for updates
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

REFERENCES

Adamowicz, A. (1989). The role of anticipation in discourse: Text processing in simultaneous interpreting. Polish Psychological Bulletin, 20, 153–160.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.Google Scholar
Barik, H. (1973). Simultaneous interpretation: Temporal and quantitative data. Language and Speech, 16, 237.Google Scholar
Bartłomiejczyk, M. (2006). Strategies of simultaneous interpreting and directionality. Interpreting, 8, 149–174. doi:10.1075/intp.8.2.03bar Google Scholar
Bartłomiejczyk, M. (2015). Wprowadzenie do tłumaczenia symultanicznego. In Chmiel, A. & Janikowski, P. (Eds.), Dydaktyka tłumaczenia ustnego (pp. 207–226). 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, 341–345.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. 191–208). 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. 143–148). Berlin: Springer.Google 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, 63–85.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. 139–154). Philadelphia, PA: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Chmiel, A. (2015). Przetwarzanie w tłumaczeniu symultanicznym. In Chmiel, A. & Janikowski, P. (Eds.), Dydaktyka tłumaczenia ustnego (pp. 227–247). 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, 227–240. doi:10.1017/S1366728904001609 Google 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, 324–345. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2005.12.004 Google Scholar
Defrancq, B. (2015). Corpus-based research into the presumed effects of short EVS. Interpreting, 17, 26–45. doi:10.1075/intp.17.1.02def Google 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, 1–25. doi:10.1075/intp.17.1.01dia Google 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, 101–134.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, 37–47.Google Scholar
Eugeni, C. (2008b). A sociolinguistic approach to real-time subtitling: Respeaking vs. shadowing and simultaneous interpreting. English in International Deaf Communication, 72, 357–382.Google Scholar
Gambier, Y. (2003). Introduction. Translator, 9, 171–189. doi:10.1080/13556509.2003.10799152 Google 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, 203–208. doi:10.1080/14640746908400214 Google Scholar
Gile, D. (2009). Basic concepts and models for interpreter and translator training. Philadelphia, PA: Benjamins.Google 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.Google Scholar
Goldman-Eisler, F. (1972). Segmentation of input in simultaneous translation. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 1, 127–140. doi:10.1007/BF01068102 Google Scholar
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. 248–288). 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, 8–17.Google Scholar
Kade, O., & Cartellieri, C. (1971). Some methodological aspects of simultaneous interpreting. Babel, 17, 12–16.Google 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. 195–202). Philadelphia, PA: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Lamberger-Felber, H. (2001). Text-oriented research into interpreting: Examples from a case-study. Hermes, 26, 39–63.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. 323–332). New York: Plenum Press.Google 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, 596–606.Google Scholar
Levenshtein, V. I. (1966). Binary codes capable of correcting deletions, insertions, and reversals. Soviet Physics Doklady, 10, 707–710.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, 15–46.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, 87–104.Google Scholar
Mead, P. (2000). Control of pauses by trainee interpreters in their A and B languages. Interpreters’ Newsletter, 10, 89–102.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, 251–266.Google 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. 43–50). 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, 81–98.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. 224–226). Philadelphia, PA: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Quaglio, P. (2009). Television dialogue: The sitcom Friends vs. natural conversation. Philadelphia, PA: Benjamins.Google 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. 57–67). Philadelphia, PA: Benjamins.Google 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, 91–112.Google Scholar
Russo, M. (2005). Simultaneous film interpreting and users' feedback. Interpreting, 7, 1–26. doi:10.1075/intp.7.1.02rus Google Scholar
Schweda-Nicholson, N. (1987). Linguistic and extra-linguistic aspects of simultaneous interpretation. Applied Linguistics, 8, 194.Google 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.Google 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. 225–236). Philadelphia, PA: Benjamins.Google 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. 101–126). 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, 139–168. doi:10.1075/intp.16.2.01tim Google 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. 121–146). Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Tissi, B. (2000). Silent pauses and disfluencies in simultaneous interpretation: A descriptive analysis. Interpreters’ Newsletter, 10, 103–127.Google Scholar
Tóth, A. (2011). Speech disfluencies in simultaneous interpreting: A mirror on cognitive processes. SKASE Journal of Translation and Interpretation, 5, 23–31.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