93080 - Dialogical, Multimedia And Distance Interpretation - Russian (Language C)

Course Unit Page

Academic Year 2021/2022

Learning outcomes

Students will learn and understand the notions and dynamics of on-site and remote communication processes between Russian and Italian and will be able to use advanced techniques for on-site and remote dialogic and monologic interpreting. They will also learn to use tools to support on-site and remote interpreting such as: the tour guide system (bidule), videoconferencing systems, telephone, web or BYOD platforms, and multimedia environments. Students will be able to design, handle and evaluate complex interpreting projects bearing in mind ethical aspects too.

Course contents

The tour guide system (bidule), the SimConsec with the smart pen, telephone and videoconference interpreting, TV and cinema interpreting, platforms for remote simultaneous interpreting (RSI), and the voice over method will be presented also on the basis of current literature.

Telephone and videoconference interpreting

The course will focus on:

  • Main features of monolingual and multilingual service calls with interpreting (emergency calls as well as health- and tourism-related calls);
  • The structure of a service call with or without interpreting;
  • Potential problems and solutions for a remote dialogue interpreter (telephone and videoconferencing interpreting);
  • Importance of non-verbal communication;
  • Tips on how to use technological tools.

TV interpreting

The course will focus on:

  • Communication features of the TV context;
  • Special requirements: requests made by clients and audience.

Cinema interpreting

The course will focus on:

  • Studying and preparing scripts for feature films before interpreting them simultaneously;
  • Simultaneous interpreting of feature films whose scripts have been studied and prepared.

Platforms for remote simultaneous interpreting (RSI)

The course will focus on:

  • Presenting the main RSI platforms and their features;
  • Learning how to use at least one RSI platform;
  • Managing team and booth dynamics.

Various voice over modalities will be introduced, including the conventional one and pre-recorded interpreting (a.k.a. ‘interpretation overlay’), i.e., pre-recorded simultaneous interpreting of multimedia content and the use of these different voice over modes in various contexts with practical recommendations.

As for the smart pen, the following will be discussed:

  • Its potential to enable simultaneous audio recording and note-taking for conventional consecutive with the aim of observing and discussing not only this product but also the note-taking process;
  • Its potential to enable hybrid consecutive/simultaneous interpreting (aka ‘ConsecSimul’ and SimConsec’) with the simultaneous rendering of a speech that has been listened to and analysed while taking notes with headphones; outline of main findings of studies performed with this tool.

The theoretical aspects and the findings of the various studies on these types of interpreting will be followed by practical exercises on some of them with the use of role plays and simulations prepared by lecturers and students.

Readings/Bibliography

Amato, Amalia (2002) "Interpreting Legal Discourse on TV: Clinton's Deposition with the Grand Jury" in Perspectives on Interpreting, Giuliana Garzone, Peter Mead e Maurizio Viezzi (eds), Bologna, Clueb: 269-290. ISBN 88-491-1956-9.

Amato, Amalia, e Gabriele Mack G (2011) “Interpreting the Oscar Night on Italian TV: an interpreters’ nightmare?”, The Interpreters' Newsletter, no. 11: 37-60. ISBN 88-8303-096-6.

Amato, Amalia (2017) “Incontri medici faccia a faccia e telefonate al servizio d'emergenza sanitaria in Italia e di emergenza negli Stati Uniti: un confronto” in Oraliter - Formas de la comunicacion presencial y a distancia, Felix San Vicente, Gloria Bazzocchi e Pilar Capanaga (a cura di), Bologna, Bonomia University Press: 143–160. ISBN 978-88-6923-296-1.

Amato, Amalia, María J. Gonzalez Rodríguez e Nicoletta Spinolo (eds) (2018) Handbook of Remote Interpreting, Bologna, AMS Acta ISBN 978-88-9801-085-1. URL: http://amsacta.unibo.it/5955/

Amato, Amalia (2020)Interpreting on the phone: interpreter’s participation in healthcare and medical emergency service calls”, inTRAlinea, Special Issue: Technology in Interpreter Education and Practice, N. Spinolo and A. Amato (eds), ISSN 1827-000X, URL: http://www.intralinea.org/specials/article/2519

Braun, Sabine (2015) “Remote interpreting”, in Pöchhacker, Franz (ed.) 2015, Routledge Encyclopaedia of Interpreting Studies, 346-348. London: Routledge.

Braun, Sabine (2014) “Comparing traditional and remote interpreting in police settings: quality and impact factors”,in Viezzi, Maurizio & Caterina Falbo (eds.) 2014, Traduzione e interpretazione per la società e le istituzioni, 161-176, Trieste: Edizioni Università di Trieste.

Castagnoli, Sara e Natacha Niemants (2018) “Corpora worth creating: A pilot study on telephone interpreting”. InTRAlinea, Special Issue New Findings in Corpus-based Interpreting Studies, C. Bendazzoli, M. Russo and B. Defrancq (eds), URL: http://www.intralinea.org/specials/article/corpora_worth_creating_a_pilot_study_on_telephone_interpreting

Chen, Sijia (2017) “Note-taking in consecutive interpreting: new data from pen recording”. The International Journal for Translation and Interpreting Research 9(1): 4-23.

Chen, Sijia (2018) “A Pen-Eye-Voice approach towards the process of note-taking and consecutive interpreting: an experimental design”, International Journal of Comparative Literature & Translation Studies 6(2): 1-8.

Chevalier, Lucille e Daniel Gile (2015) “Interpreting quality: a casestudy of spontaneous reactions”, Forum 13(1). 1-26.

Katan, David e Francesco Straniero Sergio (2001) “Look Who's Talking: The Ethics of Entertainment and Talkshow Interpreting”, Translator 7(2): 213-237.

Leeman Price, Erika, Eliseo J. Pérez-Stable; Dana Nickleach; Mónica López, e Lea S. Karliner (2012) “Interpreter perspectives of in-person, telephonic, and videoconferencing medical interpretation in clinical encounters”, Patient education and counseling 87(2): 226-232. DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2011.08.006

Mellinger, Christopher D (2019) “Computer-Assisted Interpreting Technologies and Interpreter Cognition: A Product and Process- Oriented Perspective”, Revista Tradumàtica. Tecnologies de la Traducció 17: 33-44. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/tradumatica.228

Moser-Mercer, Barbara (2005) “Remote interpreting: The crucial role of presence”, Bulletin VALS-ASLA 81: 73-97.

Orlando, M. (2014) “A study on the amenability of digital pen technology in a hybrid mode of interpreting: Consec-simul with notes”, The International Journal of Translation and Interpreting Research, 6(2): 39-54.

Orlando, M. (2015) “Digital pen technology and interpreter training, practice and research: Status and trends” in S Ehrlich & J Napier (eds.), Interpreter Education in the Digital Age, Gallaudet University Press, Washington DC, 125-152.

Pöchhacker, Franz (2020) “‘Going video’: Mediality and multimodality in interpreting”, in Saalets, Heidi & Gert Brône (eds.) 2020, Linking up with video, 13-45, Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Roziner, Ilan & Miriam Shlesinger (2010) “Much ado about something remote”, Interpreting 12(2), 214-247. DOI: 10.1075/intp.12.2.05roz

Russo, Mariachiara (1995) "Media interpreting: Variables and strategies", in Y. Gambier (ed.) Communication audiovisuelle et trasferts linguistiques/Audiovisual Communication and Language Transfer, International Forum, Strasbourg, 22-24/6/95, Translatio (Special Issue of the FIT Newsletter),14 (3-4): 343-349.

Russo, Mariachiara (1997) "Film interpreting: Challenges and constraints of a semiotic practice", in Y. Gambier, D. Gile e C. Taylor (eds.) Conference Interpreting: Current Trends in Research, Amsterdam/Philadelphia, John Benjamins, 188-192.

Russo, Mariachiara (2000) “L'interpretazione simultanea dei film e la didattica: l'esperienza di un festival” in A. Melloni, P. Capanaga e R. Lozano (a cura di) Traducir Interpretar textos de la(s) cultura(s) hispánica(s), Bologna, CLUEB, 267-285.

Russo, Mariachiara (2002) “L’interpretazione simultanea dei film: dalla preparazione all’improvvisazione” in M.G. Scelfo (a cura di) Le questioni del tradurre: comunicazione, comprensione, adeguatezza traduttiva e ruolo del genere testuale. Edizioni Associate, Roma.

Russo, Mariachiara (2005)“Simultaneous Film Interpreting and Users’ Feedback” Interpreting, 7 (1): 1-26.

Russo, Mariachiara (2015) “Film interpreting”, in F. Pöchhacker (ed.) Routledge Encyclopedia of Interpreting Studies, London, Routledge, 163-164.

Straniero Sergio, Francesco (2007) Talkshow interpreting. La mediazione linguistica nella conversazione-spettacolo, Trieste: EUT.

Wadensjö, Cecilia (1999) “Telephone Interpreting & the Synchronization of Talk in Social Interaction”, The Translator 5(2), 247-264. DOI: 10.1080/13556509.1999.10799043

Teaching methods

Power point, audio and video presentations. Role plays and simulations of multimedia interpreting activities prepared by lecturers or students.

Theoretical and practical sessions on various topics related to multimedia interpreting with possible contributions from external experts.

Assessment methods

The exam is a simultaneous or consecutive test in one of the multimedia modalities learned during the course and chosen by the lecturers. The modality, however, will be the same for all language combinations and all the sessions of the academic year.

The purpose of the exam is to check that no less than one interpreting modality has been properly acquired during the course and that students master the technical tools that are required to perform an interpreting assignment.

The topic and the modality of the exam will be communicated at least 5 days before the exam via Moodle, or AlmaEsami to enable students to prepare adequately. The outcome of the exam will be anonymously communicated on Moodle a few days after the exam and can be discussed during a meeting to be scheduled with the lecturers.

Marking.

Between 28 and 30 with honours (Excellent). Complete and accurate reproduction of the source material (only few minor mistakes will be allowed) that respects the cohesion of the original and its main rhetoric characteristics. The register of the rendition will be appropriate and fully usable; some minor formal flaws will be allowed (syntax, grammar and pronunciation mistakes). Students will have to show optimum use of the technical tools that will be required for the multimedia modality chosen for the exam.

Between 25 and 27 (Good) and between 21 and 24 (Acceptable). Partially complete and accurate reproduction of the content of the source material that only partially respects the cohesion of the original and its main rhetoric characteristics. The register is only partially appropriate but is understandable in spite of some formal flaws that do not prevent the comprehension and usability of the rendition (syntax, grammar and pronunciation mistakes). Good or acceptable handling of the technical tools that are required for the multimedia modality chosen for the exam.

Between 18 and 20 (Sufficient). Substantially correct rendition (although incomplete and not always coherent) of the main elements of the source material . The register is only partially appropriate but basically understandable in spite of formal flaws (syntax, grammar and pronunciation mistakes). Adequate handling of the technical tools for the multimedia modality chosen for the exam.

Teaching tools

Computers, platforms for remote simultaneous interpreting, smart pen, phone links with or without video for telephone and videoconference interpreting, connection to the Internet through wired computers, tour guide system (bidule).

Office hours

See the website of Lyubov Bezkrovna