Analysing interactional phenomena in video remote interpreting in collaborative settings: implications for interpreter education

References

• Ackerman, M. S. 2000. “The Intellectual Challenge of CSCW: The Gap between Social Requirements and Technical Feasibility.” Human-Computer Interaction 15 (2): 179–203.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson, A. H., A. Newlands, J. Mullin, A. M. Fleming, G. Doherty-Sneddon, and J. Van der Velden. 1996. “Impact of Video-Mediated Communication on Simulated Service Encounters.” Interacting with Computers 8 (2): 193–220.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Azarmina, P., and P. Wallace. 2005. “Remote Interpretation in Medical Encounters: A Systematic Review.” Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare 11: 140–145.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baraldi, C., and L. Gavioli. 2012. Coordinating Participation in Dialogue Interpreting. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Braun, S. 2004. Kommunikation unter widrigen Umständen? Fallstudien zu einsprachigen und gedolmetschten Videokonferenzen. Tübingen: Narr.
   Google Scholar
• Braun, S. 2007. “Interpreting in Small-Group Bilingual Videoconferences: Challenges and Adaptation Processes.” Interpreting 9 (1): 21–46.
   Google Scholar
• Braun, S., and J. Taylor. 2012. “AVIDICUS Comparative Studies – Part I: Traditional Interpreting and Remote Interpreting in Police Interviews.” In Videoconference and Remote Interpreting in Criminal Proceedings, edited by S. Braun and J. Taylor, 99–118. Antwerp/Cambridge: Intersentia
   Google Scholar
• Braun, S. 2013. “Keep Your Distance? Remote Interpreting in Legal Proceedings: A Critical Assessment of A Growing Practice.” Interpreting 15 (2): 200–228.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Braun, S. 2015. Remote Interpreting. In Routledge Handbook of Interpreting, edited by H. Mikkelson and R. Jourdenais. London/New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Braun, S. 2016. “The European AVIDICUS projects: Collaborating to assess the viability of video-mediated interpreting in legal proceedings.” European Journal of Applied Linguistics 4 (1): 173–180. doi:10.1515/eujal-2016-0002
   Google Scholar
• Braun, S. 2017. “What a Micro-Analytical Investigation of Additions and Expansions in Remote Interpreting Can Tell Us about Interpreter’s Participation in a Shared Virtual Space.” Journal of Pragmatics 107: 165–177.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Braun, S., E. Davitti, and S. Dicerto. 2018. “Video-Mediated Interpreting in Legal Settings: Assessing the Implementation.” In Here or There: Research on Interpreting via Video Link, edited by Napier, J., R. Skinner and S. Braun, 144–179. Washington: Gallaudet.
   Google Scholar
• Braun, S. 2015. “Remote Interpreting.” In Routledge Handbook of Interpreting, edited by H. Mikkelson and R. Jourdenais, 352–367. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Bursky, D. 2002. “True Worldwide Communications Need Hands-On Virtual Reality.” Electronic Design 50 (20): 22–23.
   Google Scholar
• Croes, E. A. J., M. L. Antheunis, A. P. Schouten, and E. J. Krahmer. 2019. “Social Attraction in Videomediated Communication: The Role of Nonverbal Affiliative Behaviour.” Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 36 (4): 1210–1232.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Daly-Jones, O., A. Monk, and L. Watts. 1998. “Some Advantages of Video Conferencing over High-Quality Audio Conferencing: Fluency and Awareness of Attentional Focus.” International Journal of Human-computer Studies 49 (1): 21–58.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davitti, E. 2013. “Dialogue Interpreting as Intercultural Mediation: Interpreter’s Use of Upgrading Moves in Parent-Teacher Meetings.” Interpreting 15 (2): 168–199.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davitti, E. 2015. “Interpreter-Mediated Parent-Teacher Talk.” In Linking Discourse Studies to Professional Practice, edited by L. Grujicic-Alatriste, 176–200. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
   Google Scholar
• Davitti, E. 2016. “Dialogue Interpreting as a Multimodal Activity in Community Settings.” In Multimodality across Communicative Settings, Discourse Domains and Genres, edited by V. Bonsignori and B. Crawford Camiciottoli, 116–143. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars.
   Google Scholar
• Davitti, E. 2019. “Methodological Explorations of Interpreter-Mediated Interaction: Novel Insights from Multimodal Analysis.” Qualitative Research. Special Issue: Multimodality: Methodological Explorations SAGE Publications 19 (1): 7–29.
   Google Scholar
• Davitti, E., and Pasquandrea, S. 2018. Integrating authentic data in dialogue interpreting education: A teaching unit proposal, inTRAlinea. Special Issue: Translation And Interpreting for Language Learners Department of Interpreting and Translation (DIT) of the University of Bologna, Italy
   Google Scholar
• Davitti, E., and S. Pasquandrea. 2014. “Enhancing Research-Led Interpreter Education: An Exploratory Study in Applied Conversation Analysis.” The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 8 (3): 374–398.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davitti, E., and S. Pasquandrea. 2017. “Embodied Participation: What Multimodal Analysis Can Tell Us About Interpreter-Mediated Encounters In Pedagogical Settings.” Journal of Pragmatics 107: 105–128.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Diessel, H. 2006. “Demonstratives, Joint Attention, and the Emergence of Grammar.” Cognitive Linguistics 17 (4): 463–489.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dix, A., J. E. Finlay, G. D. Abowd, and R. Beale. 2004. Human Computer Interaction. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.
   Google Scholar
• Emelo, R., and L. M. Francis. 2002. “Virtual Team Interaction.” Training Development 56 (10): 17–20.
   Google Scholar
• Federman, M. 2006. “On the Media Effects of Immigration and Refugee Board Hearings via Videoconference.” Journal of Refugee Studies 19 (4): 433–452.
   Google Scholar
• Fowler, Y. 2018. “Interpreted Prison Via Video Link: The Prisoner’s Eye View.” In Here or There: Research on Interpreting via Video Link, edited by Napier, J., R. Skinner and S. Braun, 183–209. Washington: Gallaudet.
   Google Scholar
• Heath, C., P. Luff, and A. Sellen. 1997. “Reconfiguring Media Space: Supporting Collaborative Work.” In Video-Mediated Communication, edited by K. E. Finn, A. J. Sellen, and S. B. Wilbur, 323–347. New Jersey: LEA.
   Google Scholar
• Heath, C., and P. Luff. 1991. Disembodied Conduct: Communication through Video in a Multimedia Office Environment. Proc. CHI: 99-103. NY: ACM Press.
   Google Scholar
• Iglesias Fernández, E., and M. Ouellet. 2018. “From the Phone to the Classroom: Categories of Problems for Telephone Interpreting Training.” The Interpreters’ Newsletter 23 (11): 19–44.
   Google Scholar
• Isaacs, E. A., T. Morris, T. K. Rodriguez, and J. C. Tang. 1995. A Comparison of Face-to-Face and Distributed Presentations. Proc. CHI: 354-361. NY: ACM Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ko, L. 2006. ““The Need for Long-Term Empirical Studies in Remote Interpreting Research.” A Case Study of Telephone Interpreting.” Linguistica Antverpiensia NS5: 325–338.
   Google Scholar
• Koller, M., and F. Pöchhacker. 2018. “The Work and Skills …: A Profile of First Generation Video Remote Interpreters.” In Here or There: Research on Interpreting via Video Link, edited by Napier, J., R. Skinner and S. Braun, 89–110. Washington: Gallaudet.
   Google Scholar
• Licoppe, C., M. Verdier, and C. A. Veyrier. 2018. “Voice, Power and Turn-taking in Multilingual, Consecutively Interpreted Courtroom Proceedings with Video Links.” In Here or There: Research on Interpreting via Video Link, edited by Napier, J., R. Skinner and S. Braun, 299–322. Washington: Gallaudet.
   Google Scholar
• Licoppe, C., P. Luff, C. Heath, H. Kuzuoka, N. Yamashita, and S. Tuncer. 2017. Showing Objects: Holding and Manipulating Artefacts in Video-mediated Collaborative Settings. Proc. CHI: 5295-5306. NY: ACM Press.
   Google Scholar
• Locatis, C., D. Williamson, L. Zone-Smith, I. Detzler, J. Roberson, R. Maisiak, and M. Ackerman. 2010. “Comparing In-Person, Video, and Telephonic Medical Interpretation.” Journal of General Internal Medicine 25 (4): 345–350.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luff, P., and C. Heath. 2003. “Fractured Ecologies: Creating Environments for Collaboration.” Human-Computer Interaction 18: 51–84.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin, D., and M. Rouncefield. 2003. “Making The Organization Come Alive: Talking Through And About The Technology In Remote Banking.” Human–Computer Interaction 18 (1–2): 111–148.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mason, I. 2001. Triadic Exchanges. Studies In Dialogue Interpreting. Manchester: St. Jerome.
   Google Scholar
• Mason, I. 2009. ““Role, Positioning And Discourse In Face-To-Face Interpreting.”.” In Interpreting and Translation in Public Service Settings: Police, Practice Pedagogy, edited by R. de Pedro Ricoy, I. A. Perez, and C. W. A. Wilson, 52–73. Manchester: St: Jerome.
   Google Scholar
• Masoodian, M., M. Apperley, and L. Frederickson. 1995. “Video Support For Shared Work-Space Interaction: An Empirical Study.” Interacting with Computers 7 (3): 237–253.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mok, T., and L. Oehlberg. 2017. “Critiquing physical prototypes for a remote audience.” Proc. Of the 2017 ACM Conference on Designing Interactive Systems, 1295—1307. New York, USA: ACM Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mondada, L. 2014. “The Local Constitution of Multimodal Resources for Social Interaction.” Journal of Pragmatics 65: 137–156.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mondada, L. 2016. “Challenges of Multimodality: Language and the Body in Social Interaction.” Journal of Sociolinguistics 20 (3): 336–366.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Napier, J., R. Skinner, and S. Braun, eds. 2018. Here or There: Research on Interpreting via Video Link. Studies in Interpretation Series, 16. Washington: Gallaudet.
   Google Scholar
• Nardi, B. A., . H., A. Schwartz, R. Kuchinsky, A. Leichner, S. Whitakker, and R. Sclabassi. 1993. “Turning Away from Talking Heads: The Use of Video-as-Data in Neurosurgery.” Proc. Of INTERCHI’93 Amsterdam, 327-334.
   Google Scholar
• O’Connaill, B., S. Whittaker, and S. Wilbur. 1993. “Conversations Over Video Conferences: An Evaluation Of The Spoken Aspects Of Video-Mediated Communication.” Human-Computer Interaction 8: 389–428.
   Google Scholar
• O’Malley, C., S. Langton, A. H. Anderson, G. Doherty-Sneddon, and V. Bruce. 1996. “Comparison Of Face-To-Face And Video-Mediated Interaction.” Interacting with Computers 8 (2): 177–192.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Malley, C., G. Doherty-Sneddon, A. H. Anderson, S. Langton, S. Garrod, and Bruce V. 1997. “Face-To-Face And Video-Mediated Communication: A Comparison Of Dialogue Structure And Task Performance.” Journal of Experimental Psychology 3 (2): 105–125. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-898X.3.2.105
   Google Scholar
• Olson, J. S., and G. M. Olson. 2003. “Groupware and Computer-Supported Cooperative Work.” In The Human-Computer Interaction Handbook, edited by J. A. Jacko and Sears, 583–595. Mahwah New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, .
   Google Scholar
• Pasquandrea, S. 2011. “Managing Multiple Actions Through Multimodality: Doctors’ Involvement In Interpreter-Mediated Interaction.”.” Language in Society 40: 455–481.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Penn, C., and J. Watermeyer. 2012. “Cultural Brokerage and Overcoming Communication Barriers. A Case Study From Aphasia.” In Coordinating Participation in Dialogue Interpreting, edited by C. Baraldi and L. Gavioli, 269–296. Amsterdam: John Benjamins
   Google Scholar
• Price, E. L., E. J. Pérez-Stable, D. Nickleach, M. López, and L. S. Karliner. 2012. “Interpreter Perspectives of In-Person, Telephonic, and Videoconferencing Medical Interpretation in Clinical Encounters.” Patient Education and Counseling 87 (2): 226–232.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robertson, T. 2000. “Building Bridges: Negotiating the Gap between Work Practice and Technology Design.” International Journal of Human-computer Studies 53: 121–146.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenberg, B. A. 2007. “The Critical Link 4. Professionalisation of Interpreting in the Community.” In A Data Driven Analysis of Telephone Interpreting, edited by C. Wadensjö, B. E. Dimitrova, and A. L. Nilsson, 65–76. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Ruhleder, K., and B. Jordan. 2001. “Co-Constructing Non-Mutual Realities: Delay Generated Trouble in Distributed Interaction.” Computer Supported Cooperative Work 10: 113–138.
   Google Scholar
• SelIen, A. J. 1992. Speech Patterns in Video-Mediated Conversations. Proc. CHI: 49-59. NY: ACM Press.
   Google Scholar
• Short, J., E. Williams, and B. Christie. 1976. The Social Psychology of Telecommunications. Chichester: Wiley and Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Varcasia, C. 2013. Business and Service Telephone Conversations: An Investigation of British English, German and Italian Encounters. New York: Macmillan Palgrave.
   Google Scholar
• Wadensjö, C. 1998. Interpreting as Interaction. London: Longman.
   Google Scholar
• Winston, E. A. 2005. “Designing a Curriculum for American Sign Language/English Interpreting Educators.” In Sign Language Interpreting and Interpreter Education: Directions for Research and Practice, edited by M. Marschark, R. Peterson, and E. A. Winston, 208–234. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Zuiderent, T., B. R. Winthereik, and M. Berg. 2003. “Talking about Distributed Communication and Medicine: On Bringing Together Remote and Local Actors.” Human-Computer Interaction 18: 171–180.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar