Revisiting signed language translation research to support existing interpreting practices - Dr. Gabrielle Hodge, University College London 27 ...
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
www.nzsl.nz
Revisiting signed language translation research
to support existing interpreting practices
Dr. Gabrielle Hodge, University College London
27 January 2021
1
Tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou katoa.
2
sbs.com.au/nitv 3
geographicguide.com 4
www.nzsl.nz
Revisiting signed language translation research
to support existing interpreting practices
Dr. Gabrielle Hodge, University College London
27 January 2021
5
6
Workshop 7
Who are we?
- Most signed language interpreters are white hearing women
(Bontempo, et al. 2014; RID Views, Winter 2014)
- Most NZSL/English interpreters have white British heritage, yet deaf and
hearing people using interpreter services are much more ethnically and
culturally diverse, e.g. Māori, Pasifika, migrants
- Most interpreters are hearing, some are deaf
- Most interpreters are from non-signing families, some are from signing
families
- Most translators are deaf, some are hearing
- Even fewer interpreters and translators work with deafblind signers and/
or deaf plus
8
Do we understand other people?
Do others understand us?
9
What? Spoken or written source text > signed target text
Signed source text > spoken or written target text
Who? Signing deaf people
Minorities in majority language systems (school, law, hospital, etc)
(De Meulder, et al., 2019)
Often perceived as disabled (Bryan & Emery, 2014)
Why? Intergenerational systemic disadvantage, barriers to English
literacies, only option for many, personal preferences
(e.g. Napier & Kidd, 2013)
How? Using “hybrid” of interpreting and translation practices
(Leneham, 2005; see also Wurm, 2014, 2018)
Mostly deaf presenters drawing on deaf translation norms
(Stone, 2009; Adam, et al., 2011)
When? Prepared and rehearsed ahead of time,
filmed and available as permanent resource,
can pause and rewind
10But who are translations really for?
Getty Images
11But who are translations really for?
clipartqueen.com
12But who are translations really for?
- There is a LOT of variation in signed language use (Johnston, 2003)
- Signed communication practices typically “hybrid and plural – a mesh
of signed languages and visual representations of spoken
languages” (Snoddon, 2017: 3)
- Different linguistic and communicative “repertoires” (Busch, 2012;
Blommaert & Dong, 2010; Kusters, et al., 2017)
- Result of variable “language learning trajectories” (Blommaert & Dong,
2010) due to education and migration (see e.g. mobiledeaf.org.uk)
- Also includes language deprivation and the lifelong consequences of
being denied access to language in childhood (Sutton-Spence, et al.
1990; Humphries, et al. 2016; Hall, 2017)
13The nascency principle
“The perpetual redevelopment of new forms of expression
for understanding specific discourse and spatiotemporal context,
by and for the signers who are physically present.”
(Hodge & Goswell, under review)
14Why research English into Auslan translations?
- Emerging industry with limited experience and no standardised
practices (Leneham, 2005; Bridge, 2009)
- Increasing community concern about quality of English into
Auslan translations online
- No assessment or discussion of standards for producing English
into Auslan translations
- Are these translations truly accessible for all Auslan signers?
- What about Auslan signers who have restricted English
repertoires?
15Who was involved in doing the research?
Research team
Della Goswell, Gabrielle Hodge, Stef Linder,
Cathy Clark, Lori Whynot, Jemina Napier
Steering Committee
Paul Heuston & Marianne Bridge (ASLIA National)
Mark Cave (Australian Communication Exchange)
Cindy Cave (Deaf Services Queensland)
Brent Phillips (Expression Australia)
Cara Smith (Western Australian Deaf Society)
Sheena Walters & Kate Matairavula (The Deaf Society)
Karen Lloyd & Kyle Miers (Deaf Australia)
16What do Auslan translations look like?
vimeo.com/447849152
17What translations were available online?
- We found 180 translations online (~88 hours) for 2009-2014
- Most translations produced by state deaf societies or other secular
organisations/businesses, some produced by religious organisations
- Topics included deaf society information, instructions, government,
newsletters, annual reports, emergency, health, children's books
- Most presenters were deaf (~90%), although some were hearing
- Small number were created by a team of deaf and hearing
- Most Auslan translations also contained open or closed captions,
other English text, moving or still images, and other information
presented on screen at same time
18What did we do?
alliance-scotland.org.uk
19What did we ask?
1. Who is the audience?
2. What do you think about the signing quality?
3. What do you think about the technical quality?
4. What translation processes were used?
…and what are current best practices?
20What themes were discussed?
- Challenges of producing translations
- Signing quality
- Audience
- Technical quality and captions
- Qualities of team, e.g. presenter, language consultant
- Quality assurance
- Use of voice-over, audio prompts, autocue
- Semiotic composition of target texts
- Translation processes
2122
What will we focus on tonight?
1. Main problems with existing translations
2. Audience
3. Captions
4. What works well!
…but first, what did people say?
23“My friend has [restricted English repertoire], so they will not
understand this video…they need more Auslan expression,
but this video doesn't have that.”
24“I know if they were here watching this video,
they will stop watching and look at me to explain the video.”
25“If I sign normally to my friend, they will not understand.
I will need to change signing to connect everything to their life,
e.g. you know that car…etc.”
26“A problem is that people like us working in community services can
show the video to our clients, but if they do not understand,
we need to re-explain again and again.”
27“Think about if a deaf person came into the organisation office and
said they'd experienced [topic of video], what would they say?
How would they say it? Not like that.”
28“Some signers take time to understand concepts,
even concepts we could understand quickly.
They benefit from slower explanation and repetition.”
29“You need to feel like you could have a cup of tea and watch.
But you don't feel that with this video.”
30“It’s really difficult for one video to suit all deaf audiences.”
31“I am distracted by the Auslan and captions together.”
32“Captions can mess up my understanding if they don't align with
the signing, e.g. caption is wrong or sign is wrong.
I find that frustrating.”
33“Yes captions provide backup if I don't understand Auslan,
because I'm not used to presenter's signing.”
34“I think that video is a waste of time really, because deaf who can
read can access both captions and signing, but deaf who can't read
will be confused with both captions and signing. So it's a waste.”
35“I know [interpreter presenter] well and they are one of the best
interpreters. But they don't do well in this case, the video is too fast
and with too much information.”
36“[Presenter] has beautiful Auslan and facial expression in this video.”
37“I think it should be possible to let viewer choose preference, just
like TV or internet, to pick just Auslan or Auslan plus captions.”
38“I have seen great work overseas of two deaf presenters doing
translation in an interview style. I think interview format is great.
Australians should do more of that.”
39“Translations must be natural, clear, accurate.”
40What are the main issues overall?
- Pre-existing English captions or voice-over driving Auslan content
- Auslan and English end up competing: which one wins?
- Misuse of various English strategies within Auslan translations (see
also Napier, 2011)
- Time stress and other factors driving translators to choose unusual
or uncommon signs
- Lack of meaningful contextualisation of assumed knowledge
- Audiences forced to “read” Auslan as if it was an English text
41Finding: Translators under extreme pressure
- Translation service providers vary in how they manage clients and
support freelance translators and/or translation teams
- Source texts often come with built-in recording pressures, e.g.
voice-overs in English that clients ask for Auslan to be added on
- Translation really requires a team of people with complementary
skills, e.g. presenters, language consultants, content assessors
- Logistical pressures (e.g. time, money, client) often beat the needs
of translation production (e.g. time for unpacking and drafting)
- Lack of quality assurance processes, i.e. checking that target
audiences understand what is being said in Auslan
42Finding: English captions are complicated
- Over half the translations contained English captions, usually open
captions fixed to the screen
- Captions cannot always align with Auslan signs, so often Auslan is
“meshed" into the English audio/caption timing
- Viewers forced to “read” the Auslan signing as English text
- Understanding the content of many Auslan translations depends
on understanding English, not Auslan
- Many translations not accessible to deaf Auslan signers with
restricted English repertoires
- Yet responses to captioning were complicated overall
43Finding: Translations do not match audiences
Deaf audiences are often required to:
1. Already understand both English and Auslan
2. Make sense of different communicative resources
meshed together in unnatural ways, i.e. ways that are
imposed by the English source text or pre-existing video,
rather than reflecting naturally emerging repertoires
Not fair!
44So what works well?
- Clearly define target audience and match their repertoires
- Advocate for free and dynamic translations, not literal translations
- Prioritise clear, stand-alone signed message not anchored to
source text, e.g. captions
- Expand on background/contextual information/concepts
- Use examples related to experiences of target audiences
- Design so that visual attention is guided and clear
- Basically….use translation practices, not interpreting practices
45For example?
46For example?
signlive.co.uk
47How can translation research support
interpreting practices?
48“My husband has a different kind of signed language. If the
interpreter is too high level for him, he doesn't understand them
and I step in to help. I don't like that.“
49“Important for my husband to pick appropriate interpreters.
If interpreter is too high level, he will tell me later things he was not
comfortable with and how it made him feel embarrassed.”
50“Re-explaining for deaf clients, i.e. repeating everything,
is the same as doing translation work.”
51Do we understand other people?
Do others understand us?
52How can translation research support
interpreting practices?
Consider how deaf translation norms can support interpreting
(Stone, 2009; Adam et al. 2011; Antonini, et al., 2017):
1. Who is the audience?
2. What are the skills needed? Perhaps translation practices?
3. How can I build my skills and/or collaborate?
4. What needs to be unpacked and explained as new?
5. What is the best order and arrangement?
6. Can we try new things?
5354
55
Recognise deaf expertise
- Deaf interpreter and translators’ signing flexibility and ability to match many
people is a valued and respected strength — we even have signs for this!
- This “extra-linguistic knowledge” is a prerequisite for working as deaf
interpreter (Adam, et al. 2014)
- Are deaf interpreters and translators often required to have potentially
greater range of skills than hearing interpreters?
- Yet without the same levels of training and support provided to hearing
interpreters?
- Current translation practices often derived from interpreting norms….yet
there is no convincing reason this needs to happen
- We may be better off supporting and developing deaf translation norms
56Summary
- Translating and interpreting is hard!
- Audiences and colleagues are very diverse
- Many of us still finding our way
- Yet it’s important that how we evolve is driven by community
needs, not external pressures (see Stone, 2009; Wurm, 2018)
- Some skills are not yet well-understood
- Clear, accurate signed language messaging must be protected
- Keep trying new things and improving!
57Questions?
58Guidelines for:
1. Stand-alone Auslan videos
2. Auslan added on to pre-existing
English video
https://bit.ly/3iDvtoy
59Tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou katoa.
60Tweet @gab_hodge
g.hodge@ucl.ac.uk
61References
Adam, R., Stone, C., Collins, S.D. & M. Metzger (Eds.). 2014. Deaf Interpreters at Work: International Insights. Gallaudet
University Press.
Adam, R., B. Carty & C. Stone. 2011. Ghostwriting: Deaf translators within the Deaf community. Babel, 57(4): 375-393.
Antonini, R., Cirillo, L., Rossato, L. & I. Torresi (Eds.). 2017. Non-Professional Interpreting and Translation: State of the art
and future of an emerging field of research (pp.381-409). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Blommaert, J. & J. Dong. 2010. Language and movement in space. In Nikolas Coupland. (Ed.). Handbook of language
and globalisation. Blackwell. (pp. 366-385).
Bontempo, K., Napier, J., Hayes, L. & V. Brashear. 2014. Personality Matters: An international study of sign language
interpreter disposition. International Journal of Translation and Interpreting Research, 6(1).
Bryan, A. & S. Emery. 2014. The Case for Deaf Legal Theory Through the Lens of Deaf Gain. In H-Dirksen L. Bauman &
Joseph J. Murray (Eds.). Deaf Gain: Raising the Stakes for Human Diversity. (pp. 37–62). University of Minnesota Press.
Busch, B. 2012. The linguistic repertoire revisited. Applied Linguistics, 33(5): 503-23.
De Meulder, M., Kusters, A., Moriarty, E. & J. J. Murray. 2019. Describe, don’t prescribe. The practice and politics of
translanguaging in the context of deaf signers. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development.
Hall, W. C. 2017. What you don’t know can hurt you: The risk of language deprivation by impairing sign language
development in deaf children. Matern. Child Health Journal 21(5): 961-965.
Hodge, G. & D. Goswell (under review). Improving signed language translations and recognising the nascency
principle.
Hodge, G., Goswell, D., Whynot, L., Linder, S. & C. Clark. (2015). What standards? Developing evidence-based Auslan
translation standards and production guidelines. Australian Communications Consumer Action Network, Sydney.
62References
Humphries, T., Kushalnagar, P., Mathur, G., Napoli, D.J., Padden, C., Rathmann, C. & S. Smith. 2016. Avoiding Linguistic Neglect of
Deaf Children. Social Service Review 90(4): 589-619.
Johnston, T. 2003. Language standardization and signed language dictionaries. Sign Language Studies, 3(4): 431-468.
Kusters, A., Spotti, M., Swanwick, R. & E. Tapio. 2017. Beyond languages, beyond modalities: transforming the study of semiotic
repertoires. International Journal of Multilingualism, 14(3): 219-232.
Leneham. M. 2005. The Sign Language interpreter as translator: Challenging traditional definitions of translation and interpreting.
Deaf Worlds, 21(1): 79-101.
Napier, J. & M. R. Kidd. 2013. English Literacy as a Barrier to Health Care Information for Deaf People Who Use Auslan. Aust Fam
Physician 42(12): 896-9.
Napier, J. 2011. “It’s not what they say but the way they say it.” A content analysis of interpreter and consumer perceptions of
signed language interpreting in Australia. International. J. Soc. Lang. (207): 59-87.
Sikder, A. 2019. Socio-ethnic homogeneity in the sign language interpreting profession risks it becoming institutionalised and
limits its capacity to serve deaf people. Newsli, Issue 109, July 2019.
Snoddon, K. 2017. Uncovering translingual practices in teaching parents classical ASL varieties. International Journal of
Multilingualism, 14(3): 303-316.
Sutton-Spence, R., Woll, B. & L. Allsop. 1990. Variation and recent change in fingerspelling in British Sign Language. Language
Variation and Change, 2: 313-330.
Stone, C. 2009. Toward a Deaf Translation Norm. Washington: Gallaudet University Press.
Wurm, S. 2014. Deconstructing translation and interpreting prototypes: A case of written-to-signed-language translation.
Translation Studies, 7(3): 249-266.
Wurm, S. 2018. From Writing to Sign: An investigation of the impact of text modalities on translation. Translation and Interpreting
Studies, 13(1): 130-149.
63You can also read
