The impact of context on community interpreting research, practice & training
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.52034/lanstts.v20i.695Keywords:
interpreting studies, community interpreting, geographical context, socio-institutional context, interactional context, trainingAbstract
Although the notion of context is omnipresent in research in interpreting studies (IS), especially in community settings, and defines the ways in which interpreting is being practised, researched and trained, it has not yet been recognized or defined as a topic in its own right, at least not within IS. Starting from some theoretical notions on the concept of context, this article moves on to discuss different levels of context, namely, geographical, socio-institutional and interactional. By means of examples from a variety of settings in community interpreting (CI), it shows how the different levels of context interact, and, in these ways, have an impact on CI practice, research and training.
References
Aguilar Solano, M. (2021, September 15–17). Subversive practices in creating a new interpreting ecology: The liberation of the social justice interpreter through activism and neutrality [Paper presentation]. 7th IATIS conference: The cultural ecology of translation, Barcelona.
Albakaa, A. (2020). Risk perception and its management: Lessons from Iraqi linguistic mediators for the Australian Defence Force in the Iraq war (2003-2009). In A. Laugesen & R. Gehrmann (Eds.), Communication, interpreting and language in wartime: Historical and contemporary perspectives (pp. 223–252). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-27037-7_11
Alexieva, B. (1997/2002). A typology of interpreter-mediated events. In F. Pöchhacker & M. Shlesinger (Eds.), The interpreting studies reader (pp. 218–234). Routledge.
Amato, A., & Spinolo, N. (2018). Introduction. In A. Amato, N. Spinolo, & M. J. González Rodríguez (Eds.), Handbook of remote interpreting: Research report Shift in Orality Erasmus + project: Shaping the Interpreters of the Future and of Today (pp. 79–98). AMSActa.
Angelelli, C. V. (2004). Medical interpreting and cross-cultural communication. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486616
Antonini, R. (2015). Child language brokering. In F. Pöchhacker (Ed.), Routledge encyclopedia of interpreting studies (pp. 48–49). Routledge.
Antonini, R., Cirillo, L., Rossato, L., & Torresi, I. (Eds.) (2017). Non-professional interpreting and translation: State of the art and future of an emerging field of research. John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.129
Bahadir, S. (2009). Body-and-enactment-centred interpreting pedagogy: Preliminary thoughts on a train-the-trainers concept for (medical) interpreting. In D. Andres & S. Pöllabauer (Eds.), Spürst du, wie der Bauch rauf-runter?: Fachdolmetschen im medizinischen Bereich [Is Everything all Tops Turvy in Your Tummy?: Healthcare Interpreting] (pp. 29–43). Martin Meidenbauer.
Bahadir, S. (2010). Interpreting enactments: A new path for interpreting pedagogy. In C. Kainz, E. Prun?, & R. Schögler (Eds.), Modelling the field of community interpreting: Questions of methodology in research and training (pp. 177–210). LIT.
Baigorri-Jalón, J. (2015). Spain. In F. Pöchhacker (Ed.), Routledge encyclopedia of interpreting studies (pp. 393–396). Routledge.
Baker, M. (2006). Contextualization in translator- and interpreter-mediated events. Journal of Pragmatics, 38(3), 321–337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2005.04.010
Balogh, K., & Salaets, H. (Eds.). (2015). Children and justice: Overcoming language barriers. Intersentia. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781780685144
Balogh, K., Salaets, H., & Van Schoor, D. (Eds.). (2018). Interpreter-mediated child interviews: Tools for interprofessional training. Lannoo Campus.
Baraldi, C., & Gavioli, L. (2012). Understanding coordination in interpreter-mediated interaction. In C. Baraldi & L. Gavioli (Eds.), Coordinating participation in dialogue interpreting (pp. 1–22). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.102.01intro
Barnett, R. (2016). Understanding the university: Institution, idea, possibilities. Routledge.
Biagini, M., Davitti, E., & Sandrelli, A.. (2017). Participation in interpreter-mediated interaction: Shifting along a multidimensional continuum. Journal of Pragmatics, 107, 87–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2016.11.001
Blommaert J. (2001). Context is/as critique. Critique of Anthropology, 21(1), 13–32. https://doi.org/10.1177/0308275X0102100102
Blommaert J., Smits L. , & Yacoubi, N. (2018). Context and its complications. In A. De Fina & A. Georgakopoulou (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of discourse studies, (pp. 52–70) Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108348195.004
Bolden, G. B. (2000). Toward understanding practices of medical interpreting: Interpreters’ involvement in history taking. Discourse Studies, 2(4), 387–419. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445600002004001
Bot, H. (2005). Dialogue interpreting in mental health. Rodopi. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004458574
Braun, S. (2006). Multimedia communication technologies and their impact on interpreting. In M. Carroll, H. Gerzymisch-Arbogast, & S. Nauert (Eds.), Proceedings of the Marie Curie Euroconferences, MuTra: Audiovisual translation scenarios (Copenhagen, 1–5 May 2006). MuTra.
Burlyay, S., Matyushin, I., & Yermolovich, D. (2015). Russia. In F. Pöchhacker (Ed.), Routledge encyclopedia of interpreting studies (pp. 362–365). Routledge.
Cho, J. (2021). Intercultural communication in interpreting: Power and choices. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003179993
Cicourel, A. V. (1992). The interpenetration of communicative contexts: Examples from medical encounters. In A. Duranti & C. Goodwin (Eds.), Rethinking context: Language as an interactive phenomenon (pp. 291– 311). Cambridge University Press.
Cirillo, L. (2010). Managing affect in interpreter-mediated institutional talk: Examples from the medical setting. The Journal of Specialised Translation, 14, 55–79.
Cornwall, A., & Jewkes, R. (1995). What is participatory research? Social Science & Medicine, 41(12), 1667–1676. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0277-9536(95)00127-S
Corsellis, A. (2008). Public service interpreting: The first steps. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230581951
Dal Fovo, E., & Niemants, N. (2015). Studying dialogue interpreting: An introduction. The Interpreters’ Newsletter, 20, 1–8.
Davidson, B. (2000). The interpreter as institutional gatekeeper: The social-linguistic role of interpreters in Spanish-English medical discourse. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 4(3), 379–405. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9481.00121
Davitti, E. (2013). Dialogue interpreting as intercultural mediation: Interpreters’ use of upgrading moves in parent–teacher meetings. Interpreting, 15(2), 168–199. https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.15.2.02dav
Davitti, E. (2018). Methodological explorations of interpreter-mediated interaction: Novel insights from multimodal analysis. Qualitative Research, 19(1), 7–29. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1468794118761492
Davitti, E., & Pasquandrea, S. (2017). Embodied participation: What multimodal analysis can tell us about interpreter-mediated encounters in pedagogical settings. Journal of Pragmatics, 107, 105–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2016.04.008
Dean, R. K., & Pollard, R. Q. (2018). Promoting the use of normative ethics in the practice profession of community interpreting. In L. Roberson & S. Shaw (Eds.), Signed language interpreting in the 21st century: An overview of the profession (pp. 37–64). Gallaudet University Press.
De Boe, E. (2020). Remote interpreting in healthcare settings: A comparative study on the influence of telephone and video link use on the quality of interpreter-mediated communication [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Antwerp.
Delisle, J. (2015) Canada. In F. Pöchhacker (Ed.), Routledge encyclopedia of interpreting studies (pp. 40–45). Routledge.
Devaux, J. (2017). Technologies in interpreter-mediated criminal court hearings: An Actor-Network Theory account of the interpreter’s perception of her role-space [Doctoral dissertation, University of Salford]. http://usir.salford.ac.uk/id/eprint/43417/1/Jerome%20Devaux_PhD%20Thesis.pdf
Downie, J. (2017). Finding and critiquing the invisible interpreter: A response to Uldis Ozolins. Interpreting, 19(2), 260–270. https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.19.2.05dow
Englund Dimitrova, B., & Tiselius, E. (2016). Cognitive aspects of community interpreting: Toward a process model. In R. Muñoz Martín (Ed.), Reembedding translation process research (pp. 195–214). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.128.10eng
Falbo, C. (2013). La comunicazione interlinguistica in ambito giuridico. Temi, problemi, e prospettive di ricerca. Edizioni Università di Trieste.
Flores, G., Abreu, M., Barone, C. P., Bachur, R., & Lin, H. (2012). Errors of medical interpretation and their potential clinical consequences: A comparison of professional versus ad hoc versus no interpreters. Annals of Emergency Medicine, 60(5), 545–553. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annemergmed.2012.01.025
Gentile, A., & Ozolins, U. (1996). Liaison interpreting: A handbook. Melbourne University Press.
Gentile, A. (2015). Australia. In F. Pöchhacker (Ed.), Routledge encyclopedia of interpreting studies (pp. 26–29). Routledge.
Gehrmann, R., & Laugesen, A. (2020). Cross-cultural communication and language in wartime: Reflections and future directions. In A. Laugesen & R. Gehrmann (Eds.), Communication, interpreting and language in wartime: Historical and contemporary perspectives (pp. 255–266). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-27037-7_12
Gile, D. (2006). Conference interpreting. In K. Brown (Ed.), Encyclopedia of language & linguistics (pp. 9–23). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B0-08-044854-2/04285-1
Goodwin, C. (1981). Conversational organization interaction between speakers and hearers. Academic Press.
Goodwin, C. (2003). Embedded context. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 36(4), 323–350. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327973RLSI3604_2
Goodwin, C., & Duranti, A. (1992). Rethinking context: An introduction. In A. Duranti & C. Goodwin (Eds.), Rethinking context: Language as an interactive phenomenon (pp. 1–43). Cambridge University Press.
Gumperz, J. J. (1982). Discourse strategies. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511611834
Gumperz, J. J. (1992). Contextualization and understanding. In A. Duranti & C. Goodwin (Eds.), Rethinking context: Language as an interactive phenomenon (pp. 229–253). Cambridge University Press.
Hale, S. (2007). Community interpreting. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230593442
Hansen, J. P. B. (2020). Invisible participants in a visual ecology: Visual space as a resource for organizing video-mediated interpreting in hospital encounters. Social Interaction: Video-Based Studies of Human Sociality, 3(3), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.7146/si.v3i3.122609
Hatim, B., & Mason, I. (1997). The translator as communicator. Routledge.
Hoedemaekers, I., & Soeters, J. (2009). Interactions rituals and language mediation during peace missions: Experiences from Afghanistan. In G. Caforio (Ed.), Advances in military sociology: Essays in honor of Charles C. Moskos (pp. 329–352). Emerald Group. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1572-8323(2009)000012A024
Hofer, G. (2020). Investigating expressions of pain and emotion in authentic interpreted medical consultations: “But I am afraid, you know, that it will get worse”. In I. E. T. de V. Souza & E. Fragkou (Eds.), Handbook of research on medical interpreting (pp. 136–164). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-9308-9
Howe, J. (2021). Prison communities: An examination of work, life and relationships in prison. In L. J. Leonard (Ed.), Global perspectives on people, process, and practice in criminal justice (pp. 144–154). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-6646-6.ch009
Hsieh, E., Ju, H., & Kong, H. (2010). Dimensions of trust: The tensions and challenges in provider–interpreter trust. Qualitative Health Research, 20(2), 170–181. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732309349935
Hymes, D. (1974). Foundations in sociolinguistics: An ethnographic approach. University of Pennsylvania Press.
Inghilleri, M. (2007). National sovereignty versus universal rights: Interpreting justice in a global context. Social Semiotics, 17(2), 195–212. https://doi.org/10.1080/10350330701311488
Inghilleri, M. (2013). Interpreting justice: Ethics, politics and language. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203147962
ISO 13611:2014 (2014). Interpreting: Guidelines for community interpreting. https://www.iso.org/standard/54082.html
Janzen, T., & Shaffer, B. (2008). Intersubjectivity in interpreted interactions: The interpreter’s role in co-constructing meaning. In J. Zlatev, T. P. Racine, C. Sinha, & E. Itkonen (Eds.), The shared mind: Perspectives on intersubjectivity (pp. 333–356). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/celcr.12.18jan
Kadri?, M. (2014). Giving interpreters a voice: Interpreting studies meets theatre studies. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 8(3), 452–468. https://doi.org/10.1080/1750399X.2014.971485
Kaufert, J. M, & Putsch, R. W. (1997). Communication through interpreters in healthcare: Ethical dilemmas arising from differences in class, culture, language, and power. The Journal of Clinical Ethics, 8(1), 71–87.
Kendon, A. (1982). The organization of behavior in face-to-face interaction: Observations on the development of a methodology. In K. R. Scherer & P. Ekman (Eds.), Handbook of methods in nonverbal behavior research (pp. 440–505). Cambridge University Press.
Kerasidou, A. (2020). Artificial intelligence and the ongoing need for empathy, compassion and trust in healthcare. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 98, 245–250. https://doi.org/10.2471/BLT.19.237198
Kermit, P. S. (2020). Introduction. In M. Phelan, M. Rudvin, H. Skaaden, & P. S. Kermit (Eds.), Ethics in public service interpreting (pp. 1–22). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315715056-1
Kozin, A. V. (2018). Consecutive interpreting: An interdisciplinary study. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-61726-8
Krystallidou, D. (2014). Gaze and body orientation as an apparatus for patient inclusion into/exclusion from a patient-centred framework of communication. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 8(3), 399–417. https://doi.org/10.1080/1750399X.2014.972033
Krystallidou, D., Van de Walle, C., Deveugele, M. Dougali, E., Mertens, F., Truwant, A., Van Praet, E., & Pype, P. (2017). Training doctor-minded interpreters and interpreter-minded doctors: The benefits of collaborative practice in interpreter training. Interpreting, 20 (1), 126–144. https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.00005.kry
Lan, W. (2019). Crossing the chasm: Embodied empathy in medical interpreter assessment https://repository.hkbu.edu.hk/etd_oa/674
Laugesen, A., & Gehrmann, R. (Eds.). (2020). Communication, interpreting and language in wartime: Historical and contemporary perspectives. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-27037-7
Leung, E. S. M. (2020). Medical interpreting as an emerging profession in Hong Kong. In E. N. S. Ng & I. H. M. Crezee (Eds.), Interpreting in legal and healthcare settings: Perspectives on research and training (pp. 265–285). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.151.11leu
Licoppe, C., & Verdier, M. (2013). Interpreting, video communication and the sequential reshaping of institutional talk in the bilingual and distributed courtroom. International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law, 20(2), 247–275. https://doi.org/10.1558/ijsll.v20i2.247
Lindstrom, L. (1992). Context contests: Debatable truth statements on Tanna (Vanuatu). In A. Duranti & C. Goodwin (Eds.), Rethinking context: Language as an interactive phenomenon (pp. 101–124). Cambridge University Press.
Lung, R. (2015). China. In F. Pöchhacker (Ed.) Routledge encyclopedia of interpreting studies (pp. 49–54). Routledge.
Mairs, R. (2015). Egypt. In F. Pöchhacker (Ed.) Routledge encyclopedia of interpreting studies (pp. 137–139). Routledge.
Maryns, K. (2006). The asylum speaker: Language in the Belgian asylum procedure. St Jerome.
Mason I. (2001) Triadic exchanges: Studies in dialogue interpreting. St Jerome.
Mason, I. (2012). Gaze, positioning and identity in interpreter-mediated dialogues. In C. Baraldi & L. Gavioli (Eds.), Coordinating participation in dialogue interpreting (pp. 177–200). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.102.08mas
Mason, I., & Ren, W. (2012). Power in face-to-face interpreting events. Translation and Interpreting Studies, 7(2), 234–253. https://doi.org/10.1075/tis.7.2.08mas
Merlini, R. (2015). Dialogue interpreting. In F. Pöchhacker (Ed.), The Routledge encyclopedia of interpreting studies (pp. 102–103). Routledge.
Merlini, R., & Favaron, R. (2005). Examining the “voice of interpreting” in speech pathology. In F. Pöchhacker & M. Schlesinger (Eds.), Healthcare interpreting: Discourse and interaction (pp. 101–139). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/bct.9.08mer
Mertens, D. M. (2009). Transformative research and evaluation. Guilford Press.
Metzger, M. (1995). The paradox of neutrality: A comparison of interpreters’ goals with the reality of interactive discourse (Publication No. 9620304) [Doctoral dissertation, Georgetown University]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.
Mikkelson, H. (1996). Community interpreting: An emerging profession. Interpreting, 1(1), 125–129 https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.1.1.08mik
Mondada, L. (2016). Challenges of multimodality: Language and the body in social interaction. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 20(3), 336–366. https://doi.org/10.1111/josl.1_12177
Monteoliva-García, E. (2020). The collaborative and selective nature of interpreting in police interviews with stand-by interpreting. Interpreting, 22(2), 262–287. https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.00046.mon
Monzó-Nebot, E., & Wallace, M. (2020). New societies, new values, new demands: Mapping non-professional interpreting and translation, remapping translation and interpreting ethics. Translation and Interpreting Studies, 15(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1075/tis.00046.int
Moser, B. (1978). Simultaneous interpretation: A hypothetical model and its practical application. In D. Gerver & H. W. Sinaiko (Eds.), Language interpretation and communication (pp. 353–368). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-9077-4_31
Moser-Mercer, B., Kherbiche, L., & Class, B. (2014). Interpreting conflict: Training challenges in humanitarian field interpreting. Journal of Human Rights Practice, 6(1), 140–158. https://doi.org/10.1093/jhuman/hut025
Nam Hui, K. (2015). Korea. In F. Pöchhacker (Ed.), Routledge encyclopedia of interpreting studies (pp. 224–228). Routledge.
Napier, J., Lloyd, K., Skinner, R., Turner, G. H., & Wheatley, M. (2018). Using video technology to engage deaf sign language users in survey research: An example from the “Insign” project. Translation and Interpreting, 10(2), 101–121. https://doi.org/10.12807/ti.110202.2018.a08
Napier, J., Skinner, R., Young, A., & Oram, R. (2020). Mediating identities: Sign language interpreter perceptions on trust and representation. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Professional Practice, 14(1), 75–95. https://doi.org/10.1558/jalpp.36014
Ng, E. N. S., & Crezee, I. H. M. (2020). Interpreting in legal and healthcare settings: Perspectives on research and training. John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.151
Norris, S. (2004). Analyzing multimodal interaction: A methodological framework. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203379493
Orellana, M. F. (2017). Dialoguing across differences: The past and future of language brokering research. In R. Antonini, L. Cirillo, L. Rossato, & I. Torresi (Eds.), Non-professional Interpreting and Translation: State of the art and future of an emerging field of research. John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.129.04ore
Ozolins, U. (2016). The myth of the myth of invisibility? Interpreting, 18(2), 273–284. https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.18.2.06ozo
Pasquandrea, S. (2011). Managing multiple actions through multimodality: Doctor’s involvement in interpreter-mediated interactions. Language in Society, 40(4), 455–481. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404511000479
Phelan, M., Rudvin, M., Skaaden, H., & Kermit, P. S. (2020). Ethics in public service interpreting. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315715056
Pirini, J. (2017). Agency and co-production: A multimodal perspective. Multimodal Communication, 6(2), 109–128. https://doi.org/10.1515/mc-2016-0027
Pöchhacker, F. (2000). The community interpreter’s task: Self-perception and provider views. In R. P. Roberts, S. E. Carr, D. Abraham, & A. Dufour (Eds.), The Critical Link 2: Interpreters in the community (pp. 49–65). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.31.07poc
Pöchhacker, F. (2016). Introducing interpreting studies (2nd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315649573
Pöllabauer, S. (2004). Interpreting in asylum hearings: Issues of role, responsibility and power. Interpreting, 6(2), 143–180. https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.6.2.03pol
Remael, A., & Carroll, M. (2015). Community interpreting: Mapping the present for the future. Translation and Interpreting, 7(3), 1–9.
Roy, C. (2000). Interpreting as a discourse process. Oxford University Press.
Ruiz Rosendo, L., & Persaud, C. (2016). Interpreters and interpreting in conflict zones and scenarios: A historical perspective. Linguistica Antverpiensia New Series: Themes in Translation Studies, 15, 1–35. https://doi.org/10.52034/lanstts.v0i15
Sacks, H., Shegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking in conversation. Language, 50(4), 696–736. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1974.0010
Salaets, H., & Brône, G. (2020). Linking up with video: Perspectives on interpreting practice and research. John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.149
Schäffner, C., Kredens, K., & Fowler, Y. (2013). Interpreting in a changing landscape: Selected papers from Critical Link 6. John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.109
Schön, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner: Toward a new design for teaching and learning in the professions. Jossey-Bass.
Seeber, K. G. (2011). Cognitive load in simultaneous interpreting: Existing theories – new models. Interpreting, 13(2), 176–204. https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.13.2.02see
Stivers, T., & Sidnell, J. (2005). Introduction: Multi-modal interaction. Semiotica, 2005(156), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1515/semi.2005.2005.156.1
Straniero Sergio, F., & Falbo, C. (2012). Studying interpreting through corpora: An introduction. In F. Straniero Sergio & C. Falbo (Eds.), Breaking ground in corpus-based interpreting studies (pp. 9–52). Peter Lang. https://doi.org/10.3726/978-3-0351-0377-9
Tebble, H. (1993). A discourse model for dialogue interpreting. In AUSIT Proceedings of the first practitioners’ seminar, 1–26. Canberra: Australian Institute for Interpreters and Translators.
Tipton, R. (2008). Reflexivity and the social construction of identity in interpreter-mediated asylum interviews. The Translator, 14(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/13556509.2008.10799247
Tipton, R., & Furmanek, O. (2016). Dialogue interpreting: A guide to interpreting in public services and the community. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315644578
Tiselius, E., & Albl-Mikasa, M. (2019). Introduction: Cognitive processes in dialogue interpreting. Translation, Cognition & Behavior, 2(2), 233–239. https://doi.org/10.1075/tcb.00027.tis
Todorova, M. (2020). Interpreting for refugees: Lessons from the field. In E. N. S. Ng & I. H. M. Crezee, Interpreting in legal and healthcare settings: Perspectives on research and training (pp. 63–81). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.151.03tod
Valero-Garcés, C. (2005). Doctor–patient consultations in dyadic and triadic exchanges. Interpreting, 7(2), 193–210. https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.7.2.04val
Valero-Garcés, C. (2014). A coursebook on interpreting and translating in public services and institutions. University Press of America.
Van Dijk, T. A. (1997). Discourse as social interaction. Sage.
Vargas Urpi, M. (2012). State of the art in community interpreting research: Mapping the main research topics. Babel, 58(1), 50–72. https://doi.org/10.1075/babel.58.1.04var
Vlasenko, S. V. (2019). Introduction: Interpreting in Russian contexts. Translation and Interpreting Studies, 14(3), 437–441. https://doi.org/10.1075/tis.00045.vla
Vranjes, J. (2018). On the role of eye gaze in the coordination of interpreter-mediated interactions: An eye-tracking study [Doctoral dissertation, University of Leuven]. https://lirias.kuleuven.be/retrieve/525192
Wadensjö, C. (1998). Interpreting as interaction. Longman.
Wadensjö, C. (2011). Community interpreting. In M. Baker & G. Saldanha (Eds.), The Routledge encyclopedia of translation studies (pp. 43–48). Routledge.
Wallmach, K. (2015). Africa. In F. Pöchhacker (Ed.), Routledge encyclopedia of interpreting studies (pp. 8–12). Routledge.
Weisskirch, R. S. (2007). Feelings about language brokering and family relations among Mexican American early adolescents. Journal of Early Adolescence, 27(4), 545–561. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272431607302935
Wurm, S., & Napier, J. (2017). Rebalancing power: Participatory research methods in interpreting studies. Translation and Interpreting, 9(1), 102–120. https://doi.org/10.12807/ti.109201.2017.a08
Yaseen, Z. S., & Foster, A. E. (2020). What Is empathy? In A. E. Foster & Z. S. Yaseen (Eds.), Teaching empathy in healthcare: Building a new core competency (pp. 3–16). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-29876-0_1
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Esther de Boe, Katalin Balogh, Heidi Salaets
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under the CC BY-NC 4.0 Deed that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal. The material cannot be used for commercial purposes.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
