Speech characteristics of consecutive interpreting involving speech recognition tools

Abstract

The research aims to identify the most significant differences in the speech characteristics of consecutive translations performed using speech recognition tools and traditional note-taking. The paper conducts an analysis of a corpus of empirical data, including the script of an English-language speech and the scripts of consecutive translations of this speech into Russian. While there is anecdotal evidence of using speech recognition results as a crutch for consecutive interpretation, there is a lack of scientific research devoted to this topic. The novelty of the research lies in its first-time description of the impact of speech recognition tools on the characteristics of consecutive interpreting. It has been found that relying on speech recognition results statistically significantly increases the average sentence length in translations and affects the selectiveness of the interpreters’ attention, which gradually increases as the interpreting process progresses. The research shows that translations performed using speech recognition results are closer to the linear structure of the original message in syntactic and semantic terms. As a result, such translations contain more semantic details, which are not equivalent in terms of completeness and accuracy of translation. The results of the analysis suggest that interpreting with the support of recognized speech reduces the cognitive load during the production of the target message.

References

1. Аликина Е. В. Наукометрический анализ исследований в области устного перевода: традиции и инновации // Стереотипность и творчество: межвузовский сборник науч. трудов. Пермь: Изд-во Пермского государственного университета, 2007. Вып. 11.
2. Краевская Н. А. Семантический компонент внутренней программы речевого высказывания: дисс. … к. филол. н. М., 1981.
3. Хунфэй Гу, Ибин Лю. Технология распознавания речи и ее альтернативные возможности улучшения качества устного последовательного перевода с русского на китайский // Вестник Московского университета. Серия 22: Теория перевода. 2021. № 3.
4. Швецова Ю. О. Наукометрический анализ исследований в области теории и методики профессионального обучения устных переводчиков // Известия Волгоградского государственного педагогического университета. 2010. Т. 51. № 7.
5. Bastin G. Les marqueurs de cohérence en interprétation consécutive // The Interpreter Newsletter. 2003. Vol. 2.
6. Chang L. W. Investigating Note-taking in Consecutive Interpreting – Using the Concept of Visual Grammar: PhD Thesis. Manchester, 2014.
7. Cheung A., Tianyun L. Automatic Speech Recognition in Simultaneous Interpreting: A New Approach to Computer-aided Interpreting // Proceedings of Ewha Research Institute for Translation Studies International Conference. Seoul: Ewha Womans University, 2018.
8. Ciobanu D. Automatic Speech Recognition in the Professional Translation Process // Translation Spaces. 2016. No. 5 (1).
9. Defrancq B., Fantinuoli C. Automatic Speech Recognition in the Booth: Assessment of System Performance, Interpreters’ Performances and Interactions in the Context of Numbers // Target.International Journal of Translation Studies. 2021. No. 33 (1).
10. Fantinuoli C.InterpretBank. Redefining Computer-assisted Interpreting Tools // Proceedings of the 38th Conference “Translating and the Computer”. Geneva: Editions Tradulex, 2016.
11. Fantinuoli C. Speech Recognition in the Interpreter Workstation // Proceedings of the 39th Conference “Translating and the Computer” (16-17 November, 2017). Geneva: Editions Tradulex, 2017.
12. Frittella F. M., Rodríguez S. Putting SmartTerp to Test: A Tool for the Challenges of Remote Interpreting // Context: Studies in Translation and Interculturalism. 2022. Vol. 2. No. 2. https://doi.org/10.54754/incontext.v2i2.21
13. Gengshen H. Adaptation in Consecutive Interpreting // Perspectives: Studies in Translatology. 2006. No. 14 (1). https://doi.org/10.1080/09076760608669013
14. Gile D. Basic Concepts and Models for Interpreter and Translator Training. Revised ed. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2009.
15. Gillies A. Consecutive Interpreting. A Short Course. L. – N. Y.: Routledge, 2019.
16. Han C., An K. Using Unfilled Pauses to Measure (Dis)Fluency in English-Chinese Consecutive Interpreting: In Search of an Optimal Pause Threshold(s) // Perspectives. 2021. No. 29 (6).
17. Lee S.-B. Holistic Assessment of Consecutive Interpretation: How Interpreter Trainers Rate Student Performances // Interpreting. 2019. Vol. 21. No. 2. https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.00029.lee
18. Lu R., Abdullah M. A. R., Ang L. H.Into-A or Into-B, That Is a Question: A Systematic Literature Review of Directionality and Performance in Consecutive Interpreting // SAGE Open. 2023. Vol. 13. No. 4. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440231202294
19. Pöchhacker F. Writings and Research on Interpreting: A Bibliographic Analysis // The Interpreters’ Newsletter. 1995. Vol. 6.
20. Tang F. Explicitation in Consecutive Interpreting. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2018.

Author information

About this article

Publication history

• Received: August 12, 2024.
• Published: September 26, 2024.

Keywords

• последовательный перевод
• средства распознавания речи
• избирательность внимания
• полнота перевода
• модель усилий
• consecutive interpreting
• speech recognition tools
• attention selectiveness
• completeness of translation
• effort model

Copyright

© 2024 The Author(s)
© 2024 Gramota Publishing, LLC

User license

Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)