Cover not available

Article published In: FORUM
Vol. 22:2 (2024) ► pp.206–228

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload EPUB
authorization required

What do interpreters expect of digital literacy training?

A case of the Korean Association of Translators and Interpreters

 | Chung Ang University
ORCiD logo with link | Chung Ang University
 | Ewha Womans University
Published online: 21 June 2024
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/forum.23019.jin
Abstract
In recent years, digital transformation has profoundly impacted a wide range of professions, including interpreting. As technology advancements continue to develop rapidly, it is imperative for interpreters to be able to work in a digital environment and use different tools than in traditional workplaces (Sang, Woo Yon. 2020. “Educational suggestions based on the current situations of remote interpreting and demands for interpreters.” The Journal of Translation Studies, 21(5): 129–159. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar). Against this backdrop, this paper examines a post-training survey administered by the Korean Association of Translators and Interpreters (KATI) following their digital literacy academy seminar and offers recommendations for future implementations. Three research questions guide this paper: (1) What do trainees expect from the digital literacy training provided by the association? (2) What kind of training do trainees want to see in the future? (3) What are interpreters’ expectations for the future development of Computer-Assisted Interpreting (CAI)? The research includes a descriptive account of KATI’s first rollout of digital literacy training for interpreters in Korea and an analysis of the post-training survey, followed by implications for future training.
Résumé
La transformation numérique a profondément affecté, ces dernières années, un large éventail de secteurs et de professions, notamment l’interprétariat. Les rapides progrès technologiques demandent aux interprètes de travailler dans un environnement numérique et d’adopter de nouveaux outils, différents de ceux utilisés sur les lieux de travail traditionnels (Sang, Woo Yon. 2020. “Educational suggestions based on the current situations of remote interpreting and demands for interpreters.” The Journal of Translation Studies, 21(5): 129–159. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar). Dans ce contexte, le présent article examine une enquête post-formation menée par l’Association coréenne des traducteurs et interprètes (KATI) à la suite de leur séminaire sur l’habileté numérique et propose des recommandations pour les mises en œuvre futures. Il s’articule autour de trois questions de recherche: (1) Qu’attendent les participants de la formation en habileté numérique dispensée par l’association ? ; (2) Quel type de formation souhaitent-ils voir dispensé à l’avenir ? ; (3) Quelles sont les attentes des interprètes quant au développement futur de l’interprétation assistée par ordinateur (IAO) ? La recherche comprend un compte rendu descriptif du premier déploiement de la formation à l’habileté numérique de la KATI pour les interprètes en Corée et une analyse de l’enquête post-formation, suivie d’implications pour la formation future.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Literature review
    • 2.1Calls for relevant training
    • 2.2State-of-the-art CAI: What is it, and what does it offer?
    • 2.3How can training be delivered?
  • 3.Implementation
    • 3.1Workshops on the use of digital tools for interpreting
    • 3.2Survey administration
    • 3.3Post-training survey analysis
  • 4.Survey analysis
    • 4.1The respondents’ profiles and training needs
    • 4.2First research question: Expectations about the association’s digital literacy training
    • 4.3Second research question: Preferred type of training session
    • 4.4Third research question: Expectations for future CAI development
  • 5.Conclusion and implications for future training
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
References (39)
References
Berber-Irabien, Diana. 2010. Information and communication technologies in conference interpreting: A survey of their usage in professional and educational settings. PhD diss. Universitat Rovira i Virgili.
Bilgen, Baris. 2010. Investigating terminology management for conference interpreters. PhD diss. University of Ottawa.
Braun, Sabine. 2019. Technology and interpreting. In Routledge handbook of translation and technology, ed. by Minako O’Hagan, 1–20. London: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chang, Ai-Li. 2021. “Study on interpreting competence needed in the age of distance interpreting.” Interpretation and Translation, 23(1): 213–236. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Choi, Moon Sun. 2021. “Interpreting 4.0: Remote interpreting norms and practices.” The Journal of Translation Studies, 22(1): 279–312. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2022. “Human-machine collaboration in interpreting: A review of the state of the art in computer-assisted interpreting (CAI) research.” Interpreting and Translation Studies, 26(2): 133–163. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chun, Hyunju. 2017. “The 4th Industrial Revolution and the Status of Korean Translation Industry, and the Future of Interpretation and Translation Education.” The Journal of Interpretation and Translation Education, 15(3): 235–261.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Corpas Pastor, Gloria, and Lily May Fern. 2016. A survey of interpreters’ needs and practices related to language technology. Technical paper [FFI2012-38881-MINECO/TI-DT-2016-1]. The University of Malaga. [URL]
Corpas Pastor, Gloria. 2017. “VIP: Voice-text integrated system for interpreters.” Proceedings of the 39th Conference Translating and the Computer: 7–10.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2018. “Tools for interpreters: The challenges that lie ahead.” Current Trends in Translation Teaching and Learning, E(5): 157–182. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2021. “Technology solutions for interpreters: The VIP system.” Hermeneus, 231: 91–123.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Costa, Hernani, Gloria Corpas Pastor, and Isabel Durán Muñoz. 2014. “Technology-assisted interpreting.” Multilingual, 1431: 27–32. [URL]
Desmet, Bart, Mieke Vandierendonck, and Bart Defrancq. 2018. Simultaneous interpretation of numbers and the impact of technological support. In Interpreting and Technology, ed. by Claudio Fantinuoli, 13–27. Berlin: Language Science Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Djafri, Fatmawati, and Lufi Wahidati. 2022. “Examining digital technology literacy of professional Japanese language translator and interpreter.” Lingua Cultura, 16(1): 89–96. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Donovan, Clare. 2006. “Trends -Where is interpreting heading and how can training courses keep up.” A Contribution at the EMCI conference: The Future of Conference Interpreting: Training, Technology and Research.
Fantinuoli, Claudio. 2018. “Computer-assisted interpreting: Challenges and future perspectives.” In Trends in E-Tools and Resources for Translators and Interpreters, ed. by Corpas Pastor, Gloria, and Isabel Durán Muñoz, 153–74. Leiden: Brill. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2019. “The Technological Turn in Interpreting: The Challenges That Lie Ahead.” Accessed April 24, 2024. [URL]
Fantinuoli, Claudio, and Vorya Dastyar. 2022. “Interpreting and the emerging augmented paradigm.” Interpreting and Society, 2(2): 185–194. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hamidi, Miriam, and Franz Pöchhacker. 2007. “Simultaneous consecutive interpreting: A new technique put to the test.” Meta, 52(2): 276–289. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Im, Sei-inn. 2020. “Interpreter training in a post-human world: A techne-humanities approach.” Interpreting and Translation Studies, 24(2): 159–179.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jin, Silhee. 2016. An Action Research on the Application of Constructivism in an Interpreting Classroom: Focused on an ICT-based Experiential Learning Environment. PhD diss. Hankuk University of Foreign Studies.
. 2017. “Applying Educational Technology to Interpreting Pedagogy: Considerations for Instructional Design in CAIT.” Interpreting and Translation Studies, 21 (2): 133–162.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2019. “A Case of Technology Integration in T&I Curriculum.” The Journal of Translation Studies, 20 (4): 189–218.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kalina, Sylvia. 2005. “Quality assurance for interpreting processes.” Meta, 50(2): 768–784. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2010. “New technologies in conference interpreting.” Am Schnittpunkt von Philologie und Translationswissenschaft: Festschrift zu Ehren von Martin Forstner, ed. by Lee-Jahnke, Hannelore, and Erich Prunc, 79–96. Lausanne: Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lee, Jong Kwan. 2015. “A future of humanity toward post-humanity?” Future Horizon. 261: 4–9.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lee, Juriae. 2022. “A study of interpreter training in the changing digital environment: Focused on the use of automatic speech recognition.” The Korean Journal of Japanology, 1331: 95–114. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lee, Juriae, Hae Kyung Park, and SungJoo Park. 2017. “Using smart learning technology in consecutive interpreting class: Focusing on the Korean-Japanese language pair.” Journal of Japanese Language and Culture, 411: 227–251.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lee, Juriae, Hae Kyung Park, and Woo Yon Sang. 2018. “App Design for an Assistive Tool for Simultaneous Interpretation Courses.” The Korea Journal of Japanese Education, 421: 99–116. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mellinger, Christopher. 2017. “Translators and machine translation: Knowledge and skill gaps in translator pedagogy.” The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 11(4): 280–293. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2019. “Computer-assisted interpreting technologies and interpreter cognition: A product and process-oriented perspective.” Revista Tradumàtica, 171: 32–44. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mihalache, Iulia. 2021. Human and non-human crossover: Translators partnering with digital tools. In When translation goes digital: Case studies and critical reflections, ed. by Desjardins, Renée, Claire Larsonneur, and Philippe Lacour, 19–43. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Prandi, Bianca. 2020. “The use of CAI tools in interpreter training: Where are we now and where do we go from here.” inTRAlinea: 1–10. [URL]
Ortiz, Luis Eduardo Schild, and Patrizia Cavallo. 2018. “Computer-assisted interpreting tools (CAI) and options for automation with automatic speech recognition.” TradTerm, 321: 9–31. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sang, Woo Yon. 2020. “Educational suggestions based on the current situations of remote interpreting and demands for interpreters.” The Journal of Translation Studies, 21(5): 129–159. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Son, Ji-Bong. 2019. “The Current State and Meanings of the Content of Interpretation and Translation Education in South Korea.” The Journal of Translation Studies, 20 (4): 115–140.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tripepi Winteringham, Sarah. 2010. “The usefulness of ICTs in Interpreting Practice.” Interpreters Newsletter, 151, 87–99.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Will, Martin. 2020. “Computer aided interpreting (CAI) for conference interpreters. Concepts, content and prospects.” Journal for Communication Studies, 131: 37–71.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue