Article published In: Technology
Edited by Franz Pöchhacker and Minhua Liu
[Interpreting 26:2] 2024
► pp. 201–230
Space, body and presence
An analytical framework for remote interpreting
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) 4.0 license.
For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at rights@benjamins.nl.
Open Access publication of this article was funded through a Transformative Agreement with University of Graz.
Published online: 8 July 2024
https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.00105.jer
https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.00105.jer
Abstract
The trend towards remote interpreting has caused a radical change for interpreters worldwide, one that has shifted
their workplace from well-known physical spaces to new digital spaces. Research to date has documented specific settings, language
combinations and/or interpreting modes, and it has usually focused on certain forms of remote interpreting (e.g., video remote
interpreting, video relay service). The combinations of different characteristics and factors in remote interpreting are almost
infinite, however, and single terms fail to depict and cover all possible variations. This article proposes an analytical
framework that uses conceptualisations of space, body and presence to analyse interpreting assignments in digital spaces,
regardless of language combination, setting and mode. Two examples are used to illustrate the application of this framework: a
hybrid conference and a meeting in virtual reality (VR), both of them involving sign language interpreting. The use of VR has
undergone a substantial increase in the past few years, having developed rapidly. It is therefore possible that future
interpreting assignments might take place in this new digital space. The application of these two scenarios shows that the
analytical framework can be used both to reflect on past and to anticipate future assignments.
Keywords: remote interpreting, space, body, presence, sign language interpreting
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Building blocks of the analytical framework
- 2.1Spatial triad
- 2.2Physical body, lived body and represented body
- 2.3Social presence theory
- 3.Building the analytical framework
- 4.Applying the analytical framework to interpreting scenarios in digital spaces
- 4.1Testing the framework on a hybrid conference
- 4.2Future challenges: Virtual reality?
- 5.Conclusion
References
References (59)
Auslander, P. (1992). Presence
and resistance: Postmodernism and cultural politics in contemporary American performance. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Bahadir-Berzig, Ş. (2022). Von
dolmetschenden Kabinen zu gebärdenden Avataren: Kritische Reflexionen zu den Herausforderungen der Digitalisierung in der
Dolmetschlehre. In K. Ables, S. Hansen-Schirra, K. Oster, M. J. Schaeffer, S. Signer & M. Wiedmann (Eds.), Re-thinking
translator education. In honour of Don Kiraly’s Social Constructivist
Approach. Berlin: Frank & Timme, 255–268.
Barfield, W., Zeltzer, D., Sheridan, T. & Slater, M. (1995). Presence
and performance within virtual environments. In W. Barfield & T. A. Furness III (Eds.), Virtual
environments and advanced interface design. New York: Oxford University Press, 473–513.
Bondareva, Y. & Bouwhuis, D. (2004). Determinants
of social presence in videoconferencing. In L. Ardissono & G. Semeraro (Eds.), Proceedings
of the workshop on environments for personalized information access. Working conference on advanced visual interfaces AVI
2004. [URL] (accessed 18 December
2023), 1–9.
Braun, S. (2007). Interpreting
in small-group bilingual videoconferences: Challenges and adaptation
processes. Interpreting 9 (1), 21–46.
(2020). “You
are just a disembodied voice really”: Perceptions of video remote interpreting by legal interpreters and police
officers. In H. Salaets & G. Brône (Eds.), Linking
up with video: Perspectives on interpreting practice and
research. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 47–78.
Braun, S., Slater, C., Gittins, R., Ritsos, P. D. & Roberts, J. C. (2013). Interpreting
in virtual reality: Designing and developing a 3D virtual world to prepare interpreters and their clients for professional
practice. In D. Kiraly, S. Hansen-Schirra & K. Maksymski (Eds.), New
prospects and perspectives for educating language
mediators. Tübingen: Narr Verlag, 93–120.
Braun, S. & Taylor, J. L. (Eds.) (2012). Videoconference
and remote interpreting in criminal
proceedings. Cambridge/Antwerp/Portland: Intersentia.
Carmigniani, J., Furht, B., Anisetti, M., Ceravolo, P., Damiani, E. & Ivkovic, M. (2010). Augmented
reality technologies, systems and applications. Multimedia tools and
applications 511, 341–377.
De Meulder, M., Pouliot, O. & Gebruers, K. (2021). Remote
sign language interpreting in times of Covid-19. [URL] (accessed 6 July 2021).
Dean, R. K. & Pollard, R. Q. (2013). The
Demand Control Schema: Interpreting as a practice profession. North Charleston: CreateSpace.
Descartes, R. (1996). Meditations
on first philosophy (edited by J. Cottingham). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Devaux, J. (2017). Technologies
in interpreter-mediated criminal court hearings: An Actor-Network Theory account of the interpreter’s perception of her
role-space. PhD dissertation, The University of Salford.
Downie, J. (2021). Interpreting
is interpreting: Why we need to leave behind interpreting settings to discover Comparative Interpreting
Studies. Translation and Interpreting
Studies 16 (3), 325–346.
Fheodoroff, M. (2022). The
agent-centred translation zone: Researching the people within translational spaces. Translation
in
Society 1 (2), 177–199.
Fuchs, T. (2017). Intercorporeality
and interaffectivity. In C. Meyer, J. Streeck & J. S. Jordan (Eds.), Intercorporeality.
Emerging socialities in interaction. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 3–23.
Galvão, E. Z. (2020). Gesture
functions and gestural style in simultaneous interpreting. In H. Salaets & G. Brône (Eds.), Linking
up with video: Perspectives on interpreting practice and
research. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 151–179.
Grbić, N. (2015). Settings. In F. Pöchhacker (Ed.), Routledge
encyclopedia of interpreting studies. London/New York: Routledge, 370–371.
Gulliver, M. S. (2009). DEAF
space, a history: The production of DEAF spaces. Emergent, autonomous, located and disabled in 18th and 19th century
France. PhD dissertation, The University of Bristol.
Gunawardena, C. N. (1995). Social
Presence Theory and implications for interaction and collaborative learning in computer
conferences. International Journal of Educational
Telecommunications 1 (2/3), 147–166.
Gunawardena, C. N. & Zittle, F. J. (1997). Social
presence as a predictor of satisfaction within a computer-mediated conferencing
environment. American Journal of Distance
Education 11 (3), 8–26.
Havelka, I. (2018). Videodolmetschen
im Gesundheitswesen: Dolmetschwissenschaftliche Untersuchung eines österreichischen
Pilotprojekts. Berlin: Frank & Timme (TRANSÜD Arbeiten zur Theorie und Praxis des Übersetzens und Dolmetschens
96).
Heyerick, I. (2020). The
importance of video recordings in signed language interpreting
research. In H. Salaets & G. Brône (Eds.), Linking
up with video: Perspectives on interpreting practice and
research. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 127–149.
Hills, A., Hauber, J. & Regenbrecht, H. (2005). Videos
in space: A study on presence in video mediating communication
systems. In ICAT ’05: Proceedings of the 2005 international
conference on augmented tele-existence. New York: Association for Computing Machinery, 247–248.
Hyatt, M. & Honenberger, P. (2019). “Translator’s
preface”. In H. Plessner: The
levels of the organic and the human: An introduction to philosophical anthropology. New York: Fordham University Press, ix–xiii.
Kim, J. (2011). Developing
an instrument to measure social presence in distance higher education. British Journal of
Educational
Technology 42 (5), 763–777.
Krystallidou, D. (2020). Going
video: Understanding interpreter-mediated clinical communication through the video
lens. In H. Salaets & G. Brône (Eds.), Linking
up with video: Perspectives on interpreting practice and
research. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 181–202.
Lindemann, G. (2015). Die
Verschränkung von Leib und Nexistenz. In F. Süssenguth (Ed.), Die
Gesellschaft der Daten. Über die digitale Transformation der sozialen
Ordnung. Bielefeld: transcript, 41–66.
Lindemann, G. & Schünemann, D. (2020). Presence
in digital spaces: A phenomenological concept of presence in mediatized communication. Human
Studies 431, 627–651.
Lombard, M. & Ditton, T. (1997). At
the heart of it all: The concept of presence. Journal of Computer-Mediated
Communication 3 (2).
Löw, M. & Sturm, G. (2019). Raumsoziologie:
Eine disziplinäre Positionierung zum Sozialraum. In F. Kessl & C. Reutlinger (Eds.), Handbuch
Sozialraum. Grundlagen für den Bildungs- und
Sozialbereich. Wiesbaden: Springer, 3–21.
Meta (2023a). Meta Horizon
Workrooms. [URL] (accessed 23 February 2023).
(2023b). This is Meta Quest
Pro. [URL] (accessed 23 February 2023).
Moser-Mercer, B. (2005). Remote
interpreting: Issues of multi-sensory integration in a multilingual
task. Meta 50 (2), 727–738.
Mouzourakis, P. (2006). Remote
interpreting: A technical perspective on recent
experiments. Interpreting 8 (1), 45–66.
Napier, J., Skinner, R. & Braun, S. (Eds.) (2018). Here
or there: Research on interpreting via video link. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.
O’Brien, D. (2020). Negotiating
academic environments: Using Lefebvre to conceptualise deaf spaces and disabling/enabling
environments. Journal of Cultural
Geography 37 (1), 26–45.
Plessner, H. (1975). Die
Stufen des Organischen und der Mensch: Einleitung in die philosophische Anthropologie (3rd unrevised
ed.). Berlin, New York: de Gruyter.
(2019). The
levels of the organic and the human: An introduction to philosophical anthropology. New York: Fordham University Press.
Pöchhacker, F. (2020). “Going
video”: Mediality and multimodality in interpreting. In H. Salaets & G. Brône (Eds.), Linking
up with video. Perspectives on interpreting practice and
research. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 13–45.
Rolshoven, J. (2012). Zwischen
den Dingen: der Raum. Schweizerisches Archiv für
Volkskunde 1081, 156–169.
Salaets, H. & Brône, G. (Eds.) (2020). Linking
up with video: Perspectives on interpreting practice and
research. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Sheridan, S. & O’Donnell, J. (2023). Irish
sign language interpreter workplace wellness during COVID-19: Looking back and moving
forward. Journal of
Interpretation 31 (1). [URL]
Short, J., Williams, E. & Christie, B. (1976). The
social psychology of telecommunications. London/New York: Wiley.
Simon, S. (2013). Translation
zone. In Y. Gambier & L. van Doorslaer (Eds.), Handbook
of translation studies. Volume 4. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 181–185.
Slater, M. (2018). Immersion
and the illusion of presence in virtual reality. British Journal of
Psychology 1091, 431–433.
Vranjes, J. & Brône, G. (2020). Eye-tracking
in interpreter-mediated talk. In H. Salaets & G. Brône (Eds.), Linking
up with video: Perspectives on interpreting practice and
research. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 203–233.
Warnicke, C. & Plejert, C. (2016). The
positioning and bimodal mediation of the interpreter in a video relay interpreting (VRI) service
setting. Interpreting 18 (2), 198–230.
Wiener, M. & Mehrabian, A. (1968). Language
within language: Immediacy, a channel in verbal communication. New York, NY: Appleton Century Crofts.
Cited by (1)
Cited by one other publication
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 12 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
