This chapter discusses the results related to the Research Question 1,“How aware are interpreters of the meaning and importance of Manner of Speech in courtroom examination questions and answers under different modes and modalities in remote settings”. Pre-experiment and post-experiment questionnaires are designed to elicit the professional interpreters’ views, perceptions, strategies, and professional decisions when reproducing the manner of speech in courtroom examination questions and answers. The pre-experiment questionnaire includes two multiple-choice questions and two open-ended questions, with the definition of the Manner of Speech provided before the questions. Participants were asked to (1) underline DMs in four sample sentences (Q1), (2) indicate whether they think these DMs in the sample sentences in Q1 serve any function (Q2), (3) identify the type of speech style features in three sample sentences (Q3), and (4) choose the most accurate English interpretation of Mandarin answers in four sample sentences (Q4). The post-experiment consisted of three parts: (1) Awareness, (2) Rendition, and (3) Strategy and Decision. Part 1 consisted of one multiple-choice question and two open-ended questions about interpreters’ awareness of DMs and stylistic features. Part 2 examined their rendition of DMs and manner-related features. It incorporated three 5-point Likert scale questions. Respondents selected the degree of agreement related to each statement on a scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Part 3 intended to elicit answers on the professional decisions and strategies regarding their renditions of DMs and manner-related features. It comprised five text-type questions: one question about interpreters’ professional decision about whether or not to render DMs and manner-related features and four questions about interpreters’ strategies in different modes and conditions of interpreting in remote settings. The main findings are (1) nearly half of the participants revealed a vague understanding of the meaning of the discourse markers and manner-related features, whereas the remaining participants unveiled a fair understanding of the meaning and the pragmatic functions of discourse markers and manner-related features; (2) participants could recall some discourse markers and manner-related features while doing interpreting; (3) participants indicated the importance of rendering the Manner of Speech in pragmatically equivalent forms; and (4) only a small number of participants reported that they were able to adjust their interpreting strategies in accordance with the mode of interpreting. In consecutive mode, strategies reported by interpreters include manner-related symbols in note-taking to facilitate reproduction efforts. In simultaneous mode, strategies reported by interpreters encompass summarising, chunking, and transcoding.

Interpreters’ Awareness: Strategies and Professional Decisions

章节
发表日期：

2026年

查看全文

Ran Yi

摘要

This chapter discusses the results related to the Research Question 1,“How aware are interpreters of the meaning and importance of Manner of Speech in courtroom examination questions and answers under different modes and modalities in remote settings”. Pre-experiment and post-experiment questionnaires are designed to elicit the professional interpreters’ views, perceptions, strategies, and professional decisions when reproducing the manner of speech in courtroom examination questions and answers. The pre-experiment questionnaire includes two multiple-choice questions and two open-ended questions, with the definition of the Manner of Speech provided before the questions. Participants were asked to (1) underline DMs in four sample sentences (Q1), (2) indicate whether they think these DMs in the sample sentences in Q1 serve any function (Q2), (3) identify the type of speech style features in three sample sentences (Q3), and (4) choose the most accurate English interpretation of Mandarin answers in four sample sentences (Q4). The post-experiment consisted of three parts: (1) Awareness, (2) Rendition, and (3) Strategy and Decision. Part 1 consisted of one multiple-choice question and two open-ended questions about interpreters’ awareness of DMs and stylistic features. Part 2 examined their rendition of DMs and manner-related features. It incorporated three 5-point Likert scale questions. Respondents selected the degree of agreement related to each statement on a scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Part 3 intended to elicit answers on the professional decisions and strategies regarding their renditions of DMs and manner-related features. It comprised five text-type questions: one question about interpreters’ professional decision about whether or not to render DMs and manner-related features and four questions about interpreters’ strategies in different modes and conditions of interpreting in remote settings. The main findings are (1) nearly half of the participants revealed a vague understanding of the meaning of the discourse markers and manner-related features, whereas the remaining participants unveiled a fair understanding of the meaning and the pragmatic functions of discourse markers and manner-related features; (2) participants could recall some discourse markers and manner-related features while doing interpreting; (3) participants indicated the importance of rendering the Manner of Speech in pragmatically equivalent forms; and (4) only a small number of participants reported that they were able to adjust their interpreting strategies in accordance with the mode of interpreting. In consecutive mode, strategies reported by interpreters include manner-related symbols in note-taking to facilitate reproduction efforts. In simultaneous mode, strategies reported by interpreters encompass summarising, chunking, and transcoding.