Comprehension of television news signed language interpreters

Abstract

This questionnaire-based study evaluates interpretations of TV news broadcasts into South African Sign Language from the perspective of 360 adult Deaf respondents, who identify factors hindering comprehension. Methodologically, findings are based on both open-ended and closed questions. The sources of difficulty identified, together with viewer assessments of current interpreting services and viewer expectancy norms, are explored in relation to the profile of the Deaf target audience represented by the study sample. Despite potentially low literacy levels, the study found a stronger stated preference for subtitles than for signed interpretation. The limited size of the signed language screen inset and the type of signed language used by the interpreters were found to be the main factors limiting comprehension; to a lesser extent, problems can also be related to various features of the interpreters’ performance (facial expression, mouthing, sign articulation and general language proficiency), viewers’ insufficient background knowledge and signing skills, the difficulty of dividing attention between different forms of visual input, as well as the positioning of the screen inset showing the interpreter. The cultural and linguistic heterogeneity of the South African Deaf community poses a further challenge to interpreters. Recommendations for both interpreting practice and further research emerge from the discussion.

Sign language interpreting services

“…This 1. So far, there have been publications focusing on interpreting strategies (Leeson and Foley-Cave 2007;Napier 2002), preparation strategies (Nicodemus, Swabey, and Taylor 2014), SLI ethics (Tate and Turner 2002), SLI in different settings such as broadcasting (Stone 2009;Wehrmeyer 2015), conferences (Stone and Russell 2014), healthcare (Nilsson, Turner, Sheikh, and Dean 2013;Leeson, Sheikh, Rozanes, Grehan, and Matthews 2014), education (Antia and Kreimeyer 2001;Kermit and Berge 2018;Marschark, Peterson, and Winston 2005;Ringsø and Agerup 2018;Thoutenhoofd 2005;Winston 2004), legal settings (Kermit, Mjøen, and Olsen 2011;Napier and Haug 2017;Russell 2012), video relay services (Haualand 2011(Haualand , 2012(Haualand , 2014Napier, Skinner, and Turner 2017;Warnicke and Plejert 2012), and for political participation (Turner and Napier 2014). Most of the research mentioned above uses empirical data from specific interpreted events, or from interviews with individual interpreters, clients or professionals.…”

Chapter 5. The importance of video recordings in signed language interpreting research

“…Based on the eye-tracking data, Wehrmeyer (2014) concludes that the primary source of information for the deaf viewer is the interpreter and that viewers do not switch to pictorial content as a backup source if they did not understand the interpreter. A follow-up study of deaf viewers' opinions on signed language interpreting on South African TV (Wehrmeyer 2015), confirmed these findings.…”

Sign Languages in Audiovisual Media

“…Moreover, many well regarded publications on AVT and accessibility fail to mention, let alone study, SL(I)(T) as a form of MA; current training programs on AVT and MA typically do not include modules on SL; and prestigious and up-todate publications often fail to include even a chapter or article on SL(I)(T) within AV media. There are a few exceptions to this lack of attention to SL(I)(T) within the AVT field, perhaps the most notable being the HBB4ALL 2 project and certain publications from members of the Transmedia Catalonia 1 Following the conventions of Woodward (1972) and general conventions in sign language literature (see, for instance, Forbes-Robertson, 2004;Vermeerbergen, 2006;Wehrmeyer, 2015;Meek, 2020), this article uses the term Deaf to refer to members of the Deaf community and Deaf culture belonging to a linguistic minority, and the term deaf to refer to the audiological condition of not hearing (Padden & Humphries, 1988, in National Association of the Deaf, 2021. This distinction seems useful for this particular contribution because it highlights the linguistic identity that may be associated with the use of Deaf and, therefore, the need for translation and interpreting of SLs.…”

“…114-115), and the attention required to follow the signing limits the time viewers have to understand and enjoy other visual or textual elements on screen or stage, as shown in eye-tracking studies (such as Wehrmeyer, 2014). Moreover, the literature suggests that this divided attention between multiple simultaneous information sources creates a potential issue for Deaf audiences in comprehending signers in general (Wehrmeyer, 2014(Wehrmeyer, , 2015, although more work is needed here, looking at different AV products and different Deaf communities.…”