Abstract
The need for Translation and Interpreting (T&I) services within multilingual societies has grown along with global migration. Elements in Translation and Interpreting is a Cambridge series designed to provide concise accounts of state-of-the-art theories and methods in T&I studies, pointing its readers towards new areas of research and promising analytical-theoretical directions. Co-authored by the most prominent scholars in the field of translanguaging-in-interpreting (Han, Wen & Runcieman), the element under review contours an embedded model of translanguaging-in-interpreting and interpreting-in-translanguaging from theoretical and practical perspectives, underpinned by evidence from an exploratory empirical investigation.
The authors’ recognition of today’s highly interconnected, widely plurilingual societies renders untenable the notion of interpreting as a mere transfer between one nation’s language and another’s. In particular, “translanguaging” (García & Li, 2014; Li, 2011)—that is, the multi/translingual practice and processes which lead to the production of a hybridised and creative sourcing of all semiotic repertoires and resources—is argued to be having an impact on the conservative, monolingual framing of interlinguistic interactions. There are two recent volumes on the topic of translation and translanguaging: Baynham and Lee (2019) and Sato (2022), and a John Benjamins journal Translation and Translanguaging in Multilingual Contexts, which started in 2015. This Cambridge volume presents a novel focus within this growing disciplinary interest. By providing detailed insights into the interplay between translanguaging and interpreting, this book proposes a new, interdisciplinary paradigm, with a view to not only portraying the nature of aptitude in interpreting, but also explaining and predicting its dynamic dimensions of emergence, development, and real-time performance (p. 14).
The volume consists of 75 pages, divided into six sections. First, the rise of superdiversity and concomitant translanguaging practices in urban centres is discussed in Section 1, and what this means within the landscape of interpreting studies models is given in Section 2. This is followed by a review of relevant literature (Section 3), which shows how translanguaging theories and research methods can be applied to create an integrated, unitary approach to all interpreting domains, that is, conference—consecutive (CI) and simultaneous interpreting (SI) (Section 4)—and public service interpreting (PSI) (Section 5). The authors conclude by considering perspectives on how interpreting will be impacted by translanguaging in the future, with a view to illuminating theory, practice, and pedagogy (Section 6). As such, this work is aimed both at researchers seeking to apply ideas to data and interpreting students seeking to understand their own skills development.
Section 1 begins with a short introduction to “superdiversity” (Vertovec, 2007), a complex dimension linked to the 21st century world’s social, cultural, and linguistic diversity and buttressed by the global speed of multilingual/multicultural interactivity. This complex set of highly diverse, postmodern subjectivities has resulted in the increasing prevalence and visibility of what has come to be known as translanguaging, defined as a form of intercommunication where the individual’s drive to communicate draws on multiple “languages” in melded and hybridised ways (p. 3).
Following this introduction, Sections 2 and 3 provide an overview of interpreting studies and translanguaging-in-interpreting/interpreting-in-translanguaging theories, expanding the concepts of “translation-in-translanguaging” and “translanguaging-in-translation” proposed by Baynham and Lee (2019). In Section 2, various epistemic T&I studies “turns”—such as the sociological, cognitive, and (the more recent) neural network turns—are explored, along with their distinctive research focuses on different aspects of the T&I process, products, and training. As a whole, the authors argue that these paradigms have made significant contributions to our current understanding of the interpreting process. However, these “turn”-driven perspectives are still said to fall short of providing a comprehensive framework within which interpreting aptitude or competence can be explained adequately and predicted accurately, incorporating both the internal (e.g., cognitive load, working memory, etc.) and external (e.g., ideological and sociocultural contexts, etc.) factors underpinning interpreting as a meaning-making process. According to the authors, translanguaging theory “has gradually emerged and been transformed into a practical and powerful theory explaining broad domains of human cognition and communication phenomena spanning the humanities and social sciences and beyond” (p. 14). Thus, the process of interpreting—seen as a multilingual-mediated communicative and social-cognitive activity—realises translanguaging between and beyond different linguistic structures and systems. By the same token, interpreting can be said to cover the full range of linguistic performance by multilingual language users, who are transcending the combination of structures, the alternation between systems, as well as the representation of values, identities, and relationships. By applying the key tenets of translanguaging theory to T&I, the authors posit that they can construct a grand theory as a viable solution to a complete theoretical paradigm.
Section 3 examines the main developments in conceptualising and measuring translanguaging in interpreting from a micro, meso, and macro viewpoint. Here, it is argued that, within a multilayered translanguaging space, the translator/interpreter makes full play of their multilingual, multimodal, and multisemiotic repertoire. At successive translanguaging moments, a variety of cognitive, semiotic, and modal resources are mobilised and interact, aiming for a fluid and meaningful performance. As such, the authors postulate that translanguaging theory represents an ideal theoretical framework to conceptualise the practice of interpreting. They then turn to construct the aptitude model of translating and interpreting and specify its components in order to capture the dynamic interactions of the interlocking elements that are at play during the interpreting process within the superdiverse sociocultural environment.
According to this three-layered, translanguaging-informed interpreting model (termed “3M Model”), aptitude for T&I should be conceived as the blended process of three defining properties: (a) at the micro level, the fluid, dynamic, and complex interactions with the professional’s individual-based “multi-competence” (Cook, 1992); (b) at the meso level, the tool-based or technology-driven multimodal affordances in the external environment; and (c) at the macro level, the broader sociocultural contexts in which the interpreting practice is situated and embodied. The factors comprising each layer—as well as their key features and relational interactions—are well summarised in a Figure (p. 20) and a Table (p. 22). The authors argue that this 3M Model—when augmented by integrated research methods from disciplines such as psychology and, within that, the dynamic systems approach—will allow scholars to simulate, explain, and predict the emergence, real-time performance, and developmental trajectories of all interpreting modes.
In Section 4, Han, Wen, and Runcieman again point to the fact that interpreting is a highly complex and dynamic activity that engages the professional’s cognition, emotion, and action during successive “translanguaging moments” of meaning-making (i.e., interpreting-in-translanguaging). As interpreting entails time sensitivity and utilises different amounts of cognitive resources at different stages, the interpreters’ momentary engagement is analysed with a view to understanding the underlying nonlinearity, emergence, and self-organisation dynamics of all interpreting modes from a micro-level perspective (i.e., translanguaging-in-interpreting). In this context, “moment analysis” (Lee, 2022; Li, 2011) is presented as a powerful method for interpreting-as-translanguaging research. In Li’s (2011: 1224) words, a moment is “a point in or a period of time” associated with time and sensitive to time, and it is entailed in events or developments and frames the situated agents’ behaviour. As a concept similar to rhythm, a moment is related to “repetitions of actions of the human body and in daily life” and its dynamics in translanguaging lies in the “spur-of-the-moment actions,” which, in its own terms, is called moment analysis.
This new framework is here put into practice to explore the momentary, dynamic complexity of interpreting processes, with a focus on the workflow tasks of both SI and CI. This empirical study was conducted on a group of students (from Portuguese to Chinese-Mandarin or Cantonese), whose CI and SI interpreting performance was recorded in a simulated environment, and then transcribed and analysed. Close-ups of situated and embodied moments were analysed based on the multimodal transcription of the SI and CI interpreting data. The potential challenges of temporal and spatial interpreting are outlined by zooming in on the complex and rationalising process of both CI (via note-taking behaviours) and SI (through analysis of pauses) task engagement. Textual description is combined with multimodal transcription in order to study interpreters’ “translanguaging moments” during the SI and CI task performance (pp. 38–44) at a micro level. In particular, the situated note-taking/reading moments in CI are chosen because they are seen as the reference points in rendering performance, showing the translanguaging dynamics with “spur-of-the-moment actions.” The review of notes in conjunction with the interpreter’s note-reading (rendition) allows for better inferences, which in return triangulates our understanding of notes. In SI, the pause moments are selected. They are part of the rendering, either silenced or filled, and constitute consequently “a period of time.” During this duration of time, all silent/filled but dynamically mobilised repertoires of the interpreter are in full preparation for the multimodal, multilinguistic, and multisemiotic “spur-of-the-moment actions.”
Interestingly, results show that SI and CI entail different levels of time sensitivity and are likely to consume different amounts of cognitive resources within translanguaging environments, thus adding to the understanding of process obtained by an application of Gile’s effort models. Activities involved in the CI processes—including visual, audio, and body movements—are coordinated in a fluid and interchangeable space. On the contrary, during the constrained moments of SI (which manifested as silent “pauses”), interpreters’ body language reveals their mental tension and struggle to bring together different resources of personal history, past experience, and the real-time contexts, all contributing to creating a mental working space. Thus, the authors support the claim that, under a translanguaging view, “all close-up scenarios of the CI and SI moments are interwoven in the time and space dimensions, affording the interpreters the transformative power to make meaning that communicates” (p. 46).
In Section 5, after a brief, historical overview of the key elements in PSI studies (pp. 46–48), Han, Wen, and Runcieman look at the impact that the emergence of translanguaging practices is also having on PSI settings. Community interpreters are called upon to mediate between state institutions and immigrant, multilingual/multicultural communities, which are more likely to experience translanguaging in complex interlingual/intercultural ways. This section specifically adopts an ethnographic approach to discuss the pedagogical implications of translanguaging-in-interpreting/interpreting-in-translanguaging, gleaned from the 3M Model. In particular, the authors discuss the example of how translanguaging is intricately tied to an individual’s process of knowledge construction and lived experience as found in Runcieman’s (2022) research into court interpreting. They posit that PSI training needs to respond to superdiversity and translanguaging as interpreters will continue to encounter translanguaging in their professional life. In today’s increasingly complex societies, languages are not seen as bounded entities, but rather as fluid and interchangeable in the situated moment. This, in turn, needs to be reflected in pedagogy. Moreover, translanguaging (between bi-/multilinguals) is shown to promote greater cognitive development when tackling complex issues and rationalising processes. In addition, translanguaging is said to aid social and professional identity work as students develop their understandings of future roles.
Section 6 concludes the book by briefly proposing new avenues for future T&I theory, research, and practice, with the aim of investigating the relationship between translanguaging and interpreting, embedded within an integrated, 3M Model. The authors call for further empirical, multidisciplinary research endeavours to address the 3M Model’s relation to other competencies (i.e., interpreting aptitude) and complex dynamic systems at macro, meso, and micro level. Suggestions for further reading are also given.
In conclusion, the book’s strength lies in its flexible execution of an interdisciplinary approach to interpreting studies with a focus on translanguaging, as shown on conceptual, theoretical, and methodological dimensions. The study of the interplay between the two reveals that they are embedded in each other, contributing to enrich the in-depth knowledge of both. Thus, a major concern for interpreter trainers is to rise to this challenge in the future, and start viewing language as an increasingly untethered, decolonised, and universal resource.
Methodologically speaking, this book showcases two distinct (albeit complementary) approaches. First, Sections 2 to 4 take a social-cognitive approach, through which we describe the social-cognitive factors influencing the interpreting process from the translanguaging perspective, including the broader social-cultural and ideological contexts (the macro level), the external environment (the meso level), and the psychological and neurobiological factors (the micro level). Second, Section 5 showcases an ethnographic perspective, which draws on the personal accounts of interpreters, and how translanguaging impacts and shapes their perceptions of practising their profession.
Undoubtedly, the essence of translanguaging theory lies in its dynamics and flexibility in breaking down cognitive, societal, linguistic, semiotic, and technological boundaries. But this comprehensively interdisciplinary approach could appear demanding for readers without prior immersion in multidisciplinary knowledge when key conceptual borrowings like “power,” “cultural/historical norms” and “cognitive load” are used with scant introductions. Moreover, empirical analysis and methodological discussions may not be granular and extended enough to satisfy readers’ expectations. Further research is needed in order to reveal the much wider potential of this approach, based on moment analysis and the 3M Model and to confirm the findings. Sections 4 and 5 could be complemented by providing quantitative data that would support the conclusions made on the basis of the purely qualitative analysis of the multimodal patterns in interpreted communication. These results sections could also feature a more thorough discussion about some of the methodological challenges of carrying out a segment-by-segment analysis of transcripts and video-recordings in interpreting research. It is also in a sense a pity that the results are based on simulations and interviews. Although the difficulties in obtaining data are well known—especially in PSI settings—, it would be of interest to follow through with a study on authentic interactions and bigger samples of interpreters in order to explore how the variables identified in this study play out in real life. Finally, other important topics and methods—such as ethics in interpreters’ use of technology, or even broader societal impacts of interpreting—have not been addressed.
Despite these limitations, this book will be of great value for T&I scholars, practitioners, and educators. A translanguaging-informed aptitude model can offer crucial insights into the ways interpreters can mediate and influence communication in the face of complex, dynamic, and fluid interactions in various interpreting settings.
