Tambov
All-Russian academic journal
“Issues of Cognitive Linguistics”

SELF-REPAIR IN ABORTED UTTERANCES: A MULTIMODAL ANALYSIS OF SIMULTANEOUS INTERPRETING

SELF-REPAIR IN ABORTED UTTERANCES: A MULTIMODAL ANALYSIS OF SIMULTANEOUS INTERPRETING


Author:  A.V. Leonteva, O.V. Agafonova, A.A. Petrov

Affiliation:  Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher Education “Moscow State Linguistic University”

Abstract:  The article presents the results of an empirical research dedicated to the co-occurrence of gestures and self-repairs in simultaneous interpreting. Self-repairs, viewed as a type of disfluencies, are divided into three categories: 1) a disfluency followed by a resolution (“positive” self-repair), 2) a disfluency consisting of repetition of the same lexical unit (“zero” self-repair); 3) an utterance truncated without a restart, which means that such a disfluency is not resolved.
The study is based on the assumption that in simultaneous interpreting statistically significant correlation will be observed between various types of self-repair and various types of gestures, such as pragmatic, representational, deictic gestures and adapters.  The data was obtained from 18 interpreters who were asked to interpret a popular science lecture from Russian into English. The material was analysed in ELAN and JAMOVI, and quantitative and statistical methods (T-test and ANOVA) were used to check on the hypotheses.
The study revealed a strong correlation between self-repairs and gesture usage, which suggests that in moments of disfluency gestures facilitate speech. Concerning the relation between various types of self-repair and functional types of gestures, the hypothesis was not confirmed, although the statistics points to the fact that the simultaneous interpreters tend to use particular types of gestures with certain self-repairs.

Keywords:  aborted utterances, self-repair, simultaneous interpreting, co-speech gestures, multimodality.

References:  Akhavan N., Goksun T., Nozari N. Disfluency production in speech and gesture. In A. Papafragou, D. Grodner, D. Mirman, J.C. Trueswell (eds.), Proceedings of the 38th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society. 2016. P. 716-721.
Beattie G., Coughlan J. Do iconic gestures have a functional role in lexical access? An experimental study of the effects of repeating a verbal message on gesture production. Semiotica 119 (3/4). An experimental investigation of the role of iconic gestures in lexical access using the tip-of-the-tongue phenomenon. British Journal of Psychology 89. 1998. P. 221-249.
Biber D., Johansson S., Leech G., Conrad S., Finegan E. Longman grammar of spoken and written English. Harlow: Longman. 1999. P. xii + 1,204.
Bressem J. Repetitions in gesture: Structures, functions, and cognitive aspects. Ph.D. dissertation, Faculty of Social and Cultural Sciences, European University Viadrina, Frankfurt (Oder). 2012.
Bressem J., Müller C. A repertoire of German recurrent gestures with pragmatic functions. In C. Müller, A. Cienki, E. Fricke, S.H. Ladewig, D. McNeill and J. Bressem (Eds.), Body – Language – Communication. An International Handbook on Multimodality in Human Interaction (Handbooks of Linguistics and Communcation Science 38.2.). Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. 2014. P. 1575-1591.
Cienki A. Ten lectures on Spoken language and Gesture from Perspective of Cognitive Linguistics. Issues of Dynamicity and Multimodality. Leiden, Boston: Brill, 2017. P. 24-44.
Clark H. Using Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1996.
Dayter D. Variation in non-fluencies in a corpus of simultaneous interpreting vs. non-interpreted English. Perspectives. 2020. P. 1-18.
Desmet B., Vandierendonck M., Defrancq B. Simultaneous interpretation of numbers and the impact of technological support. In Claudio Fantinuoli (ed.), Interpreting and technology. Berlin: Language Science Press. 2018. P. 13–27.
Gósy M. Disfluencies and self-monitoring. Govor = Speech. XXIV. 2007. P. 91-110.
Gumul E. Explicitation and directionality in simultaneous interpreting. “Linguistica Silesiana”. Vol. 38. 2017. P. 311-329.
Hervais-Adelman A., Moser-Mercer B., Michel Ch., Golestani N. fMRI of simultaneous interpretation reveals the neural basis of extreme language control. Cerebral Cortex, 25 (12), 2015. P. 4727-4739.
Iriskhanova O.K., Cienki A. The Semiotics of Gestures in Cognitive Linguistics: Contribution and Challenges // Вопросы когнитивной лингвистики. 2018. № 4. P. 25-36. [Iriskhanova O.K., Cienki A. The Semiotics of Gestures in Cognitive Linguistics: Contribution and Challenges // Voprosy kognitivnoy lingvistiki. 2018. № 4. P. 25-36.]
Kendon A. Gestures as illocutionary and discourse structure markers in Southern Italian conversational. Journal of Pragmatics, 23. 1995. P. 247-279.
Kita S., Alibali M. W., Chu M. How do gestures influence thinking and speaking? The gesture-for-conceptualization hypothesis. Psychological Review, 124(3). 2017. P. 245-266.
Kita S. How representational gestures help speaking. In: David McNeill (ed.), Language and Gesture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2000. P. 162-185.
Krauss R. M. Why Do We Gesture When We Speak? Current Directions in Psychological Science, 7(2), 1998. P. 54–60.
Krauss R. M., Chen Y., Gottesman R. F. Lexical gestures and lexical access: A process model. In D. McNeill (ed.), Language and gesture. N.Y.: Cambridge University Press, 2000. P. 261-283.
McNeill D. Hand and Mind: What Gestures reveal about thought. Chicago, University Press. 1992.
Mittelberg I., Evola V. Iconic and representational gestures. In: C. Müller, A. Cienki, E. Fricke, S. H. Ladewig, D. McNeill and J. Bressem (Eds.), Body – Language – Communication. An International Handbook on Multimodality in Human Interaction (Handbooks of Linguistics and Communication Science 38.2.). Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. 2014. P. 1732-1746.
Lederer M. La traduction simultanée – experience et théorie. Paris, France: Minard. 1981.
Levelt W. J. M. Monitoring and self-repair in speech. Cognition, 14. 1983. P. 41-104.
Seeber K. Cognitive load in simultaneous interpreting: Existing theories – New models. Interpreting. 13. 2011. P. 176-204.
Seeber K. Cognitive load in simultaneous interpreting: Measures and methods. Target. 25:1. 2013. P. 18–32.
Seeber K. Multimodal Processing in Simultaneous Interpreting. In The Handbook of Translation and Cognition. Hoboken, NJ, USA: John Wiley, 2017. P. 461-475.
Stachowiak-Szymczak K. Eye Movements and Gestures in Simultaneous and Consecutive Interpreting. New York: Springer. P. 1-42.
Streeck J. Pragmatic aspects of gesture. In: Jacob Mey (ed.), International Encyclopedia of Languages and Linguistics, Oxford: Elsevier. 2005. P. 71-76.
Tóth A. Speech disfluencies in simultaneous interpreting: A mirror on cognitive processes. SKASE Journal of Translation and Interpretation. 5(2). 2011. P. 23-31.
Ирисханова О.К., Петров А.А., Маковеева А.И., Леонтьева А.В. Когнитивная нагрузка в условиях синхронного перевода: опыт полимодального анализа // Когнитивные исследования языка. 2019. Вып. XXXVIII. С. 100-116. [Iriskhanova O.K., Petrov A.A., Makoveeva A.I., Leont'eva A.V. Kognitivnaya nagruzka v usloviyakh sinkhronnogo perevoda: opyt polimodal'nogo analiza // Kognitivnye issledovaniya yazyka. 2019. Vyp. XXXVIII. S. 100-116.]

For citation:  : Leonteva, A. V., Agafonova, O. V.,  Petrov, A. A. (2021). Self-repair in aborted utterances: a multimodal analysis of simultaneous interpreting. Voprosy Kognitivnoy Lingvistiki, 3, 59-66.

Pages:  59-66

Back to the list



Login:
Password: