althoughtheterminformation and communication technologydescribesa widespreadconcept,
thedefinitionofitisnotsoobviousbecausetherangeofpossibledefinitionsisquitebroad.
Myresearchintothetopicshowedthatthereisnowidespreadandunanimouslyusedscien-tificdefinitionofICT.Forthisreason,I triedtofinda definitionwhichwasasdetailedand
comprehensiveaspossible,andthedefinitionprovidedonthewebpageoftheunitedStates
accessBoardwasonewhichfulfilledmycriteriathemost:
anyinformationtechnology,equipment,orinterconnectedsystemorsubsys-temofequipmentforwhichtheprincipalfunctionisthecreation,conversion,
KristófandrásMóricz
duplication,automaticacquisition,storage,analysis,evaluation,manipulation,
management,movement,control,display,switching,interchange,transmission,
reception,orbroadcastofdataorinformation. examplesofICTareelectronic
content, telecommunications products, computers and ancillary equipment,
software,informationkiosksandtransactionmachines,videos,ITservices,and
multifunctionofficemachineswhichcopy,scan,andfaxdocuments(united
StatesaccessBoard).
ofcourse,ICTtoolsarementionedanddefinedintranslationandinterpretingstudies,too.
BerberIrabien’sdissertationusesthedefinitionofwhatis.com,whichisalsoa non-scientific
butcommercialwebsite,incontrasttotheunitedStatesaccessBoard’swebpage:
[…]anumbrellatermthatincludesanycommunicationdeviceorapplication,
encompassing:radio,television,cellularphones,computerandnetworkhard-wareorsoftware,satellitesystems,andsoon,aswellasthevariousservices
andapplicationsassociatedwiththem,suchasvideoconferencinganddistance
learning(Whatis.com2008)(BerberIrabien2010).
However,I wouldliketosticktotheformerdefinitionbecauseitcontainseveryaspectrel-evantforinterpretingresearch.Thisisimportantconsideringthenextpoint,whichisthe
typologyofICTsininterpreting,inordertobeabletomakea cleardistinctionbetween
the categories.WhileinthefieldoftranslationtheuseofICTsisa well-researchedtopic,
in thecaseofinterpreting,scientificresearchstartedsomewhatlater.Ininterpretingresearch,
themostimportantICT-relatedresearchtopicsweremachineinterpretingandterminologi-calaidforinterpreters.Froma historicalpointofviewICTshavealwaysbeeninfluentialin
theprofessionofinterpreters:simultaneousinterpretingcouldbeintroducedbyestablishing
appropriateaudiosystems,makingitpossiblefortheinterpretertoworkina separatedbooth.
2.2 thetyPologyof ict usageininterPreting
Thereisa widerangeofICTsmanyofwhicharealsousedbyinterpreters.Inconnectionwith
interpreting,ICTscouldbeclassifiedbasedonthefollowingthreemaincategorieswhichI set
upin2016(Móricz2016):
– ICTsformachineinterpreting:toolswhichexisttotakeovera partorthewholeof
interpreters’work.
– ICTsastransfertools(voiceandpicture):deviceswhichfacilitatetheworkofthe
interpreters,suchasaudiodevices,screens,headphonesetc.
– ICTsasinterpretingtools:toolsusedbyinterpretersinordertobridgetheknowledge
gap(Will2009)betweeninterpretersandparticipantsofa conference.
Thistypologyisnecessaryinordertodistinguishthethirdcategoryfromthefirstandsecond
ones:inmystudyI shalldealwiththosetoolswhichhelptheinterpretertodelivera better
interpretationperformancebyprovidingtheminformation,thusservingasCaI(computer-assistedinterpreting)tools.
Intheliterature,therearealsoothertypologiesused.BerberIrabienmakesa distinctionbe-tweeninternalandexternalICTs.WhileinternalICTsareavailableonthecomputer,externalICTs
arelinkedtootherdevices(cameras,televisionsetc.).HerdefinitionforexternalICTsisasfollows:
alltheaidsmeanttoimprovetheprocess,preparationorfunctionoftheprod-uctoftheinterpreterthatarenotusedwith,oravailablewithin,thecomputer.
Theyareexternal,suchascameras,audio-visualrecorders,television,cellular
telephones,microphones,headphones,andpocketelectronicdictionariesnot
connectabletothecomputer(BerberIrabien2010).
Thisdefinitionmightneedrevisioninthenearfutureasmoderntechnologiesbecomemore
andmoreintegrated,i.e.smartcombineddevicestakeovertheroleofseparatetools.Berber
Irabien(2010)alsomentionsyetanothertypology(originatingfromTorresdelrey):informa-tiontechnologyversuscommunicationtechnology.Theformercategoryconsistsofsoftware
andhardware,whilethelatterrefersmainlytotheInternet.Theproblemwiththistypology
issimilartothatofinternalandexternalICTs,asduetorecentdevelopmentsinmodern
technologycleardistinctionsarebecomingincreasinglyimpossible.
2.3 sPecifictyPesof ict toolsininterPreting
FromthethreemaincategorieslistedearlierI wouldliketodealwiththethirdone(ICTas
interpretingtool).WithinthisthirdcategoryICTtoolscanbedividedintotwosubcatego-ries,softwareandhardware.ofcourse,there’sa directrelationbetweenthetwo:hardware
aretheretocarrythesoftwarewhichareusedbyinterpreters.Itisimportanttomentionthat
hereI amnotdealingwithequipmentwhichhasnosoftwareinterface.Therecouldbesome
specialexceptionsinthiscategory:forexample,a torchcouldhelpinterpretersreadsomething
froma bookora printeddictionary,butthesetoolsdonotactuallyperforma directfunction
thathelpsinterpretersbridgetheknowledgegap.
Thisisa listofthemostwidespreadICThardwareusedbyinterpreters:
– PC(personalcomputersathome-usedforpreparationorworkaftertheinterpreting
event)
– portablecomputers(laptops,tabletswhichcanbeusedinallphasesoftheinterpretingtask)
– smartphones,
– othervideo/audiodevices.
Thisisa listofsoftwareusedbyinterpreters:
– texteditors,
– browsers,
– electroniconlinedictionaries,
– parallelcorporainanelectronicformat,
– terminologysoftware,
– smartphoneapps,
– communicationapps/chats,Whatsapp.
KristófandrásMóricz
Itisclearthatmostofthesetoolswerenotdevelopedspecificallyforinterpreters,butthereare
somewhichcouldbeanexception,e.g.terminologysystems,astheyaredesignedtoprovide
directhelpforinterpretersinterminologicalquestions.
Therearevarioussystemsservingasa terminologytoolforinterpreters.Someonlyassume
thetasksofformerpaper-basedtools(suchasvocabularies,presentationmaterials),whileothers
canbebuiltupascomplexsystemswhichnotonlydealwiththelistofthewordsneededfor
theparticularinterpretingjobs,butalsomanageinterpretinghistory(wordsfromperviousjobs
inthesametopic)andhavedifferentfunctions,makingtheinterpreter’sworkeasier.rütten
mentionsthattherearesomeconcernsamongtranslatorsandterminologyexpertsastowhether
wordlistsareappropriatefroma terminologicalpointofview:
Workingwithmultilingualwordlistsiswidelydisapprovedofamongtrans- latorsorterminologists.Thesesimplelistslackanykindofadditionalinfor-mationconcerninggrammar,meaning,reliability,etc.Theyoftenevenseem
inconsistentandunstructuredordonotcorrespondtotheofficial,standardised
terms.However,severalinterpretershavealreadyunderlinedtheirusefulness,
andthereareoccasionswheresuchlistsmayverywellservethespecialpurpose
ofconferenceinterpreters,whichsimplyentailsfindingtherightwordatthe
rightmoment(rütten2004).
Hereitisimportanttounderlinethatprogrammesusedbytranslators(CaT)andtermi-nologistshavea completelydifferentstructurecomparedtocomputerassistedinterpreting
software.Themainreasonforthisisthesituativityoftheinterpreter’swork:there’snooppor-tunityforlookinguplongdefinitionsora completesetofwords,interpretersworkinginthe
boothneedhelprightaway.Sofarthereisa verysmallselectionofCaItools.Theonesthatal-readyexistareverydiverse(Fantinuoli2016).rüttensetupa softwaremodelbasedonwhich
anidealCaIsystemcouldbebuiltup.Sheidentifiedfiveimportantstepswhichhavetobe
directlylinkedtothemainpage.onlineandofflinesearchisthefirstimportantfunction,the
secondoneisdocumentmanagement:atthisstage,miscellaneousdocumentscanbeputinto
thesystem(wordlists,documentsfromthecustomer,etc.)ThethirdphaseisTerminology
extractionandanalysis:analysesdocuments(module2),extractspotentialtechnicalterms
andtheirequivalentsina differentlanguagewhenparalleltextsintherespectivelanguages
areavailableoritispossibletoconsultelectronicdictionariesorencyclopaedias.Thefourth
moduleisthereforterminologymanagement,dealingwithterminologyfrommodule3and
externalsourcesaswell.Thefifthmoduleisthetrainer,facilitatingbettermemorisationof
wordsandexpressionssavedinmodule4(rütten2004).
FantinuolidistinguishestwotypesofCaItools,theso-calledfirstgenerationandsecond
generationones.Whilefirstgenerationtoolscanonlymanagewordlistsandvocabulariesin
aninterpreter-friendlyway(seethefirsttwomodulesofrütten’smodel),secondgeneration
toolsarealreadyabletoprovideterminologyandknowledgemanagementorgobeyondthat:
organisetextualmaterial,retrieveinformationfromcorporaorotherresources,learnconcep-tualdomainsandhavemoreadvancedsearchfunctions.underthecategoryfirstgeneration,
FantinuolimentionsInterplex,Interpreters’Help,Terminus,LookupanddolTerm,butonly
thefirsttwoarecommerciallyavailableandmaintained.InterpretbankandIntraglossbelong
tothecategoryofsecondgenerationtools(Fantinuoli2016).
InhisarticleWilldiscussessystemswithanappropriatescientificbackground.These
meetsimilardemandstorütten’ssystem,theynotonlyexistashelpduringtheinterpreting
work,butalsoforthepreparationandthepost-interpretingphase:LookupProfessionaland
Interpretbank3(Will2009).
2.4 asPectsofusing ict tools
Consideringthesesystemsit’salsointerestinginwhichphaseofaninterpreter’sworkthereisthe
mostdemandforICTtools(before,duringorafterinterpreting).TheresultofBerberIrabien’s
research(2010)showedthatthehighestlevelofICTtoolusageistobeseenintheprepara-tionphase,whileworkingwithICTtoolsduringinterpretingtakessecondplace.Thelowest
figureswereregisteredinthepost-interpretingphase.a problemwiththesefiguresisthatthere
areseveralICTsinthelistoftoolsexaminedwhichcannotbefullyusedineachphaseofthe
interpretingjob.MyresearchontheHungarianinterpretingscene(2017)showssimilarresults.
However,theuseofICTsduringworkhasreacheda higherproportionthaninthecaseofBerber
Irabien’sstudy.also,theresultsofBerberIrabien’sstudyaswellasmysurveyshowthatsimilar
CaIsoftwareareuseful,astheyareutilisedbyinterpretersbefore,duringandafterwork.
anotherimportantquestionishowtheevolutionoftechnologycaninfluencethefuture
ofinterpreting.Therearealreadytechnologieswhichcanprovidea basiclevelinterpreting:
thesearetranslationenginescombinedwithsoundrecognitionsoftware.Thereisa consensus
amongexpertsthatmachineinterpretingwouldn’tbeabletoreplacehumaninterpretersin
theshortterm.accordingtoprognosesinthefutureinterpretingjobswillbedividedintotwo
categories:thefirst,simpleronescouldbetakenoverbymachines,whilemorecomplicated
tasksremaininthe‘hands’ofhumaninterpreters(Horváth2016).
2.4.1 The benefits and drawbacks of iCt usage in interpreting
WhilenearlyeveryauthordealingwiththetopicofICTsininterpretingacknowledgesthe
importanceoftheICTtoolsininterpreting,todatetheimpactofthesetoolsisnotclear.The
mainquestionisthefollowing:istheextensiveusageofmodernelectronictoolsreallythat
usefulordotheside-effectsoutweightheirpotentialbenefits?Thestrongestcriticismisvoiced
byTripepiWinteringham:
Theoretically,thesetoolsshouldrepresentthemosteffectiveinformationin-terfacewheninterpreting,butistheirpracticalusefeasibleanddoesrendition
benefit?Themaindrawbackoftheuseofthesetoolsisthatitisstillconsidered,
atleastinthebooth,tosomeextentasunnatural(donovan2006:5),pre-sumablybecauseitmaybetime-consuminganddistractinginanactivitythat
requiresconcentrationandfast-paceddecodinganddelivery.Theinterpreterat
workmaynothavethetimeorthecognitiveabilitytolookupa wordonlineor
inhis/herelectronicdictionary,ordetectandchoosethecorrecttranslationof
a specifictermamongthemyriadofpossiblesolutionsthataregenerallyoffered
bydictionaries(TripepiWinteringham2010).
KristófandrásMóricz
TripepiWinteringham’smostimportantargumentisthattheusageofICTtoolsincursan
extraeffortfortheinterpreters.anotherargumentisthattheconstantuseofelectronicdevices
distractsnotonlytheinterpreterbutalsothecustomer.Furthermore,itisdisturbingforthem
toseetheinterpreterfocusingontheirgadgetinsteadofthecommunicativesituationitself.
SimilarpointsweremadebyJoneswhounderlinestheimportanceoftherightpriorisation,
sayingthattheprimarytaskoftheinterpreteristofocusonthecommunicativesituation:
Many colleagues now work with a laptop in the booth. This can of course
bea boon.Itcanhelponetocallupdocumentsreferredtointhemeeting.
Itenablesinterpreterstosearchglossariesandterminologydatabases.Butthe
concentrationontextandterminology–whilstofcourseI shouldneverdeny
thatusingcorrectterminologyisanessentialpartoftheinterpreter’sjob–can
leadtheinterpretertolosesightofthefirstaimofinterpretationaswelearnit,
namelyconveyingmeaningandfacilitatingcommunication(Jones2014).
ItisimportantnotonlywhethertheinterpreterusesICTtoolsornot,butalsowhichonesthey
prefer,iftheyusethematall.WillemphasisesthatICTtoolsusedbyinterpretersareoftenvery
similartoCaTtools,butthesearenotsufficienttosupportinterpretingtasksduetotheirstruc-ture(Will2015).anotherimportantquestionisthetimewheninterpretersusetheirtools.of
course,theonthespotusagehasitslimitations,butwell-developedtoolscanalsoprovidemuch
helpinthepreparationphaseandaftertheinterpretingaswell(rütten2004).afterall,ICT
toolshavebecomeaninseparablepartofinterpreters’work:inthepreparationphase,during,
aswellasafterwork.Hereportabledevicesplaythemostimportantrole(Horváth2014).
anotherinterestingquestionisifthereisanyconnectionbetweentheage,sexorother
characteristicsofthepersonandhowtheyuseICTsinconnectionwiththeirwork.Berber
Irabienexaminedthesequestionsaswell,suchasquestionsabouta possibledifferencebe-tweenfreelanceandinternalinterpreters:
freelanceinterpretersareusingproportionallymoreICTsthantheirin-house
counterparts,contrarytowhatthestereotypewouldleadonetobelieve.The
stereotypeisthatin-houseinterpreterswouldhaveaccesstomoreICTsand
wouldthereforeusethemmoreoften.Infact,duringaninformalconversa-tion,itwasmentionedthatinsomeinstitutionsthereisnoInternetconnection
availableforfreelanceinterpreters;onlythein-houseinterpretershaveaccess.
Thiscommentwouldsupporttheviewthatthereshouldbemoreactiveuseof
ICTsbyin-houseinterpreters,butwhichis,however,rejectedbythesefigures
(BerberIrabien2010).
anotherquestionisinwhichphaseinterpretersuseICTtoolsduringtheirwork:Berber
IrabienshowsthatICTsareusedthemostinthepreparationphase,whileusageduringwork
camesecond.ICTsareusedtheleastafterwork.BerberIrabiendoesnotelaborateonthe
questionwhethertheuseduringtheworkonthespotalsocontainspreparatoryworkoritIS
onlytheICTusedduringinterpreting(probablyhelpingboothmates).
2.4.2 side glance to remote interpreting
remoteinterpretingisnota subjectofthispaper.nevertheless,someresearchesonthe
topicactuallyrevealedtheattitudeofinterpreterstowardsmoderntechnology,thereforeit
isworthtakinga lookatit.remoteinterpretingemergedasa newformofinterpretingin
the1970s.oneofitsfirstformswasusedinaustralia:refugeeinterpretingstartedin1973
viatelephone.oneoftheimportantfactorsinvolvedinthefastspreadingofremoteinter-pretingwastherapiddevelopmentofinformationtechnology.Withremoteinterpreting,it
wasalsopossibletocutcostsandsavetime.(TripepiWinteringham2010).accordingto
BerberIrabienwecandistinguishbetweenthreeformsofdistanceinterpreting:telephone
interpreting,videoconferencingandremoteinterpreting(BerberIrabienusesdistancein-terpretingasanumbrellatermandremoteinterpretingforthecasewheninterpretersare
sittingina separateroomfromthespeakersandlisteners.Invideoconferencing,interpreters
aresittinginthesamelocationassomeoftheparticipantswhileothersareina different
location.)
Sincetheintroductionofremoteinterpretingseveralresearcheshavebeenconducted
whichexaminedthelinkbetweenremoteinterpretingandinterpreters,aswellasinterpret-ers’attitude.earlystudiesshowedthatalthoughremoteinterpretingisefficient,interpreters
feltverystronglyaboutit.In1999theunconcludedanexperimentintheframeworkof
a two-weekconferencewithsixlanguages.Questionnairesweredistributedamongpar-ticipantsandinterpretersaswell.Theresultsshowedthatinterpretersperceivedthenew
situationasmorestressfulandcomplicatedthanconventionalinterpreting:theyfeltmore
exhaustedandlessmotivated.Theyfoundthevoicetransmissiontobe“okay”,butnotthe
imagetransmission(andreasandFalk2009).Itisimportanttopointoutthattheaudi-encewasactuallycontentwiththeworkoftheinterpreters.Intheverysameyearanother
experiment,organisedbytheInternationalTelecommunicationunionandtheecolede
Traductionetd’Interpretationtookplacewhichincludedtwoboothsperlanguage,oneat
thesiteandoneremotebooth.
asintheunexperiment,theaudiencewassatisfiedwithinterpretationquality.
Thesalivatestsdidnotshowa substantialdifferencebetweenthelevelsofstress
hormonesoftheinterpretersintheboothinsidetheconferenceroomandthose
doingremoteinterpreting.Buttheinterpretersthemselvesagaindescribedthe
experienceofremoteinterpretingasnegative.Theyfelta physicalandpsycho-logicaldistancetotheconferenceproceedings,whichmadethemexperience
a feelingoflossofcontrol.accordingly,theyfelttheirstresslevelswhendoing
remoteinterpretingwerehigher.Thefactthattheinterpretersweredisassoci-atedfromtheconferenceproceedingslednotonlytoa decreaseinmotivation
butalsotoa subjectiveincreaseintheoccurrenceoffatiguesymptoms.Images
fromtheconferenceroomthatwouldhavebeenimportantfortheinterpreters
toseewerenotshown.ananalysisoftheresultsraisedtheissuewhethera lack
ofvisualcontactmeansthatinterpretersneedmorementalcapacitytocompen-sateforthislackofinformationwhichinturncausessymptomsoffatigueto
occurearlierthanusual(andresandFalk2009).
KristófandrásMóricz
oneofthemainproblemswithremoteinterpretingisthelackofcontext,nonverbalinforma-tion,gestures,facialexpressionsandviewoftheaudience,asvisualinformationisnecessary
fortheinterpreters.andresandFalkcametotheconclusionthatthereareplentyofopen
questionsconcerningremoteinterpreting,suchasthefollowing:whenisitappropriateto
useremoteinterpretingandisitnecessarytoincluderemoteinterpretinginthetrainingof
interpreters?(andresandFalk2009).
Seresi,however,emphasisesthatintheresearchestherewasnohardevidenceorrootcause
foundforthenegativeimpressionsoftheinterpreters.remoteinterpretingisactuallyreally
difficultinthelearningphaseuntiltheinterpretergetsusedtothenewworkingconditions.