Investigating the Efficacy of Conference Room Webcams for Remote Group Sign Language Interpretation Sessions

This study describes the temporal aspects of relay interpreting by a mixed team of spoken and sign language interpreters in order to identify the characteristics of spoken and sign language relay interpreting and to help spoken language interpreters better understand the difference between the two types. The study quantitatively analyzes five time variables (speaking time, word count, ear-voice-span (EVS), tail-to-tail span (TTS), and pause), and their correlations. The temporal aspects of spoken and relay interpretation in sign language are as follows: (1) sign language interpretation requires more words to transfer the same amount of information as spoken language interpretation; (2) sign language interpreters have a shorter EVS than spoken language interpreters; (3) the simultaneity of spoken and relay sign language interpretation is more affected by TTS than by EVS, because spoken language TTS has a high correlation with speech time and word count in sign language interpretation; 4) sign language interpreters actively use the pauses between sentences of spoken language interpreters for target language (TL) production; 5) sign language interpreters produce more words for a shorter period of time than spoken language interpreters.

Sign language is the only way for deaf and mute people to represent their needs and feelings. Most of non-deaf-mute people do not understand sign language, which leads to many difficulties for deaf-mutes' communication in their social life. Sign language interpretation systems and applications get a lot of attention in the recent years. In this paper, we review sign language recognition and interpretation studies based on machine learning, image processing, artificial intelligence, and animation tools. The two reverse processes for sign language interpretation are illustrated. This study discusses the recent research on sign language translation to text and speech with the help of hand gestures, facial expressions interpretation, and lip reading. Also, state of the art in speech to sign language translation is discussed. In addition, some of the popular and highly rated Android and Apple mobile applications that facilitate disabled people communication are presented. This paper clarifies and highlights the recent research and real used applications for deaf-mute people help. This paper tries to provide a link between research proposals and real applications. This link can help covering any gap or non-handled functionalities in the real used applications. Based on our study, we introduce a proposal involves set of functionalities/options that separately introduced and discussed by the recent research studies. These recent research directions should be integrated for achieving more real help. Also, a set of non-addressed research directions are suggested for future focus.

Introduction Every evening, the Al Jazeera satellite channel features a one-hour, comprehensive newscast of world events. Superimposed in the corner of the television screen is a box containing a sign language interpreter who translates the spoken Arabic of the newscaster. The interpreter is one of a team of Jordanian Sign Language (LIU) interpreters who regularly interpret the newscast. However, the sign language they use is not strictly LIU. Heavily influenced by LIU, it is a newly devised sign language which uses vocabulary drawn from different Arab sign languages, including Egyptian Sign Language and Saudi Sign Language. The vocabulary was compiled in a dictionary by the Council of Arab Ministers of Social Affairs (CAMSA), a committee within the League of Arab States (LAS). The effort by CAMSA to encourage a standard pan-Arab Sign Language (ArSL) has been met with wide resistance, in large part because deaf viewers say they cannot understand the language. In this paper, we describe the geography of sign languages in Arab countries. As we explain, there already exists a number of sign languages used by Arab deaf communities. Some are designated as nation-state sign languages and are used in the instruction of deaf students in their educational systems. The adoption of ArSL by Arab countries potentially threatens the future of these nation-state sign languages as well as an unknown number of smaller sign languages existing within this region.

The representation of the metrics of the hands is distorted, but is susceptible to malleability due to expert dexterity (magicians) and long-term tool use (baseball players). However, it remains unclear whether modulation leads to a stable representation of the hand that is adopted in every circumstance, or whether the modulation is closely linked to the spatial context where the expertise occurs. To this aim, a group of 10 experienced Sign Language (SL) interpreters were recruited to study the selective influence of expertise and space localisation in the metric representation of hands. Experiment 1 explored differences in hands’ size representation between the SL interpreters and 10 age-matched controls in near-reaching (Condition 1) and far-reaching space (Condition 2), using the localisation task. SL interpreters presented reduced hand size in near-reaching condition, with characteristic underestimation of finger lengths, and reduced overestimation of hands and wrists widths in comparison with controls. This difference was lost in far-reaching space, confirming the effect of expertise on hand representations is closely linked to the spatial context where an action is performed. As SL interpreters are also experts in the use of their face with communication purposes, the effects of expertise in the metrics of the face were also studied (Experiment 2). SL interpreters were more accurate than controls, with overall reduction of width overestimation. Overall, expertise modifies the representation of relevant body parts in a specific and context-dependent manner. Hence, different representations of the same body part can coexist simultaneously.

Scientific and public health knowledge must be communicated efficiently to the public during a health crisis to allow communities to prepare, respond and recover. Public briefings and national campaigns are important components of this communication, and sign language interpreting may be an element of this process. This paper examines the experiences of sign language interpreters during the COVID-19 crisis in Ireland and the UK, and explores their role in providing access to scientific and public health information for the Deaf or hard of hearing (DHH) community. Findings are based on interviews conducted in the first half of 2020 with 16 Irish Sign Language (ISL) or British Sign Language (BSL) interpreters or science communicators, 11 of whom had direct experience of interpreting during COVID-19 briefings. These interviews constitute authentic accounts of sign language interpreters working during a global health crisis. Interviews were qualitatively analysed to discuss how specialised competence and scientific understanding factored into participants' experiences and to derive lessons to inform future crises.

This methodological essay describes the generativity of collaborative collaging in a qualitative inquiry project with American Sign Language (ASL) interpreters who serve D/deaf students within a public university. Sign language interpreting is a demanding profession requiring physical endurance, creativity, and quick mental processing to switch between spoken and sign language. Interpreters’ visual communicative culture aligns conceptually with the embodied arts-based, visual, and tactile research technique of collaging. We first introduce collaging scholarship to ground our discussion of using collaging as a method within this case study of ASL interpreters. We then provide an overview of ASL interpreter research and our case study to situate the collaging method used alongside other approaches, asking, “How was collaging a productive method for exploring interpreters’ understanding of their work experiences?” We describe the use of the method and the productivity of interpreters’ collaging for surfacing embodied experiences, fueling collaborative meaning-making, and showing rather than telling aspects of interpreters’ labor in another expressive language. We conclude by identifying the value of collaborative collaging in this case study and for other researchers, issues, and contexts.

With an indisputable complexity of communication for hearing and speaking impaired people, most sign language recognition systems utilize virtual reality or onscreen robots. This paper presents the design and development of a special and low-cost humanoid robot that can perform as a sign language interpreter. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first endeavor to fabricate a humanoid robot for Bangla sign language (BdSL) and Medical signs interpretation. Considering the plethora of design criteria and balancing between rigidity and flexibility 3D models of the robotics parts are designed and 3D printed ensuring cost efficiency. With the help of modern fabrication technology, the robot is developed and assembled with proper actuators and circuitry. An image dataset is built comprising 950 images for BdSL recognition and made publicly available. We utilized the Recurrent neural network (RNN) and Convolutional neural network (CNN) for deep learning model establishment and feature extraction from video and image data. The developed humanoid robot has 43 Degrees of freedom (DoF) which includes two 15 DoF hands. It can imitate 16 BdSL alphabets in sign language, can capture a video or image input in real-time from the user, and recognize 10 medical signs and 38 alphabets of BdSL. The learning model for video-based medical sign recognition achieved 87.5% test accuracy. Image-based Bangla sign language recognition achieved an overall test accuracy of 98.19% in our dataset and 93.8% in another available dataset. Compared to the state-of-the-art robotic systems for sign language interpretation, our approach has achieved higher kinematic characteristics, remarkable results in sign recognition, and impressive competency in sign imitation; all at almost 10 times lower cost than the state-of-the-art systems. The results are evidence that our approach is efficient and suitable in helping hearing and speaking impaired people. Moreover, this work initiates a research scope that can be further extended for creating equal opportunities for the hearing and speaking impaired community.

This mixed methods study investigated the effects of directionality (language direction) and age of signed language acquisition on the simultaneous interpreting performance of professional English/Auslan (Australian Sign Language) interpreters, who comprised native signers and non-native signers. Each participant interpreted presentations simultaneously from English into Auslan, and vice versa, with each task followed by a brief semi-structured interview. Unlike a similar study, results reveal no significant differences between the native signers’ English-to-Auslan simultaneous interpreting performance and their Auslan-to-English simultaneous interpreting performance, suggesting that balanced bilingual interpreters are free from the rule of directionality. Although this finding held true for the non-native signers, results indicate a need for the non-native signers to continue to enhance their signed language (L2) competence. Furthermore, although the native signers were similar to the non-native signers in overall simultaneous interpreting performance in each language direction, the native signers were significantly superior to the non-native signers in both the target text features and delivery features of English-to-Auslan simultaneous interpreting performance. These findings also suggest that the non-native signers need to further improve their signed language (L2) proficiency. Nevertheless, an analysis of the qualitative interview data reveals that the professional interpreters perceived distinct challenges that were unique to each language direction.

This introduction presents an overview of the key concepts discussed in the subsequent chapters of this book. The book focuses on the cognitive processes and theoretical foundations of sign language translation and interpreting. It focuses on sign language translation studies and includes three contributions. The book then discusses sign language interpreting studies. It also explores the education of sign language translators and interpreters. The book addresses the politics of service delivery for both sign language translation and interpreting. It then looks at the delivery of sign translation and interpreting services in public service settings. The book also presents a view of interpreting as a multimodal–multilingual task as a consequence of the interactions between signed and spoken interlocutors. It presents an analysis on Argentine Sign Language sign language interpreter teamwork during sign language translation/interpretation of parliament broadcasts on TV, audiovisual contents, TV programmes, and webcasting.

Deaf people are among those who, due to their insufficient knowledge of Polish, are compelled to use interpreting services in all settings. In order to exercise their right to full access to information within both public and private services, they need highly skilled sign language interpreters. These, however, have relatively limited opportunities of professional development and no possibility to pursue higher education in the area of sign language interpreting. In our paper a pioneer project, consisting in providing training opportunities for Polish Sign Language (PJM) interpreters on the use of strategies and techniques in public service interpreting, is presented. The study is based on a mixed-method approach combining a qualitative and quantitative analysis. In particular, the results of observations of the use of techniques in public service interpreting made during two, 3-hour each, training workshops organized for PJM interpreters are discussed, followed by the presentation of the results of a survey concerning the use of interpreting techniques carried out among the participants of the above two workshops. The results of both the observations and the survey have inspired many questions concerning an ethical aspect of both spoken and sign language interpreting techniques. Furthermore, a necessity to implement a project relating to further training and research, of which the discussed pilot project is a promising point of departure, has been confirmed.

The present study describes how Swedish Sign Language (SSL) interpreters systematically use signing space and movements of their hands, arms and body to simultaneously layer iconic expressions of metaphors for differences and for time, in ways previously not described. This is analyzed as the interpreters embodying metaphors, and each of the conceptual metaphors they embody seems to be expressed in a distinct manner not noted before in accounts of the structure of signed languages. Data consists of recordings of Swedish-SSL interpreting by native SSL signers. Rendering spoken Swedish into SSL, these interpreters produce complex sequences making abundant use of the circumstance that in signed language you can express several types of information simultaneously. With little processing time, they produce iconic expressions, frequently using several underlying conceptual metaphors to simultaneously layer information. The interpreters place individual signs in relation to time lines in order to express metaphorical content related to time, and use movement’s of their bodies to express comparisons and contrasts. In all of the analyzed sequences, the interpreters express the metaphor difference-between-is-distance-between. In addition, they layer metaphors for difference and time simultaneously, in some instances also expressing the orientational metaphor pair more-is-up and less-is-down at the same time.

This paper discusses the process of undertaking an exploratory longitudinal study of language learning and interpreter aptitude. It discusses the context of aptitude testing, the test selection for a test battery, the recruitment of subjects within the small-scale study (n=22) and the administration of that battery within the context of whether longitudinal studies are feasible with small cohorts of sign language interpreters. Sign languages continue to be languages of limited diffusion in Europe. Even with gradually increasing numbers of ‘hearing’ sign language users, typically those wishing to become sign language interpreters do not have high levels of sign language fluency prior to enrolling in sign language interpreter training. As such, these students need to gain fluency in sign language, whilst also beginning to engage in interpreter education and interpreting-skills development. To date there is little understanding of how best to screen sign language interpreter program applicants to ensure the effective use of resources, i.e. to educate those who will both learn sign language to C1 fluency (Pro-signs, 2016) during the BA and also be able to learn how to interpret. Longitudinal studies enable us to take a longer view of learning and the professionalisation of skills and knowledge. They do, however, require significant time and this in itself can prove to be an obstacle when university researchers are required to produce tangible research outputs for career goals such as promotion or tenure.

The concept of ‘trust’ is frequently used when discussing the working relationship between deaf signers and signed language interpreters, with interpreters often claiming that trust is a prerequisite to a successful interaction. This paper presents original data from an in-depth research project which used collaborative autoethnography to gather the experiences of seven deaf academics who work regularly with British Sign Language (BSL) interpreters, who interpret between BSL and spoken English, to analyse the concept of ‘trust’ in our working relations with BSL interpreters. We found that ‘trust’ is not a useful or productive concept for our interpersonal and professional aims. Instead, we outline multiple ways in which deaf academics can assess and evaluate interpreters’ values, competencies, and performance without relying on ‘trust’. Our findings provide an important, powerful and under-explored perspective on the working relations between deaf academics and interpreters. We suggest these findings can be applied by deaf BSL signers and interpreters in contexts beyond academia, and constitute an important contribution to the literature on interpreting.

The practice of interpretation of sign languages dates back many, many years, though the practice is just now struggling to achieve the status of a profession — shifting from a more-or-less clinical focus to a more-or-less linguistic one. Research on sign languages, which is itself very recent, has convincingly demonstrated that at least some sign languages are indeed languages in the linguistic sense, thereby forcing us to expand our conceptions of the nature of language and to re-examine our approaches to the study of language. Experiments on the simultaneous interpretation of sign languages are contributing to our knowledge and understanding of language and communication in general as well as to the resolution of problems dealing specifically with sign language interpretation. These are the major points that we have gained from the presentations by Domingue and Ingram, Tweney, and Murphy. The relevance of their discussions of sign language interpretation to the general subject areas of language, interpretation, and communication is largely self-evident. Essentially, we are all saying that the interpretation of sign languages is an integral part of the general study of interpretation and that no description (practical or theoretical) of interpretation which fails to take account of sign language interpretation can be regarded as complete. I have set myself the task of demonstrating this point beyond any doubt. The papers by Domingue and Ingram, Tweney, and Murphy have called attention to a number of problems in interpretation of sign languages. My approach will be to explore some of these problems further in relation to language, interpretation and communication in general.

This chapter offers an overview of sign language (SL) interpretation provision in 20 cities/countries in Asia, covering issues such as the availability of services, institutional support, and the challenges confronting the hearing and deaf interpreters. Eiichi and Shin’ichi reported that by 2001, there were approximately 3,000 certified interpreters in Japan. Among these certified interpreters, however, only 16% worked full-time due to insufficient job opportunities. Xiao and Yu reported two surveys conducted in China, one on SL interpreters and one on the deaf community. The survey questions covered five areas: the profile of the interpreters, the features of the interpretation market, professional issues, interpreting difficulties and directionality, quality issues, and the role of the interpreters. Torsuwan reported on the situation of deaf people and the SL interpretation in Bangkok and the vicinity. Fung investigated how Hong Kong Sign Language–Cantonese interpreters approach sentence structures which required different word orders.