{"title":"西班牙刑事诉讼语料库口译人员会话管理问题与策略注解","authors":"Marta Arumí, Mireia Vargas-Urpí","doi":"10.1075/TIS.00023.ARU","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This article reviews the design and methodology developed for compiling and analyzing corpora that can inform corpus-based studies\n involving public service interpreting discourses. The corpus was transcribed and annotated using the EXMARaLDA software tools designed for\n working with oral corpora. The annotation system accounts for Wadensjö’s (1998) distinction\n between “talk-as-text” and “talk-as-activity” in order to classify interpreters’ various problems when working in criminal proceedings and\n the strategies they adopt in response. The article provides the results of an analysis of a pilot sample of 20 criminal proceedings,\n focusing on non-renditions and distinguishing between those that are “justified” and those that are “unjustified.” The article then\n discusses these preliminary results as part of the ongoing project.","PeriodicalId":191178,"journal":{"name":"Community Interpreting, Translation, and Technology","volume":"176 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-11-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"14","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Annotation of interpreters’ conversation management problems and strategies in a corpus of criminal proceedings in\\n Spain\",\"authors\":\"Marta Arumí, Mireia Vargas-Urpí\",\"doi\":\"10.1075/TIS.00023.ARU\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n This article reviews the design and methodology developed for compiling and analyzing corpora that can inform corpus-based studies\\n involving public service interpreting discourses. The corpus was transcribed and annotated using the EXMARaLDA software tools designed for\\n working with oral corpora. The annotation system accounts for Wadensjö’s (1998) distinction\\n between “talk-as-text” and “talk-as-activity” in order to classify interpreters’ various problems when working in criminal proceedings and\\n the strategies they adopt in response. The article provides the results of an analysis of a pilot sample of 20 criminal proceedings,\\n focusing on non-renditions and distinguishing between those that are “justified” and those that are “unjustified.” The article then\\n discusses these preliminary results as part of the ongoing project.\",\"PeriodicalId\":191178,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Community Interpreting, Translation, and Technology\",\"volume\":\"176 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-11-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"14\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Community Interpreting, Translation, and Technology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1075/TIS.00023.ARU\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Community Interpreting, Translation, and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1075/TIS.00023.ARU","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Annotation of interpreters’ conversation management problems and strategies in a corpus of criminal proceedings in
Spain
This article reviews the design and methodology developed for compiling and analyzing corpora that can inform corpus-based studies
involving public service interpreting discourses. The corpus was transcribed and annotated using the EXMARaLDA software tools designed for
working with oral corpora. The annotation system accounts for Wadensjö’s (1998) distinction
between “talk-as-text” and “talk-as-activity” in order to classify interpreters’ various problems when working in criminal proceedings and
the strategies they adopt in response. The article provides the results of an analysis of a pilot sample of 20 criminal proceedings,
focusing on non-renditions and distinguishing between those that are “justified” and those that are “unjustified.” The article then
discusses these preliminary results as part of the ongoing project.