When I watch the morning news before going to work, there is a sign language interpreter in the corner of the screen. Is she giving a word for word interpretation, or just relaying the basic ideas behind the stories?
My understanding of ASL interpretation is that interpreters communicate a detailed translation of what is going on.
However, it is likely not word-for-word because we use so many figurative expressions in English. In that case, the interpreter conveys the meaning of the expression rather than a literal translation.
The Washington Post did a fascinating article recently on interpreters who sign at rock concerts–very intriguing read about the intricacies of translation.
Just like in any language translation, there are harder and easier concepts to convey between English and ASL. Hence the term “interpretation.” They usually try to achieve what is closest to the intended meaning. So, I guess my answer is “neither.”
An interesting article about interpreting pop songs:
ETA: same article. Didn’t see it on preview!
Um, are we just supposed to be guessing since we can’t see it? Running out of time, but a word for word recounting would be based on using an alphabetic system, which is recognizable by a hand in a fairly fixed position only manipulating fingers, and the more commonly used sign languages that are based on gestures, and don’t have direct correspondence to many words.
Sorry, I forget the specific terms used for sign languages, no time to look them up now.
This isn’t true. There is Signed Exact English which shares English grammar and alters ASL signs to correspond directly with English. It is distinct from ASL, which has its own grammar and its own idiom.
SEE is not used by ASL interpreters for the same reason esperanto isn’t used by French language interpreters. They are very closely related, and at least partially mutually intelligible, but not the same.
Let’s put it this way. Would a translation from French or Arabic or Japanese be a word for word interpretation? No it wouldn’t be, because those languages have different grammar and vocabulary. ASL also has a different grammar and vocabulary than English, and so a word for word translation is impossible.
It’s possible to create a Signed English translation that would be word for word, but at that point why not just put up captions?
Thanks, I wanted to get back to this thread and clear that up. I had been told that you don’t even need to know any English to use ASL. SEE is something new to me (I don’t have much contact with people who sign anymore). I think I was correct that using the common alphabetic system would be recognizable from the finger movements though. Is that correct? And what is the term I’m looking for? Is that just ASL Alphabet?
That is correct. They are not grammatically related languages. When people fall into using ASL signs with English grammar, it is considered a pidgin (in SEE the signs are modified to convey certain English language concepts and vocabulary). That said, since ASL is not a written language, English is the native written language of ASL speakers in English-speaking countries.
I think the term for spelling it out by hand is fingerspelling. Fun learning tool here. I SUCK.
You’re talking about fingerspelling. If you watch an ASL interpreter, they’ll break into fingerspelling for names and proper nouns and words where there isn’t a good ASL gloss.
SEE is just a system of using ASL signs in English word order, and including some helper affixes to indicate English grammar.
Apparently some famous folks have their own signs, though. I remember once having a conversation (through an interpreter) with an ASL speaker, and mentioned Einstein. The interpreter conveyed this via a gesture which evoked his distinctive hair.
All deaf people have a name-signs. So typical practice is to fingerspell the name, then give the name sign, and refer to the person by name sign afterwards. The problem comes with people or places that don’t have name signs.
On another board I frequent, a member is a bright 18-year-old boy who was born profoundly deaf. He posts in English words (mixed with a few ‘texting’ shortcuts – he is after all 18!) But he thinks, and writes, in ASL syntax, making his posts sometimes quite intriguing to parse out.
Yep… I remember some of the joke signs for presidents - Carter was a C handshape signing the sign for “peanut”, and Reagan was the R handshape like a gun shooting, and Clinton was the sign for “hypocrite” made with a C handshape, but I don’t remember seeing any signs for either of the Bushes… and nothing yet for Obama - (that I’ve seen yet…)
I’ve seen several different sign names for Obama here in Kenya, where The Deaf community here uses Kenyan Sign Language as well as a lot of ASL. The signs vary from region to region, but in my area I’ve seen a “B” handshape next to the ear and also an “O” shape in a circle. Most famous people have them. One of my students showed me the sign for Bruce Lee (who knew?) and it is awesome: it’s reminiscent of the little motion he did in his movies when he realizes he is bleeding just before he goes into his frenzy.
Of course not. That would be pointless, since CC is available. ASL doesn’t even use the same word order. I could say, “The blue car sped down the narrow road towards the end of a mountain” with a few signs. This is partially why it is interpretation, not translation. ASL is heavy on detail…not that all terps are great or anything, but im wondering if you think ASL is a complete language?
That sounds like a skinny hearing person with a play on words re: ears!
Any language is “heavy on detail” depending on the individual user. How is American Sign Language not a “complete language” and what do you mean by “complete language”?
You misread. I was pointing out that ASL is a full and natural language and wondering if the OP didn’t know that, what with his views on deaf and communication.
ASL is detail rich even in everyday talk. I mean…you can say a lot with just a few signs. It is very visual. So its possible that someone can look at a terp and think, oh, they must not be saying much.
Like I said- sign for car, sign for road, indicate car moving, facial expression and spatial concepts appropriate and zing, that took all of 1/2 a second.
Translating word for word is silly. Like, if you said, “My nose is running”, ASL would ask, “to where??” Or, “I have a cold,” but translating word for word would puzzle people as you cannot own a cold.
It is detail-rich. The specific signs a non user can pick out is only a small part. The rest is in the details.
Like the supposed sign for Obama. in ASL, I could make the B next to my ear, then O while making a small o with my mouth and I just indicated not only who I was talking about, but subliminally conveyed he’s a skinny man with big ears (depending on how it was signed) as signaling the ear can mean a non deaf person, the small o is skinny, and use of first initial is common when talking about a non deaf person. So yeah, visual languages are rich in detail. Kind of like reading Chinese characters. Can’t be boring if you’re fluent.
Some of the “texting” shortcuts are actually abbreviations that date back to TDD/TTY communication. Many of those don’t apply in text messaging or online chat (e.g., “GA” for Go Ahead, or “SK” for Stop Keying), but others have lived on or changed slightly (e.g., “ROFL” for Rolling On Floor Laughing or “CUL” for See You Later).
That is correct. ASL isn’t even based on English; it’s based on French Sign Language. Interestingly, although the denizens of America and Great Britain share English as a spoken language, ASL and BSL (British Sign Language) are completely different.