 |
customer@davidpublishing.com |
 |
3275638434 |
 |
 |
| Paper Publishing WeChat |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
The Disembodied Conduit: A Cognitive-Pragmatic and Interactional Analysis of Remote Interpretation
Elizabeth Valverde Loaiza, JIA Xiaoqing
Full-Text PDF
XML 68 Views
DOI:10.17265/1539-8080/2026.02.002
University of Shanghai for Science and Technology, Shanghai, China
The systemic integration of remote interpretation modalities—Over-the-Phone (OPI) and Video Remote Interpreting (VRI)—into global communication infrastructures has precipitated a paradigmatic realignment within interpreting practice, necessitating a fundamental reconceptualization of interpreter role, competence, and interaction management. This research employs a rigorous qualitative, practice-based methodology to situate the distinct exigencies of remote English-Spanish interpretation within a synthesized theoretical framework that integrates cognitive load theory with principles of interactional linguistics and incorporates insights from media richness theory and communication accommodation theory. Drawing upon the authors’ extensive engagements within a high-volume, on-demand service environment, we investigated the compounded cognitive-pragmatic pressures induced by contextual deprivation, relentless domain-switching, and the management of high-stakes, emotionally-laden discourse, all of which are recognized antecedents of vicarious trauma and compassion fatigue. The interpreter’s strategic compensatory adaptations are found to be a form of pragmatic engineering, a professional necessity for mitigating the severe constriction of paralinguistic and kinesic channels inherent in technologically-mediated communication. The concluding synthesis advances critical implications for pedagogical reform, professional support infrastructures, and future empirical research, advocating for the formal scholarly and institutional recognition of remote interpreting as a specialized field of inquiry with distinct theoretical and practical parameters.
remote interpreting, disembodiment, cognitive load, pragmatic engineering
Elizabeth Valverde Loaiza & JIA Xiaoqing. The Disembodied Conduit: A Cognitive-Pragmatic and Interactional Analysis of Remote Interpretation. US-China Foreign Language, February 2026, Vol. 24, No. 2, 56-61 doi:10.17265/1539-8080/2026.02.002
Angelelli, C. V. (2004). Revisiting the interpreter’s role. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Argyle, M. (1988). Bodily communication. London: Routledge.
Austin, J. L. (1962). How to do things with words. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bakhtin, M. M. (1986). Speech genres and other late essays. Austin: University of Texas Press.
Baraldi, C., & Gavioli, L. (Eds.). (2012). Coordinating participation in dialogue interpreting. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Bavelas, J. B. (2000). Listeners as co-narrators. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(6), 941-952.
Berk-Seligson, S. (2002). The bilingual courtroom. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Bontempo, K., & Malcolm, K. (2012). Educating interpreters about vicarious trauma. International Journal of Interpreter Education, 4(1), 1-20.
Bot, H. (2005). Dialogue interpreting in mental health. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Braun, S. (2019). Video-mediated interpreting. In The Routledge handbook of translation and technology (pp. 333-348). London: Routledge.
Braun, S., & Taylor, J. L. (Eds.). (2012). Videoconference and remote interpreting in criminal proceedings. Cambridge: Intersentia.
Chernov, G. V. (2004). Inference and anticipation in simultaneous interpreting. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Christoffels, I. K., & De Groot, A. M. B. (2005). Simultaneous interpreting: A cognitive perspective. In Handbook of bilingualism (pp. 454-479). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Daft, R. L., & Lengel, R. H. (1986). Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design. Management Science, 32(5), 554-571.
Davidson, B. (2000). The interpreter as institutional gatekeeper. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 4(3), 379-405.
Dean, R. K., & Pollard, R. Q. (2001). Application of demand-control theory to sign language interpreting. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 6(1), 1-14.
Dean, R. K., & Pollard, R. Q. (2013). The demand control schema. Charleston: CreateSpace.
Díaz-Galaz, S. (2015). The effect of previous preparation in simultaneous interpreting. Across Languages and Cultures, 16(1), 29-49.
Ericsson, K. A., & Kintsch, W. (1995). Long-term working memory. Psychological Review, 102(2), 211-245.
Fantinuoli, C. (Ed.). (2018). Interpreting and technology. Berlin: Language Science Press.
Figley, C. R. (Ed.). (1995). Compassion fatigue. Levittown: Brunner/Mazel.
Flores, G. (2012). Errors of medical interpretation and their potential clinical consequences. Annals of Emergency Medicine, 60(5), 545-553.
Gile, D. (2009). Basic concepts and models for interpreter and translator training. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Giles, H. (Ed.). (2016). Communication accommodation theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Goffman, E. (1981). Forms of talk. Pennsylvania: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Goodwin, C. (2000). Action and embodiment within situated human interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 32(10), 1489-1522.
Gouadec, D. (2007). Translation as a profession. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In Syntax and semantics 3: Speech acts (pp. 41-58). New York: Academic Press.
Hale, S. B. (2007). Community interpreting. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Hale, S., & Napier, J. (2013). Research methods in interpreting. London: Bloomsbury.
Hochschild, A. R. (1983). The managed heart. Oakland: University of California Press.
Inghilleri, M. (2005). The sociology of Bourdieu and translation studies. The Translator, 11(2), 125-145.
Jones, R. H. (Ed.). (2015). Discourse and digital practices. London: Routledge.
Knapp, M. L. (2014). Nonverbal communication in human interaction. Beverly: Wadsworth.
Koch, I. (2018). Cognitive structure in human multitasking. Psychological Bulletin, 144(6), 557-583.
Liu, M. (2008). How do experts interpret? In Efforts and models in interpreting and translation research (pp. 159-177). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Lombard, M., & Ditton, T. (1997). At the heart of it all: The concept of presence. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 3(2).
Maslach, C. (2001). Job burnout. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 397-422.
Mason, I. (Ed.). (2009). Special issue on dialogue interpreting. The Translator, 15(2).
McCann, I. L., & Pearlman, L. A. (1990). Vicarious traumatization. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 3(1), 131-149.
Mellinger, C. D., & Hanson, T. A. (2019). Quantitative research methods in translation and interpreting studies. London: Routledge.
Metzger, M. (1999). Sign language interpreting. Washington: Gallaudet University Press.
Monsell, S. (2003). Task switching. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7(3), 134-140.
Napier, J. (Ed.). (2018). Here or there? Research on interpreting via video link. Washington: Gallaudet University Press.
O’Brien, S. (2020). Translation and technology. In The Routledge handbook of translation and technology (pp. 473-488). London: Routledge.
Pöchhacker, F. (2016). Introducing interpreting studies. London: Routledge.
Risku, H. (2002). Situatedness in translation studies. Cognitive Systems Research, 3(3), 523-533.
Rosenberg, B. A. (2022). The vicarious trauma toolkit. Journal of Healthcare Interpretation, 15(2), 45-60.
Roy, C. B. (2000). Interpreting as a discourse process. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sacks, H. (1974). A simplest systematics for turn-taking. Language, 50(4), 696-735.
Sawyer, D. B. (2004). Fundamental aspects of interpreter education. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Searle, J. R. (1969). Speech acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Seeber, K. G. (2011). Cognitive load in simultaneous interpreting. Interpreting, 13(2), 176-204.
Seeber, K. G. (2017). Multimodal processing in simultaneous interpreting. In The Routledge handbook of interpreting (pp. 155-168). London: Routledge.
Setton, R., & Dawrant, A. (2016). Conference interpreting. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Tipton, R., & Furmanek, O. (2020). Dialogue interpreting. London: Routledge.
Valero-Garcés, C. (2014). Emotional factors in public service interpreting. Translation and Interpreting Studies, 9(1), 90-107.
Verschueren, J. (1999). Understanding pragmatics. London: Arnold.
Wadensjö, C. (1998). Interpreting as interaction. London: Longman.
Zapf, D. (2002). Emotion work and psychological well-being. Human Resource Management Review, 12(2), 237-268.