The Work of Libras-Portuguese Interpreters during the Covid-19 Pandemic: Remote Interpretation and Presumed Interlocution

ABSTRACT

In this article, we present the results of a research that aimed to analyze the Libras-Portuguese interpreters’ work during the COVID-19 pandemic based on three different speech genres: conference, lecture, and musical lives. To this end, we adopted the simple self-confrontation methodology, developed in the context of the French Activity Clinic, and placed Libras interpreters who worked from these genres face to face with their performances. Based on a theoretical articulation established between Bakhtinian thought and sign language translation and interpretation studies, the analysis undertaken, vertically and horizontally, revealed that the dynamics of the pandemic imposed linguistic, procedural and relational demands and adjustments on interpreters.

KEYWORDS:
Interpretation; Brazilian Sign Language; Pandemic; Self-confrontation; Speech Genres

RESUMO

Neste artigo apresentamos os resultados de uma pesquisa que objetivou analisar a atuação de intérpretes de Libras-português durante a pandemia de COVID-19 a partir de três gêneros do discurso diferentes: conferência, aula e lives musicais. Para tanto, adotamos o dispositivo metodológico da autoconfrontação simples, elaborado no contexto da Clínica da Atividade Francesa, e colocamos intérpretes de Libras que atuaram a partir desses gêneros frente a frente com suas atuações. A partir de uma articulação teórica estabelecida entre o pensamento bakhtiniano e os estudos da tradução e interpretação da língua de sinais (ETILS), a análise empreendida, de forma vertical e horizontal, revelou que a dinâmica da pandemia impôs aos intérpretes demandas e adequações de ordem linguística, procedimental e relacional.

PALAVRAS-CHAVE:
Interpretação; Libras; Pandemia; Autoconfrontação; Gêneros do Discurso

Introduction

It is needed to leave the island to see the island.

We cannot see ourselves without leaving ourselves. ¹

José Saramago

There is no doubt that the COVID-19 pandemic that ravaged the planet from the end of 2019 to 2022² has changed substantially the ways of interaction and social organization. Isolated at home as we were stranded with no place to escape, all of us were living the uncertain future and the impacts on the routine and health (especially the mental health). At that moment, we had no idea what would be to come, but we knew that several areas of our life would not be the same, as our daily lives had been completely affected. However, of all these, the most modified in facing the unexpected pandemic period was the work.

In front of the installed chaos, Brazilian Sign Language (Libras)-Portuguese Language (PL) interpreters,³ as well as other categories of workers, were not just impacted but impelled to resignify the ways in which they carry out their activities. Before the pandemic interpreting was almost limited to settings of face-to-face communication in lectures, conferences, medical appointments, public hearings, artistic performances, or other contexts. During the pandemic, interpreting has to take place almost exclusively remotely, mediated by technology when sign language interpreters and deaf people do not share the same physical location (Moser-Mercer, 2005; Alley, 2012; Braun, 2015).

The adaptation and readjustment experienced by the Libras-Portuguese interpreters allowed the permanence of the interpretation work as the deaf community right, guaranteed by the Brazilian legislation, such as Law 10.436/02, Decree 5.626/05, Law 12.319/10 and Law 13.146/15 which, despite referring to no emergency scenarios, such as the pandemic, determine the guarantee to access for deaf people to education, justice, health and culture.

In this direction, the pandemic allowed a twofold scenario to the Libras-LP interpreters’ work: (i) adapting the presential activities to the remote work aiming the interpretation maintenance based on the speech genres mobilized before the pandemic; (ii) the emergence of new genres from these settings.

Regarding the first, the Libras-PL interpreters remote work happened mainly in educational settings, especially due to the presential activities changing in all educational levels that led most institutions to adopt remote⁴ education. This change also happened in conferences, as events of different types, themes and institutions were turned into virtual, revealing, to some extent, the lack or the presence of accessibility to sensorial visual or hearing⁵ disabled people. And related to the second, sign language interpreters started to work in musical live streams, and musical performances without presential audiences. Although for the structure and discursive point of view, the live streams were presential performance adaptations, to the interpreters this was a new genre as before the pandemic there was no mention of these professionals’ work in these cases.

This paper, in this sense, presents part of a post-doc research, developed for the first author under the supervision of the second. The general aim was to analyze the Libras-Portuguese interpreters’ work during the COVID-19 pandemic based on three speech genres: conferences, lectures and musical livestreams. Using the self-confrontation methodology three sign language interpreters, who worked during the pandemic on these speech genres, were invited to enunciate, in an exotopic position related to their work during the pandemic, about their interpretations from Portuguese to Libras. For space reasons, we will present as an analytic category a presumed interlocution in this paper, and its effects on the interpretations of enunciative-discursive strategies, as well as its effects in genre transpositions to the remote interpretation, in the emergency of pandemic situation.

1 Interlingual Interpreting and Its Enunciative-Discursive Dimension

Interpreting is an activity of professional language, complex and multifaceted that “[...] is performed ‘here and now’ for the benefit of people who want to engage in communication across barriers of language and culture” (Pöchhacker, 2004, p. 10). For its realization, in cases where people wish to communicate using different languages, for the interpreter work, one is settled as a source language (S_L) and the other as a target language (T_L).

Languages of different modalities require distinct biophysiological channels for language production and understanding. Mobilizing these modalities in the interpreting activity requires to consider some complexities, since sign language interpreters, or intermodal interpreters (Rodrigues, 2018) are dealing with people who speak different languages but also have distinct sensorial experiences in their perception and expression of the world and reality. Most of these professional work with deaf people, who have “[...] a linguistic identity that goes through a sensorial paradigm fixed in visuality” (Barbosa, 2018, p. 201)⁶ expressed, among other factors, by a language that is gestural-visual, and with hearing people, whose perception is marked, first and foremost, by sonority and manifested by a vocal-auditory language.

This complexity highlights the interpreting act as an interlinguistic mediation activity but also and above all, as an exercise of mediation for subjects who spot themselves linguistically, sensorial, axiologically and discursively in the world. Deaf and hearing people are considered as members of culturally, linguistically, and socially different communities that demand interpreting work for immediate interaction. It calls researchers to dedicate themselves to this topic and articulate concepts arising from different fields of knowledge, such as Interpreting Studies, Linguistics, Applied Linguistics and Discourse Analysis. In this sense, as a complex and multifaceted activity that “concretizes the plurality of worldviews” allowing “[...] the breaking down of borders and the flow of different forms of human existence in their local cultures [...]” (Nascimento, 2018, p. 7),⁷ sign language interpreting demands an equally complex and multifaceted perspective.

Based on these aspects, this work sought to establish a theoretical-methodological dialogue to study this activity from two dimensions, among many of the dimensions existing in exploring this activity: (i) the enunciative-discursive dimension, which encloses the language mobilization in the interpretative process from the symbiotic place of the first person marking by the interpreter, not been him/her the author of the statement produced in the LS; and (ii) the cognitive dimension, considering that the interpreter, as a professional agent of this language activity, undertakes mental and neurocognitive efforts to be able, in an extremely restricted time, to re-enunciate, in the LT, what he/she understood in the LS and, in the case of sign languages, with specific effects given the difference in the language modalities involved in the process.

To this end, we consider productive a dialogue between what has been conventionally called Bakhtinian⁸ thought, which gives rise to what in Brazil is called dialogic discourse analysis (DDA) (Brait, 2008), and the studies of translation and interpretation of sign language (ETILS).

From the first perspective, we mobilize the conception of language presented as social, historical, and ideological, and that considers, for all purposes, that every communicative act is permeated by axiological aspects. In this sense, language, unlike the vision developed for modern linguistics, is not limited to the abstract dimension, at the level of meaning, but involves, above all, the thematic dimension, of meaning, and only occurs when real subjects mobilize semiotic-ideological⁹ systems in equally real and concrete situations.

Here, language materializes in the form of statements that, unlike other approaches and theoretical perspectives, are always concrete and unique and involve everything, from the real language situational conditions of use to the intersubjective dimension of those involved in the communication situation. For Brait and Mello (2008, p. 67), the statement, here, as well as the particularities of its enunciation, necessarily define the interactive process, in other words, the verbal and nonverbal “[...] integrate the situation and, at the same time, are part of a larger historical context, regarding aspects (statements, discourses, subjects, etc.) that precede this specific statement and regarding what it projects ahead [...].”¹⁰

The social organization of real and concrete subjects is urgent for a statement constitution. The interlocution is real, active, and responsive and, in the absence of a concrete, visible and tangible presence, it is occupied, “[...], of a normal representative of the social group to which the speaker belongs” (Vološinov, 1973, p. 85).¹¹

The word, as a statement material unit, “[...] the word is oriented toward an addressee, toward who that addressee might be: a fellow-member or not of the same social group [...]” (Vološinov, 1973, p. 85),¹² showing that “verbal communication can never be understood and explained outside of this connection with concrete situation” (Vološinov, 1973, p. 95).¹³ Therefore, interaction occurs based on the positioning of subjects in social situations, as “each and every word expresses ‘one’ in relation to the ‘other’” (Vološinov, 1973, p. 86)¹⁴ and, in this perspective, the interlocutionary relations established in the immediate social situation of production configure the concrete statement.

Since the concrete statement is founded, above all, on interlocutionary relations and these relations shape the enunciator enunciative-discursive project, the discourse genres, which correspond to the organization by the similarity of these statements (Bakhtin, 1986),¹⁵ guide what the speaker wants to say. These statements, then, are articulated ethically and aesthetically through an architecture that involves everything from the axiological position assumed by the protagonist of the enunciative-discursive act to the effects of meaning caused by it in the spheres of reception and circulation.

The interlocutor position, in this direction, is a central aspect of the concrete statement production and its organization in the genres form, precisely because, in this perspective, language and its organization are defined by the intrinsic relationship of otherness marked by three axiological dimensions that form the architecture of human existence: the I-for-me, the I-for-the-other and the other-for-me.

The Bakhtinian concepts of concrete utterance, discourse genres and otherness have been mobilized for the analysis of corpora of different materialities and consistencies since they encompass the idea of social and historical subject, immediate context and semiotic-ideological dimension. For this reason, the contribution of the Circle allows us to observe the interpretation from an enunciative-discursive perspective because it challenges the researcher enrolled in this perspective to consider the generalities and singularities of their productions based on discourse genres located in different spheres of activity.

From this conception, interpretation will be taken here as a discursive practice that mobilizes genres from different spheres of activity, allowing the interaction of subjects, languages, and cultures (Nascimento, 2018). The interpreter, as an agent of this activity, will be seen as an enunciator crossed and constituted by an axiological position that also influences and impacts the target statement production of the interpretation. The interpreter’s task, from this perspective, is to interpret meanings, transposing, during his/her activity, much more than linguistic systems, as Sobral (2008, p. 33) argues, but performing “[...] legitimate transpositions, which presupposes knowing the meaning production systems that are the languages and the forms the languages have or allow to create meanings of one language in another language.”¹⁶

In this process of (re)constructing meanings from S_L to T_L, the interpreter, in an intense activity. This activity is, evidently, cognitive and needs to consider aspects inherent to how the subjects involved in the mediated interaction understand the world. For the task performed by the subjects focused in this study, the sensory, subjective, cultural and linguistic worlds are in interaction, compelling the interpreter to deal not only with the immediacy characteristic of the interpretive activity but especially with the ways in which these dimensions are intertwined. Sign language interpreters act in the in-between space of the deaf and hearing modes of perceiving and expressing the world and reality because deaf communities, as sociolinguistic minorities, are located within majority societies and are in constant relationship with them and, consequently, influencing and interfering them (Nascimento; Daroque, 2019). Thus, the interaction is marked, among other aspects, by the difference in the modalities of the languages involved and their impacts and effects on the interpretation process.¹⁷

To address these issues, we also invoke concepts from the emerging field known as Sign Language Translation and Interpreting Studies (SLTIS). According to Rodrigues and Beer (2015), this recent field is marked by interdisciplinarity, but it is unique and defined by two specific disciplinary fields: Translation Studies and Interpreting Studies. SLTIS are marked, among other aspects, by the issue of the modality of the languages involved in the translation and interpreting processes and encourages researchers to articulate SLTIS with the field of Sign Language Linguistics, which has, since the 1960s, “faced the challenge of convincing the academic community that sign languages are natural languages. To do this, it has been necessary to show that signed languages share with spoken languages the characteristics that are their defining characteristics” (McCleary; Viotti, 2011, p. 289).

On the scope of theoretical reflections arising from this field, the constant revisiting of these concepts has shown that although in Translation Studies and Interpreting Studies there is much clarity and conceptual and terminological distinction regarding translation and interpretive operationalizations, both from a cognitive, professional, and formative point of view, when sign languages enter the scene, this distinction ends up being rethought, depending on the context of action.

This situation occurs due to what is called language modality effects (Quadros, 2006) that indicate the differences and similarities between vocal-auditory and gestural-visual languages and that have been observed in translating and interpreting processes within the scope of SLTIS. According to Rodrigues (2018), “although the intrinsic characteristics of the oral languages translation and interpretation are shared by the sign language translation and interpreting, these processes have specificities,”¹⁸ which demands that researchers interested in the subject pay attention to the conceptual differences and their practical effects on research and training of translators and interpreters of these languages.

In the Brazilian context, research on the effects of language modality on intermodal translation and interpretation produced to date has sought to discuss, describe, and analyze the cognitive and discursive dimensions and their effects on the translators and interpreters practice and training. Some research has demonstrated the effects of modality on interpretation and translation processes from the perspective of the four-dimensionality of Libras in relation to the Portuguese language, based on empirical-experimental studies (Rodrigues, 2013; Lourenço, 2015) and studies related to the field of discourse (Nascimento, 2011; 2017).

The processes of performing intermodal translation and interpretation (Rodrigues, 2018) are similar to intramodal translation and interpretation of languages, observed in vocal-auditory modality. However, the ways of accessing the target text, as well as the delivery of the product, are marked, among other things, by the need to visualize the speech when the direction of the process is vocal language-sign language. According to Rodrigues (2018, p. 119), translation and interpretation of sign language are commonly recorded on video and access to the text is by visualizing the translator’s body. “The same occurs in the intermodal interpretation process that has sign language as the target text since sign interpreters need to be visible to the audience.”¹⁹

Given these specificities, any translation or interpretation production process for sign language needs to consider the central elements linked to the gesture-visual modality of the target language. Regarding interpretation, Rodrigues (2018) warns that there will not necessarily be a need to use technological equipment for the target audience to access the target text produced by the interpreter, depending on the context of the performance. However, in contexts of large conferences or in which the interpretation needs to be transmitted by technological equipment, a structure for capturing and transmitting the interpreter’s image must be guaranteed.

However, although the transmission of intermodal interpretation was growing in events with large audiences such as conferences, shows, lectures, and religious services, the reality of the Covid-19 pandemic introduced, in Brazil, the remote interpretation as a new work modality, imposing the production and access to the service through technologies mediation, contributing to the expansion of Libras remote interpretation in Brazil.

In his doctoral thesis, Parente Jr (2024) conducted a radiographic study on the performance of Libras interpreters during the pandemic. Through a questionnaire answered by 222 interpreters from all regions of Brazil, the researcher concluded that Libras interpreters had to deal with new work demands that imposed a redefinition of interpreting competence due to the health crisis. According to the author, the pandemic impacted the pricing of services, negotiations of working conditions, the preparation of contracts and budgets, and the management of multiple stimuli, among other elements.

Taking these aspects and the remote interpretation emergence as a new work modality for Libras-Portuguese interpreters in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, the articulation between Bakhtinian thought and the SLTIS allows us to observe the practice of sign language interpretation in this study, considering that:

• - the genre to be interpreted is the aspect that most determines the interpreter’s enunciative act and the interlocutionary relations that, in turn, are those that drive the subjects’ decision-making;

• - the linguistic modalities in an SLI [sign language interpretation] cannot be observed only by their material composition of meaning and by the cognitive control bias because the enunciative act and the concrete situation are determining factors for the use of one or two languages simultaneously (Nascimento, 2016, p. 171).²⁰

2 Study Metodologic Aspects

This research has a qualitative approach and is analytical-descriptive in its nature, aligned with the definition proposed by Gil (2019), which postulate that descriptive and exploratory research are adopted by social researchers concerned with practical action.

The study was submitted, evaluated, and approved by the Research Ethics Committee (CEP) of the School of Philosophy, Letters and Human Sciences of the University of São Paulo (FFLCH-USP)²¹ and developed in the Research Group Sign Language and Cognition (LiSCo) laboratory. The LiSCo Group has been developing research at the interface between Sign Language Linguistics, Translation Studies, Deaf Education and Health Sciences and “its general objective is to study language processing and cognitive functions in individuals who use sign languages, establishing relationships with the areas of education, health and language studies” (Barbosa, 2018, p. 202).²² The group’s recent studies focus on the use of sign language by bilingual deaf person (Barbosa, 2016) and on the interpretation of sign language in health contexts (Barbosa; Marques; Sampaio, 2019), and are therefore an important space to produce research linked to the theme of the Libras-Portuguese interpreter.

2.1 Research Subjects, Self-Confrontation, and Corpus Construction

To understand the performance of Libras interpreters during the pandemic, three Libras-Portuguese interpreters were selected, aged between 20 and 50 years old, one woman and two men. They worked in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic based on the following genres: (i) conferences, (ii) lectures and (iii) musical live streams. These genres were chosen because they were the ones that more circulated through platforms that allowed recording during their performances, such as Google Meet, Zoom and Stream Yard, making it possible to watch the material that is already stored on platforms such as YouTube.

The inclusion criteria were: (i) having worked in one of the three genders; (ii) having at least four years of experience as a Libras interpreter; (iii) having completed some training course at undergraduate, specialization, extension or free course level in institutions representing the deaf community.

The methodological model adopted was the simple self-confrontation, which was originally proposed by the French linguist Daniel Faïta (2005) in the context of the Activity Clinic, aiming to look at language in a work situation, enabling the analyst/researcher to observe how the activity protagonists mobilize, in words, what is found in the field of action. The methodology allows and relies on the “[...] possibility of varied and creative methodological designs [...] that make diverse materials dialogue [...]” given that “[...] it is not the technological sophistication of the model that guarantees a transformative effect of the activity, but rather this capacity for dialogic listening of the researcher, in the different enunciative-discursive planes that the activity itself allows” (Moura-Vieira, 2012, p. 136).²³ The choice of this methodological model is justified, therefore, by the fact that it allows the dialogic movement around what the protagonists see about what they do.

The methodology is structured in three phases: 1) constitution of the analysis group, which consists of choosing the collective to be analyzed and the number of protagonists who will take part in the activities to be filmed; 2) carrying out simple self-confrontations, when, after filming the interpretation activities, the participants discursively mobilize the experiences observed in the recorded act. In simple self-confrontation, the protagonist produces a discourse in reference to the observed activity together with the analyst/researcher; and 3) extension of the analysis work, which corresponds to the researcher’s work with the statements produced in the self-confrontations (Vieira; Faïta, 2003).

In the first stage, the interpreters were recruited and invited to participate in the study. The first contact was initially via social media or email, where the project was explained. With the subject acceptance, the Termo de Consentimento Livre Esclarecido [Informed Consent Form] (TCLE) was sent. After signing the form, we scheduled a day for the second stage. After the participants accepted and signed the TCLE, we asked them to send at least three videos with performances from the indicated genres. From the list sent by the participants, we selected one video based on the duration criterion, considering the shortest time as a parameter.

In the case of the genre lecture, there were some specificities. We contacted different professionals who were interested in participating in the research, but unfortunately, for institutional reasons, they were unable, given that, in some places, classes recorded during the pandemic were deleted for data storage reasons, or the institution did not authorize the use of the material due to possible problems with students information, based on the Lei Geral de Proteção de Dados [Brazilian General Data Protection Law], 13.709/18. However, after several contacts, we obtained authorization from a private Higher Education institution in the city of São Paulo to conduct the self-confrontation based on a lecture held in a specialization course in Translation and Interpretation of Libras/Portuguese that, during the pandemic, like many other courses, began to be held remotely. All class participants signed a consent form authorizing the use of voice and image.

In the second stage, self-confrontations were carried out remotely on the RNP Web Conference Platform (https://conferenciaweb.rnp.br/), which allows the presentation of people’s images and the use of visual resources such as videos, slides and others below the image. The platform proved to be very useful for conducting the research because, during the self-confrontation, it was possible to see the interpreter and the source material. The platform offers image and sound recording resources but, to be sure we have the data, we also chose to record the computer screen during the self-confrontation using the Screenrec software.

In all self-confrontations, we asked participants to tell us about their stories with sign language, when they started working as interpreters, and what the context of their work was at that time. After this first part, we effectively began the self-confrontation process. In all of them, however, when we reached the current context of work, it was possible to make a direct connection between the experience with the pandemic, which was, in this sense, an important point of connection with what would be done next. The first self-confrontation was the genre conferences which lasted 1 hour, the second was the genre video lecture which lasted 1 hour and 10 minutes, and the third was the genre music livestream which lasted 1 hour and 12 minutes.

Figure 1
Self-confrontations Records

The real names, as well as the images of the participants, are used in the analysis and statements discussion for two reasons: (i) the interpreters did their commentaries in Portuguese discussing their performances in Libras. In this sense, it was necessary, during the transcription, to use excerpts of signs and images in the discussion since the statements will be bimodal in nature, that is, two different linguistic modalities (visual-gesture and oral-auditory). Since Libras is a visual-gesture language and all discursive production occurs with the use of the body, the image of the speaker is essential for the research; and (ii) since their image will be used, it makes no sense to use fictitious names.

The corpus generated has a linguistic-discursive nature, that is, they are statements produced by the interpreters about and based on the interpretative situation observed during the self-confrontation. In other studies that used the same methodological model with sign language interpreters (Nascimento, 2016; Nascimento & Nascimento, 2021; Nascimento & Brait, 2021; Araújo, 2023; Fraga, 2023) there was the appearance of double linguistic-enunciative materiality:

(i) monomodal statements, when the interpreters use only one of the languages without overlapping the other. In this case, there is a large discursive production in PL [Portuguese language], the research subject’s mother language, to comment on the interpretive activity; (ii) intermodal statements, when both languages are produced simultaneously during the comments on the activities (Nascimento, 2016, p. 222).²⁴

In the use of this methodological model, there are also specific forms of citation, such as transliterated intermodal citation, marked using direct discourse in Libras and its vocal transliteration into Portuguese, and demonstrative intermodal citation, marked by the demonstration of the term in Libras and the referencing in Portuguese through demonstrative deictics (Nascimento, 2016; Nascimento; Brait, 2021). Considering the differences in the modality of the languages mobilized during intermodal enunciations, a multimodal transcription system (Nascimento, 2023) was developed to allow the appearance of the linguistic materialities of sign language and Portuguese. In this system, the strategy combines Pretti’s (2003) proposal with the insertion of images so that it is possible to visualize the overlapping of the languages used by the enunciators. As Nascimento (2023, p. 19) describes,

The strategy, then, was to use “[”, as in Pretti’s model (2003), to highlight the overlapping of languages. To show the use of deictics performed by the speakers during the intermodal bilingual citation, we used the color red and, below the image, the gloss of the equivalent lexicon given by the subject of the activity or the description of the Libras grammatical aspect.²⁵

To analyze the statements, we adopted Campos’ (2018; 2021) proposal of verticalization and horizontalization in research carried out in the Human Sciences. This approach, also anchored in the Bakhtinian perspective,

[...] allows the researcher to seek the possible degree of generalization in research articulating the depth and the scope, a generally complex resolution equation in research aimed at listening to otherness, whose corpus is composed of interviews, focus groups, testimonies, among other possibilities (Campos, 2021, p. 419).²⁶

The path taken by Campos (2021, p. 419) indicates that the intersection of these axes allows, during the corpus analysis, the construction of a sort of security for the researcher’s conclusions, given that “[...] verticality [is] the theme of the interviewed subjects and horizontality, the theme of the researcher subject.” In this sense, “the method carries out the dialogic proposal by opening itself to the chorus that participates in this delicate dialogue between subjects who occupy their discursive places, but in permanent contact.”²⁷

Therefore, we will undertake an analysis of each interview, diving deeply into the socio-historical position of each elf-confronted individual based on the discourse genres they interpreted and used, and then look for common themes among the interviews, seeking some possible generalization about the sign language interpretation in the context of the pandemic. In this article, for reasons of space, we present a section of the horizontal analysis when the researcher, from his privileged and axiological position, can observe all the individual statements and seek generalizations, an ambition that, in a certain way, all research seeks (Campos, 2021). The category selected for this work was the presumed interlocution as a guideline for remote interpretation.

3 The Presumed Interlocution as a Guide for Linguistic-Enunciative Choices and the Remote Interpretation Process

During the self-confrontations, it was possible to observe a recurring concern with the real or presumed audience. However, the lecture and conference genres had direct interlocutions with the interpreters’ speeches and were known to them. In the first, due to the unique dynamics of the remote lecture with open cameras and deaf students, the interpretation was directly delivered and received prompt feedback on the content understanding, something like in-person lectures. In the second, the interpretation was bidirectional, with the presence of a deaf mediator in the conference. In this case, the interpreter had a direct and responsive dialogue, signing in Libras to introduce the guest and, afterwards, was attentively watching the interpreted content. In the musical livestream interpretation, there was no direct dialogue with deaf people, since the team was composed of three hearing interpreters and it did not take place in a completely remote environment, unlike the other genres. In this case, the interpreters were at the location where the live show was taking place with the singers, without deaf people and without an immediate response from the deaf people.

SELF-CONFRONTATIONS EXCERPTS

Cleverson In an in-person interpretation, I would be able to see the audience’s feedback and then adjust my interpretation if necessary. So, for me, this is a big challenge when I am interpreting remotely. I need this feedback to adjust my interpretation, to know if I’m doing well or if I suddenly need to change the linguistic register or change my strategies. I think this is the main point because there is no feedback from the audience, also the reduced viewing space. It took me a while to get used to it. And then, thirdly, I have concerns about how the technology works.28 Ricieri Something I noticed here was that in a moment when the teacher did something funny and one of the deaf students, Cris, she made a joke too and I interacted with her, it’s like:::... in a more informal way, I could say, you know...29 Regiane: It’s you and the person watching that livestream and you have that interaction, so at some moments you’ll see that I interacted with the screen, and I went back to the camera. So, he said something like “ah I want to meet you, me and you” so it’s me and you ((gestures to the camera)), right, if the singer positioned himself/herself for the audience, we also have to position ourselves for the audience.30

Cleverson	In an in-person interpretation, I would be able to see the audience’s feedback and then adjust my interpretation if necessary. So, for me, this is a big challenge when I am interpreting remotely. I need this feedback to adjust my interpretation, to know if I’m doing well or if I suddenly need to change the linguistic register or change my strategies. I think this is the main point because there is no feedback from the audience, also the reduced viewing space. It took me a while to get used to it. And then, thirdly, I have concerns about how the technology works.28
Ricieri	Something I noticed here was that in a moment when the teacher did something funny and one of the deaf students, Cris, she made a joke too and I interacted with her, it’s like:::... in a more informal way, I could say, you know...29
Regiane:	It’s you and the person watching that livestream and you have that interaction, so at some moments you’ll see that I interacted with the screen, and I went back to the camera. So, he said something like “ah I want to meet you, me and you” so it’s me and you ((gestures to the camera)), right, if the singer positioned himself/herself for the audience, we also have to position ourselves for the audience.30

From a Bakhtinian perspective, no statement is spoken to the void, that is, all speech is addressed, intended for someone. Voloshinov (2017, p. 204), for example, states that “[...] the statement is formed between two socially organized individuals, and, in the absence of a real interlocutor, it is occupied by the image of the average representative of that social group to which the speaker belongs.” Grillo (2023, pp. 16-17), when discussing translation from this perspective, states that

extralocalization and vision surplus are the conditions for the dialogical relations operated by translators during their metalinguistic activity. Firstly, the translator places two cultures and two languages in dialogue in order to, through comparison, make the translated text possible. When preparing his/her text, the translator considers the apperceptive field of perception of the discourse by the recipient (Bakhtin, 2016[1953-1954], p. 63): what the translator assumes to be known or not by the recipient, his convictions, his values, his tastes, etc. However, it is not only the presumed (second) addressee that interferes, the translation is constituted through dialogical relations with an invisible third party, a supra-addressee (Bakhtin, 2016[1959-1960], pp. 104-105): in the case of a scientific work translation, the past and present dominant ideas and their authors in a scientific sphere (e.g. linguistics, literary theory, etc.) and their place in the scientific field in general and in the past, present and anticipated future culture.³¹

Although it addresses translation, not interpretation, from an operational point of view, Grillo’s (2023) quote helps us think about the relationship of destination in the interpretive process. In their work, the interpreter generally deals with immediate recipients. In contexts considered and called community-based (those involving the communicational mediation of minority language speakers in situations of public service use, for example), the public is in front of them. With the pandemic, these contexts were reinterpreted due to social distancing.

Each genre observed in the self-confrontations presents unique interactional dynamics because they are, evidently, different. However, it is clear that, of the three, the genre lecture seemed to preserve, based on the observations made by the interpreter, the dynamics produced in the face-to-face plan. The speaker’s alternation and the student’s interaction with the teacher and interpreters is something constant in face-to-face educational interpreting.

However, in the genre conference, as we see in the excerpt highlighted above from Cleverson’s speech, the absence of a wider audience that could show him positivity or negativity in relation to his interpretation left him in a kind of “limbo,” of the emptiness of the other, since the feedback from this real interlocutor contributes to the interpretation adequacy.

This feedback has already been highlighted in studies on interpreting in this genre, as developed by Pointurier-Pournin (2014), who observed simultaneous interpreting of French sign language in her doctoral thesis, based on the model of cognitive efforts developed by Gile (1995). In this model, based on a cognitive perspective, Simultaneous Interpreting (SI) is the sum of hearing (A), memory (M), production (P), and coordination of these efforts (Gile, 2009; 2015), but Pointurier-Pournin (2014) added two more efforts that are directly linked to sign language interpreting: Self-Management in Space (SMS), which includes the physical positioning of the interpreter and the use of space to optimize the reception of the French Sign Language as well as the visibility of deaf people in the audience; and Immediate Interaction with Deaf People (IIS), which concerns parallel interactions between deaf people in the environment or with the interpreter himself, requiring other attention resources (Pointturier-Pournin & Gile; 2012; Pointturier-Pournin, 2014; Gile, 2016).

In Nascimento and Nascimento (2021), it is also observed that the dynamics of the interpretation spatial-visual composition in face-to-face conferences that usually takes place at events, offers the interactive possibility of deaf people with interpreters during the interpretation, allowing, in this sense, an adaptation, alteration, reformulation of the interpretation based on what is observed in the facial, behavioural, and discursive response of the audience.

In the musical live stream genre, the interpreter’s team seeks strategies to ensure, assuming an audience that consumes the interpretation, the transmission of the meaning and “spirit” established by the live show’s atmosphere. The use of the lexicon “energy” by the self-confronted performer shows concern for those who were watching. In this case, the presence of Libras interpreters in musical live stream revives the old controversy over the relationship established between deaf people and music.

For a long time, music interpretation was seen as a colonizing practice that imposed the hearing being ways in the world to the deaf people who, for biological reasons, do not have the same sensory access to music as a cultural production of the societies in which they live. However, some studies have been addressing this old issue and demystifying understandings of the relationship between these subjects and music. This is what Oliveira’s (2021) study does, interviewing deaf people from a deaf association in a city in Brazil northeast and identifying that deaf people experience music both through interpretation into Libras and through vibratory sensoriality and, in some cases, when there are traces, auditory as well. Fraga’s (2023) research also discusses this issue based on a case study with a deaf interpreter who worked on an interpretation team in a musical live stream event. Through the self-confrontation model, the deaf interpreter also makes notes about the cultural differences between the deaf and hearing ways of producing art and their impact on the Libras interpreting. In this sense, the concern narrated by the interpreter in the musical livestream genre meets a presumed interlocutor, but one who consumes that cultural product through his or her interpreting work.

The issue of presumed interlocution was a factor that impacted the interpreters’ decisions during the interpretation process. Not knowing the immediate audience was a decisive factor in the use of some interpretative strategies, including the use of discursive expansions at the syntactic-spatial level and the use of more than one lexicon to refer to the same concept.

As previously discussed, sign language is a gesture-visual language in which linguistic production takes place in space. According to Quadros (2022), there are four spaces in Libras from a grammatical point of view: (i) wide space, in which the signer uses amplitude in the production of signs because there is no spatial restriction; (ii) intermediate space, in which the signer produces sign language within frame limited by the waist and head height; (iii) restricted space, in which linguistic production is limited and the body is partially visible, restricted more to the shoulders; and (iv) highly restricted space, in which the body is barely visible and the signer uses sign language closer to the face and shoulders. Each of these spaces has grammatical production, but it is characteristic of them. Spaces can also be referential. According to Lidell (1995), who discusses the issue of space in sign languages based on Fauconnier’s theory of mental spaces (1994), the spaces of discursive production in sign language are cognitively integrated with discourse.

Based on this perspective, Moreira (2006) and Araújo (2016) describe the three possible spaces for discursive production in Libras: (i) real space, which would be a “mental representation” of the immediate physical environment in which the speech act in sign language occurs. It is “real” because discursive production in sign language is anchored, enunciatively, in present references through pointing that works as demonstrative deictics; (ii) surrogate space, which corresponds to a space where things and people are represented in the first person as if they were present. In this space, the signer incorporates the physical, behavioural, and emotional being forms that he or she seeks to represent. The signer, in this sense, moves between the position of enunciator and narrator of past, present, or future events and situations; and (iii) token space, in which the entities or things referred are represented in the form of a fixed point in physical space. Entities are invisible, they are just points associated with some real mental representation. In this space, production is more limited because it is always anchored, referentially, at the same point in space.

The self-confrontations show a concern with discursive production in sign language according to each genre that imposes on interpreters, stylistic and grammatical aspects that are specific to them. Bakhtin (1986)³² reminds us that every statement is a link in the chain of discursive communication. It is the speaker’s active position in this or that field of object and meaning. Therefore, each statement is characterized, above all, by a certain semantic-objective content. The choice of linguistic means and discourse genres is determined, firstly, by the tasks (by the idea) of the subject of the discourse (or author) centred on the object and meaning. It is the first element of the statement that determines its stylistic-compositional peculiarities.

In this sense, discursive production in sign language and the use of the signing space are marked by the discourse genre, but in the cases under analysis, they are determined by the supports in which the discourse in Libras will be conveyed, as evidenced by the following excerpts.

SELF-CONFRONTATIONS EXCERPTS

Cleverson: And then I’ll go back a little bit to the theoretical part there. During my academic career I had contact with some ways of translating, of interpreting in some theoretical schools and the one I got closest to, the one I had the most affinity with was the functionalist translation, right. And then I realized that maybe it’s::: this theoretical school has influenced me in my interpretation. Why? Ricardo says, right, “that the school needs to know” right, “the CODA” which is that hearing child of deaf parents. I add one or two signs there because I believe that at the time I understood why this knowing is not that superficial knowing. So knowing differently, so I made the conventional sign for knowing in Libras which is this one here, but then I made this one here. Many times we put for all this, you also need to observe that person more closely. So I put it in my head that the school needs to get to know this student who is the CODA more deeply, right? And also the sign of noticing. I did the one to look at that choice I no longer remember what was going through my head for me to choose that term instead of the sign of perceiving but of knowing to add this sign was a conscious choice33 Ricieri One more observation here, he/the teacher used a term from this interpretation modality that I didn’t know and then I realized that I looked to the side to get Talita’s support/I didn’t either/I couldn’t, I couldn’t spell it because I didn’t know the word and the teacher, he realized that I was having difficulty and then he interrupted the class so he could spell it and help me, right, to explain this concept so it was something that I noticed here too...34 Regiane Eh::: another thing we were also concerned about in the interpretation is that you make some cultural adaptations, for example, he said in one part of the song: “I’m going to call you and I’m going to tell you that I’m your fan” So, how do I, a deaf person, call someone else, right? He’s not going to call this/in the way we use it today/a little bitless, right, that’s why everything is spoken today, when you/ “oh my God, who’s calling,” anyway... Ah::: you’re not going to make that kind of call where you’re going to use your voiceb right, not this oral part, he will use a video call... so they are small details that you/35

Cleverson:	And then I’ll go back a little bit to the theoretical part there. During my academic career I had contact with some ways of translating, of interpreting in some theoretical schools and the one I got closest to, the one I had the most affinity with was the functionalist translation, right. And then I realized that maybe it’s::: this theoretical school has influenced me in my interpretation. Why? Ricardo says, right, “that the school needs to know” right, “the CODA” which is that hearing child of deaf parents. I add one or two signs there because I believe that at the time I understood why this knowing is not that superficial knowing. So knowing differently, so I made the conventional sign for knowing in Libras which is this one here, but then I made this one here. Many times we put for all this, you also need to observe that person more closely. So I put it in my head that the school needs to get to know this student who is the CODA more deeply, right? And also the sign of noticing. I did the one to look at that choice I no longer remember what was going through my head for me to choose that term instead of the sign of perceiving but of knowing to add this sign was a conscious choice33
Ricieri	One more observation here, he/the teacher used a term from this interpretation modality that I didn’t know and then I realized that I looked to the side to get Talita’s support/I didn’t either/I couldn’t, I couldn’t spell it because I didn’t know the word and the teacher, he realized that I was having difficulty and then he interrupted the class so he could spell it and help me, right, to explain this concept so it was something that I noticed here too...34
Regiane	Eh::: another thing we were also concerned about in the interpretation is that you make some cultural adaptations, for example, he said in one part of the song: “I’m going to call you and I’m going to tell you that I’m your fan” So, how do I, a deaf person, call someone else, right? He’s not going to call this/in the way we use it today/a little bit less, right, that’s why everything is spoken today, when you/ “oh my God, who’s calling,” anyway... Ah::: you’re not going to make that kind of call where you’re going to use your voiceb right, not this oral part, he will use a video call... so they are small details that you/35

The discussion of possible meanings in linguistic choices in the target language based on what is produced in the source language did not take place because of the change from in-person to remote interpretation. These issues are inherent to the interpretation process itself, but the thematic content imposed by each genre mobilized the interpreters to think of appropriate strategies for that situation.

In the case of the genre conference, the interpreter, in the excerpt presented above, reflects on his active position in understanding the statement in Portuguese and the correspondence of meaning in Libras. The discussion established about the verb “to perceive” and its possibilities of construction in sign language indicate a concern for the audience to understand the thematic content produced in that specific genre. In the same way, the interpreter of the musical live streaming genre reflected, from a cultural position of transit between the two communities, on the experiences of the target audience to insert them in the experience of identification with the song performed. The linguistic-discursive aspects, in these cases, indicate that the genre imposes a form of linguistic production in which “the speaker’s evaluative relationship with his discourse object (whatever that object may be) also determines the choice of the statement lexical, grammatical and compositional resources” (Bakhtin, 1986, p. 84).³⁶

In the case of the genre lecture, another contour and finish is presented, especially in the scene brought up for this discussion. The linguistic production was wrong and this error was noticed by the professor who, from his axiological and discursive position, offers the interpreter a specific finish, precisely because of the possibility of accessing him, of seeing him on the same horizon as the students. Here, the remote dynamic imposed the possibility of linguistic-discursive interaction and contours of meaning that the face-to-face would not allow. The teacher saw the interpreter, but he not only saw, he saw his difficulty and contributed to his task. According to Bakhtin (1990, p. 35, author’s emphasis):

In the category of I, my exterior is incapable of being experienced as a value that encompasses and consummates me. It is only in the category of the other that it is thus experienced, and I have to subsume myself under this category of the other in order to be able to see myself as a constituent in the unitary pictorial-plastic external world.³⁷

Final Considerations

This study aimed to analyze the Libras-Portuguese interpretation using three discursive genres during the Covid-19 pandemic: conferences, lectures, and musical live streaming. As specific objectives, the study sought to answer the following questions: (i) how did the transition from in-person to remote change the use of languages in the Libras-Portuguese interpretation process? (ii) what are the enunciative-discursive strategies used by interpreters when performing genres adapted from in-person to remote, such as conferences and lectures? (iii) how did Libras-Portuguese interpreters deal with enunciative-discursive issues of new genres, such as musical live streaming shows?

Regarding the first question, it was noted that the dynamics of interaction in the analyzed genres imposed new concerns on the interpreters regarding the use of Libras and the Portuguese language. The first and most latent was the one linked to the thematic content of the genres. From the Bakhtinian perspective, adopted in this study, this characteristic provides the finishing touch to the genre, the meaning outline and, is defined by the addressed unit while speaking. It is not restricted to the subject but involves it and shapes it according to the interactions established in the communicative situation based on the sphere of activity in which they are mobilized.

In this sense, the fact that the genres address very peculiar thematic aspects, there was the imposition of specific language uses, especially Libras. In the case of the genre lecture, observed in the self-confrontation based on bidirectionality, it was noted that the interpreter made linguistic-discursive choices based on the social and ideological speaker position and showed concern with the understanding of the presumed audience. Aspects intensified by the thematic outline linked to the deaf community itself. In the genre lecture, the fact that it was an interpreter training course with deaf people present, the interpreter’s lexical-semantic choices perceived during the self-confrontation indicated that the lecture constitutive otherness, intensified by the social, subjective, and linguistic difference of the participants, imposed specific ways of using languages in that context. In the musical livestreaming genre, these choices were guided by the interpreter’s attempt to consider the presumed deaf audience as consumers of that cultural producer who, historically, has always been seen as distant and not characteristic of the deaf community.

Regarding the second question, we noticed an exploration linked to the referential spaces, in the case of Libras, alternation of people and use of speaker’s community dialectal expressions, in the case of Portuguese (specifically in the conference genre). The fact that Libras interpretation, in the three genres, was projected and displayed through a screen, we noticed that the intermediate space was the most used, although in the musical livestreaming genre there was greater approximation to the wide space. A strategy widely used in interpretation to establish discursive meanings in both languages and pointed out during the self-confrontation was the use of discursive correspondence, and not equivalence, as a translation paradigm, which indicates that the genre itself tries to move the interpreter to reflect beyond the abstract dimension of languages.

Finally, regarding musical live streaming, it is clear that the performers needed to create collective agency strategies to deal with the constraints imposed by it. The unpredictable dynamics of the performances, even with playlists and sequential organization of the songs and, therefore, the possibility of intense preparation with the lyrics, indicates that the work carried out is one of interpretation and not translation. The intense preparation of the team does not prevent the change in the dynamics of the in-person interactions of the live streaming show nor the possibility of reorganization, by the singer or the band, of that musical sequence with the insertion of new songs, including those in languages not spoken by the interpreter team.

The pandemic was a very difficult time for the entire planet. The restrictions imposed on social interactions made many people sick and forced us to rethink our relationships, affections, and interactional dynamics. The world of work was extremely affected by the pandemic and, currently, in the post-pandemic scenario, we are harvesting the fruits of these social reorganizations experienced during that period.

In this sense, Libras interpreters and translators were not spared from these changes. However, we can boldly state that this was perhaps the category that benefited most from the new work dynamics established during the pandemic. The imposition of virtuality as a form of interaction and production of knowledge and culture exposed the need to think about environments that are accessible to all audiences. The absence of Libras interpreters and genres such as those addressed in this study not only exposed the disregard of organized groups for the deaf public but also revealed that the social construction for full access for linguistic and social minorities is still something that has not been fully achieved, even after several legal instruments that guarantee rights for the deaf community.

Facing this, we hope that this study can contribute to the reflection on the ways in which the pandemic has reconfigured the work dynamics and the possibilities of access for deaf people to the most varied social fields. The possible effect of this contribution can perhaps be seen in interpreter training courses that, after the pandemic period, were forced to consider remote interpreting work as a possibility and field of activity, something that was not considered before this chaotic period.

• 1
  In Portuguese: “É preciso sair da ilha para ver a ilha. Não nos vemos se não saímos de nós.”
• 2
  The World Health Organization (WHO) declared the end of the Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) regarding COVID-19 on May 5, 2023. Source: https://www.paho.org/pt/noticias/5-5-2023-oms-declara-fim-da-emergencia-saude-publica-importancia-internacional-referente
• 3
  Although the Brazilian legislation (Decree 5.626/05, Law 12.319/10, Law 13.146/15, Law 14.704/23) and several studies use the binomial “translator and interpreter” to refer to the translation and interpretation professional who works with the Libras-Portuguese pair, in this work we will refer only to the interpreter, because (i) we address the issue of interpretation and not translation; and (ii) we understand that the linguistic, discursive, cognitive and labour demands differ from the work of translation.
• 4
  Emergent remote teaching, the term used by different institutions during the pandemic, turned into an alternative to restrictions on in-person interactions. The use of the term remote teaching in place of Distance Education was adopted because this term had been used before this period, coexisting with in-person education as a distinct modality, offered regularly (Saviani and Galvão, 2021, p. 38). However, the authors stated, at the time of the pandemic, that “differently, remote ‘teaching’ is presented as a substitute exceptionally adopted in this period of the pandemic, in which in-person education is prohibited.”
• 5
  In addition to the increase in the number of Libras interpreters, during the pandemic, there was a significant increase in the use of Audio Description, a translation modality that originates in audio-visual media and translates images and situations into words to provide access to people who are blind, visually impaired or have low vision.
• 6
  In Portuguese: “[...] uma identidade linguística que passa por um paradigma sensorial fixado na visualidade.”
• 7
  In Portuguese: “concretiza a pluralidade de visões de mundo;” “[...] a quebra de fronteiras e o fluir de diferentes formas de existir do humano em suas culturas locais [...].”
• 8
  The Bakhtinian thought or the dialogic perspective is how Mikhail M. Bakhtin - in dialogue with other Russian intellectuals at the beginning of the 20th century, especially with the linguist Valentin Vološinov and the literary journalist Pavel M. Medvedev - conceived language in the context of culture, literature, aesthetics, arts and communication, contributing directly to the Human Sciences in general. (Brait, 2002).
• 9
  The semiotic-ideological conceptual category encompasses a double dimension: the representational, symbolic, signic and ideology, the valuation (Vološinov, 1973). For the author, linguist of the Circle, there is no sign without ideology and no ideology without a sign. Accordingly, the semiotic-ideological composition. Considering this perspective, language is not just an abstract system, but a living organism mobilized by social, historical, and axiological subjects, it makes sense to refer to language in this way.
• 10
  In Portuguese: “[...] integram a situação e, ao mesmo tempo, fazem parte de um contexto maior histórico, tanto no que diz respeito a aspectos (enunciados, discursos, sujeitos etc.) que antecedem esse enunciado específico quanto ao que ele projeta adiante [...].”
• 11
  VOLOŠINOV, V. N. Marxism and the Philosophy of language. Trad. Ladislav Matejka and R. Titunik. Translator’s Preface.Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1973.
• 12
  See footnote 13.
• 13
  See footnote 13.
• 14
  See footnote 13.
• 15
  BAKHTIN, M. The Problem of Speech Genres. In: Speech Genres & Other Late Essays. Translated by Vern W. McGee and Edited by Caryl Emerson and Michael Holquist. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1986, pp. 60-102.
• 16
  In Portuguese: realizando “[...] transposições legítimas, o que pressupõe conhecer os sistemas de produção de sentido que são as línguas e as formas que elas têm ou permitem criar sentidos de uma língua em outra língua.”
• 17
  Certainly, other dimensions, such as ethnic-racial and gender relations, permeate these interactions and have concrete effects on the ways in which subjects project themselves and others in their discourses. However, for reasons of space, we will not address these elements in this article.
• 18
  In Portuguese: “embora as características intrínsecas à tradução e à interpretação de línguas orais sejam partilhadas pelos processos tradutórios e interpretativos que envolvem línguas de sinais, esses processos possuem especificidades.”
• 19
  In Portuguese: “No processo de interpretação intermodal que tem como texto alvo a língua de sinais ocorre o mesmo, já que os intérpretes de sinais precisam estar visíveis diante do público.”
• 20
  In Portuguese: “o gênero a ser interpretado é o aspecto que mais determina o ato enunciativo do intérprete e as relações interlocutivas que, por sua vez, são as que impulsionam as tomadas de decisão dos sujeitos; - as modalidades linguísticas em uma ILS [interpretação de língua de sinais] não podem ser observadas, apenas, pela sua composição material de significação e pelo viés de controle cognitivo porque o ato enunciativo e a situação concreta são determinantes para o uso de uma ou de duas línguas simultaneamente.”
• 21
  Research Ethics Committee Process Number: 5.470.018. CAAE: 58926322.4.0000.0138.
• 22
  In Portuguese: “seu objetivo geral é o de estudar o processamento da linguagem e as funções cognitivas em indivíduos que usam línguas de sinais, estabelecendo relações com as áreas da educação, saúde e estudos da linguagem.”
• 23
  In Portuguese: “[...] possibilidade de desenhos metodológicos variados e criativos [...] que façam dialogar materiais diversificados [...];” “[...] não é a sofisticação tecnológica do dispositivo que garante um efeito transformador da atividade, mas sim essa capacidade de escuta dialógica do pesquisador, nos diferentes planos enunciativos-discursivos que a própria atividade permite.”
• 24
  In Portuguese: “(i) enunciações monomodais, quando os intérpretes utilizam apenas uma das línguas sem sobrepor a outra. Nesse caso, há grande produção discursiva em LP [língua portuguesa], a língua materna dos sujeitos da pesquisa, para comentar a atividade interpretativa; (ii) enunciações intermodais, quando são produzidas, durante os comentários das atividades, as duas línguas simultaneamente.”
• 25
  In Portuguese: A estratégia, então, foi usar “[”, tal como no modelo de Pretti (2003), para evidenciar a sobreposição de língua. Para mostrar o uso do dêitico que os enunciadores faziam durante a citação bilíngue intermodal, usamos a cor vermelho e, abaixo da imagem, a glosa do léxico equivalente dado pelo sujeito da atividade ou a descrição do aspecto gramatical da Libras.”
• 26
  In Portuguese: “[...] permite ao pesquisador buscar o grau possível de generalização em uma pesquisa articulando profundidade e abrangência, equação de resolução em geral complexa em pesquisas voltadas à escuta da alteridade, cujo corpus se compõe de entrevistas, grupos focais, depoimentos, entre outras possibilidades.”
• 27
  In Portuguese: “[...] a verticalidade [é] o tema dos sujeitos entrevistados e a horizontalidade, o do sujeito pesquisador;” Nesse sentido, “o método realiza a proposta dialógica ao abrir-se para o coro que participa desse delicado diálogo entre sujeitos que ocupam lugares discursivos próprios, mas em permanente contato.”
• 28
  In Portuguese: “Numa interpretação ao vivo eu conseguiria ver o feedback do público para daí ajustar se necessário a minha interpretação. Então essa para mim é uma grande dificuldade de interpretar remotamente, eu preciso desse feedback para ajustar minha interpretação para saber se eu tô indo bem ou se eu preciso de repente mudar ali o registro linguístico ou mudar minhas estratégias. Esse acho que é o ponto principal né não tem o feedback do público e aí o espaço reduzido de visualização também eu demorei um pouco para acostumar e aí também terceiro a preocupação com o funcionamento da tecnologia.”
• 29
  In Portuguese: “Algo também que eu notei aqui teve um momento dali que o professor fez algo engraçado e uma das alunas surdas, que é a Cris, ela fez uma brincadeira também e eu interagi ali com ela é:::... de uma forma, posso dizer, mais informal assim, sabe...”
• 30
  In Portuguese: “É você e a pessoa que está assistindo aquela live é você ter aquela interação, então em alguns momentos você vai ver que eu interagia com a tela e eu voltava para câmera. Então ele falava assim “ah eu quero te encontrar eu e você” então é eu e você ((gesticula para a câmera)), né, se o cantor/ele se posicionava para o público a gente também tem que se posicionar para o público.”
• 31
  In Portuguese: “a extralocalização e o excedente de visão são as condições para as relações dialógicas operadas pelos tradutores durante sua atividade metalinguística. Em primeiro lugar, o tradutor coloca em diálogo duas culturas e duas línguas a fim de, por meio da comparação, possibilitar o texto traduzido. Ao elaborar seu texto, o tradutor considera o campo aperceptivo de percepção do discurso pelo destinatário (Bakhtin, 2016[1953-1954], p. 63): o que o tradutor supõe ser sabido ou não pelo destinatário, suas convicções, seus valores, seus gostos etc. Contudo, não é apenas o destinatário (segundo) presumido que interfere, a tradução se constitui por meio de relações dialógicas com um terceiro invisível, um supradestinatário (Bakhtin, 2016[1959-1960], pp. 104-105): no caso da tradução de uma obra científica, as ideias dominantes passadas e presentes e seus autores em uma esfera científica (por exemplo, a linguística, a teoria literária etc.) e seu lugar no campo científico em geral e na cultura passada, presente e futura antecipada.”
• 32
  See footnote, 17.
• 33
  In Portuguese: “E aí vou retomar um pouquinho da parte teórica ali. Eu durante a minha trajetória acadêmica eu tive contato com algumas formas de se traduzir, de se interpretar em algumas correntes teóricas e a que eu mais me aproximei, que eu mais tive afinidade foi da tradução funcionalista tá. E aí eu percebi que talvez é::: essa corrente teórica tem me influenciado na minha interpretação. Por quê? O Ricardo fala assim né “que a escola precisa conhecer” né “o CODA” que são ali aquele filho ouvinte de pais surdos. Eu acrescento um ou dois sinais ali porque eu acredito que na hora eu tenho compreendido por que esse conhecer não é aquele conhecer superficial. Então conhecer diferente, então fiz o sinal convencional de conhecer em Libras que é esse aqui, mas depois fiz esse aqui. Muitas vezes a gente colocapara isso tudo de caso também de você observar mais atentamente aquele sujeito. Então eu coloquei assim na minha cabeça que a escola precisa conhecer mais profundamente esse aluno que é o CODA né. E também o sinal de eu fiz o de olhar aí essa escolha eu já não me lembro o que que passava na minha cabeça para eu escolher esse termo em vez do sinal de perceber mas do conhecer de acrescentar esse sinal foi uma escolha consciente”
• 34
  In Portuguese: “Mais uma observação aqui, ele/o professor usou um termo dessa modalidade de interpretação que eu não conhecia e aí eu percebi que eu olhei para o lado para pegar o apoio da Talita/eu não também/eu não, eu não conseguia soletrar porque eu não sabia a palavra e o professor, ele percebeu que eu tava com dificuldade e aí ele interrompeu a aula para poder soletrar e me ajudar, né, pra explicar esse conceito então foi algo que eu percebi aqui também...”
• 35
  In Portuguese: “É::: outra coisa que a gente se preocupava também lá na interpretação é você fazer algumas adaptações culturais, por exemplo, ele falou assim numa parte da música: “eu vou te ligar e vou falar que eu sou seu fã” Então, como que eu surdo liga para o outro, né? Ele não vai ligar nesse/de forma como a gente utiliza hoje/um pouco menos né por isso hoje tudo é oralizado, quando você/ “ai meu Deus, quem tá ligando”, enfim... É::: não vai fazer esse tipo de ligação onde você vai usar a sua voz né, essa parte oral não, ele vai utilizar uma chamada de vídeo... então são pequenos detalhes que você/”
• 36
  See footnote 17.
• 37
  BAKHTIN, M. Author and Hero in Aesthetic Activity (ca. 1920-1923). In: BAKHTIN, M. Art and Answerability. Early Philosophical Essays by M. M. Bakhtin. Translated by Vadim Liapunov. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1990, pp. 4-256.
• Translated by Felipe Venâncio Barbosa - [e-mail]
• Reviews
  Due to the commitment assumed by Bakhtiniana. Revista de Estudos do Discurso [Bakhtiniana. Journal of Discourse Studies] to Open Science, this journal only publishes reviews that have been authorized by all involved.

Research Data and Other Materials Availability

The contents underlying the research text are included in the manuscript.

References

• ARAÚJO, Magali Nicolau de Oliveira de. Os espaços na Libras 2016. 143 f. (Tese) Doutorado em Linguística, Instituto de Letras, Universidade de Brasília, Brasília, 2016.
• ARAÚJO, Quetlin Ester Camargo Ribeiro de. A atuação de tradutores e intérpretes de Libras -língua portuguesa durante a pandemia nos cursos MOOCS do IFRS 2023. 167. (Dissertação). Mestrado em Estudos da Tradução, Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, 2023.
• ALLEY, Erica. Exploring Remote Interpreting. International Journal of Interpreter Education. V. 4, N. 1, pp. 111-119, 2012. Disponível em: http://www.cit-asl.org/new/exploring-remote-interpreting/ Acesso em 20 abr. 2021.
  » http://www.cit-asl.org/new/exploring-remote-interpreting/
• BAKHTIN, Mikhail. Os gêneros do discurso. Organização, tradução, posfácio e notas Paulo Bezerra. Notas da edição russa Serguei Botcharov. São Paulo: Editora 34, 2016.
• BAKHTIN, M. O autor e a personagem na atividade estética. In: BAKHTIN, M. Estética da criação verbal Introdução e tradução do russo de Paulo Bezerra. Prefácio à edição francesa de Tzvetan Todorov. São Paulo: Martins Fontes, 2003. pp. 3-192.
• BRAIT, Beth; MELO, Rosineide. Enunciado/ enunciado concreto/ enunciação. In: BRAIT, B. (Org.) Bakhtin: conceitos-chave. São Paulo: Contexto, 2008. pp. 61-78.
• BRAIT, Beth. Análise e teoria do discurso. In: BRAIT, Beth. (Org.) Bakhtin: outros conceitos-chave. São Paulo: Editora Contexto, 2008. pp. 9-31.
• BRAIT, Beth. Perspectiva dialógica, atividades discursivas, atividades humanas. In: SOUZA-E-SILVA, Maria Cecília Perez; FAÏTA, Daniel. (Orgs.). Linguagem e trabalho: construção de objetos de análise no Brasil e na França. São Paulo: Editora Cortez, 2002. pp. 331-347.
• BRAUN, S. Remote Interpreting. In: MIKKELSON, H.; JOURDENAIS, R. (ed.). Routledge Handbook of Interpreting London/New York: Routledge, 2015. pp. 1-18.
• CAMPOS, Maria Tereza de Arruda. Verticalização e horizontalização em pesquisas em Ciências Humanas. Letras de Hoje, v. 56, n. 3, pp. 405-420, 2021. DOI: 10.15448/1984-7726.2021.3.40677. Disponível em: https://revistaseletronicas.pucrs.br/ojs/index.php/fale/article/view/40677 Acesso em 1 mai. 2024.
  » https://doi.org/10.15448/1984-7726.2021.3.40677.» https://revistaseletronicas.pucrs.br/ojs/index.php/fale/article/view/40677
• CAMPOS, Maria Tereza R. A. Teias do tempo: o jovem do Ensino Médio como sujeito na gestação do futuro. 2018. 351 f. Tese (Doutorado em Linguística Aplicada) - Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo, São Paulo, 2018. Disponível em: https://tede2.pucsp.br/bitstream/handle/21804/2/Maria%20Tereza%20Rangel%20Arruda%20Campos.pdf Acesso em 25 out. 2024.
  » https://tede2.pucsp.br/bitstream/handle/21804/2/Maria%20Tereza%20Rangel%20Arruda%20Campos.pdf
• FAÏTA, Daniel. Análise dialógica da atividade profissional Trad. Maristela Botelho França, Maria da Glória Correa di Fanti, Adautos Antonio M. Vieira. Rio de Janeiro: Imprinta Express, 2005.
• FRAGA, Graziele Lucio Gomes. Relações dialógicas entre um tradutor e intérprete surdo e a sua atuação: um estudo de caso sobre o trabalho em equipe na tradução e interpretação de músicas populares para a Libras, 2023. 127 f. (Dissertação) Mestrado em Estudos da Tradução, Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, 2023. Disponível em https://repositorio.ufsc.br/handle/123456789/254472?show=full Acesso 10 ago. 2024.
  » https://repositorio.ufsc.br/handle/123456789/254472?show=full
• GIL, Antônio Carlos. Métodos e técnicas de pesquisa social. 7. ed. São Paulo: Atlas, 2019.
• GILE, Daniel. Testando a hipótese da “corda bamba” do modelo dos esforços na interpretação simultânea - uma contribuição. Trad. Markus Johannes Weininger, Giovana Bleyer Ferreira dos Santos, Diego Maurício Barbosa. Cadernos de Tradução, Florianópolis, V. 35. N. Especial 2, pp. 590-647, 2015. Disponível em: https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/traducao/article/view/2175-7968.2015v35nesp2p590 Acesso em 13 ago. 2024.
  » https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/traducao/article/view/2175-7968.2015v35nesp2p590
• GILE, Daniel. Interpreting Studies: A Critical View from Within. MonTI, 1, pp. 135 - 155, 2009. Disponível em: https://www.redalyc.org/pdf/2651/265119728011.pdf Acesso em 13 ago. 2024.
  » https://www.redalyc.org/pdf/2651/265119728011.pdf
• GILE, Daniel. The Effort Models and Gravitational Model: Clarifications and Update. Presentation, Gile Clarifications Effort Models, 2016.
• GRILLO, Sheila Vieira de Camargo. A tradução entre o dialogismo, a cultura e a comparação. Cadernos de Tradução, Florianópolis, v. 43, n.1, pp. 1-27, 2023. Disponível em: https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/traducao/article/view/90321/52673 Acesso em 01 mai. 2023.
  » https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/traducao/article/view/90321/52673
• LIDELL, Scott. K. Real, Surrogate, and Token Space: Grammatical Consequences in ASL. In: EMMOREY, Karen.; REILLY, Juddy. (Eds). Language, Gesture and Space Hillsdale, N. J: Lawrence Erbaum Associates, 1995.
• LOURENÇO, Guilherme. Investigando a produção de construções de interface sintático-gestual na interpretação simultânea intermodal. Cadernos de Tradução, Florianópolis, v. 35, 114, v. 2, pp. 320-353, 2015. Disponível em https://doi.org/10.5007/2175-7968.2015v35nesp2p319 Acesso em 28 jun. 2021.
  » https://doi.org/10.5007/2175-7968.2015v35nesp2p319
• McCLEARY, Leland; VIOTTI, Ivani. Língua e gesto em línguas sinalizadas. Juiz de Fora, Veredas On Line, V, 15, N. 1, pp. 289-304, 2011. Disponível em: https://periodicos.ufjf.br/index.php/veredas/article/view/25111 Acesso em 23 jun. 2024.
  » https://periodicos.ufjf.br/index.php/veredas/article/view/25111
• MOURA-VIEIRA, Marcos Antônio. A atividade e o discurso na clínica: uma análise dialógica do trabalho médico. Amsterdam/Recife: CreatSpace Independet Publishing Platform, 2012.
• MOSER-MERCER, Barbara. Remote Interpreting: Issues of Multi-Sensory Integration in a Multilingual Task. Meta, v. 50 n. 2, pp. 727-738, 2005. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.7202/011014ar Acesso em 20 abr. 2021.
  » https://doi.org/10.7202/011014ar
• MOREIRA, Renata Lucia. Uma descrição da dêixis de pessoa na língua de sinais brasileira: pronomes pessoas e verbos indicadores. 2007. 150 f. (Dissertação). Mestrado em Linguística. Faculdade de Filosofia, Letras e Ciências Humanas, Universidade de São Paulo, 2007. Disponível em: https://www.teses.usp.br/teses/disponiveis/8/8139/tde-13112007-103644/pt-br.php Acesso em 13 ago. 2024.
  » https://www.teses.usp.br/teses/disponiveis/8/8139/tde-13112007-103644/pt-br.php
• NASCIMENTO, Marcus Vinícius Batista. Formação de intérpretes de Libras e Língua Portuguesa: encontros de sujeitos, discursos e saberes. 2016. 318 f. Tese (Doutorado em Linguística Aplicada e Estudos da Linguagem) - Faculdade de Filosofia, Comunicação, Letras e Artes, Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo, São Paulo, 2016. Disponível em: https://tede2.pucsp.br/handle/handle/19562 . Acesso em 20 mar. 2021.
  » https://tede2.pucsp.br/handle/handle/19562
• NASCIMENTO, Vinícius. Presença da tradução e da interpretação das línguas de sinais no “grande tempo” da cultura. Bakhtiniana. Revista de Estudos do Discurso, v. 13, n. 3, pp. Port. 5-15, 2018. Disponível em: https://revistas.pucsp.br/index.php/bakhtiniana/article/view/39180 Acesso em 13 ago. 2024.
  » https://revistas.pucsp.br/index.php/bakhtiniana/article/view/39180
• NASCIMENTO, Vinícius; BRAIT, Beth. Citação bilíngue intermodal: O discurso citado no contexto de formação de intérpretes de Libras-português. Letras de Hoje, v. 56, n. 3, pp. 726-737, 2021. Disponível em: https://revistaseletronicas.pucrs.br/fale/article/view/40581 Acesso em 13 ago. 2024.
  » https://revistaseletronicas.pucrs.br/fale/article/view/40581
• NASCIMENTO, Vinicius; NOGUEIRA, Tiago Coimbra. Interpretação simultânea remota de libras-português em conferências durante a pandemia de Covid-19: dimensões de uma prática emergente. Fórum linguístico, Florianópolis, v. 18, n. 4, pp. 7006 - 7028, 2021. Disponível em: https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/forum/article/view/81143/48297 Acesso em 31 jan. 2024.
  » https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/forum/article/view/81143/48297
• NASCIMENTO, V. & DAROQUE, S. C. Língua oral-auditiva e língua gesto-visual. In: LACERDA, C. B. F.; SANTOS, L. F. & MARTINS, V. R. O. Libras: aspectos fundamentais Curitiba: InterSaberes, 2019. pp. 43-76.
• NASCIMENTO, Marcus Vinícius Batista Nascimento. Do campo ao texto em pesquisas com tradutores e intérpretes de Libras-português: desafios na transcrição de corpora bilíngue intermodal simultâneo. DELTA: Documentação e Estudos em Linguística Teórica e Aplicada, v. 39, n. 4, 2023. Disponível em: https://revistas.pucsp.br/index.php/delta/article/view/58715 Acesso em 13 ago. 2024.
  » https://revistas.pucsp.br/index.php/delta/article/view/58715
• NASCIMENTO, Vinícius. O eu-para-mim de intérpretes de língua de sinais experientes em formação. Bakhtiniana. Revista de Estudos do Discurso, v. 13, n. 3, pp. Port. 104-122, 2018. Disponível em: https://revistas.pucsp.br/index.php/bakhtiniana/article/view/35494 Acesso em 13 ago. 2024.
  » https://revistas.pucsp.br/index.php/bakhtiniana/article/view/35494
• NASCIMENTO, Vinícius. Janelas de libras e gêneros do discurso: apontamentos para a formação e atuação de tradutores de língua de sinais. Trabalhos em Linguística Aplicada, Campinas, v. 56, n. 2, pp. 461-492, 2017. Disponível em: https://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/tla/article/view/8649203 Acesso em 15 ago. 2024.
  » https://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/tla/article/view/8649203
• OLIVEIRA, Sebastião Genilson Viana de. Perspectivas surdas sobre a música: uma análise cultural dos artefatos surdos. 2021. 71 f. (Trabalho de Conclusão de Curso). Licenciatura Plena em Letras Libras, Universidade Federal-Rural do Semi Árido, 2021. Disponível em: https://repositorio.ufersa.edu.br/items/c3f18caa-3945-4c89-8c70-7a9d7d9750e9 Acesso em 14 ago. 2024.
  » https://repositorio.ufersa.edu.br/items/c3f18caa-3945-4c89-8c70-7a9d7d9750e9
• PARENTE JR., Fernando de Carvalho. Competência à prova de desastres: as habilidades dos intérpretes de Libras-português em atuação remota pré e pós-pandemia. 357 fls (Tese). Doutorado em Estudos da Tradução, Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, 2024. Disponível em: https://repositorio.ufsc.br/handle/123456789/255045 Acesso em 12 ago. 2024.
  » https://repositorio.ufsc.br/handle/123456789/255045
• PÖCHHACKER, Franz. Introducing Interpreting Studies. New York: Routledge, 2004.
• POINTURIER-POURNIN, Sophie.; GILE, Daniel. Les tactiques de l’interprète en langue des signes face au vide lexical: une étude de cas. The Journal of Specialised Translation, Issue 17, January, pp. 164-183, 2014.
• PRETI, Dini. (Org.). Interação na fala e na escrita. São Paulo: Humanitas, 2003.
• QUADROS, Ronice Muller. Gramática da Libras. Florianópolis: Signa, 2022.
• QUADROS, Ronice Muller. Efeitos de modalidade de língua: as línguas de sinais. Educação Temática Digital, Campinas, v. 7, pp. 168-178, 2006. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.20396/etd.v7i2.801 Acesso em 01 mai. 2024.
  » https://doi.org/10.20396/etd.v7i2.801
• RODRIGUES, Carlos Henrique. Interpretação simultânea intermodal: sobreposição, performance corporal-visual e direcionalidade inversa. Revista da Anpoll, Florianópolis, V. 1, N. 44, pp. 111-129, 2018. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.18309/anp.v1i44.1146 Acesso em 31 mar. 2024.
  » https://doi.org/10.18309/anp.v1i44.1146
• RODRIGUES, Carlos Henrique. A interpretação para a língua de sinais brasileira: efeitos de modalidade e processos inferenciais. (Tese). Doutorado em Linguística Aplicada. Programa de Pós-Graduação em Estudos Linguísticos. Faculdade de Letras, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, 2013. Disponível em https://repositorio.ufmg.br/handle/1843/MGSS-9CXQ8L Acesso em 2 fev. 2024.
  » https://repositorio.ufmg.br/handle/1843/MGSS-9CXQ8L
• RODRIGUES, Carlos Henrique; BEER, Hanna. Os estudos da tradução e da interpretação de línguas de sinais: novo campo disciplinar emergente? Cadernos de Tradução, v. 35, n. 2, pp. 17-45, 5 out. 2015. Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC). Disponível em: https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/traducao/article/view/2175-7968.2015v35nesp2p17/30707 Acesso em 13 ago. 2024.
  » https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/traducao/article/view/2175-7968.2015v35nesp2p17/30707
• SAVIANI, Demerval; GALVÃO, Ana Carolina. Educação na pandemia: a falácia do “ensino” remoto. Universidade e Sociedade ANDES-SN, ano XXXI, janeiro, 2021. Disponível em: https://sintese.org.br/educacao/educacao-na-pandemia-a-falacia-do-ensino-remoto/ Acesso em 1 mai. 2023.
  » https://sintese.org.br/educacao/educacao-na-pandemia-a-falacia-do-ensino-remoto/
• SOBRAL, Adail Ubirajara. Dizer o ‘mesmo’ outros: ensaios sobre tradução. São Paulo: SBS Editora, 2008.
• VIEIRA, Marcos Antônio.; FAÏTA, Daniel. Quando os outros olham outros de si mesmo: reflexões metodológicas sobre a autoconfrontação cruzada. Polifonia. V. 7, N° 7, pp. 27-65. Cuiabá: EdUFMT. 2003. Disponível em: https://periodicoscientificos.ufmt.br/ojs/index.php/polifonia/article/view/1137 Acesso em 25 jun. 2024.
  » https://periodicoscientificos.ufmt.br/ojs/index.php/polifonia/article/view/1137
• VOLÓCHINOV, V. (Círculo de Bakhtin). Marxismo e filosofia da linguagem Problemas fundamentais do método sociológico na ciência da linguagem. Tradução, Notas e Glossário Sheila Grillo; Ekaterina V. Américo. Ensaio introdutório Sheila Grillo. São Paulo: Editora 34, 2017.

• Editors in Charge
  Adriana Pucci Penteado de Faria e Silva
  Beth Brait
  Bruna Lopes
  Maria Helena Cruz Pistori
  Paulo Rogério Stella
  Regina Godinho de Alcântara

Review I

About the reviewerSCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

Review I

1. The study’s title, “The Performance of Libras-Portuguese Interpreters during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Remote Interpretation and Presumed Interlocution,” is fully appropriate for the article’s development. The authors perform an excellent textual construction between the aspects present in the title and in the text.

2. Through the study’s objective, the authors provide a clear explanation of the work and an excellent articulation of the text.

3. In their theoretical-methodological foundation, the authors engage in a productive dialogue with the article text. Through dialogic discourse analysis (DDA), the authors mobilize the conception of language (social, historical, and ideological), materialized in the form of statements (Libras-Portuguese interpretations) and define its axiological aspects. The concepts and other aspects of sign language translation and interpretation studies (SLTIS) contribute to the analysis of the research object. Thus, the authors address issues on the language modality involved and their impacts and effects on the interpretation process in the Portuguese-Libras direction.

4. In this way, the authorship demonstrates up-to-date knowledge through the theory and bibliography used, with immense relevance to the research.

5. Regarding originality, the article presents new reflections and extremely important contributions related to the dynamics of Libras-Portuguese translators and interpreters’ work and how these discursive genres are reconfigured during the pandemic period. The reconfiguration of these interpretive activities has enabled and enabled deaf people to access these social activities. In view of the above, the study makes an excellent contribution to ADD and to SLTIS.

It would be interesting to include in the abstract: Brazilian Sign Language (Libras).

Review the citations according to ABNT (NBR 10520). The indication of individual authorship, within the parentheses, must be made in upperand lower-case letters.

It is needed to standardize the following terms:

- Libras-Portuguese or Libras-LP (only appears on page 2);

- Studies of Translation and Interpretation of Sign Language or studies of translation and interpretation of sign language (STISL). Note: The definition of the acronym is on page 5 and is repeated on page 7.

The reference “NAPIER, J. An historical overview of signed language interpreting research: Featuring highlights of personal research. Cadernos de Tradução, Florianópolis, v. 2, n. 26, pp. 63-98, 2010. Available at: https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/traducao/article/view/2175-7968.2010v2n26p63 Accessed on May 1, 2023” is not present in the text. APPROVED

• peer review recommendation: accept

History

• Peer review received
  27 June 2024

Review II

About the reviewerSCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

Review II

The article presents reflections and contributions regarding the work of Libras-Portuguese interpreters in different discourses. Clearly and using scientific language, the objectives outlined are achieved according to research related to dialogic discourse analysis and studies on sign language translation and interpretation. The text also presents a relevant and up-to-date bibliography, but there are mandatory corrections, as indicated in the appendix. APPROVED

• peer review recommendation: accept

History

• Peer review received
  24 July 2024

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  17 Mar 2025
• Date of issue
  2025

History

• Received
  04 Apr 2024
• Accepted
  21 Feb 2025