When two languages are competing
An ERP study of sentence processing in expert and novice interpreters
Past studies have shown that expert interpreters were better than novices at using contextual cues to anticipate upcoming
information. However, whether such sensitivity to contextual cues can be traced by means of neural signatures is relatively unexplored. The
present study used event-related brain potentials (ERPs) along with a language-switching paradigm – including non-switched (Chinese–Chinese,
L1–L1) and switched (Chinese–English, L1–L2) conditions – to investigate whether interpreters with many years of experience, interpreters
with a few years of experience and post-graduate-level interpreting students differed in the way they process contextually congruent or
incongruent sentence-final target words. The results show that while the manipulations of congruency and switching independently induced a
strong brain response in all three groups, the interaction between the two factors elicited different patterns across groups during
500–700 ms: (1) while a sustained congruency effect was found in the two less-experienced groups for the switched condition, such an effect
was observed in the most experienced group for both switched and non-switched conditions; (2) only the least-experienced group showed a
frontal negativity towards incongruent trials in the switched condition. These 200 ms transient group differences revealed that it might be
possible to trace the development of interpreting ability by examining the ERP components in a language-switching setting.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 1.1N400 and associated cognitive functions
- 1.2Post-N400 positivity (PNP) and associated cognitive functions
- 1.3ERP studies on interpreting
- 1.4The present study
- 2.Methods
- 2.1Participants
- 2.2Materials
- 2.3Procedure
- 2.4Data acquisition and preprocessing
- 2.5Data analysis
- 3.Results
- 3.1Behavioral data
- 3.2ERP data
- 3.2.1300–500 ms
- 3.2.2500–700 ms
- 3.2.3700–1000 ms
- 4.Discussion
- 5.Conclusion
- Notes
-
References
References (63)
References
Brothers, T., Swaab, T. Y. & Traxler, M. J. (2017). Goals and strategies influence lexical prediction during sentence comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language
93
1, 203–216. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Brothers, T., Wlotko, E. W., Warnke, L. & Kuperberg, G. R. (2020). Going the extra mile: Effects of discourse context on two late positivities during language comprehension. Neurobiology of Language
1
(1), 135–160. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Brouwer, H. & Crocker, M. W. (2017). On the proper treatment of the N400 and P600 in language comprehension. Frontiers in Psychology
8
(1327). ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Brouwer, H., Crocker, M. W., Venhuien, N. J. & Hoeks, J. C. J. (2017). A neurocomputational model of the N400 and the P600 in language processing. Cognitive Science
41
1, 1318–1352. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Brouwer, H., Fitz, H. & Hoeks, J. (2012). Getting real about semantic illusions: Rethinking the functional role of the P600 in language comprehension. Brain Research
1446
1, 127–143. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bühler, H. (1986). Linguistic (semantic) and extra-linguistic (pragmatic) criteria for the evaluation of conference interpretation and interpreters. Multilingua,
5
(4), 231–235.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Chan, S. (2019). An elephant needs a head but a horse does not: An ERP study of classifier-noun agreement in Mandarin. Journal of Neurolinguistics
52
1, 100852. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Chiaro, D. & Nocella, G. (2004). Interpreters’ perception of linguistic and non-linguistic factors affecting quality: A survey through the world wide web. Meta
49
(2), 278–293. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Collart, A. & Chan, S. (2021). Processing past time reference in a tenseless language: An ERP study on the Mandarin aspectual morphemes -le and -guo. Journal of Neurolinguistics
59
1, 100998. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Davenport, T. & Coulson, S. (2011). Predictability and novelty in literal language comprehension: An ERP study. Brain Research 14181, 70–82. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Delogu, F., Brouwer, H. & Crocker, M. W. (2019). Event-related potentials index lexical retrieval (N400) and integration (P600) during language comprehension. Brain and Cognition
135
1, 103569. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Delogu, F., Drenhaus, H. & Crocker, M. W. (2018). On the predictability of event boundaries in discourse: An ERP investigation. Memory & Cognition
46
(2), 315–325. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
DeLong, K. A. & Kutas, M. (2020). Comprehending surprising sentences: Sensitivity of post-N400 positivities to contextual congruity and semantic relatedness. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
DeLong, K. A., Urbach, T. P., Groppe, D. M. & Kutas, M. (2011). Overlapping dual ERP responses to low cloze probability sentence continuations.Psychophysiology 48 (9), 1203–1207. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Delorme, A. & Makeig, S. (2004). EEGLAB: An open source toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics including independent component analysis. Journal of Neuroscience Methods
134
(1), 9–21. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Dijkstra, T. & van Heuven, W. J. B. (2002). The architecture of the bilingual word recognition system: From identification to decision. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition
5
(3), 175–197. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Elmer, S., Meyer, M. & Jäncke, L. (2010). Simultaneous interpreters as a model for neuronal adaptation in the domain of language processing. Brain Research
1317
1, 147–156. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Federmeier, K. D. & Kutas, M. (1999). A rose by any other name: Long-term memory structure and sentence processing. Journal of Memory and Language
41
1, 469–495. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Federmeier, K. D., Kutas, M. & Dickson, D. S. (2016). A common neural progression to meaning in about a third of a second. In G. Hickok & S. L. Small (Eds.), Neurobiology of language. New York: Academic Press, 557–567. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Federmeier, K. D., Wlotko, E. W., De Ochoa-Dewald, E. & Kutas, M. (2007). Multiple effects of sentential constraint on word processing. Brain Research
1146
1, 75–84. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Friederici, A. D. (2002). Towards a neural basis of auditory sentence processing. Trends in Cognitive Sciences
6
(2), 78–84. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Friederici, A. D. (2011). The brain basis of language processing: From structure to function. Physiological Reviews
91
(4), 1357–1392. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hagoort, P. (2003). How the brain solves the binding problem for language: A neurocomputational model of syntactic processing. Neuroimage
20
1(Supplement 1), S18–S29. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Jung, T.-P., Makeig, S., Westerfield, M., Townsend, J., Courchesne, E. & Sejnowski, T. J. (2000). Removal of eye artifacts from visual event-related potentials in normal and clinical subjects. Clinical Neurophysiology
111
1, 1745–1758. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kolk, H. & Chwilla, D. (2007). Late positivities in unusual situations. Brain and Language
100
(3), 257–261. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kuperberg, G. R. (2007). Neural mechanisms of language comprehension: Challenges to syntax. Brain Research
1146
1, 23–49. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kuperberg, G. R., Paczynski, M. & Ditman, T. (2011). Establishing causal coherence across sentences: An ERP study. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience
23
(5), 1230–1246. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kutas, M. & Federmeier, K. D. (2000). Electrophysiology reveals semantic memory use in language comprehension. Trends in Cognitive Sciences
4
(12), 463–470. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kutas, M. & Federmeier, K. D. (2009). N400. Scholarpedia
4
(10), 7790. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kutas, M. & Federmeier, K. D. (2011). Thirty years and counting: Finding meaning in the N400 component of the event-related brain potential (ERP). Annual Review of Psychology
62
1, 621–647. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kutas, M. & Hillyard, S. A. (1980). Reading senseless sentences: Brain potentials reflect semantic incongruity. Science
207
(4427), 203–205. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kutas, M. & Hillyard, S. A. (1984). Brain potentials during reading reflect word expectancy and semantic association. Nature
307
(5947), 161–163. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Landauer, T., Foltz, P. W. & Laham, D. (1998). An introduction to latent semantic analysis. Discourses Processes
25
(2&3), 259–284. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lee, T.-H. (2002). Ear voice span in English into Korean simultaneous interpretation. Meta
47
(4), 596–606. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lenth, R. (2020). EMMEANS: Estimated Marginal Means, aka Least-Squares Means. R package version 1.4.8. [URL]
Liao, C.-H. & Chan, S.-H. (2016). Direction matters: Event-related brain potentials reflect extra processing costs in switching from the dominant to the less dominant language. Journal of Neurolinguistics
40
1, 79–97. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Liu, M. (2008). How do experts interpret? Implications from research in interpreting studies and cognitive science. In G. Hansen, A. Chesterman & H. Gerzymisch-Arbogast (Eds.), Efforts and models in interpreting and translation research: A tribute to Daniel Gile. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 159–177.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lopez-Calderon, J. & Luck, S. J. (2014). ERPLAB: An open-source toolbox for the analysis of event-related potentials. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 81. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Luck, S. J. (2014). An introduction to the event-related potential technique (2nd ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
MathWorks (2005). MATLAB: The language of technical computing: Desktop tools and development environment, version 7. Natick, MA: The MathWorks.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Morales, J., Padilla, F., Gómez-Ariza, C. J. & Bajo, M. T. (2015). Simultaneous interpretation selectively influences working memory and attentional networks. Acta Psychologica 1551, 82–91. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Moreno, E. M., Federmeier, K. D. & Kutas, M. (2002). Switching languages, switching palabras (words): An electrophysiological study of code switching. Brain and Language
80
(2), 188–207. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ness, T. & Meltzer-Asscher, A. (2018). Lexical inhibition due to failed prediction: Behavioral evidence and ERP correlates. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition
44
(8), 1269–1285. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Oldfield, R. C. (1971). The assessment and analysis of handedness: The Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychologia
9
(1), 97–113. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Osterhout, L. & Holcomb, P. J. (1992). Event-related potentials elicited by syntactic anomaly. Journal of Memory and Language 311, 785–806. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Pires, L., Leitão, J., Guerrini, C. & Simões, M. R. (2014). Event-related brain potentials in the study of inhibition: Cognitive control, source localization and age-related modulations. Neuropsychology Review
24
(4), 461–490. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Proverbio, A. M., Leoni, G. & Zani, A. (2004). Language switching mechanisms in simultaneous interpreters: An ERP study. Neuropsychologia
42
(12), 1636–1656. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
R Core Team (2018). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. URL [URL]
Singmann, H., Bolker, B., Westfall, J., Aust, F. & Ben-Shachar, M. S. (2020). afex: Analysis of Factorial Experiments. R package version 0.28-0. [URL]
Tanner, D., Morgan-Short, K. & Luck, S. J. (2015). How inappropriate high-pass filters can produce artifactual effects and incorrect conclusions in ERP studies of language and cognition. Psychophysiology
52
(8), 997–1009. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Taylor, W. L. (1953). Cloze procedure: A new tool for measuring readability. Journalism Quarterly
30
1, 415–433. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Van der Meij, M., Cuetos, F., Carreiras, M. & Barber, H. A. (2011). Electrophysiological correlates of language switching in second language learners. Psychophysiology
48
(1), 44–54. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Van Heuven, W. J. B. & Dijkstra, T. (2010). Language comprehension in the bilingual brain: fMRI and ERP support for psycholinguistic models. Brain Research Reviews
64
(1), 104–122. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Van Petten, C. & Luka, B. J. (2006). Neural localization of semantic context effects in electromagnetic and hemodynamic studies. Brain and Language
97
(3), 279–293. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Van Petten, C. & Luka, B. J. (2012). Prediction during language comprehension: benefits, costs, and ERP components. International Journal of Psychophysiology
83
(2), 176–190. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Wittenberg, E., Paczynski, M., Wiese, H., Jackendoff, R. & Kuperberg, G. (2014). The difference between “giving a rose” and “giving a kiss”: Sustained neural activity to the light verb construction. Journal of Memory and Language
73
1, 31–42. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Xiang, M. & Kuperberg, G. (2015). Reversing expectations during discourse comprehension. Language, Cognition, and Neuroscience
30
(6), 648–672. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Yang, C., Perfetti, C. A. & Liu, Y. (2010). Sentence integration processes: An ERP study of Chinese sentence comprehension with relative clauses. Brain & Language
112
1, 85–100. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Zhang, Y., Zhang, J. & Min, B. (2012). Neural dynamics of animacy processing in language comprehension: ERP evidence from the interpretation of classifier–noun combinations. Brain and Language
120
(3), 321–331. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cited by (3)
Cited by three other publications
Amos, Rhona M., Kilian G. Seeber & Martin J. Pickering
Özkan, Deniz, Ena Hodzik & Ebru Diriker
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 4 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.