Article published In:
TargetVol. 31:3 (2019) ► pp.378–397
Syntactic processing in sight translation by professional and trainee interpreters
Professionals are more time-efficient while trainees view the source text less
The study examines how professional and trainee interpreters process syntax in sight translation. We asked 24 professionals and 15 trainees to sight translate sentences with subject-relative clauses and more difficult object-relative clauses while measuring translation accuracy, eye movements and translation durations. We found that trainees took longer to achieve similar translation accuracy as professionals and viewed the source text less than professionals to avoid interference, especially when reading more difficult object-relative sentences. Syntactic manipulation modulated translation and viewing times: participants took longer to translate object-relative sentences but viewed them less in order to avoid interference in target language reformulations. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to show that reading measures in sight translation should be analysed together with translation times to explain complex reading patterns. It also proposes a new measure, percentage of dwell time, as an index of interference avoidance.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Syntactic processing in interpreting
- 3.Effects of interpreting experience
- 4.The present study
- 4.1Participants
- 4.2Apparatus
- 4.3Materials
- 4.4Procedure
- 4.5Data analysis and results
- 4.5.1Accuracy
- 4.5.2Viewing measures for relative clauses
- 4.5.3Sentence viewing times
- 4.5.4Sentence translation times
- 4.5.5Percentage of dwell time
- 4.5.6Strategies in interpreting object-relative clauses
- 4.6Discussion
- 4.6.1Group effects
- 4.6.2Sentence effects
- 5.Conclusion
-
References
References (40)
Agrifoglio, Marjorie. 2004. “Sight Translation and Interpreting: A Comparative Analysis of Constraints and Failures.” Interpreting 6 (1): 43–67. 
Andrews, Glenda, Damian Birney, and Graeme S. Halford. 2006. “Relational Processing and Working Memory Capacity in Comprehension of Relative Clause Sentences.” Memory & Cognition 34 (6): 1325–1340.
Barr, Dale J., Roger Levy, Christoph Scheepers, and Harry J. Tily. 2013. “Random Effects Structure for Confirmatory Hypothesis Testing: Keep It Maximal.” Journal of Memory and Language 68 (3): 255–278.
Bates, Douglas, Reinhold Kliegl, Shravan Vasishth, and Harald Baayen. 2015. “Parsimonious Mixed Models.” Arxiv Preprint. [URL]
Caplan, David, Sujith Vijayan, Gina Kuperberg, Caroline West, Gloria Waters, Doug Greve, and Anders M. Dale. 2002. “Vascular Responses to Syntactic Processing: Event-Related fMRI Study of Relative Clauses.” Human Brain Mapping 15 (1): 26–38.
Caplan, David, and Gloria Waters. 2013. “Memory Mechanisms Supporting Syntactic Comprehension.” Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 20 (2): 243–268.
Chmiel, Agnieszka. 2018. “In Search of the Working Memory Advantage in Conference Interpreting – Training, Experience and Task Effects.” International Journal of Bilingualism 22 (3): 371–384.
Chmiel, Agnieszka, Przemysław Janikowski, and Anna Cieślewicz. Forthcoming. “The Eye or the Ear? Source Language Interference in Sight Translation and Simultaneous Interpreting.” Interpreting. International Journal of Research and Practice in Interpreting.
Chmiel, Agnieszka, and Iwona Mazur. 2013. “Eye Tracking Sight Translation Performed by Trainee Interpreters.” In Tracks and Treks in Translation Studies, edited by Catherine Way, Sonia Vandepitte, Reine Meylaerts, and Magdalena Bartłomiejczyk, 189–205. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Díaz-Galaz, Stephanie, Presentacion Padilla, and María Teresa Bajo. 2015. “The Role of Advance Preparation in Simultaneous Interpreting: A Comparison of Professional Interpreters and Interpreting Students.” Interpreting 17 (1): 1–25.
Dragsted, Barbara, and Inge G. Hansen. 2009. “Exploring Translation and Interpreting Hybrids. The Case of Sight Translation.” Meta 54 (3): 588–604.
Garcia, Adolfo M., Augustin Ibanez, David Huepe, Alexander L. Houck, Maëva Michon, Carlos G. Lezama, Sumeer Chadha, and Alvaro Rivera-Rei. 2014. “Word Reading and Translation in Bilinguals: The Impact of Formal and Informal Translation Expertise.” Frontiers in Psychology 51: 1302.
Gernsbacher, Morton A., and Miriam Shlesinger. 1997. “The Proposed Role of Suppression in Simultaneous Interpretation.” Interpreting 2 (1–2): 119–140.
Gibson, Edward. 2000. “The Dependency Locality Theory: A Distance-Based Theory of Linguistic Complexity.” In Image, Language, Brain, edited by Yashusi Miyashita, Alec P. Marantz, and Wayne O’Neil, 95–126. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Gile, Daniel. 2009. Basic Concepts and Models for Interpreter and Translator Training. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Hejwowski, Krzysztof. 2004. Kognitywno-Komunikacyjna Teoria Przekładu [Cognitive-communicative theory of translation]. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
Jakobsen, Arnt L., and Kristian Jensen. 2008. “Eye Movement Behaviour across Four Different Types of Reading Task.” In Looking at Eyes – Eye Tracking Studies of Reading and Translation Processing, edited by Susane Göpferich, Arnt L. Jakobsen, and Inger Mees, 103–124. Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur.
Jones, Roderick. 2002. Conference Interpreting Explained. Manchester: St. Jerome.
Jörg, Udo. 1997. “Bridging the Gap: Verb Anticipation in German-English Simultaneous Interpreting.” In Translation as Intercultural Communication, edited by Mary Snell-Hornby, Zuzana Jettmarová, and Klaus Kaindl, 217–228. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
King, Jonathan, and Marcel Adam Just. 1991. “Individual Differences in Syntactic Processing: The Role of Working Memory.” Journal of Memory and Language 30 (5): 580–602.
Lemhöfer, Kristin, and Mirjam Broersma. 2012. “Introducing Lextale: A Quick and Valid Lexical Test for Advanced Learners of English.” Behavior Research Methods 44 (2): 325–343.
Liu, Minhua, Diane L. Schallert, and Patrick J. Carroll. 2004. “Working Memory and Expertise in Simultaneous Interpreting.” Interpreting 6 (1): 19–42.
Liversedge, Simon P., Kevin B. Paterson, and Martin J. Pickering. 1998. “Eye Movements and Measures of Reading Time.” In Eye Guidance in Reading and Scene Perception, edited by Geoffrey Underwood, 55–75. Oxford: Elsevier.
Macizo, Pedro, and Maria T. Bajo. 2004. “When Translation Makes the Difference: Sentence Processing in Reading and Translation.” Psicologica: International Journal of Methodology and Experimental Psychology 25 (1): 181–205.
Maier, Robert M., Martin J. Pickering, and Robert J. Hartsuiker. 2017. “Does Translation Involve Structural Priming?” Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 70 (8): 1575–1589.
Pöchhacker, Franz. 2004. Introducing Interpreting Studies. London: Routledge.
R: A Language and Environment For Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna.
Reichle, Erik D., Simon P. Liversedge, Alexander Pollatsek, and Keith Rayner. 2009. “Encoding Multiple Words Simultaneously in Reading Is Implausible.” Trends in Cognitive Sciences 13 (3): 115–119.
Riccardi, Alessandra. 1996. “Language-Specific Strategies in Simultaneous Interpreting.” In Teaching Translation and Interpreting 3, edited by Cay Dollerup and Vibeke Appel. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
. 1998. “Interpreting Strategies and Creativity.” In Translators’ Strategies and Creativity, edited by Ann Beylard-Ozeroff, Jana Králová, and Barbara Moser-Mercer, 171–180. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Ruiz, Carmen, Natalia Paredes, Pedro Macizo, and Maria Teresa Bajo. 2008. “Activation of Lexical and Syntactic Target Language Properties in Translation.” Acta Psychologica 128 (3): 490–500.
Seeber, Kilian G. 2011. “Cognitive Load in Simultaneous Interpreting: Existing Theories ‒ New Models.” Interpreting 13 (2): 176–204.
Seeber, Kilian G., and Dirk Kerzel. 2011. “Cognitive Load in Simultaneous Interpreting: Model Meets Data.” International Journal of Bilingualism 16 (2): 228–242.
Setton, Robin, and Manuela Motta. 2007. “Syntacrobatics: Quality and Reformulation in Simultaneous-with-Text.” Interpreting 9 (2): 199–230.
Shreve, Gregory M., Isabel Lacruz, and Erik Angelone. 2010. “Cognitive Effort, Syntactic Disruption, and Visual Interference in a Sight Translation Task.” In Translation and Cognition, edited by Gregory M. Shreve and Erik Angelone, 63–84. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
SR Research Experiment Builder 1.10.165 [Computer Software]. (2011). Mississauga, Ontario, Canada: SR Research Ltd.
Sunnari, Marianna. 1996. “Comparison of Expert and Novice Performance in Simultaneous Interpreting.” In Proceedings of the XIV World Congress of FIT, 993–1000. Melbourne.
Timarová, Šárka, Ivana Čeňková, and Reine Meylaerts. 2015. “Simultaneous Interpreting and Working Memory Capacity.” In Psycholinguistic and Cognitive Inquiries into Translation and Interpreting, edited by Aline Ferreira and John W. Schwieter, 101–126. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Viezzi, Maurizio. 1989. “Information Retention as a Parameter for the Comparison of Sight Translation and Simultaneous Interpretation: An Experimental Study.” The Interpreters’ Newsletter 21: 65–69.
Warren, Tessa, and Edward Gibson. 2002. “The Influence of Referential Processing on Sentence Complexity.” Cognition 851: 79–112.
Cited by (27)
Cited by 27 other publications
Chen, Sijia & Jan-Louis Kruger
2024. Visual processing during computer-assisted consecutive interpreting. Interpreting. International Journal of Research and Practice in Interpreting 26:2 ► pp. 231 ff. 
Chmiel, Agnieszka, Marta Kajzer-Wietrzny, Danijel Koržinek, Dariusz Jakubowski & Przemysław Janikowski
2024. Syntax, stress and cognitive load, or on syntactic processing in simultaneous interpreting. Translation, Cognition & Behavior 7:1 ► pp. 22 ff.
Chernovaty, Leonid, Martin Djovčoš & Natalia Kovalchuk
2023. The Impact of the Source-Text Syntactic Characteristics on the Sight-Translation Strategies and Quality. PSYCHOLINGUISTICS 34:2 ► pp. 156 ff.
Chmiel, Agnieszka & Agnieszka Lijewska
2023. Reading patterns, reformulation and eye-voice span (IVS) in sight translation. Translation and Interpreting Studies 18:2 ► pp. 213 ff.
Fang, Jing, Xiaomin Zhang & Haidee Kotze
2023. The effects of training on reading behaviour and performance in sight translation: a longitudinal study using eye-tracking. Perspectives 31:4 ► pp. 655 ff.
Götz, Andrea
2023. Chapter 3. Adding connectives to manage interpreted discourse. In Pragmatics and Translation [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 337], ► pp. 51 ff.
Kuang, Huolingxiao & Binghan Zheng
2023. Note-taking effort in video remote interpreting: effects of source speech difficulty and interpreter work experience. Perspectives 31:4 ► pp. 724 ff.
Xiao, Yao, Kristian Tangsgaard Hvelplund & Chen-En Ho
Zhao, Nan, Zhenguang G. Cai, Yanping Dong & Daniel Mirman
2023. Speech errors in consecutive interpreting: Effects of language proficiency, working memory, and anxiety. PLOS ONE 18:10 ► pp. e0292718 ff.
Chmiel, Agnieszka & Nicoletta Spinolo
2022. Testing the impact of remote interpreting settings on interpreter experience and performance. Translation, Cognition & Behavior 5:2 ► pp. 250 ff.
Hu, Ting, Xinyu Wang & Haiming Xu
2022. Eye-Tracking in Interpreting Studies: A Review of Four Decades of Empirical Studies. Frontiers in Psychology 13
Lijewska, Agnieszka, Agnieszka Chmiel & Albrecht W. Inhoff
2022. Stages of sight translation: Evidence from eye movements. Applied Psycholinguistics 43:5 ► pp. 997 ff.
Zhu, Xuelian & Vahid Aryadoust
2022. A Synthetic Review of Cognitive Load in Distance Interpreting: Toward an Explanatory Model. Frontiers in Psychology 13
Fang, Jing & Xiaomin Zhang
2021. Pause in Sight Translation: A Longitudinal Study Focusing on Training Effect. In Diverse Voices in Chinese Translation and Interpreting [New Frontiers in Translation Studies, ], ► pp. 157 ff.
Ho, Chen-En
2021. What does professional experience have to offer?. Translation, Cognition & Behavior 4:1 ► pp. 47 ff.
Ma, Xingcheng
2021. Coping with syntactic complexity in English–Chinese sight translation by translation and interpreting students.. Across Languages and Cultures 22:2 ► pp. 192 ff.
Ma, Xingcheng & Dechao Li
2021. A cognitive investigation of ‘chunking’ and ‘reordering’ for coping with word-order asymmetry in English-to-Chinese
sight translation. Interpreting. International Journal of Research and Practice in Interpreting 23:2 ► pp. 192 ff.
Ma, Xingcheng & Dechao Li
2024. Effect of word order asymmetry on the cognitive load of English–Chinese sight translation. Translation and Interpreting Studies 19:1 ► pp. 105 ff.
Ma, Xingcheng, Dechao Li & Yu-Yin Hsu
2021. Exploring the impact of word order asymmetry on cognitive load during Chinese–English sight translation. Target. International Journal of Translation Studies 33:1 ► pp. 103 ff.
Su, Wenchao & Defeng Li
2021. Exploring the effect of interpreting training: Eye-tracking English-Chinese sight interpreting. Lingua 256 ► pp. 103094 ff.
Abdel Latif, Muhammad M. M.
2020. Translation/Interpreting Process Research. In Translator and Interpreter Education Research [New Frontiers in Translation Studies, ], ► pp. 85 ff.
Seeber, Kilian G., Laura Keller & Alexis Hervais-Adelman
2020. When the ear leads the eye – the use of text during simultaneous interpretation. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience 35:10 ► pp. 1480 ff.
Su, Wenchao
2020. Gaze Behaviors, Interpreting Styles, and Language Specificity. In Eye-Tracking Processes and Styles in Sight Translation [New Frontiers in Translation Studies, ], ► pp. 127 ff.
Su, Wenchao
2020. Issues and Approaches to CTIS. In Eye-Tracking Processes and Styles in Sight Translation [New Frontiers in Translation Studies, ], ► pp. 9 ff.
Su, Wenchao
2020. Introduction. In Eye-Tracking Processes and Styles in Sight Translation [New Frontiers in Translation Studies, ], ► pp. 1 ff.
Su, Wenchao
2020. Translation Style in Sight Translation. In Eye-Tracking Processes and Styles in Sight Translation [New Frontiers in Translation Studies, ], ► pp. 19 ff.
Su, Wenchao
2023. Eye-voice span in sight interpreting: an eye-tracking investigation. Perspectives 31:5 ► pp. 969 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 7 november 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.