Cover not available
Article published In:
Translation and Interpreting Studies
Vol. 18:2 (2023) ► pp.213–234

Reading patterns, reformulation and eye-voice span (IVS) in sight translation

ORCID logo | Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań
ORCID logo | Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań
The study examined how a required reformulation of a source text affects reading patterns in sight translation. We also tested how interpreters regulated their eye-voice span (IVS, understood as the delay between viewing the source language word and speaking it in the target language) in the task. Twenty-four professional conference interpreters sight translated (from Polish into English) a text with syntactically symmetrical sentences (that could be copied in the target language) or asymmetrical ones (that required reformulation). The participants’ output and eye movements were recorded. Mean IVS turned out to exceed 8s. Text viewing durations and IVS did not differ between symmetrical and asymmetrical sentences. In contrast, reformulated output structures generated larger IVS than the retained ones. Also, words appearing later in the text on the screen were associated with longer IVS. This shows that IVS is a complex construct and that reformulation affects reading patterns in sight translation.
Keywords: sight translation, reading patterns, eye-tracking, ear-voice span, syntactic reformulation
Article outline
  • Introduction
  • Eye-voice span (IVS)
  • Syntactic processing in sight translation
  • The study
    • Participants
    • Materials
    • Apparatus
    • Procedure
    • Data analysis
  • Results
  • Discussion
  • Conclusions
  • Note
  • References
Published online: 11 October 2022
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/tis.21021.chm
References (55)
References
Agrifoglio, Marjorie. 2004. “Sight translation and interpreting: A comparative analysis of constraints and failures.” Interpreting 6 (1): 43–67. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baddeley, Alan. 2000. “The episodic buffer: A new component of working memory?” Trends in Cognitive Sciences 4 (11): 417–23. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Barik, Henri C. 1973. “Simultaneous interpretation: Temporal and quantitative data.” Language and Speech 16 (3): 237–70. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bartłomiejczyk, Magdalena. 2010. “Effects of short intensive practice on interpreter trainees’ performance.” In Why Translation Studies Matters, ed. by Daniel Gile, Gyde Hansen, and Nike K. Pokorn, 183–94. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bates, Douglas, Reinhold Kliegl, Shravan Vasishth, and Harald Baayen. 2015. “Parsimonious mixed models.” ArXiv:1506.04967 [Stat], June. [URL]
Bates, Douglas, Martin Mächler, Ben Bolker, and Steve Walker. 2015. “Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4.” Journal of Statistical Software 67 (1): 1–48. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bliese, Paul, Gilad Chen, Patrick Downes, Donald Schepker, and Jonas Lang. 2022. “Multilevel: Multilevel Functions.” Accessed 5 October 5 2022. [URL]
Buswell, Guy T. 1922. Fundamental Reading Habits: A Study of Their Development. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Chen, Jui-Ching. 2015. “Sight translation.” In The Routledge Handbook of Interpreting, ed. by Holly Mikkelson and Renee Jourdenais, 144–53. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Chmiel, Agnieszka, Przemysław Janikowski, and Anna Cieślewicz. 2020. “The eye or the ear?: Source language interference in sight translation and simultaneous interpreting.” Interpreting 22 (2): 187–210. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Christoffels, Ingrid K., and Annette M. B. De Groot. 2004. “Components of simultaneous interpreting: Comparing interpreting with shadowing and paraphrasing.” Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 7 (3): 227–40. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Christoffels, Ingrid K., Annette M. B. de Groot, and Judith F. Kroll. 2006. “Memory and language skills in simultaneous interpreters: The role of expertise and language proficiency.” Journal of Memory and Language 54 (3): 324–45. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
De Luca, Maria, Maria Pontillo, Silvia Primativo, Donatella Spinelli, and Pierluigi Zoccolotti. 2013. “The eye-voice lead during oral reading in developmental dyslexia.” Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 71: 1–17. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Defrancq, Bart. 2015. “Corpus-based research into the presumed effects of short EVS.” Interpreting 17 (1): 26–45. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dragsted, Barbara, and Inge Gorm Hansen. 2009. “Exploring translation and interpreting hybrids. The case of sight translation.” Meta 54 (3): 588–604. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gernsbacher, Morton Ann, and Miriam Shlesinger. 1997. “The proposed role of suppression in simultaneous interpretation.” Interpreting 2 (1–2): 119–40. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halm, Katja, Irene Ablinger, Anne Ullmann, Matthew J. Solomon, Ralph Radach, and Walter Huber. 2011. “What is the eye doing during reading aloud? Eye-voice span in acquired dyslexia.” Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences 231: 244–45. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Huang, Chih-Chieh. 2011. “Tracking eye movements in sight translation.” Unpublished M.A. thesis, Taiwan: National Taiwan Normal University. [URL]
Inhoff, Albrecht Werner, and Weimin Liu. 1998. “The perceptual span and oculomotor activity during the reading of Chinese sentences.” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 24 (1): 20–34. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Inhoff, Albrecht Werner, Matthew Solomon, Ralph Radach, and Bradley A. Seymour. 2011. “Temporal dynamics of the eye–voice span and eye movement control during oral reading.” Journal of Cognitive Psychology 23 (5): 543–58. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Järvilehto, Timo, Veli-Matti Nurkkala, and Kyösti Koskela. 2009. “The role of anticipation in reading.” Pragmatics & Cognition 17 (3): 509–26. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kade, Otto. 1967. “Zu Einigen Besonderheiten Des Simultandolmetschens.” Fremdsprachen 11 (1): 8–17.Google Scholar
Kalina, Sylvia. 2002. “Quality in interpreting and its prerequisites: A framework for a comprehensive view.” In Interpreting in the 21st Century: Challenges and opportunities, ed. by Giuliana Garzone and Maurizio Viezzi, 121–30. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kurz, Ingrid. 2002. “Conference interpreting: Quality in the ears of the user.” Meta 46 (2): 394–409. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lamberger-Felber, Heike. 2001. “Text-oriented research into interpreting – Examples from a case-study.” HERMES – Journal of Language and Communication in Business 14 (26): 39–63. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Laubrock, Jochen, and Reinhold Kliegl. 2015. “The eye-voice span during reading aloud.” Frontiers in Psychology 61. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lee, Tae-Hyung. 2002. “Ear voice span in English into Korean simultaneous interpretation.” Meta: Journal Des Traducteurs 47 (4): 596. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lemhöfer, Kristin, and Mirjam Broersma. 2012. “Introducing LexTALE: A quick and valid lexical test for advanced learners of English.” Behavior Research Methods 44 (2): 325–43. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Liang, Junying, Yuanyuan Fang, Qianxi Lv, and Haitao Liu. 2017. “Dependency distance differences across interpreting types: Implications for cognitive demand.” Frontiers in Psychology 81: 2132. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lindell, Michael K., and Christina J. Brandt. 1999. “Assessing interrater agreement on the job relevance of a test: A comparison of CVI, T, RWG(J)}, and R*WG(J)} indexes.” Journal of Applied Psychology 84 (4): 640–47. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Maier, Robert M., Martin J. Pickering, and Robert J. Hartsuiker. 2017. “Does translation involve structural priming?” Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 70 (8): 1575–89. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Markiewicz, Karolina. 2019. “Assessing quality in sight translation as compared to written translation.” M.A. thesis, Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań, Poland.
Matuschek, Hannes, Reinhold Kliegl, Shravan Vasishth, Harald Baayen, and Douglas Bates. 2017. “Balancing Type I error and power in linear mixed models.” Journal of Memory and Language 941: 305–15. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Paneth, Eva. 1957. “An investigation into conference interpreting.” In The Interpreting Studies Reader, ed. by Franz Pöchhacker and Miriam Shlesinger, 30–40. Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Pöchhacker, Franz. 2004. Introducing Interpreting Studies. New York: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pollatsek, Alexander, Shmuel Bolozky, Arnold D. Well, and Keith Rayner. 1981. “Asymmetries in the perceptual span for Israeli readers.” Brain and Language 14 (1): 174–80. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
R Core Team. 2020. A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. [URL]
Riccardi, Alessandra. 1996. “Language: Specific strategies in simultaneous interpreting.” In Teaching Translation and Interpreting 3: New Horizons, ed. by Cay Dollerup and Vibeke Appel, 213–222. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rojo, Ana, and Javier Valenzuela. 2013. “Constructing meaning in translation: The role of constructions in translation problems.” In Cognitive Linguistics and Translation, ed. by Ana Rojo and Iraide Ibarretxe-Antuñano, 283–310. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sakia, Remi. M. 1992. “The Box-Cox Transformation Technique: A review.” The Statistician 41 (2): 169–178. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Seeber, Kilian G., Laura Keller, and Alexis Hervais-Adelman. 2020. “When the ear leads the eye – The use of text during simultaneous interpretation.” Language, Cognition and Neuroscience 35 (10): 1480–94. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Seeber, Kilian G., and Dirk Kerzel. 2012. “Cognitive load in simultaneous interpreting: Model meets data.” International Journal of Bilingualism 16 (2): 228–42. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Setton, Robin, and Manuela Motta. 2007. “Syntacrobatics: Quality and reformulation in simultaneous-with-text.” Interpreting 9 (2): 199–230. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
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, ed. by Gregory M. Shreve and Erik Angelone, 63–84. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Su, Wenchao. 2020. Eye-Tracking Processes and Styles in Sight Translation. Singapore: Springer Singapore. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Su, Wenchao, and Defeng Li. 2019. “Identifying translation problems in English-Chinese Sight Translation: An eye-tracking experiment.” Translation and Interpreting Studies 14 (1): 110–34. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2020. “Exploring processing patterns of Chinese-English sight translation: An eye-tracking study.” Babel 66 (6): 999–1024. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Timarová, Šárka, Ivana Čeňková, Reine Meylaerts, Erik Hertog, Arnaud Szmalec, and Wouter Duyck. 2014. “Simultaneous interpreting and working memory executive control.” Interpreting 16 (2): 139–68. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2015. “Simultaneous interpreting and working memory capacity.” In Psycholinguistic and Cognitive Inquiries into Translation and Interpreting, ed. by Aline Ferreira and John W. Schwieter, 101–26. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Timarová, Šárka, Barbara Dragsted, and Inge Gorm Hansen. 2011. “Time lag in translation and interpreting: A methodological exploration.” In Methods and Strategies of Process Research: Integrative approaches in Translation Studies, ed. by Cecilia Alvstad, Adelina Hild, and Elisabet Tiselius: 121–46. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
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.Google Scholar
Wickham, Hadley. 2016. Ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis. 2nd Edition. New York: Springer Science. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zheng, Binghan, and Hao Zhou. 2018. “Revisiting processing time for metaphorical expressions: An eye-tracking study on eye-voice span during sight translation.” Foreign Language Teaching and Research 50 (5): 738–53.Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Su, Wenchao
2023. Eye-voice span in sight interpreting: an eye-tracking investigation. Perspectives 31:5 ► pp. 969 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 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.