Abstract
This paper presents an eye-tracking study in which number processing in simultaneous interpreting was investigated. Interpreting accuracy and eye behaviour were studied together to unveil the processing and rendering of numbers by interpreting trainees (N = 22) and professional interpreters (N = 26). While professional interpreters rendered numerals and the context in which they appeared with better accuracy, there was also a positive correlation between number interpreting accuracy and context interpreting accuracy. Our results indicate that interpreting arithmetic values of numerals is more cognitively demanding than interpreting their context, which is reflected in longer mean fixation duration on numbers than on the elements they referred to. Further research is needed to investigate numerical data processing in other tasks, involving other language pairs and interpreting directionality. The study outcomes may be a useful contribution to research on the cognitive aspects of simultaneous interpreting, numerical data processing, as well as interpreter training.
8 Acknowledgements
This study was financed by research grant no. 2015/17/N/HS2/03160 from the National Science Centre, Poland. Paweł Korpal is supported by the Foundation for Polish Science (FNP).
References
Baddeley, A. and G. Hitch. 1974. “Working memory”. In: Bower, G. (ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation. Stanford: Academic Press. 48–79.10.1016/S0079-7421(08)60452-1Search in Google Scholar
Baddeley, A. 2000. “The episodic buffer: A new component of working memory?” Trends in Cognitive Sciences 4(11). 417–423.10.1016/S1364-6613(00)01538-2Search in Google Scholar
Braun, S. and A. Clarici. 1996. “Inaccuracy for numerals in simultaneous interpretation: Neurolinguistic and neuropsychological perspectives”. The Interpreters’ Newsletter 7. 85–102.Search in Google Scholar
Christoffels, I. and A. de Groot. 2005. “Simultaneous interpreting: A cognitive perspective”. In: Kroll, J. F. and A. de Groot (eds.), Handbook of bilingualism: Psycholinguistic approaches. New York: Oxford University Press. 454–479.Search in Google Scholar
Christoffels, I., A. de Groot and J. F. Kroll. 2006. “Memory and language skills in simultaneous interpreters: The role of expertise and language proficiency”. Journal of Memory and Language 54. 324–345.10.1016/j.jml.2005.12.004Search in Google Scholar
Daro, V. and F. Fabbro. 1994. “Verbal memory during simultaneous interpretation: Effects of phonological interference”. Applied Linguistics 15(4). 365–381.10.1093/applin/15.4.365Search in Google Scholar
De Groot, A., P. Delmaar and S. Lupker. 2000. “The processing of interlexical homographs in translation recognition and lexical decision: Support for non-selective access to bilingual memory”. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 53A(2). 397–428.10.1080/027249800390547Search in Google Scholar
Fabbro, F., B. Gran and L. Gran. 1991. “Hemispheric specialization for semantic and syntactic components of languages in simultaneous interpreters”. Brain and Language 41. 1–42.10.1016/0093-934X(91)90108-DSearch in Google Scholar
Gerver, D. 1969. “The effects of source language presentation rate on the performance of simultaneous conference interpreters”. In: Foulke, E. (ed.), Proceedings of the 2nd Louisville Conference on Rate and/or Frequency Controlled Speech. University of Louisville. 162–184.Search in Google Scholar
Gerver, D. 1975. “A psychological approach to simultaneous interpretation”. Meta: Translators’ Journal 20(2). 119–128.10.7202/002885arSearch in Google Scholar
Gerver, D. 1976. “Empirical studies of simultaneous interpreting: A review and a model”. In: Brislin, R. (ed.), Translation, Applications and Research. New York: Gardner Press. 165–207.Search in Google Scholar
Gile, D. 1995. Basic concepts and models for interpreter and translator training. Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/btl.8(1st)Search in Google Scholar
Gile, D. 2009. Basic concepts and models for interpreter and translator training (rev. ed.). Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/btl.8Search in Google Scholar
Hervais-Adelman, A., B. Moser-Mercer and N. Golestani. 2015. “Brain functional plasticity associated with the emergence of expertise in extreme language control”. NeuroImage 114. 264–74.10.1016/j.neuroimage.2015.03.072Search in Google Scholar
Holmqvist, K., M. Nystrom, R. Anderson, R. Dewhurst, H. Jarodzka and J. van de Weiter. 2015. Eye tracking. A comprehensive guide to methods and measures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Hvelplund, K. T. 2014. “Eye tracking and the translation process: Reflections on the analysis and interpretation of eye-tracking data”. MonTI. Monografías de Traducción e Interpretación, Special Issue – Minding translation. 201–223.Search in Google Scholar
Jensen, C. 2008. “Assessing eye-tracking accuracy in translation studies”. Copenhagen Studies in Language 38. 157–174Search in Google Scholar
Jones, R. 2002. Conference interpreting explained. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing.Search in Google Scholar
Just, M. A. and P. A. Carpenter. 1980. “A theory of reading: from eye fixations to comprehension”. Psychological review 87(4). 329–354.10.1037/0033-295X.87.4.329Search in Google Scholar
Kade, O. 1968. Zufall und Gesetzmäßigkeit in der Übersetzung. Leipzig: Verlag Enzyklopadie.Search in Google Scholar
Korpal, P. and K. Stachowiak. 2017. “A closer look at numbers in simultaneous interpreting: An eye-tracking study”. Poster presented at the 19th European Conference on Eye Movements, Wuppertal, 20-24 August.Search in Google Scholar
Lambert, S. 2004. “Shared attention during sight translation, sight interpretation and simultaneous interpretation”. Meta: Translators’ Journal 49(2). 294–306.10.7202/009352arSearch in Google Scholar
Lederer, M. 1981. La traduction simultanée – expérience et théorie. Paris: Minard.Search in Google Scholar
Liu, M., D. L. Schallert and P. J. Carroll. 2004. “Working memory and expertise in simultaneous interpreting”. Interpreting 6(1). 19–42.10.1075/intp.6.1.04liuSearch in Google Scholar
Mazza, C. 2001. “Numbers in simultaneous interpretation”. The Interpreters’ Newsletter 11. 87–104.Search in Google Scholar
Meiran, N., B. Hommel, U. Bibi and I. Lev. 2002. “Consciousness and control in task switching”. Consciousness and Cognition 11(1). 10–33.10.1006/ccog.2001.0521Search in Google Scholar
Mizuno, A. 2005. “Process model for simultaneous interpreting and working memory”. Meta: Translators’ Journal 502. 739–752.10.7202/011015arSearch in Google Scholar
Obler, L. 2012. “Conference interpreting as extreme language use”. International Journal of Bilingualism 16(2). 177–182.10.1177/1367006911403199Search in Google Scholar
Padilla, P., M. T. Bajo, J. Canas and F. Padilla. 1995. “Cognitive processes of memory in simultaneous interpretation”. In: Tommola, J. (ed.), Topics in Interpreting Research Turku: University of Turku, Centre for Translation and Interpreting. 61–71.Search in Google Scholar
Rayner, K. 1998. “Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research”. Psychological Bulletin 124(3). 372–422.10.1037/0033-2909.124.3.372Search in Google Scholar
Samuel, S. 2014. How much do in-vehicle tasks with swapping, switching and spillover effects interfere with drivers’ ability to detect and respond to threats on the forward roadway? PhD dissertation. University of Massachusetts.Search in Google Scholar
Seeber, K. 2011. “Cognitive load in simultaneous interpreting. Existing theories – new models”. Interpreting 13(2). 176–204.10.1075/intp.13.2.02seeSearch in Google Scholar
Seeber, K. 2012. “Multimodal input in simultaneous interpreting: An eye-tracking experiment”. In: Zybatov, L., A. Petrova and M. Ustaszewski (eds.), Proceedings of the 1st International Conference TRANSLATA, Translation and Interpreting Research: yesterday – today – tomorrow. Frankfurt: Peter Lang. 341–347.Search in Google Scholar
Seeber, K. 2013. “Multimodal processing during simultaneous interpreting – evidence from an eye-tracking study”. Poster presented at the 17th European Conference on Eye Movements, Lund, 11–16 August.Search in Google Scholar
Seeber, K. and D. Kerzel. 2011. “Cognitive load in simultaneous interpreting: model meets data”. International Journal of Bilingualism 16(2). 228–242.10.1177/1367006911402982Search in Google Scholar
Seleskovitch, D. 1976. Interpretation. A psychological approach to translating. Paris: Didier Erudition.Search in Google Scholar
Shlesinger, M. 2000. Strategic allocation of working memory and other attentional resources in simultaneous interpreting. PhD dissertation. Bar-Ilan University.Search in Google Scholar
Stavrakaki, S., K. Megari, M. H. Kosmidis, M. Apostolidou and E. Takou. 2012. “Working memory and verbal fluency in simultaneous interpreters”. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology 34(6). 624–633.10.1080/13803395.2012.667068Search in Google Scholar
Sunnari, M. 1995. “Processing strategies in simultaneous interpreting: ‘saying it all’ vs. synthesis”. In: Tommola, J. (ed.), Topics in Interpreting Research. Turku: University of Turku. 109–119.Search in Google Scholar
Timarova, Š., I. Čeňkova, R. Meylaerts, E. Hertog, A. Szmalec and W. Duyck. 2014. “Simultaneous interpreting and working memory executive control”. Interpreting 16(2). 139–168.10.1075/intp.16.2.01timSearch in Google Scholar
Tiselius, E. 2013. “Expertise without deliberate practice? The case of simultaneous interpreters”. The Interpreters’ Newsletter 18. Accessed: June 2 2016. https://www.openstarts.units.it/dspace/bitstream/10077/9748/1/Tiselius_Interpreters18.pdf.Search in Google Scholar
© 2018 Faculty of English, Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznań, Poland
