1887
Volume 65, Issue 1
  • ISSN 0521-9744
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9668
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This article presents an experimental study that compares six expert and eleven novice interpreters in order to assess the effect of moderate and high delivery rates on the simultaneous interpreting of specialised discourse. The dependent variables were ear voice span (EVS) and target speech accuracy. The participants interpreted one medical speech from English into Spanish divided into three parts: the first and third parts were delivered at a moderate delivery rate and the second at a high delivery rate. Twelve segments were selected from the original speech and evaluated by five independent raters (two interpreters and three medical doctors) in terms of accuracy. The findings indicate that a high delivery rate has no significant impact on EVS, and no statistically significant differences were found between the EVS of the two groups of interpreters. The results also show that a high delivery rate has an impact on target speech accuracy in that both novices and experts perform better at a moderate delivery rate.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/babel.00081.rui
2019-03-29
2019-09-21
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Adamowicz, Alicja
    1989 “The Role of Anticipation in Discourse: Text Processing in Simultaneous Interpreting”. Polish Psychological Bulletin20 (2): 153–160.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Alonso Bacigalupe, Luis
    1999 “Sobre la doble recepción del mensaje y la preparación del texto: Resultados de un estudio experimental en IS”. InAnovar/Anosar: Estudios de traducción e interpretación, ed. byAlberto Álvarez Lugrís; and Anxo Fernández Ocampo, 11–25. Vigo: Servicio de Publicacións, Universidad de Vigo.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Anderson, Linda
    1994 “Simultaneous Interpretation: Contextual and Translation Aspects”. InBridging the Gap: Empirical Research in Simultaneous Interpretation, ed. bySylvie Lambert; and Barbara Moser-Mercer, 101–120. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.3.11and
    https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.3.11and [Google Scholar]
  4. Baese-Berk, Melissa M.; and Tuuli H. Morrill
    2015 “Speaking Rate Consistency in Native and non-Native Speakers of English”. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America138 (3): 223–228. 10.1121/1.4929622
    https://doi.org/10.1121/1.4929622 [Google Scholar]
  5. Barghout, Alma; Lucía Ruiz Rosendo; and Mónica Varela García
    2015 “The Influence of Speed on Omissions in Simultaneous Interpretation. An Experimental Study”. Babel61 (3): 305–334. 10.1075/babel.61.3.01bar
    https://doi.org/10.1075/babel.61.3.01bar [Google Scholar]
  6. Barik, Henri C.
    1973 “Simultaneous Interpretation: Temporal and Quantitative Data”. Language and Speech16: 237–270. 10.1177/002383097301600307
    https://doi.org/10.1177/002383097301600307 [Google Scholar]
  7. Bevilacqua, Lorenzo
    2009 “The Position of the Verb in Germanic Languages and Simultaneous Interpretation”. The Interpreters’ Newsletter14: 1–31.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Carter-Thomas, Shirley; and Elizabeth Rowley-Jolivet
    2003 “Analysing the Scientific Conference Presentation. A Methodological Overview of a Multimodal Genre”. ASp: La revue du GERAS39/40: 59–72. 10.4000/asp.1295
    https://doi.org/10.4000/asp.1295 [Google Scholar]
  9. Chernov, Ghelly V.
    2004Inference and Anticipation in Simultaneous Interpreting. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.57
    https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.57 [Google Scholar]
  10. Christoffels, Ingrid K.; and Annette M. B. De Groot
    2004 “Components of Simultaneous Interpreting: Comparing Interpreting with Shadowing and Paraphrasing”. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition7 (3): 227–240. 10.1017/S1366728904001609
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728904001609 [Google Scholar]
  11. Christoffels, Ingrid K.
    2004 Cognitive Studies in Simultaneous Interpreting. PhD dissertation. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam.
  12. De Groot, Annette M. B.
    1997 “The Cognitive Study of Translation and Interpretation: Three Approaches”. InCognitive Processes in Translation and Interpreting, ed. byJoseph H. Danks; Gregory M. Shreve; Stephen B. Fountain; and Michael K. McBeath, 25–26. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. De Manuel Jerez, Jesús
    2014 “L’usage des discours réels dans la formation d’interprètes: pourquoi, comment et quand?” EVIVA Seminar, Evaluating the Use of Virtual Learning Environments in the Education of Interpreters and their Clients. Welsh Higher Education, Brussels, 28November 2014.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Defrancq, Bart
    2015 “Corpus-based Research into the Presumed Effects of Short EVS”. Interpreting17 (1): 26–45. 10.1075/intp.17.1.02def
    https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.17.1.02def [Google Scholar]
  15. Dejean le Féal, Karla
    1978 Lectures et improvisations: Incidences de la forme de l’énonciation sur la traduction simultanée. PhD dissertation. Paris : Université de la Sorbonne Nouvelle.
  16. Díaz Gálaz, Stephanie
    2012 La influencia del conocimiento previo en la interpretación simultánea de discursos especializados: Un estudio empírico. PhD dissertation. Granada: University of Granada.
  17. Díaz Gálaz, Stephanie; Presentación Padilla Benítez; and M. Teresa Bajo Molina
    2015 “The Role of Advance Preparation in Simultaneous Interpreting: A Comparison of Professional Interpreters and Interpreting Students”. Interpreting17 (1): 1–25. 10.1075/intp.17.1.01dia
    https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.17.1.01dia [Google Scholar]
  18. Donato, Valentina
    2003 “Strategies Adopted by Student Interpreters in SI: A Comparison Between the English-Italian and the German-Italian Language-pairs”. The Interpreter’s Newsletter12: 101–134.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Gerver, David
    1969/2002 “The Effects of Source Language Presentation Rate on the Performance of Simultaneous Conference Interpreters”. InThe Interpreting Studies Reader, ed. byFranz Pöchhacker; and Miriam Schlesinger, 53–66. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. 1976 “Empirical Studies of Simultaneous Interpretation: A Review and a Model”. InTranslation: Applications and Research, ed. byRichard W. Brislin, 165–207. New York: Gardner Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Gile, Daniel
    2009Basic Concepts and Models for Interpreter and Translator Training (Rev. ed.). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.8
    https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.8 [Google Scholar]
  22. Goffman, Erving
    1981Forms of Talk. Philadelphia (PA): University of Pennsylvania Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Goldman-Eisler, Frieda
    1972 “Segmentation of Input in Simultaneous Interpretation”. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research1 (2): 127–140. 10.1007/BF01068102
    https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01068102 [Google Scholar]
  24. Hild, Adelina
    2011 “Effects of Linguistic Complexity on Expert Processing during Simultaneous Interpreting”. InMethods and Strategies of Process Research: Integrative Approaches in Translation Studies, ed. byCecilia Alvstad; Adelina Hild; and Elizabeth Tiselius, 249–267. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.94.19hil
    https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.94.19hil [Google Scholar]
  25. 2014 “The Role of Self-regulatory Processes in the Development of Interpreting Expertise”. Translation and Interpreting Studies9 (1): 128–149. 10.1075/tis.9.1.07hil
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tis.9.1.07hil [Google Scholar]
  26. Isham, William P.
    1994 “Memory for Sentence Form after Simultaneous Interpretation: Evidence both for and against Deverbalization”. InBridging the Gap: Experimental Research in Simultaneous Interpretation, ed. bySylvie Lambert; and Barbara Moser-Mercer, 155–212. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.3.15ish
    https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.3.15ish [Google Scholar]
  27. Lamberger-Felber, Heike
    2001 “Text-Oriented Research into Interpreting”. Hermes, Journal of Linguistics26: 39–64.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Lederer, Marianne
    1981La traduction simultanée: expérience et théorie. Paris: Minard.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Lee, Tae-Hyung
    2002 “Ear Voice Span in English into Korean Simultaneous Interpretation”. Meta47 (4): 596–606. 10.7202/008039ar
    https://doi.org/10.7202/008039ar [Google Scholar]
  30. Li, Changshuan
    2010 “Coping Strategies for Fast Delivery in Simultaneous Interpretation”. JoSTrans13: 19–25.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Liu, Minhua
    2001Expertise in Simultaneous Interpreting: A Working Memory Analysis. Unpublished PhD dissertation. Austin (TX): University of Texas at Austin.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Liu, Minhua; Diane L. Schallert; and Patrick J. Carroll
    2004 “Working Memory and Expertise in Simultaneous Interpreting”. Interpreting6 (1): 19–42. 10.1075/intp.6.1.04liu
    https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.6.1.04liu [Google Scholar]
  33. MacWhinney, Brian
    1997 “Simultaneous Interpretation and the Competition Model”. InCognitive Processes in Translation and Interpreting, ed. byJoseph H. Danks; Gregory M. Shreve; Stephen B. Fountain; and Michael K. McBeath, 215–232. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Messina, Alessandro
    1998 “The Reading Aloud of English Language Texts in Simultaneously Interpreted Conferences”. Interpreting3 (2): 147–161. 10.1075/intp.3.2.02mes
    https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.3.2.02mes [Google Scholar]
  35. Meuleman, Chris; and Fred Van Besien
    2009 “Coping with Extreme Speech Conditions in Simultaneous Interpreting”. Interpreting11 (1): 20–34. 10.1075/intp.11.1.03meu
    https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.11.1.03meu [Google Scholar]
  36. Monti, Christina; Claudio Bendazzoli; Annalisa Sandrelli; and Mariachiara Russo
    2005 “Studying Directionality in Simultaneous Interpreting through an Electronic Corpus: EPIC (European Parliament Interpreting Corpus)”. Meta50 (4): np. 10.7202/019850ar
    https://doi.org/10.7202/019850ar [Google Scholar]
  37. Napier, Jemina
    2004 “Interpreting Omissions. A New Perspective”. Interpreting6 (2): 117–142. 10.1075/intp.6.2.02nap
    https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.6.2.02nap [Google Scholar]
  38. Navarro González, Fernando A.
    1997Traducción y lenguaje en medicina. Barcelona: Fundación Dr. Antonio Esteve.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Oléron, Pierre; and Hubert Nanpon
    1965 “Recherches sur la traduction simultanée”. Journal de psychologie normale et pathologique62: 73–94.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Ono, Takahiro; Hitomi Tohyama; and Shigeki Matsubara
    2008 “Construction and Analysis of Word-Level Time-Aligned Simultaneous Interpretation Corpus”. InProceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, ed. byNicoletta Calzolari; Khalid Choukri; Bente Maegaard; Joseph Mariani; Jan Odijk; Stelios Piperidis; and Daniel Tapias. Paris: ELRA.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Pio, Sonia
    2003 “The Relation between ST Delivery Rate and Quality in Simultaneous Interpretation”. The Interpreters’ Newsletter12: 69–100.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Podhajská, Květa
    2008 “Time Lag in Simultaneous Interpretation from English into Czech and its Dependence on Text Type”. Folia Translatologica10: 87–110.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Pym, Anthony
    2009 “On Omission in Simultaneous Interpreting: Risk Analysis of a Hidden Effort”. InEfforts and Models in Interpreting and Translation Research: A Tribute to Daniel Gile, ed. byGyde Hansen; Andrew Chesterman; and Heidrun Gerzymisch-Arbogast, 83–105. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.80.08pym
    https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.80.08pym [Google Scholar]
  44. Roach, Peter
    1998 “Some Languages are Spoken More Quickly than Others”. InLanguage Myths, ed. byLaurie Bauer; and Peter Trudgill, 150–158. London: Penguin.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Rodero, Emma
    2012 “A Comparative Analysis of Speech Rate and Perception in Radio Bulletins”. Text and Talk32 (3): 391–411. 10.1515/text‑2012‑0019
    https://doi.org/10.1515/text-2012-0019 [Google Scholar]
  46. Ruiz Rosendo, Lucía
    2009La interpretación en el ámbito de la medicina. Granada: Comares.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Schweda-Nicholson, Nancy
    1987 “Linguistic and Extralinguistic Aspects of Simultaneous Interpretation”. Applied Linguistics8 (2): 194–205. 10.1093/applin/8.2.194
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/8.2.194 [Google Scholar]
  48. Seleskovitch, Danica; and Marianne Lederer
    1984Interpréter pour traduire. Paris: Didier Érudition.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Seleskovitch, Danica
    1978Interpreting for International Conferences. Washington D. C.: Pen & Booth.
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Setton, Robin; and Andrew Dawrant
    2016Conference Interpreting. A Complete Course. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.120
    https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.120 [Google Scholar]
  51. Shlesinger, Miriam
    2003 “Effects of Presentation Rate on Working Memory in Simultaneous Interpreting”. The Interpreters’ Newsletter12: 37–49.
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Sunnari, Marianna
    1995 “Processing Strategies in Simultaneous Interpreting (SI): “Saying It All” vs. Synthesis”. InTopics in Interpreting Research, ed. byJorma Tommola, 109–121. Turku: University of Turku.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Swales, John M.
    1990Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings. Cambridge: CUP.
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Timarová, Sarka; Barbara Dragsted; and Inge G. Hansen
    2011 “Time Lag in Translation and Interpreting. A Methodological Exploration”. InMethods and Strategies of Process Research. Integrative Approaches in Translation Studies, ed. byCecilia Alvstad; Adelina Hild; and Elizabeth Tiselius, 121–146. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.94.10tim
    https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.94.10tim [Google Scholar]
  55. Tiselius, Elizabeth; and Gard B. Jenset
    2011 “Process and product in simultaneous interpreting: What they tell us about experience and expertise”. InMethods and Strategies of Process Research. Integrative Approaches in Translation Studies, ed. byCecilia Alvstad; Adelina Hild; and Elizabeth Tiselius, 269–300. Amsterdan: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.94.20tis
    https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.94.20tis [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/babel.00081.rui
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/babel.00081.rui
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error