1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Interpreting
  4. Volume 25, Issue 2
  5. Article
Volume 25, Issue 2
  • ISSN 1384-6647
  • E-ISSN: 1569-982X
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This study investigated individual differences in prediction during language comprehension in professional and student Turkish (A)–English (B) simultaneous interpreters as a function of simultaneous interpreting (SI) experience and working memory capacity (WMC). A Turkish visual-world eye-tracking prediction task examined whether the accusative versus the nominative case markers on the initial nouns of sentences could be used as cues to predicting an upcoming argument. The participants’ WMC was measured using an automated operation span task. We found a prediction effect (a significantly higher increase in fixations to the plausible agent with time in the accusative than in the nominative condition) for the professionals, but not for the students. WMC contributed positively to the prediction effect in the professionals. Our findings indicate an SI-related advantage for prediction in professional versus student interpreters. Importantly, the present findings revealed an SI-related advantage in a prediction task that did not require interpreting.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/intp.00085.ozk
2022-09-22
2023-12-02

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/intp.00085.ozk
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. AIIC
    AIIC (2019) The AIIC A-B-C. https://aiic.org/site/world/about/profession/abc (accessed6 July 2022).
  2. Allopenna, P. D., Magnuson, J. S. & Tanenhaus, M. K.
    (1998) Tracking the time course of spoken word recognition using eye movements: Evidence for continuous mapping models. Journal of Memory and Language38 (4), 419–439. 10.1006/jmla.1997.2558
     https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1997.2558 [Google Scholar]
  3. Altmann, G. T. M.
    (2011) Language can mediate eye movement control within 100 milliseconds, regardless of whether there is anything to move the eyes to. Acta Psychologica137 (2), 190–200. 10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.09.009
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.09.009 [Google Scholar]
  4. Amos, R. M. & Pickering, M. J.
    (2020) A theory of prediction in simultaneous interpreting. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition23 (4), 706–715. 10.1017/S1366728919000671
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728919000671 [Google Scholar]
  5. Amos, R. M., Seeber, K. G. & Pickering, M. J.
    (2022) Prediction during simultaneous interpreting: Evidence from the visual-world paradigm. Cognition, 2201, 104987. 10.1016/j.cognition.2021.104987
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2021.104987 [Google Scholar]
  6. Babcock, L. & Vallesi, A.
    (2017) Are simultaneous interpreters expert bilinguals, unique bilinguals, or both?Bilingualism: Language and Cognition20 (2), 403–417. 10.1017/S1366728915000735
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728915000735 [Google Scholar]
  7. Baguley, T.
    (2012) Serious stats: A guide to advanced statistics for the behavioral sciences. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1007/978‑0‑230‑36355‑7
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-230-36355-7 [Google Scholar]
  8. Barr, D. J.
    (2008) Analyzing ‘visual world’ eye-tracking data using multilevel logistic regression. Journal of Memory and Language59 (4), 457–474. 10.1016/j.jml.2007.09.002
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2007.09.002 [Google Scholar]
  9. Barr, D. J., Levy, R., Scheepers, C. & Tily, H. J.
    (2013) Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language68 (3), 255–278. 10.1016/j.jml.2012.11.001
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2012.11.001 [Google Scholar]
  10. Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B. & Walker, S.
    (2015) Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software67 (1), 1–48. 10.18637/jss.v067.i01
     https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01 [Google Scholar]
  11. Borovsky, A., Elman, J. L. & Fernald, A.
    (2012) Knowing a lot for one’s age: Vocabulary skill and not age is associated with anticipatory incremental sentence interpretation in children and adults. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology112 (4), 417–436. 10.1016/j.jecp.2012.01.005
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2012.01.005 [Google Scholar]
  12. Bresnan, J.
    (2001) Lexical-functional syntax. Oxford: Blackwell.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Brouwer, S., Özkan, D. & Küntay, A. C.
    (2019) Verb-based prediction during language processing: The case of Dutch and Turkish. Journal of Child Language46 (1), 80–97. 10.1017/S0305000918000375
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305000918000375 [Google Scholar]
  14. Brown, M., Salverda, A. P., Dilley, L. C. & Tanenhaus, M. K.
    (2011) Expectations from preceding prosody influence segmentation in online sentence processing. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review18 (6), 1189–1196. 10.3758/s13423‑011‑0167‑9
     https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-011-0167-9 [Google Scholar]
  15. Brunyé, T. T., Carney, P. A., Allison, K. H., Shapiro, L. G., Weaver, D. L. & Elmore, J. G.
    (2014) Eye movements as an index of pathologist visual expertise: A pilot study. PLoS ONE9 (8), e103447. 10.1371/journal.pone.0103447
     https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0103447 [Google Scholar]
  16. Bybee, J. L.
    (1985) Morphology: A study of the relation between meaning and form. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.9
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.9 [Google Scholar]
  17. Bybee, J.
    (1995) Regular morphology and the lexicon. Language and Cognitive Processes10 (5), 425–455. 10.1080/01690969508407111
     https://doi.org/10.1080/01690969508407111 [Google Scholar]
  18. Chernov, G. V.
    (2004) Inference and anticipation in simultaneous interpreting: A probability-prediction model. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.57
     https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.57 [Google Scholar]
  19. Chernov, V. M.
    (1994) Message redundancy and message anticipation in simultaneous interpreting. InS. Lambert & B. Moser-Mercer (Eds.), Bridging the gap: Empirical research in simultaneous interpretation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 139–154. 10.1075/btl.3.13che
     https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.3.13che [Google Scholar]
  20. Chmiel, A.
    (2021) Effects of simultaneous interpreting experience and training on anticipation, as measured by word-translation latencies. Interpreting23 (1), 18–44. 10.1075/intp.00048.chm
     https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.00048.chm [Google Scholar]
  21. Christoffels, I. K., de Groot, A. M. B. & Kroll, J. F.
    (2006) Memory and language skills in simultaneous interpreters: The role of expertise and language proficiency. Journal of Memory and Language54 (3), 324–345. 10.1016/j.jml.2005.12.004
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2005.12.004 [Google Scholar]
  22. Cooper, R. M.
    (1974) The control of eye fixation by the meaning of spoken language: A new methodology for the real-time investigation of speech perception, memory, and language processing. Cognitive Psychology6 (1), 84–107. 10.1016/0010‑0285(74)90005‑X
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(74)90005-X [Google Scholar]
  23. Fan, D. C., Collart, A. & Chan, S-H.
    (2022) When two languages are competing: An ERP study of sentence processing in expert and novice interpreters. Interpreting24 (1), 1–37. 10.1075/intp.00069.fan
     https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.00069.fan [Google Scholar]
  24. García, A. M.
    (2014) The interpreter advantage hypothesis: Preliminary data patterns and empirically motivated questions. Translation and Interpreting Studies9 (2), 219–238. 10.1075/tis.9.2.04gar
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tis.9.2.04gar [Google Scholar]
  25. García, A. M., Muñoz, E. & Kogan, B.
    (2019) Taxing the bilingual mind: Effects of simultaneous interpreting experience on verbal and executive mechanisms. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition23 (4), 729–739. 10.1017/S1366728919000063
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728919000063 [Google Scholar]
  26. Gerver, D., Longley, P., Long, J. & Lambert, S.
    (1984) Selecting trainee conference interpreters: A preliminary study. Journal of Occupational Psychology57 (1), 17–31. 10.1111/j.2044‑8325.1984.tb00144.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8325.1984.tb00144.x [Google Scholar]
  27. Göksun, T., Küntay, A. C. & Naigles, L. R.
    (2008) Turkish children use morphosyntactic bootstrapping in interpreting verb meaning. Journal of Child Language35 (2), 291–323. 10.1017/S0305000907008471
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305000907008471 [Google Scholar]
  28. Hintz, F., Meyer, A. S. & Huettig, F.
    (2017) Predictors of verb-mediated anticipatory eye movements in the visual world. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition43 (9), 1352–1374. 10.1037/xlm0000388
     https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000388 [Google Scholar]
  29. Huettig, F. & Altmann, G. T. M.
    (2004) The online processing of ambiguous and unambiguous words in context: Evidence from head-mounted eye-tracking. InM. Carreiras & C. Clifton (Eds.), The on-line study of sentence comprehension: Eyetracking, ERP and beyond. New York: Psychology Press, 187–207.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Huettig, F. & Janse, E.
    (2016) Individual differences in working memory and processing speed predict anticipatory spoken language processing in the visual world. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience31 (1), 80–93. 10.1080/23273798.2015.1047459
     https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2015.1047459 [Google Scholar]
  31. Huettig, F. & Mani, N.
    (2016) Is prediction necessary to understand language? Probably not. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience31 (1), 19–31. 10.1080/23273798.2015.1072223
     https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2015.1072223 [Google Scholar]
  32. Huettig, F. & Pickering, M. J.
    (2019) Literacy advantages beyond reading: Prediction of spoken language. Trends in Cognitive Sciences23 (6), 464–475. 10.1016/j.tics.2019.03.008
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2019.03.008 [Google Scholar]
  33. Huettig, F., Singh, N. & Mishra, R. K.
    (2011) Language-mediated visual orienting behavior in low and high literates. Frontiers in Psychology21, 2851. 10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00285
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00285 [Google Scholar]
  34. Injoque-Ricle, I., Barreyro, J. P., Formoso, J. & Jaichenco, V. I.
    (2015) Expertise, working memory and articulatory suppression effect: Their relation with simultaneous interpreting performance. Advances in Cognitive Psychology11 (2), 56–63. 10.5709/acp‑0171‑1
     https://doi.org/10.5709/acp-0171-1 [Google Scholar]
  35. Ito, A., Pickering, M. J. & Corley, M.
    (2018) Investigating the time-course of phonological prediction in native and non-native speakers of English: A visual world eye-tracking study. Journal of Memory and Language981, 1–11. 10.1016/j.jml.2017.09.002
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2017.09.002 [Google Scholar]
  36. Ito, A. & Sakai, H.
    (2021) Everyday language exposure shapes prediction of specific words in listening comprehension: A visual world eye-tracking study. Frontiers in Psychology121, 2401. 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.607474
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.607474 [Google Scholar]
  37. Jörg, U.
    (1997) Bridging the gap: Verb anticipation in German–English simultaneous interpreting. InM. Snell-Hornby, Z. Jettmarova & K. Kaindl (Eds.), Translation as intercultural communication: Selected papers from the EST Congress, Prague 1995. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 217–228. 10.1075/btl.20.22jor
     https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.20.22jor [Google Scholar]
  38. Kamide, Y., Altmann, G. T. M. & Haywood, S. L.
    (2003) The time-course of prediction in incremental sentence processing: Evidence from anticipatory eye movements. Journal of Memory and Language491, 133–156. 10.1016/S0749‑596X(03)00023‑8
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0749-596X(03)00023-8 [Google Scholar]
  39. Kamide, Y., Scheppers, C. & Altmann, G. T. M.
    (2003) Integration of syntactic and semantic information in predictive processing: Cross-linguistic evidence from German and English. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research32 (1), 38–55. 10.1023/A:1021933015362
     https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021933015362 [Google Scholar]
  40. Köpke, B. & Nespoulous, J.
    (2006) Working memory performance in expert and novice interpreters. Interpreting8 (1), 1–23. 10.1075/intp.8.1.02kop
     https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.8.1.02kop [Google Scholar]
  41. Langacker, R.
    (1988) A usage-based model. InB. Rudzka-Ostyn (Ed.), Topics in cognitive linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cilt.50.06lan
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.50.06lan [Google Scholar]
  42. Lederer, M.
    (1981) La traduction simultanée: Expérience et théorie: Paris: Minard Lettres Modernes.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Lewis, R. L., Vasishth, S. & Van Dyke, J. A.
    (2006) Computational principles of working memory in sentence comprehension. Trends in Cognitive Sciences10 (10), 447–454. 10.1016/j.tics.2006.08.007
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2006.08.007 [Google Scholar]
  44. Lin, Y., Lv, Q. & Liang, J.
    (2018) Predicting fluency with language proficiency, working memory, and directionality in simultaneous interpreting. Frontiers in Psychology9 (1543). 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01543
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01543 [Google Scholar]
  45. Liu, Y., Hintz, F., Liang, J. & Huettig, F.
    (2022) Prediction in challenging situations: Most bilinguals can predict upcoming semantically-related words in their L1 source language when interpreting. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 1–15. 10.1017/S1366728922000232
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728922000232 [Google Scholar]
  46. Liu, M., Schallert, D. L. & Carroll, P. J.
    (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]
  47. Lozano-Argüelles, C. & Sagarra, N.
    (2021) Interpreting experience enhances the use of lexical stress and syllabic structure to predict L2 word endings. Applied Psycholinguistics42 (5), 1135–1157. 10.1017/S0142716421000217
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716421000217 [Google Scholar]
  48. Matsumoto, H., Terao, Y., Yugeta, A., Fukuda, H., Emoto, M., Furubayashi, T., Okano, T., Hanajima, R. & Ugawa, Y.
    (2011) Where do neurologists look when viewing brain CT images? An eye-tracking study involving stroke cases. PLoS ONE6 (12), e28928. 10.1371/journal.pone.0028928
     https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0028928 [Google Scholar]
  49. Mellinger, C. & Hanson, T.
    (2019) Meta-analyses of simultaneous interpreting and working memory. Interpreting21 (2), 165–195. 10.1075/intp.00026.mel
     https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.00026.mel [Google Scholar]
  50. Mishra, R. K., Singh, N., Pandey, A. & Huettig, F.
    (2012) Spoken language-mediated anticipatory eye-movements are modulated by reading ability: Evidence from Indian low and high literates. Journal of Eye Movement Research5 (1). 10.16910/jemr.5.1.3
     https://doi.org/10.16910/jemr.5.1.3 [Google Scholar]
  51. Moser-Mercer, B., Frauenfelder, U. H., Casado, B. & Künzli, A.
    (2000) Searching to define expertise in interpreting. InB. Englund Dimitrova & K. Hyltenstam (Eds.), Language processing and simultaneous interpreting: Interdisciplinary perspectives. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.40.09mos
     https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.40.09mos [Google Scholar]
  52. Özge, D., Küntay, A. & Snedeker, J.
    (2019) Why wait for the verb? Turkish speaking children use case markers for incremental language comprehension. Cognition1831, 152–180. 10.1016/j.cognition.2018.10.026
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2018.10.026 [Google Scholar]
  53. Özge, D., Marinis, T. & Zeyrek, D.
    (2013) Object-first orders in Turkish do not pose a challenge during processing. InU. Özge (Ed.), Proceedings of the 8th Workshop on Altaic Formal Linguistics. Cambridge, MA: MIT, 269–280.
     [Google Scholar]
  54. Padilla, P., Bajo, M. T., Cañas, J. J. & Padilla, F.
    (1995) Cognitive processes of memory in simultaneous interpretation. InJ. Tommola (Ed.), Topics in interpreting research. Turku: University of Turku Centre for Translation and Interpreting, 61–71.
     [Google Scholar]
  55. Padilla, F., Bajo, M. T. & Macizo, P.
    (2005) Articulatory suppression in language interpretation: Working memory capacity, dual tasking and word knowledge. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition8 (3), 207–219. 10.1017/S1366728905002269
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728905002269 [Google Scholar]
  56. R Core Team
    R Core Team (2021) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. https://www.R-project.org/ (accessed6 July 2022).
     [Google Scholar]
  57. Riccardi, A.
    (1996) Language-specific strategies in simultaneous interpreting. InC. Dollerup & V. Appel (Eds.), Teaching translation and interpreting31. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 213–222. 10.1075/btl.16.30ric
     https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.16.30ric [Google Scholar]
  58. Schneider, W., Eschman, A. & Zuccolotto, A.
    (2002) E-Prime user’s guide. Pittsburgh: Psychology Software Tools Inc.
     [Google Scholar]
  59. Seeber, K. G. & Kerzel, D.
    (2011) Cognitive load in simultaneous interpreting: Model meets data. International Journal of Bilingualism16 (2), 228–242. 10.1177/1367006911402982
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1367006911402982 [Google Scholar]
  60. Setton, R.
    (2005) So what is so interesting about simultaneous interpreting?Skase Journal of Translation and Interpretation1 (1), 70–84.
     [Google Scholar]
  61. Signorelli, T. M., Haarmann, H. J. & Obler, L. K.
    (2011) Working memory in simultaneous interpreters: Effects of task and age. International Journal of Bilingualism16 (2), 198–212. 10.1177/1367006911403200
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1367006911403200 [Google Scholar]
  62. Stavrakaki, S., Megari, K., Kosmidis, M. H., Apostolidou, M. & Takou, E.
    (2012) Working memory and verbal fluency in simultaneous interpreters. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology34 (6), 624–633. 10.1080/13803395.2012.667068
     https://doi.org/10.1080/13803395.2012.667068 [Google Scholar]
  63. Steedman, M. & Baldridge, J.
    (2011) Combinatory categorial grammar. InR. D. Borsley & K. Börjars (Eds.), Non-transformational syntax. Oxford: Blackwell, 181–224. 10.1002/9781444395037.ch5
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444395037.ch5 [Google Scholar]
  64. Tanenhaus, M. K., Spivey-Knowlton, M. J., Eberhard, K. M. & Sedivy, J. C.
    (1995) Integration of visual and linguistic information in spoken language comprehension. Science268 (5217), 1632–1634. 10.1126/science.7777863
     https://doi.org/10.1126/science.7777863 [Google Scholar]
  65. Timarová, Š., Čeňková, I., Meylaerts, R., Hertog, E., Szmalec, A. & Duyck, W.
    (2015) Simultaneous interpreting and working memory capacity. InA. Ferreira & J. W. Schwieter (Eds.), Psycholinguistic and cognitive inquiries into translation and interpreting. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 101–126. 10.1075/btl.115.05tim
     https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.115.05tim [Google Scholar]
  66. Turner, M. L. & Engle, R. W.
    (1989) Is working memory capacity task dependent?Journal of Memory and Language281, 127–154. 10.1016/0749‑596X(89)90040‑5
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(89)90040-5 [Google Scholar]
  67. Tzou, Y. Z., Eslami, Z. R., Chen, H. C. & Vaid, J.
    (2011) Effect of language proficiency and degree of formal training in simultaneous interpreting on working memory and interpreting performance: Evidence from Mandarin–English speakers. International Journal of Bilingualism16 (2), 213–227. 10.1177/1367006911403197
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1367006911403197 [Google Scholar]
  68. Unsworth, N., Heitz, R. P., Schrock, J. C. & Engle, R. W.
    (2005) An automated version of the operation span task. Behavior Research Methods37 (3), 498–505. 10.3758/BF03192720
     https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03192720 [Google Scholar]
  69. Wen, H. & Dong, Y.
    (2019) How does interpreting experience enhance working memory and short-term memory? A meta-analysis. Journal of Cognitive Psychology31 (8), 769–784. 10.1080/20445911.2019.1674857
     https://doi.org/10.1080/20445911.2019.1674857 [Google Scholar]
  70. Yudes, C., Macizo, P. & Bajo, T.
    (2011) The influence of expertise in simultaneous interpreting on non-verbal executive processes. Frontiers in Psychology2 (309). 10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00309
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00309 [Google Scholar]
  71. Yudes, C., Macizo, P., Morales, L. & Bajo, M. T.
    (2013) Comprehension and error monitoring in simultaneous interpreters. Applied Psycholinguistics34 (5), 1039–1057. 10.1017/S0142716412000112
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716412000112 [Google Scholar]
  72. Zhang, W. & Yu, D.
    (2019) A duet and/or a concerto? Simultaneous interpreters’ working memory and interpreting expertise. Babel65 (4), 519–537. 10.1075/babel.00107.yu
     https://doi.org/10.1075/babel.00107.yu [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/intp.00085.ozk
Loading
Simultaneous interpreting experience enhances the use of case markers for prediction in Turkish
Interpreting 25, 186 (2023); https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.00085.ozk
/content/journals/10.1075/intp.00085.ozk
/content/journals/10.1075/intp.00085.ozk
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): eye-tracking; individual differences; morphosyntactic prediction; SI experience; working memory capacity

Most Cited

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