1887
image of The effect of cognitive load on temporal and disfluency patterns of speech
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This paper investigates how variation in the complexity of speech tasks is reflected in the temporal characteristics and disfluency patterns of speech. We examined temporal characteristics (speech rate, global articulation rate, ratio of pauses, frequency of pauses, and mean duration of pauses) and disfluency markers (overall frequency of disfluencies; frequency of filled pauses, filler words, whole-word repetitions, part-word repetitions, broken words, prolonged sounds, and revisions; frequency of disfluency clusters) in four speech production tasks (consecutive interpreting, sight translation, spontaneous speech and extemporaneous speech) with twelve speakers.

Our hypothesis, according to which the examined parameters will differ across the four tasks, was partly confirmed by the data; even though not all speech tasks differed significantly in all the examined parameters, our investigation revealed that there were significant differences between some tasks in four parameters, and between others in nine out of the fourteen parameters examined. Our data also suggest that in terms of the temporal characteristics and disfluency markers examined, the four tasks can be represented on a continuum based on the cognitive load associated with each task. At one end of the continuum and generating the least cognitive load is spontaneous speech, and at the other, generating the most cognitive load, is sight translation.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/target.19041.bon
2020-07-28
2020-08-07
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Agrifoglio, Marjorie
    2004 “Sight Translation and Interpreting: A Comparative Analysis of Constraints and Failures.” Interpreting6 (1): 43–67. 10.1075/intp.6.1.05agr
    https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.6.1.05agr [Google Scholar]
  2. Boersma, Paul, and David Weenink
    2008 Praat: Doing phonetics by computer (Version 5.0.1). AccessedJune 26, 2020. www.fon.hum.uva.nl/praat/download_win.html
  3. Bóna, Judit
    2014 “Temporal Characteristics of Speech: The Effect of Age and Speech Style.” The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America136 (2): EL116–EL121. 10.1121/1.4885482
    https://doi.org/10.1121/1.4885482 [Google Scholar]
  4. Bóna, Judit, and Mária Bakti
    2014 “A beszédtervezés és- kivitelezés temporális sajátosságai szinkrontolmácsok beszédprodukcióiban [Temporal characteristics of speech planning and execution in the speech production of simultaneous interpreters].” Fordítástudomány41 (1): 16–28.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Chen, Sijia
    2017 “The Construct of Cognitive Load in Interpreting and its Measurement.” Perspectives25 (4): 640–657. 10.1080/0907676X.2016.1278026
    https://doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.2016.1278026 [Google Scholar]
  6. Duchin, Sandra W., and Edward D. Mysak
    1987 “Disfluency and Rate Characteristics of Young Adult, Middle-aged, and Older Males.” Journal of Communication Disorders20 (3): 245–257. 10.1016/0021‑9924(87)90022‑0
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-9924(87)90022-0 [Google Scholar]
  7. Englund Dimitrova, Brigitta, and Elisabet Tiselius
    2016 “Cognitive Aspects of Community Interpreting: Toward a Process Model.” InReembedding Translation Process Research, edited byRicardo Muñoz Martín, 195–214. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.128.10eng
    https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.128.10eng [Google Scholar]
  8. Fletcher, Janet
    2010 “The Prosody of Speech: Timing and Rhythm.” InThe Handbook of Phonetic Sciences, edited byWilliam J. Hardcastle, John Laver, and Fiona E. Gibbon, 521–602. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell. 10.1002/9781444317251.ch15
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444317251.ch15 [Google Scholar]
  9. Gile, Daniel
    1995Basic Concepts and Models for Interpreter and Translator Training. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.8(1st)
    https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.8(1st) [Google Scholar]
  10. 2015 “The Contributions of Cognitive Psychology and Psycholinguistics to Conference Interpreting: A Critical Analysis.” InPsycholinguistic and Cognitive Inquiries into Translation and Interpreting, edited byAline Ferreira and John W. Schwieter, 41–64. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Goldman-Eisler, Frieda
    1968Psycholinguistics: Experiments in Spontaneous Speech. London: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Gósy, Mária
    2005Pszicholingvisztika [Psycholinguistics]. Budapest: Osiris.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. 2007 “Disfluencies and Self-monitoring.” Govor24 (2): 91–110.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. 2012 “Sorozatmegakadások mintázata a spontán beszédben [Complex disfluencies in spontaneous speech].” Beszédkutatás20: 107–131.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Grosjean, François, and Alain Deschamps
    1975 “Analyse contrastive des variables temporelles de l’anglais et du français: vitesse de parole et variables composantes, phénomènes d’hésitation [Contrastive analysis of temporal variables of English and French: Speech rate and component variables, hesitation phenomena].” Phonetica31: 144–184. 10.1159/000259667
    https://doi.org/10.1159/000259667 [Google Scholar]
  16. Gyarmathy, Dorottya
    2015 “Diszharmóniás jelenségek, megakadások a beszédben [Disharmonies and disfluencies in speech].” InDiszharmóniás jelenségek a beszédben [Disharmony phenomena in speech], edited byMária Gósy, 9–49. Budapest: MTA Nyelvtudományi Intézet.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Hubbard, Carol P., and Ehud Yairi
    1988 “Clustering of Disfluencies in the Speech of Stuttering and Nonstuttering Preschool Children.” Journal of Speech and Hearing Research31 (2): 228–33. 10.1044/jshr.3102.228
    https://doi.org/10.1044/jshr.3102.228 [Google Scholar]
  18. Hurtado Albir, Amparo, and Fabio Alves
    2009 “Translation as Cognitive Activity.” InThe Routledge Companion to Translation Studies, edited byJeremy Munday, 54–73. Oxon: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Jacewicz, Ewa, Robert Allen Fox, and Lai Wei
    2010 “Between-speaker and Within-speaker Variation in the Speech Tempo of American English.” The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America128 (2): 839–850. 10.1121/1.3459842
    https://doi.org/10.1121/1.3459842 [Google Scholar]
  20. Jones, Roderick
    1998Conference Interpreting Explained. Manchester: St. Jerome.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Kahneman, Daniel
    1973Attention and Effort. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. LaSalle, Lisa R., and Edward G. Conture
    1995 “Disfluency Clusters of Children who Stutter: Relation of Stutterings to Self-repairs.” Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research38 (5): 965–977. 10.1044/jshr.3805.965
    https://doi.org/10.1044/jshr.3805.965 [Google Scholar]
  23. Levelt, Willem J. M.
    1989Speaking: From Intention to Articulation. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Lickley, Robin J.
    2015 “Fluency and Disfluency.” InThe Handbook of Speech Production, edited byMelissa A. Redford, 445–474. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Mead, Peter
    2000 “Control of Pauses by Trainee Interpreters in their A and B Languages.” The Interpreter’s Newsletter, 10: 89–102.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. 2002 “Exploring Hesitation in Consecutive Interpreting: An Empirical Study.” InInterpreting in the 21st Century. Challenges and Opportunities, edited byGuiliana Garzone and Maurizio Viezzi, 73–82. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.43.08mea
    https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.43.08mea [Google Scholar]
  27. Muñoz Martín, Ricardo
    2010 “On Paradigms in Cognitive Translatology.” InTranslation and Cognition, edited byGregory M. Shreve and Erik Angelone, 169–187. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/ata.xv.10mun
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ata.xv.10mun [Google Scholar]
  28. Plauché, Madelaine C., and Elizabeth E. Shriberg
    1999 “Data-driven Subclassification of Disfluent Repetitions based on Prosodic Features.” InProceedings of the 14th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Vol.2, 1513–1516.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Pöchhacker, Franz
    2004Introducing Interpreting Studies. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203504802
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203504802 [Google Scholar]
  30. 2013 Professor Franz Pöchhacker interviewed at Critical Link 7. AccessedOctober 5, 2015. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5hKUb1AL5w
  31. Ramig, Lorraine A.
    1983 “Effects of Physiological Aging on Speaking and Reading Rates.” Journal of Communication Disorders16 (3): 217–226. 10.1016/0021‑9924(83)90035‑7
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-9924(83)90035-7 [Google Scholar]
  32. Roberts, Patricia M., Ann Meltzer, and Joanne Wilding
    2009 “Disfluencies in Non-stuttering Adults Across Sample Lengths and Topics.” Journal of Communication Disorders42 (6): 414–427. 10.1016/j.jcomdis.2009.06.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcomdis.2009.06.001 [Google Scholar]
  33. Seeber, Kilian G.
    2011 “Cognitive Load in Simultaneous Interpreting: Existing Theories – New Models.” Interpreting13 (2): 176–204. 10.1075/intp.13.2.02see
    https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.13.2.02see [Google Scholar]
  34. 2013 “Cognitive Load in Simultaneous Interpreting: Measures and Methods.” Target25 (1): 18–32. 10.1075/target.25.1.03see
    https://doi.org/10.1075/target.25.1.03see [Google Scholar]
  35. 2015 “Cognitive Load.” InThe Routledge Encyclopedia of Interpreting Studies, edited byFranz Pöchhacker, 60–61. Oxon: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Shreve, Gregory, Isabel Lacruz, and Erik Angelone
    2011 “Sight Translation and Speech Disfluency: Performance Analysis as a Window to Cognitive Translation Processes.” InMethods and Strategies of Process Research: Integrative Approaches in Translation Studies, edited byCeilia Alvstad, Adelina Hild, and Elisabet Tiselius, 93–120. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.94.09shr
    https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.94.09shr [Google Scholar]
  37. Tiselius, Elisabet
    2018 “Exploring Cognitive Aspects of Competence in Sign Language Interpreting of Dialogues: First Impressions.” Hermes – Journal of Language and Communication in Business, 57: 49–61. 10.7146/hjlcb.v0i57.106193
    https://doi.org/10.7146/hjlcb.v0i57.106193 [Google Scholar]
  38. Wickens, Christopher D.
    1984 “Processing Resources in Attention, Dual Task Performance, and Workload Assessment.” InVarieties of Attention, edited byRaja Parasuraman and David Roy Davies, 63–102. Orlando: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/target.19041.bon
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/target.19041.bon
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