Translation and Interpreting Studies. The Journal of the American Translation and Interpreting Studies Association - Volume 20, Issue 2, 2025

The aim of this article is to show how sound can translate knowledge, not with words but sensorially, with the whole body. Together with the new ways of understanding translation not only through words but with the whole body and senses, the article bases its argument on the new approaches to sound and music of the so-called “Sound studies” and “Sonic art” and applies the notion of “atmosphere” to Cecilia Vicuña’s artworks. She uses her voice and the voices of others as a means to translate without words and thus creates atmospheres that are affective translations of the land and the environment, of the human and the non-human. Her atmospheres are spaces in which she translates corporeally.

This study investigates the effect of different remote simultaneous interpreting (RSI) settings on interpreter performance, experience, anxiety, and cognitive load. Thirty-six professional English-Polish and Spanish-Italian interpreters performed RSI in three conditions: with a co-located boothmate, a not co-located boothmate communicating via chat, and a boothmate in a virtual booth. Interpreter renditions, questionnaire responses, and eye-tracking data were analyzed. Objective accuracy and self-assessed performance were scored lowest in the not co-located setting, with little difference between the co-located and virtual conditions, suggesting that virtual booths may effectively replicate traditional booths. Unexpectedly, boothmate presence did not affect cognitive load, anxiety or user experience, demonstrating interpreters’ adaptability to diverse RSI setups. Findings also suggest positive attitudes toward technology and high technological competence improve user experience and facilitate more structured visual attention. The study enhances our understanding of RSI and underscores interpreters’ ability to navigate visually complex environments.

Existing studies have employed both cross-sectional and longitudinal research designs to investigate the impact of simultaneous interpreting (SI) practice and training experience on executive functions (EFs). However, findings have been inconsistent regarding whether interpreters exhibit superior EFs compared with non-interpreters. To explore the factors contributing to these inconsistencies, the present literature review provides an overview of the relevant empirical studies that investigate the three core sub-components of EFs: inhibiting, shifting, and updating. Based on the reviewed studies, key methodological factors are identified, including the exclusive reliance on either longitudinal or cross-sectional research designs and the variation in tasks used to assess the same EFs sub-component across studies. Given these factors, the review proposes potential methodological refinements aimed at enhancing the reliability and validity of future research in this area.

Transnational clinical research is increasingly commonplace, which has led to a growing need for patient-reported outcome instruments (PROIs) that can be used by patients in different countries. The process to cross-culturally adapt these health questionnaires is described in many guidelines, which coincide in that an appropriate translation and cultural transfer are of outmost importance. This article examines the translation methodology used in 100 recent scholarly articles that report on PROI cross-cultural adaptations to explore who is responsible for the initial translation, its subsequent back translation, and the translation review process. It will be argued that the limited involvement of professional translators in these processes signals a mistrust toward these practitioners that stems from assumptions about translation and bilingualism that are not always accurate.

In his polemical article “Translating into/out of one’s mother tongue: On the feasibility of translating Chinese classics into English by native Chinese translators,” Chinese scholar Pan Wenguo engages critically with the argument advanced by British sinologist A. C. Graham that “we can hardly leave translation to the Chinese” (Graham 1965: 37). Arguing forcefully in favor of the translation of Chinese classics by Chinese translators, Pan’s article is a seminal statement on the importance of ‘outward’ translation practices in China.

This paper is a critical response to the assertion that translation of Chinese classics into English can only be done by translators who are native speakers of English rather than Chinese, as maintained by scholars such as A. C. Graham. It analyses the three main reasons given to support that assertion, namely, (1) translation in generally done into, not out of, one’s mother tongue; (2) the translator may enlist some help from native Chinese critics in understanding Chinese language and culture, but not in expressing the idea; (3) some translations by non-native translators were rendered in an unbearable kind of “Chinese English”. The above reasons are critiqued with reference to the development of international politics and the global economy, as well as translation studies. In the end, the paper points out the need for more native Chinese translators to undertake the translation of Chinese classics into English.