Cover not available
Article published In:
Babel
Vol. 66:3 (2020) ► pp.434–456

Language interference in English-Chinese simultaneous interpreting with and without text

| Southeast University
| Hong Kong Polytechnic University
This study investigated the effect of source language interference during English-Chinese simultaneous interpreting (SI) with and without text by examining the relationships between manifestations of language interference and interpreting modes. A corpus-based descriptive approach was used to investigate language interference during English-Chinese interpreting at various sessions of the United Nations General Assembly. An intermodal comparison was carried out in three dimensions, addressing (1) the general linguistic properties of the interpreted texts; (2) the distribution of reformulation strategies; and (3) strategies for interpreting passive constructions and attributive clauses, two structures representing structural asymmetries between English and Chinese. The results indicated that the interpreted texts produced by SI with text and SI without text showed different degrees of language interference.
Keywords: language interference, language specificity, English-Chinese interpreting
Article outline
  • 1.Language interference in interpreting
  • 2.Language specificity: A potential trigger of interference during interpreting
  • 3.Language specificity in English-Chinese interpreting
    • 3.1Passive constructions in English and Chinese
    • 3.2Attributive clauses in English and Chinese: Right-branching vs. left-branching
  • 4.Interpreting mode and language interference
    • 4.1SI with text
  • 5.Research questions
  • 6.Research design
    • 6.1The UN GA archive
    • 6.2Data processing
  • 7.Data analysis and discussion
    • 7.1Overall use of lexical features in different modes
      • 7.1.1Lexical variety
      • 7.1.2High-frequency words
    • 7.2Intermodal comparison: Analysis of target reformulation strategies
    • 7.3Intermodal comparison: Interpreting passive constructions and attributive clauses
      • 7.3.1Interpreting passive constructions in SI with text and SI without text
      • 7.3.2Interpreting attributive clauses in SI with text and SI without text
  • 8.Conclusion
    • 8.1Major findings and implications
    • 8.2Limitations and prospects
  • References
Published online: 20 May 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/babel.00168.che
References (34)
References
Ahn, In-Kyoung. 2005. “Pedagogical considerations of perspective coherence problems in simultaneous interpreting as a result of linguistic structure, illustrated by German-Korean examples”. Meta 50 (2): 696–712. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Agrifoglio, Marjorie. 2004. “Sight translation and interpreting: a comparative analysis of constraints and failures”. Interpreting 6 (1): 43–67. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
De Feo, Nicoletta. 1993. Strategie di riformulazione sintetica nell’interpretazione simultanea dall’inglese in italiano: un contributo sperimentale. M.A. Thesis. Trieste: SSLMIT, University of Trieste.Google Scholar
Donato, Valentina. 2003. “Strategies adopted by student interpreters in SI: a comparison between the English-Italian and the German-Italian language-pairs”. The Interpreters’ Newsletter 121: 101–134.Google Scholar
El-Sakran, Tharwat. 2010. “The impact of PowerPoint slide shows on interpreters’ performance”. Turjuman: Revue de Traduction et D’interprétation/ Journal of Translation Studies 19 (1): 197–220.Google Scholar
Falbo, Caterina. 1999. “MorfoSI without textassi e riformulazione”. In Interpretazione simultanea e consecutiva. Problemi teorici e metodologie didattiche, ed. by Caterina Falbo; Mariachiara Russo; and Francesco Straniero Sergio, 175–188. Milano: Hoepli.Google Scholar
Gile, Daniel. 1995. “Fidelity assessment in consecutive interpretation: an experiment”. Target 7 (1): 151–164. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2005. “Directionality in conference interpreting: a cognitive view”. In Directionality in interpreting. The “retour” or the native?, ed. by Rita Godijns; and Michael Hinderdael, 9–26. Ghent: Communication and Cognition.Google Scholar
. 2009. Basic concepts and models of interpreter & translator training. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ivanov, Konstantin; Kate Davies; and Boris Naimushin. 2014. “Teaching simultaneous interpreting with text”. In Fighting the fog in multilingualism, ed. by Sergey Goncharov; and Angelique Antonova, 48–63. St Petersburg: Herzen University Press.Google Scholar
Jakobsen, Arnt Lykke; and Kristian TH Jensen. 2008. “Eye movement behaviour across four different types of reading task”. Copenhagen Studies in Language 361: 103–124.Google Scholar
Kader, Stephanie; and Sabine Seubert. 2014. “Anticipation, segmentation… stalling? how to teach interpreting strategies”. In To know how to suggest…: approaches to teaching conference interpreting, ed. by Dörte Andres; and Martina Behr, 125–143. Berlin: Frank & Timme GmbH.Google Scholar
Kalina, Sylvia. 1998. Strategische prozesse beim dolmetschen: Theoretische grundlagen, empirische fallstudien, didaktische konsequenzen. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Lamberger-Felber, Heike; and Julia Schneider. 2008. “Linguistic interference in simultaneous interpreting with text”. In Efforts and models in interpreting and translation research – A tribute to Daniel Gile, ed. by Gyde Hansen; Andrew Chesterman; and Heidrun Gerzymisch-Arbogast, 215–236. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Lambert, Sylvie. 1988. “Information processing among conference interpreters: a test of the depth-of-processing hypothesis”. Meta 33 (3): 377–387. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2004. “Shared attention during sight translation, sight interpretation and simultaneous interpretation”. Meta 49 (2): 294–306. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Riccardi, Alessandra. 1995. “Language-specific strategies in simultaneous interpreting”. In Teaching translation and interpreting, ed. by Cay Dollerup; and Annette Lindegaard, 213–222. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
. 1999. “Interpretazione simultanea: strategie generali e specifiche”. In Interpretazione simultanea e consecutiva: problemi teorici e metodologie didattiche, ed. by Caterina Falbo; Mariachiara Russo; and Francesco Straniero Sergio, 161–174. Milán: Hoepli.Google Scholar
Seeber, Kilian G. 2010. “Simultaneous interpreting with text”. FTI Interpretation Department Faculty Retreat, École de Traduction et d’Interprétation, Universite de Genève. Conference Presentation.Google Scholar
Seeber, Kilian G; and Kerzel, Dirk. 2011. “Cognitive load in simultaneous interpreting: Model meets data”. International Journal of Bilingualism 16 (2): 228–242. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Seleskovitch, Danica. 1978. Interpreting for international conferences: problems of language and communication. Washington D.C: Pen and Booth.Google Scholar
Setton, Robin. 1999. Simultaneous interpretation – a cognitive-pragmatic analysis. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Setton, Robin; and Manuela Motta. 2007. “Syntacrobatics: quality and reformulation in simultaneous-with-text”. Interpreting 9 (2): 199–230. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shlesinger, Miriam. 2003. “Effects of presentation rate on working memory in simultaneous interpreting”. The Interpreters’ Newsletter 121: 37–49.Google Scholar
Shreve, Gregory M.; Isabel Lacruz; and Erik Angelone. 2010. “Cognitive effort, syntactic disruption and visual interference in a sight translation task”. In Translation and cognition, ed. by Gregory M. Shreve; and Erik Angelone, 63–84. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Teich, Elke. 2003. Cross-linguistic variation in system and text: A methodology for the investigation of translations and comparable texts. Berlin: de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tsai, Yvonne. 2015. “A learner corpus study of attributive clauses and passive voice in student translations”. In Handbook of research on teaching methods in language translation and interpretation, ed. by Cui Ying, 85–101. Hershey: IGI Global. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Verspoor, Marjolijn; and Kim Sauter. 2000. English sentence analysis: an introductory course. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Viezzi, Maurizio. 1990. “Sight translation, simultaneous interpretation and information retention”. In Aspects of applied and experimental research on conference interpretation, ed. by Laura Gran; and Christopher Taylor, 54–60. Udine: Campanotto.Google Scholar
Wilss, Wolfram. 1978. “Syntactic anticipation in German English simultaneous interpretation”. In Language interpretation and communication. proceedings of the NATO symposium on language interpretation and communication (Venice, 1977), ed. by David Gerver; and Wallace H. Sinaiko, 335–343. New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
Xiao, Richard. 2010. “How different is translated Chinese from native Chinese? A corpus-based study of translation universals”. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 15 (1): 5–35. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2015. “Source language interference in English-to-Chinese translation”. In Yearbook of corpus linguistics and pragmatics, ed. by Romero-Trillo Jesús, 139–162. Imprint: Springer.Google Scholar
Xiao, Richard; Tony McEnery; and Yufang Qian. 2006. “Passive constructions in English and Chinese: a corpus-based contrastive study”. Languages in Contrast 6 (1): 109–149. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zanettin, Federico. 2013. “Corpus methods for descriptive translation studies”. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences 951: 20–32. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (11)

Cited by 11 other publications

Liu, Zhibo & Juhua Dou
2023. Lexical density, lexical diversity, and lexical sophistication in simultaneously interpreted texts: a cognitive perspective. Frontiers in Psychology 14 DOI logo
Tian, Sha, Lingxiao Jia & Zhining Zhang
2023. Investigating students’ attitudes towards translation technology: The status quo and structural relations with translation mindsets and future work self. Frontiers in Psychology 14 DOI logo
Tien, Marko, Andrea Albonico & Jason J. S. Barton
2023. Faces, English words and Chinese characters: a study of dual-task interference in mono-and bilingual speakers. Experimental Brain Research 241:4 ► pp. 1131 ff. DOI logo
Xu, Han & Kanglong Liu
2023. Syntactic simplification in interpreted English: Dependency distance and direction measures. Lingua 294 ► pp. 103607 ff. DOI logo
Xu, Han & Kanglong Liu
2024. The impact of directionality on interpreters’ syntactic processing: Insights from syntactic dependency relation measures. Lingua 308 ► pp. 103778 ff. DOI logo
Cheung, Andrew K. F.
2022. Remote Simultaneous Interpreting from Home or Hub: Accuracy of Numbers from English into Mandarin Chinese. In Translation and Interpreting in the Age of COVID-19 [Corpora and Intercultural Studies, 9], ► pp. 113 ff. DOI logo
Cheung, Andrew K. F.
2024. Cognitive load in remote simultaneous interpreting: place name translation in two Mandarin variants. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications 11:1 DOI logo
Cheung, Andrew K. F.
2024. Editorial: Cognition and language contact: interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary approaches. Frontiers in Psychology 15 DOI logo
Cheung, Andrew K. F.
2022. Listeners’ perception of the quality of simultaneous interpreting and perceived dependence on simultaneous interpreting. Interpreting. International Journal of Research and Practice in Interpreting 24:1 ► pp. 38 ff. DOI logo
Liu, Kanglong & Andrew K. F. Cheung
2022. Translation and Interpreting in the Age of COVID-19: Challenges and Opportunities. In Translation and Interpreting in the Age of COVID-19 [Corpora and Intercultural Studies, 9], ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Zhang, Yifan & Andrew K. F. Cheung
2022. A corpus-based study of modal verbs in Chinese–English governmental press conference interpreting. Frontiers in Psychology 13 DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 9 october 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.