Article published in:
Interpreting
Vol. 21:2 (2019) ► pp. 196219
References

References

Agrifoglio, M.
(2004) Sight translation and interpreting: A comparative analysis of constraints and failures. Interpreting 6 (1), 43–67. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cai, R., Dong, Y., Zhao, N. & Lin, J.
(2015) Factors contributing to individual differences in the development of consecutive interpreting competence for beginner student interpreters. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 9 (1), 104–120. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, S.
(1999) A cognitive approach to source text difficulty in translation. Target 11 (1), 33–63. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chen, C.
(2015) Sight translation. In H. Mikkelson & R. Jourdenais (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of interpreting. London/New York: Routledge, 144–153.Google Scholar
Cooper, T. C.
(1976) Measuring written syntactic patterns of second language learners of German. The Journal of Educational Research 69, 176–183. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Crossley, S. A., Greenfield, J. & McNamara, D. S.
(2008) Assessing text readability using cognitively based indices. TESOL Quarterly 42 (3), 475–493. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Deane, P., Sheehan, K. M., Sabatini, J., Futagi, Y. & Kostin, I.
(2006) Differences in text structure and its implications for assessment of struggling readers. Scientific Studies of Reading 10, 257–275. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dragsted, B. & Hansen, I.
(2007) Speaking your translation: Exploiting synergies between translation and interpreting. In F. Pöchhacker, A. L. Jakobsen & I. M. Mees (Eds.), Interpreting studies and beyond: A tribute to Miriam Shlesinger. Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur, 251–274.Google Scholar
(2009) Exploring translation and interpreting hybrids: The case of sight translation. Meta 54 (3), 588–604. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Engber, C. A.
(1995) The relationship of lexical proficiency to the quality of ESL compositions. Journal of Second Language Writing 4 (2), 139–155. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ersozlu, E.
(2005) Training of interpreters: Some suggestions on sight translation teaching. Translation Journal 9 (4). http://​www​.translationjournal​.net​/journal​/34sighttrans​.htm (accessed 17 May 2019).
Flesch, R.
(1948) A new readability yardstick. Journal of Applied Psychology 32, 221–233. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gile, D.
(1997) Conference interpreting as a cognitive management problem. In J. Danks, G. Shreve, S. Fountain & M. McBeath (Eds.), Cognitive processes in translation and interpreting. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 196–214.Google Scholar
(2009) Basic concepts and models for interpreter and translator training (Rev. ed.). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gillies, A.
(2013) Conference interpreting: A student’s practice book. London: Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
González, R. D., Vásquez, V. F. & Mikkelson, H.
(2012) Fundamentals of court interpretation. Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press.Google Scholar
[ p. 217 ]
Graesser, A. C., McNamara, D. S., Louwerse, M. M. & Cai, Z.
(2004) Coh-Metrix: Analysis of text on cohesion and language. Behavioral Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers 36, 193–202. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hunt, K. W.
(1970) Do sentences in the second language grow like those in the first? TESOL Quarterly 4, 195–202. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jeon, E. H. & Yamashita, J.
(2014) L2 reading comprehension and its correlates: A Meta–analysis. Language Learning 64 (1), 160–212. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jiménez Ivars, A.
(2008) Sight translation and written translation. A comparative analysis of causes of problems, strategies and translation errors within the PACTE translation competence model. Forum 6 (2), 79–103. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lambert, S.
(2004) Shared attention during sight translation, sight interpretation and simultaneous interpretation. Meta 49 (2), 294–306. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lee, J.
(2012) What skills do student interpreters need to learn in sight translation training? Meta 57 (3), 694–714. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Leech, G., Rayson, P. & Wilson, A.
(2001) Word frequencies in written and spoken English: Based on the British National Corpus. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Liu, M.
(2013) Design and analysis of Taiwan’s interpretation certification examination. In D. Tsagari & R. van Deemter (Eds.), Assessment issues in language translation and interpreting. Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 163–178.Google Scholar
Liu, M., & Chiu, Y. H.
(2009) Assessing source material difficulty for consecutive interpreting: Quantifiable measures and holistic judgment. Interpreting 11 (2), 244–266. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Louwerse, M. M. & Mitchell, H. H.
(2003) Toward a taxonomy of a set of discourse markers in dialog: A theoretical and computational linguistic account. Discourse processes 35 (3), 199–239. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lu, X.
(2011) A corpus–based evaluation of syntactic complexity measures as indices of college–level ESL writers’ language development. TESOL Quarterly 45 (1), 36–62. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2012) The relationship of lexical richness to the quality of ESL learners’ oral narratives. The Modern Language Journal 96 (2), 190–208. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
McNamara, D. S., Louwerse, M. M., McCarthy, P. M. & Graesser, A. C.
(2010) Coh-Metrix: Capturing linguistic features of cohesion. Discourse Processes 47 (4), 292–330. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
McNamara, D. S., Graesser, A. C. & Louwerse, M. M.
(2012) Sources of text difficulty: Across genres and grades. In J. P. Sabatini, E. Albro & T. O’Reilly (Eds.), Measuring up: Advances in how we access reading ability. Plymouth, UK: Rowman & Littlefield Education, 89–116.Google Scholar
McNamara, D. S., Graesser, A. C., McCarthy, P. M. & Cai, Z.
(2014) Automated evaluation of text and discourse with Coh-Metrix. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Meehl, P. E.
(1990) Why summaries of research on psychological theories are often uninterpretable. Psychological Reports 66 (Monograph Suppl. 1–V66), 195–244. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Moser-Mercer, B.
(1994) Aptitude testing for conference interpreting: Why, when and how. In S. Lambert & B. Moser-Mercer (Eds.), Bridging the gap: Empirical research in simultaneous interpretation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 57–68. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
[ p. 218 ]
Nicodemus, B. & Emmorey, K.
(2013) Direction asymmetries in spoken and signed language interpreting. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 16 (3), 624–636. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ozuru, Y., Rowe, M., O’Reilly, T. & McNamara, D. S.
(2008) Where’s the difficulty in standardized reading tests: The passage or the question? Behavior Research Methods 40 (4), 1001–1015. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pöchhacker, F.
(2004) Introducing interpreting studies. London/New York: Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rayner, K. & Pollatsek, A.
(1994) The psychology of reading. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Révész, A. & Brunfaut, T.
(2013) Text characteristics of task input and difficulty in second language listening comprehension. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 35 (1), 31–65. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Richards, J. C., Platt, J. & Platt, H.
(1992) Longman dictionary of language teaching and applied linguistics. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Robinson, P.
(2001) Task complexity, task difficulty, and task production: Exploring interactions in a componential framework. Applied Linguistics 22, 27–57. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(Ed.) (2011) Second language task complexity: Researching the cognition hypothesis of language learning and performance. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rydland, V., Aukrust, V. G. & Fulland, H.
(2012) How word decoding, vocabulary and prior topic knowledge predict reading comprehension. A study of language-minority students in Norwegian fifth grade classrooms. Reading and writing 25 (2), 465–482. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Setton, R. & Dawrant, A.
(2016) Conference interpreting: A complete course. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Shreve, G., Lacruz, I. & Angelone, E.
(2010) Cognitive effort, syntactic disruption, and visual interface in a sight translation task. In E. Angelone & G. Shreve. (Eds.),. Translation and cognition: Recent developments. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 63–84. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2011) Sight translation and speech disfluency: Performance analysis as a window to cognitive translation processes. In C. Alvstad, A. Hild & E. Tiselius. (Eds.), Methods and strategies of process research. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 93–120. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. M.
(1990) Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Sun, S. & Shreve, G. M.
(2014) Measuring translation difficulty: An empirical study. Target 26 (1), 98–127. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Viaggio, S.
(1995) The praise of sight translation (and squeezing the last drop there out of). The Interpreters’ Newsletter 6, 33–42.Google Scholar
Viezzi, M.
(1989) Information retention as a parameter for the comparison of sight translation and simultaneous interpretation: An experimental study. The Interpreters’ Newsletter 2, 65–69.Google Scholar
(1990) Sight translation, simultaneous interpretation and information retention. In L. Gran & C. Taylor (Eds.), Aspects of applied and experimental research on conference interpretation. Udine: Campanotto, 54–60.Google Scholar
[ p. 219 ]
Wallace, M.
(2013) Rethinking bifurcated testing models in the court interpreter certification process. In D. Tsagari & R. van Deemter (Eds.), Assessment issues in language translation and interpreting. Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 67–83.Google Scholar
Wu, Z.
(2016) Towards understanding interpreter trainees’ (de)motivation: An exploratory study. Translation & Interpreting 8 (2), 13–25.Google Scholar
Yeh, S. & Liu, M.
(2006) A more objective approach to interpretation evaluation: Exploring the use of scoring rubrics. Journal of the National Institute for Compilation and Translation 34 (4), 57–78.Google Scholar
Yu, G.
(2009) The shifting sands in the effects of source text summarizability on summary writing. Assessing Writing 14 (2), 116–137. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 4 other publications

Abdel Latif, Muhammad M. M.
2020.  In Translator and Interpreter Education Research [New Frontiers in Translation Studies, ],  pp. 61 ff. Crossref logo
Fang, Jing & Xiaomin Zhang
2021.  In Diverse Voices in Chinese Translation and Interpreting [New Frontiers in Translation Studies, ],  pp. 157 ff. Crossref logo
Gieshoff, Anne Catherine
2021. Does it help to see the speaker’s lip movements?. Translation, Cognition & Behavior 4:1  pp. 1 ff. Crossref logo
Jiang, Xinlei & Yue Jiang
2020. Effect of dependency distance of source text on disfluencies in interpreting. Lingua 243  pp. 102873 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 29 august 2021. 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.