Does the particular prosody of simultaneous interpreting have an impact on comprehensibility? This paper presents
an experiment that sought to answer this question. Two groups of listeners (47 with relevant contextual knowledge about the
subject-matter of the speech and 40 with less contextual knowledge) listened to the interpretation into French of a 20-minute
lecture in German under two conditions (the actual interpretation and a read-aloud rendition of the transcript of the
interpretation by the same interpreter) and answered comprehension questions. The prosodic features of the two conditions were
analysed, and differences regarding the temporal organisation of speech, disfluencies, pitch register and the interface between
prosody and syntax emerged. Simultaneous interpreting was found to be more monotonous, to contain a larger number of short and
long silent pauses, more hesitations (“euh”) and more non-syntactic pauses as well as to have a more irregular speech rate. The
read-aloud version was livelier, with more medium-length silent pauses and almost no hesitation. Results of the comprehension
questionnaire do not demonstrate that interpreting-specific prosodic features affect comprehensibility to a significant extent.
This is consistent with professional norms of interpreting in specialised conferences, where verbal aspects have priority over
non-verbal ones.
Abeillé, A., Clément, L. & Toussenel, F. (2003). Building a treebank for French. In A. Abeillé (Ed.), Treebanks: Building and using parsed corpora. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 165–188.
Ahrens, B. (2004). Prosodie beim Simultandolmetschen. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
Alexieva, B. (1997). A typology of interpreter-mediated events. The Translator 3 (2), 153–174.
Astésano, C., Bertrand, R., Espesser, R. & Nguyen, N. (2013). Dissociation between prominence and boundary phenomena in French: a perception study. In pS-prominenceS, Viterbo, Italy, 12–14December 2013.
Avanzi, M. (2012). L’interface prosodie/syntaxe en français. Dislocations, incises et asyndètes. Brussels: Peter Lang.
Avanzi, M., Goldman, J.-Ph., Lacheret-Dujour, A., Simon, A. C. & Auchlin, A. (2007). Méthodologie et algorithmes pour la détection automatique des syllabes proéminentes dans les corpus de français parlé. Cahiers of French Language Studies 13 (2), 2–30.
Blanche-Benveniste, C., Bilger, M., Rouget, C., Van Den Eynde, K., Mertens, P. & Willems, D. (1990). Le français parlé: Études grammaticales. Paris: Éditions du CNRS.
Boersma, P. & Weenink, D. (2015). Praat: Doing phonetics by computer. Version 5.4.06. [URL] (accessed 22 September 2019).
Brennan, S. E. & Schober, M. F. (2001). How listeners compensate for disfluencies in spontaneous speech. Journal of Memory and Language 44 (2), 274–296.
Brennan, S. E. & Williams, M. (1995). The feeling of another’s knowing: Prosody and filled pauses as cues to listeners about the metacognitive states of speakers. Journal of Memory and Language 34 (3), 383.
Buck, G. (2001). Assessing listening. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Buschmeier, H. & Włodarczak, M. (2013). TextGridTools: A TextGrid processing and analysis toolkit for Python. In Proceedings der 24. Konferenz zur Elektronischen Sprachsignalverarbeitung, Bielefeld, Germany. 26–28March 2013, 152–157.
Carlson, K. (2009). How prosody influences sentence comprehension. Language and Linguistics Compass 3 (5), 1188–1200.
Christodoulides, G. (2013a). Prosodic features of simultaneous interpreting. In P. Mertens & A. C. Simon (Eds.), Proceedings of the Prosody-Discourse Interface Conference 2013 (IDP-2013). Leuven, 11–13September 2013, 33–37. [URL] (accessed 22 September 2019).
Christodoulides, G. (2013b). The prosody of simultaneous interpreting: A corpus-based study. Master’s thesis, Université catholique de Louvain.
Christodoulides, G. (2014). Praaline: integrating tools for speech corpus research. In N. Calzolari, K. Choukri, T. Declerck, H. Loftsson, B. Maegaard, J. Mariani, A. Moreno, J. Odijk & S. Piperidis (Eds.), Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC’14). European Language Resources Association (ELRA), Reykjavik, Iceland, 26–31May 2014, 31–34. [URL] (accessed 22 September 2019).
Christodoulides, G., Avanzi, M. & Goldman, J.-Ph. (2014). DisMo: A morphosyntactic, disfluency and multi-word unit annotator. An evaluation on a corpus of French spontaneous and read speech. In N. Calzolari, K. Choukri, T. Declerck, H. Loftsson, B. Maegaard, J. Mariani, A. Moreno, J. Odijk & S. Piperidis (Eds.), Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC’14). European Language Resources Association (ELRA), Reykjavik, Iceland, 26–31May 2014, 3902–3907. [URL] (accessed 22 September 2019).
Christophe, A., Peperkamp, S., Pallier, C., Block, E. & Mehler, J. (2004). Phonological phrase boundaries constrain lexical access I. Adult data. Journal of Memory and Language 51 (4), 523–547.
Collados Aís, Á. (2001). Efectos de la entonación monótona sobre la recuperación de la información en receptores de interpretación simultánea. Trans 51, 103–110. [URL] (accessed 22 September 2019).
Collados Aís, Á., Iglesias Fernández, E., Pradas Macías, E. M. & Stévaux, E. (Eds.) (2011). Qualitätsparameter beim Simultandolmetschen. Interdisziplinäre Perspektiven. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
Collados Aís, Á., Pradas Macías, E. M., Stévaux, E. & García Becerra, O. (Eds.) (2007). La evaluación de la calidad en interpretación simultánea: parámetros de incidencia. Granada: Comares.
Crystal, D. (2008). A dictionary of linguistics and phonetics. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Cutler, A. (1999). Prosody and intonation, processing issues. In R. A. Wilson, & F. C. Keil (Eds.), MIT encyclopedia of the cognitive sciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 682–683.
Cutler, A., Oahan, D. & van Donselaar, W. (1997). Prosody in the comprehension of spoken language: A literature review. Language and Speech 401, 141–201.
Degand, L. & Simon, A. C. (2009a). Mapping prosody and syntax as discourse strategies: How Basic Discourse Units vary across genres. In A. Wichmann, D. Barth-Weingarten & N. Dehé (Eds.), Where prosody meets pragmatics: Research at the interface. Bingley: Emerald, 79–105. [URL] (accessed 22 September 2019).
Degand, L. & Simon, A. C. (2009b). On identifying basic discourse units in speech: Theoretical and empirical issues. Discours. Revue de linguistique, psycholinguistique et informatique (4). [URL] (accessed 22 September 2019).
Degand, L., Simon, A. C., Tanguy, N. & Van Damme, T. (2014). Initiating a discourse unit in spoken French: Prosodic and syntactic features of the left periphery. In S. Pons Borderia (Ed.), Discourse segmentation in Romance languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 243–273.
Di Cristo, A. (2013). La prosodie de la parole. Paris: De Boeck/Solal.
Fónagy, I. & Berard, E. (1972). « Il est huit heures »: contribution à l’analyse sémantique de la vive voix. Phonetica 26 (3), 157–192.
Gile, D. (1989). Les flux d’information dans les réunions interlinguistiques et l’interprétation de conférence : premières observations. Meta 34 (4), 649–660.
Goldman, J.-Ph. (2011). EasyAlign: An automatic phonetic alignment tool under Praat. In P. Cosi, R. De Mori, G. Di Fabbrizio, & R. Pieraccini (Eds.), Proceedings of InterSpeech, 12th Annual Conference of the International Speech Communication Association. Florence, 27–31August 2011. ISCA Archive, 3233–3236. [URL] (accessed 22 September 2019).
Goldman, J.-Ph., Auchlin, A., Avanzi, M. & Simon, A. C. (2008). ProsoReport: An automatic tool for prosodic description. Application to a radio style. In Speech Prosody [Campinas, Brazil], 6–8May 2008, 701–704. [URL] (accessed 22 September 2019).
Goldman, J.-Ph., François, T., Roekhaut, S. & Simon, A. C. (2010). Étude statistique de la durée pausale dans différents styles de parole. In Actes des 28èmes journées d’étude sur la parole (JEP) Mons, 25–28 May 2010, 161–164. [URL] (accessed 22 September 2019).
Goldman, J.-Ph., Pršir, T. & Auchlin, A. (2014). C-PhonoGenre: A 7-hour corpus of 7 speaking styles in French: Relations between situational features and prosodic properties. In N. Calzolari, K. Choukri, T. Declerck, H. Loftsson, B. Maegaard, J. Mariani, A. Moreno, J. Odijk & S. Piperidis (Eds.), Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC’14). European Language Resources Association (ELRA), Reykjavik, Iceland, 26–31May 2014. [URL] (accessed 22 September 2019).
Gussenhoven, C. (2002). Intonation and interpretation: Phonetics and phonology. In B. Bel & I. Marlien (Eds.), Proceedings of Speech Prosody 2002. Aix-en-Provence, France, 11–13April 2002. Aix-en-Provence: Laboratoire Parole et Langage, 47–57. [URL] (accessed 22 September 2019).
Holub, E. & Rennert, S. (2011). Fluency and intonation as quality indicators. Presentation at the Second International Conference on Interpreting Quality, Almuñécar/Spain, 24–26March 2011.
Holub, E. (2010). Does intonation matter? The impact of monotony on listener comprehension. The Interpreters’ Newsletter 151, 117–126.
Howell, D. C. (2011). Fundamental statistics for the behavioral sciences. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.
Huttunen, K., Keränen, H., Väyrynen, E., Pääkkönen, R. & Leino, T. (2011). Effect of cognitive load on speech prosody in aviation: Evidence from military simulator flights. Applied Ergonomics 42 (2), 348–357.
Jameson, A., Kiefer, J., Müller, C., Grossmann-Hutter, B., Wittig, F. & Rummer, R. (2010). Assessment of a user’s time pressure and cognitive load on the basis of features of speech. In M. Crocker & J. Siekmann (Eds.), Resource-adaptive cognitive processes. Berlin: Springer, 171–204.
Jun, S.-A. & Fougeron, C. (2000). A phonological model of French intonation. In A. Botinis (Ed.), Intonation: Analysis, modelling and technology. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 209–242.
Kaufmann, F. (1993). Interview et interprétation consécutive dans le film Shoah, de Claude Lanzmann. Meta 38(4), 664-673.
Lacheret-Dujour, A. & Beaugendre, F. (1999). La prosodie du français. Paris: Éditions du CNRS.
Landercy, A. & Renard, R. (1977). Éléments de phonétique. 2e édition. Centre International de Phonétique Appliquée – Mons. Brussels: Didier.
Le, P. N. & Choi, E. (2012). The use of spectral information in the development of novel techniques for speech-based cognitive load classification. PhD dissertation, University of New South Wales.
Little, D. R., Oehmen, R., Dunn, J., Hird, K. & Kirsner, K. (2012). Fluency profiling system: An automated system for analyzing the temporal properties of speech. Behavior Research Methods 45 (1), 191–202.
Martin, L. J., Degand, L. & Simon, A. C. (2014). Forme et fonction de la périphérie gauche dans un corpus oral multigenres annoté. Corpus 131, 243–265.
Martin, Ph. (2012). Neurophysiological research explains prosodic structures constraints. Revista de Estudos da Linguagem [UFMG, Belo Horizonte, Minais Gerais] 20 (2), 13–22.
Martin, Ph. (2015). The structure of spoken language: Intonation in Romance. Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press.
Mertens, P. & Simon, A. C. (2013). Towards automatic detection of prosodic boundaries in spoken French. In P. Mertens & A. C. Simon (Eds), Proceedings of the Prosody–Discourse Interface Conference, Leuven, Belgium, 11–13September 2013, 81–87. [URL] (accessed 22 September 2019).
Mertens, P. (2004). The Prosogram: Semi-automatic transcription of prosody based on a tonal perception model. In B. Bel & I. Marlien (Eds.), Proceedings of Speech Prosody 2004. Nara, Japan, 23–26March 2004. [URL] (accessed 22 September 2019).
Michelas, A. & d’Imperio, M. (2010). Accentual phrase boundaries and lexical access in French. Speech Prosody 2010, 1008821: 1–4. [URL] (accessed 22 September 2019).
Moser, P. (1995). Survey on expectations of users of conference interpretation: Final report commissioned by AIIC. Vienna: SRZ Stadt + Regionalforschung GmbH.
Pöchhacker, F. (1992). The role of theory in simultaneous interpreting. In C. Dollerup & A. Loddegaard (Eds.), Teaching translation and interpreting: Training, talent and experience. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 211–220.
Pöchhacker, F. (1995). Simultaneous interpreting: A functionalist perspective. Hermes, Journal of Linguistics 141, 31–53.
Pöchhacker, F. (2001). Quality assessment in conference and community interpreting. Meta 46 (2), 410–425.
Pöchhacker, F. (2012). Qualität, die man versteht: ein funktional-kognitiver Ansatz. In B. Ahrens, M. Albl-Mikasa & C. Sasse (Eds.), Dolmetschqualität in Praxis, Lehre und Forschung. Festschrift für Sylvia Kalina. Tübingen: Narr, 19–31.
Pradas Macías, E. M. (2009). Identificación del patrón pausístico para la medición de la calidad en interpretación simultánea. In G. Wotjak, V. Ivavona & E. Tabares Plasencia (Eds.), Translatione via facienda. Festschrift für Christiane Nord zum 65. Geburtstag. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 235–252.
R Development Core Team (2008). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria. [URL] (accessed 22 September 2019).
Reithofer, K. (2013b). Englisch als Lingua Franca und Dolmetschen. Ein Vergleich zweier Kommunikationsmodi unter dem Aspekt der Wirkungsäquivalenz. Tübingen: Narr.
Reithofer, K. (2015). Communicative effect. In F. Pöchhacker (Ed.), Routledge encyclopedia of interpreting studies. London: Routledge.
Rennert, S. (2010). The impact of fluency on the subjective assessment of interpreting quality. The Interpreters’ Newsletter 151, 101–115.
Rossi, M. (1999). L’intonation, le système du français: description et modélisation. Paris: Ophrys.
Schriver, K. (1989). Evaluating text quality: The continuum from text-focused to reader-focused methods. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication 32 (4), 238–255.
SCIC, Direction générale de l’interprétation, Commission européenne. (2011). Interpretation tests: how to judge a candidate’s performance. In Commission européenne – SCIC Training for Trainers Seminar – List of handouts. Brussels.
Selkirk, E. (2011). The syntax-phonology interface. In J. Goldsmith, J. Riggle & A. C. Yu (Eds.), The handbook of phonological theory, 2nd edition. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell, 435–483.
Setton, R. (2005). Pointing to contexts: A relevance-theoretic approach to assessing quality and difficulty in interpreting. In D. Helle, V., J. Engberg and H. Gerzymisch-Arbogast (Eds.), Knowledge systems and translation. Berlin & New York: Walter de Gruyter, 275-312.
Shriberg, E. (2001). To ‘errrr’ is human: Ecology and acoustics of speech disfluencies. Journal of the International Phonetic Association 31 (01), 153–169.
Simon, A. C. & Degand, L. (2011). L’analyse en unités discursives de base: Pourquoi et comment?Langue Française 170 (2), 45–59.
Smith, V. L. & Clark, H. H. (1993). On the course of answering questions. Journal of Memory and Language 32 (1), 25–38.
Sperber, D. & Wilson, D. (1986/1995). Relevance: Communication and cognition. 2nd edition. Oxford: Blackwell.
Steinbeis, M. (2013). Notenbanken machen Sachwerte alernativlos. FinanceNewsTV, Fondskongress, Mannheim, Germany. [URL] (accessed 22 September 2019).
Van Segbroeck, M., Travadi, R., Vaz, C., Kim, J., Black, M. P., Potamianos, A. & Narayanan, S. S. (2014). Classification of cognitive load from speech using an i-vector framework. In Proceedings of Interspeech, Singapore, 14–18September 2014, 751–755. [URL] (accessed 22 September 2019).
Vasilescu, I., Rosset, S. & Adda-Decker, M. (2010). On the functions of the vocalic hesitation euh in interactive man-machine question answering dialogs in French. In DISS-LPSS Joint Workshop/Disfluency, Tokyo, Japan, 25–26September 2010, 111–114. [URL] (accessed 22 September 2019).
Williams, S. (1995). Observations on anomalous stress in interpreting. The Translator 1 (1), 47–64.
Wilson, D. & Wharton, T. (2006). Relevance and prosody. Journal of Pragmatics 38 (10), 1559–1579.
Wolfer, S. (2015). Comprehension and comprehensibility. In K. Maksymski, S. Gutermuth & S. Hansen-Schirra (Eds.), Translation and comprehensibility. Berlin: Frank & Timme, 34–51.
Zwischenberger, C. (2013). Qualität und Rollenbilder beim simultanen Konferenzdolmetschen. Berlin: Frank & Timme.
Cited by (5)
Cited by five other publications
Guo, Wei, Xun Guo, Junkang Huang & Sha Tian
2024. Modeling listeners’ perceptions of quality in consecutive interpreting: a case study of a technology interpreting event. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications 11:1
Gao, Fei
2023. Getting the message in ‘Sound’ across at conference interpreting: a case study on rendering prosodic emphasis. Perspectives 31:6 ► pp. 1033 ff.
2023. How Does Interpreter’s Intonation Affect the Pragmatics of Courtroom Questions? A Case Study of Chinese-English Court Interpreting. In New Advances in Legal Translation and Interpreting [New Frontiers in Translation Studies, ], ► pp. 137 ff.
Rojo López, Ana M., Ana-Isabel Foulquié-Rubio, Laura Espín López & Francisco Martínez Sánchez
2021. Analysis of speech rhythm and heart rate as indicators of stress on student interpreters. Perspectives 29:4 ► pp. 591 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 august 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.