This article investigates the correlation between explicitation and increased cognitive load in simultaneous
interpreting by trainee interpreters. It has been hypothesised, on the one hand, that certain explicitating shifts in simultaneous
interpreting may be caused by increased cognitive load and they may be performed in an attempt to mask processing problems; and,
on the other, that performing explicitating shifts may lead to increased cognitive load and trigger processing problems. The study
triangulates product analysis (manual comparison of source and target texts) with process analysis (retrospective protocols of the
participants). In the product the correlation between the occurrence of explicitating shifts and increased cognitive load is
sought by identifying problem indicators in the form of three types of disfluency: hesitation markers, false starts and anomalous
pauses exceeding two seconds (performance measure). Retrospective protocols are analysed in search of reports of explicitating
shifts and/or increased cognitive load experienced and/or the cognitive effort expended (subjective measure). The product analysis
shows the correlation between explicitating shifts and cognitive load at the level of 31%. The Spearman’s rank-order correlation
coefficient r = 0.48 indicates that there is a positive association between these two variables. This finding is
further confirmed by 122 retrospective comments of the subjects in the study.
Bakti, M. (2017). Explicitation in sight-translating into Hungarian texts. In A. Łyda & K. Holewik (Eds.), Interdisciplinary encounters – dimensions of interpreting studies. Katowice: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Śląskiego, 160–173.
Baumgarten, N., Meyer, B. & Özçetin, D. (2008). Explicitness in translation and interpreting: A critical review and some empirical evidence (of an elusive concept). Across Languages and Cultures 9 (2), 177–203.
Biernacka, A. (2019). Elementy dodane w tłumaczeniu wypowiedzi w postępowaniu sądowym [Added elements in translation of court proceedings]. In E. Gruszczyńska, M. Guławska-Gawkowska, A. Szczęsny (Eds.), Translatoryczne i dyskursywne oblicza komunikacji. Warszawa: Instytut Lingwistyki Stosowanej WLS, 153–167.
Biernacka, A. & Kalata-Zawłocka, A. (2019). Techniki w tłumaczeniu bilateralnym: zintegrowane podejście do przekładu języków fonicznych i migowych [Techniques in bilateral interpreting: integrated approach to spoken and sign language interpreting]. In K. Hejwowski, K. Dębska & D. Urbanek (Eds.), Tłumaczenie wczoraj, dziś i jutro Warszawa: Instytut Lingwistyki Stosowanej UW, 57–82.
Bortfeld, H., Leon, S., Bloom, J., Schober, M. & Brennan, S. (2001). Disfluency rates in conversation: Effect of age, relationship, topic, role, and gender. Language and Speech 44 (2), 123–147.
Chen, S. (2017). The construct of cognitive load in interpreting and its measurement. Perspectives 25 (4), 640–657.
da Silva, I. A. L. & Pagano, A. S. (2017). Cognitive effort and explicitation in translation tasks. In S. Hansen-Schirra, O. Czulo & S. Hofmann (Eds.), Empirical modelling of translation and interpreting. Berlin: Language Science Press, 155–175.
Defrancq, B., Plevoets, K. & Magnifico, C. (2015). Connective markers in interpreting and translation: where do they come from. In J. Romero Trillo (Ed.), Corpus pragmatics in translation and contrastive studies, 31. Dordrecht: Springer, 195–222.
Englund Dimitrova, B. & Tiselius, E. (2014). Retrospection in interpreting and translation: Explaining the process?MonTI Special Issue – Minding Translation 11, 177–200.
Gile, D. (1997). Conference interpreting as a cognitive management problem. In J. E. Danks, G. M. Shreve, S. B. Fountain & M. K. McBeath (Eds.), Cognitive processes in translation and interpreting. Thousand Oaks/London/New Delhi: Sage, 196–214.
Gile, D. (1999). Testing the Effort Models’ tightrope hypothesis in simultaneous interpreting – a contribution. Hermes 231, 153–172.
Gile, D. (2015). Effort Models, In F. Pöchhacker (Ed.), Routledge encyclopedia of interpreting studies. London: Routledge, 135–136.
Guilquin, G. (2008). Hesitation markers among EFL learners: Pragmatic deficiency or difference? In J. Romero Trillo (Ed.), Pragmatics and corpus linguistics: A mutualistic entente. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 119–149.
Gumul, E. (2006). Explicitation in simultaneous interpreting: A strategy or a by-product of language mediation?Across Languages and Cultures 7 (2), 171–190.
Gumul, E. (2007). Explicitation in conference interpreting. In M. Thelen & B. Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk (Eds.), Translation and meaning. Part 7. Maastricht: Universitaire Pers Maastricht, 449–456.
Gumul, E. (2008). Explicitation in simultaneous interpreting – The quest for optimal relevance? In E. Wałaszewska, M. Kisielewska-Krysiuk, A. Korzeniowska & M. Grzegorzewska (Eds.), Relevant worlds: Current perspectives on language, translation and relevance theory. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 188–205.
Gumul, E. (2010). Explicitating political discourse. In Ch. Schaeffner (Ed.). Political discourse, media and translation. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 94–115.
Gumul, E. (2017). Explicitation in simultaneous interpreting. A study into explicitating behaviour of trainee interpreters. Katowice: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Śląskiego.
Gumul, E. (2019). Evidence of cognitive effort in simultaneous interpreting: Process versus product data. Beyond Philology 16 (4), 11–45.
Gumul, E. & Łyda, A. (2010). Disambiguating grammatical metaphor in simultaneous interpreting. In J. Maliszewski (Ed.), Diskurs und Terminologie beim Fachübersetzen und Dolmetschen. Discourse and terminology in specialist translation and interpreting. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 87–99.
Hatim, B. & Mason, I. (1997). The translator as communicator. London: Routledge.
Igras-Cybulska, M., Ziółko, B., Żelasko, P. & Witkowski, M. (2016). Structure of pauses in speech in the context of speaker verification and classification of speech type. Journal on Audio, Speech, and Music Processing 181. <[URL]> (accessed 27 July 2020).
Kajzer-Wietrzny, M. (2012). Interpreting universals and interpreting style. PhD dissertation, Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań.
Krings, H. P. (1986). Was in den Köpfen von Übersetzern vorgeht. Tübingen: Narr.
Lam, P. (2009). The effect of text type on the use of so as a discourse particle. Discourse Studies 11 (3), 353–372.
Mason, M. (2008). Courtroom interpreting. Lanham: University Press of America.
Morselli, N. (2018). Interpreting universals: A study of explicitness in the intermodal EPTIC corpus. inTRAlinea Special Issue: New Findings in Corpus-based Interpreting Studies. <[URL]> (accessed 9 July 2019).
Murtisari, E. T. (2013). A Relevance-based framework for explicitation and implicitation in translation. An alternative typology. Trans-kom 6 (2), 315–344.
Murtisari, E. T. (2016). Explicitation in translation studies: The journey of an elusive concept. Translation & Interpreting 8 (2), 64–81.
Oviatt, S. (1995). Predicting spoken disfluencies during human–computer interaction. Computer Speech and Language 91, 19–35.
Pöchhacker, F. (2016). Introducing interpreting studies (2nd edition). London: Routledge.
Puurtinen, T. (2003). Explicitating and implicitating source text ideology. Across Languages and Cultures 4 (1), 53–62.
Schachter, S., Christenfeld, N., Ravina, B. & Bilous, F. (1991). Speech disfluency and the structure of knowledge. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 60 (3), 362–367.
Tang, F. & Li, D. (2016). Explicitation patterns in English–Chinese consecutive interpreting: Differences between professional and trainee interpreters. Perspectives 24 (2), 235–255.
Tang, F. & Li, D. (2017). A corpus-based investigation of explicitation patterns between professional and student interpreters in Chinese–English consecutive interpreting. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 11 (4), 373–395.
Waldensjö, C. (1998). Interpreting as interaction. London/New York: Longman.
Wiraszka, Ł. (2015). Kategoria punktu widzenia w przekładzie ustnym z perspektywy językoznawstwa kognitywnego w relacji język polski – język angielski [The category of point of view in interpreting from the cognitive linguistics perspective based on the Polish–English language pair]. Kraków: Universitas.
Zhang, Q. (2009). Explicitation in Chinese-to-English consecutive interpreting: A case study. Chinese Translators Journal 30 (5), 77–81.
Sources
Hood, V. L. (2008). Can a physician refuse to help a patient? American perspective. VII Krajowa Konferencja Szkoleniowa Towarzystwa Internistów Polskich, Warszawa, 24 kwietnia 2008 – Sympozjum satelitarne ‘Dylematy etyczne w praktyce lekarskiej – czy lekarz może odmówić pacjentowi pomocy?’ <[URL]> (accessed 16 July 2010).
Radziwiłł, K. (2008). Czy lekarz może odmówić pacjentowi pomocy? VII Krajowa Konferencja Szkoleniowa Towarzystwa Internistów Polskich, Warszawa, 24 kwietnia 2008. Sympozjum satelitarne ‘Dylematy etyczne w praktyce lekarskiej – czy lekarz może odmówić pacjentowi pomocy?’ <[URL]> (accessed 16 July 2010).
Umiastowski, J. (2008). Czy lekarz może odmówić pomocy lekarskiej w sytuacji, gdy nakazuje mu to jego sumienie? VII Krajowa Konferencja Szkoleniowa Towarzystwa Internistów Polskich, Warszawa, 24 kwietnia 2008, Sympozjum satelitarne ‘Dylematy etyczne w praktyce lekarskiej – czy lekarz może odmówić pacjentowi pomocy?’ <[URL]> (accessed 16 July 2010).
Cited by (11)
Cited by 11 other publications
Li, Shu Scott, James Price Dillard & Miriam Brinberg
2024. Campaign-Induced Interpersonal Communication: Identifying Turn Types and Exploring Their Interdependencies. Communication Studies► pp. 1 ff.
2023. Syntactic simplification in interpreted English: Dependency distance and direction measures. Lingua 294 ► pp. 103607 ff.
Gumul, Ewa
2022. Changing the text through explicitation. How trainee interpreters perceive the role of explicitating shifts. The Translator 28:2 ► pp. 234 ff.
Gumul, Ewa
2023. Interpreters who explicitate talk more. On the relationship between explicitating styles and retrospective styles in simultaneous interpreting. Perspectives 31:4 ► pp. 601 ff.
Gumul, Ewa & Magdalena Bartłomiejczyk
2022. Interpreters’ explicitating styles. Interpreting. International Journal of Research and Practice in Interpreting 24:2 ► pp. 163 ff.
Lin, Yumeng, Duo Xu & Junying Liang
2021. Differentiating Interpreting Types: Connecting Complex Networks to Cognitive Complexity. Frontiers in Psychology 12
Valdeón, Roberto A.
2021. Perspectives on interpreting. Perspectives 29:4 ► pp. 441 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.