Methodological Aspects of Interpretation (and Translation) Research

Daniel Gile

Very little actual scientific research has been carried out in I/T to date, essentially because of the lack of scientific background among I/T investigators. Major problems are found in the sampling procedures, materials, experimental conditions and tasks, quantification procedures and conclusion-drawing logic. In order to foster I/T research, methodological research training could be given to investigators, and interdisciplinary contacts and networking should be promoted. The input of I/T practitioners to I/T research can be valuable in spite of their lack of training provided they use simple methods and are supervised appropriately. Non I/T practitioners should work with practitioners.

Table of contents

Because of their importance in the development of culture and because they involve language, interpretation and translation have been the focus of much reflection and have generated a large mass of literature. However, [ p. 154 ]most of the writings on I/T are normative or philosophical, and scientific research in the field is very recent, only several decades old. One of the driving forces behind the development of I/T research were efforts towards machine translation, which started in the fifties, stopped for a while and are again in full swing. Other vectors of translation research are the increasing use of mathematical methods and statistics in the behavioural and linguistic sciences and the interest psychologists and psycholinguists have taken in I/T.

Full-text access is restricted to subscribers. Log in to obtain additional credentials. For subscription information see Subscription & Price. Direct PDF access to this article can be purchased through our e-platform.


Anderson, Linda
1979Simultaneous Interpretation: Contextual and Translation Aspects. Montreal: Concordia University. [M.A. Thesis.]Google Scholar
Arjona-Tseng, Etilvia
1989 “Preparing for the XXIth Century”. Keynote speech. Proceedings of the Twentieth Anniversary Symposium: The Training of Teachers of Translation and Interpretation. Monterey, California: Monterey Institute of International Studies 1989.Google Scholar
Barik, Henri
1969A Study in Simultaneous Interpretation. University of North Carolina. [Ph.D. Dissertation.]Google Scholar
Bühler, Hildegund
1986 “Linguistic (Semantic) and Extra-Linguistic (Pragmatic) Criteria for the Evaluation of Conference Interpretation and Interpreters”. Multilingua 5. 231–235.Google Scholar
Dillinger, Michael L.
1989Component Processes of Simultaneous Interpreting. Montreal: McGill University. [Ph.D. Dissertation.]Google Scholar
[ p. 173 ]
1990 “Comprehension during Interpreting: What Do Interpreters Know that Bilinguals Don’t?The Interpreter’s Newsletter (Trieste) 3. 41–58.Google Scholar
Flores d’Arcais, G.B.
1978 “The Contribution of Cognitive Psychology to the Study of Interpretation”. D. Gerver and H. Wallace Sinaico, eds. Language Interpretation and Communication. New York and London: Plenum Press, Nato Conference Series 1978 385–402.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fourastié, Jean
1966Les conditions de l’esprit scientifique. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
Gerver, David
1976 “Empirical Studies of Simultaneous Interpretation: A Review and a Model”. R. Brislin, ed. Translation Applications and Research. New York: Gardner Press 1976 165–207.Google Scholar
Gile, Daniel
1983 “Aspects méthodologiques de l’évaluation de la qualité du travail en interprétation simultanée”. Meta 28:3. 236–243.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1985 “La sensibilité aux écarts de langue et la sélection d’informateurs dans l’analyse d’erreurs”. The Incorporated Linguist 24:1. 29–32.Google Scholar
1989La communication linguistique en réunion multilingue—Les difficultés de la transmission informationnelle en interprétation simultanée. Université Paris III. [Thèse de doctorat.]Google Scholar
1990a “Scientific Research vs. Personal Theories in the Investigation of Interpretation”. Gran and Taylor, 1990 . 28–41.Google Scholar
1990b “Observational Studies and Experimental Studies in the Investigation of Interpetation”. Paper given at the Scuola Superiore di Lingue Moderne per Interpreti e Traduttori, Università degli Studi di Trieste, March 19, 1990. [Mimeo.]Google Scholar
1990c “L’évaluation de la qualité de l’interprétation par les délégués: une étude de cas”. The Interpreter’s Newsletter 3. 66–71.Google Scholar
1990d “Research Proposals for Interpreters”. Gran and Taylor, 1990 . 226–236.Google Scholar
Gore, Sheila M. and Douglas G. Altman
1982Statistics in Practice. London: British Medical Association.Google Scholar
Gran, Laura and John Dodds
eds. 1989The Theoretical and Practical Aspects of Teaching Conference Interpretation: Proceedings of the First International Symposium on Conference Interpreting at the University of Trieste. Udine: Campanotto Editore.Google Scholar
Gran, Laura and Christopher Taylor
eds. 1990Aspects of Applied and Experimental Research on Conference Interpretation. Udine: Campanotto Editore.Google Scholar
Hansen, M., W. Hurwitz and W. Madow
1953Sample Surveys Methods and Theory. New York, London and Sydney: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.Google Scholar
Hoffstaedter, Petra
1987 “Poetic Text Processing and Its Empirical Investigation”. Poetics 16. 75–91.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kurz, Ingrid
1989 “Conference Interpreting: User Expectations”. ATA—Proceedings of the 30th Annual Conference. Medford, NJ: Learned Information Inc. 1989 143–148.Google Scholar
Meak, Lidia
1983La selezione dell’informazione per l’interpretazione simultanea della literatura medica. Trieste: Università degli Studi di Trieste, Scuola Superiore di Lingue Moderne per Interpreti e Traduttori. [Unpublished Monograph.]Google Scholar
Pinter (Kurz), Ingrid
1969Der Einfluss der Ubung und Konzentration auf Simultanes Sprechen und Horen. University of Vienna. [Doctoral Dissertation.]Google Scholar
[ p. 174 ]
Schor, S. and I. Karten
1966 “Statistical Evaluation of Medical Journal Manuscripts”. JAMA 195. 1123–1128.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Seleskovitch, Danica
1975Langage, langues et mémoire. Paris: Minard Lettres Modernes.Google Scholar
Shlesinger, Miriam
1989Simultaneous Interpretation as a Factor in Effecting Shifts in the Position of Texts on the Oral-Literate Continuum. Tel Aviv University. [M.A. Thesis.]Google Scholar
Snedecor, George W. and William G. Cochran
1967Statistical Methods, 6th Edition. Ames, Iowa: The Iowa State University Press.Google Scholar
Stenzl, Catherine
1983Simultaneous Interpretation—Groundwork towards a Comprehensive Model. University of London. [M.A. Thesis.]Google Scholar
Toury, Gideon
1991 “Experimentation in Translation Studies: Achievements, Prospects and Some Pitfalls”. Sonja Tirkkonen-Condit, ed. Empirical Research in Translation and Intercultural Studies: Selected Papers of the TRANSIF Seminar, Savonlinna 1988. Tübingen: Narr 1991 45–66.Google Scholar
Treisman, A.
1965 “The Effects of Redundancy and Familiarity on Translation and Repeating Back a Native and Foreign Language”. British Journal of Psychology 56. 369–379.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Viezzi, Maurizio
1989 “Information Retention as a Parameter for the Comparison of Sight Translation and Simultaneous Interpretation: An Experimental Study”. The Interpreter’s Newsletter 2. 65–69.Google Scholar