Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-4rdrl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-18T13:29:03.138Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Parallel processing of the target language during source language comprehension in interpreting*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2013

YANPING DONG*
Affiliation:
Guangdong University of Foreign Studies
JIEXUAN LIN
Affiliation:
Guangdong University of Foreign Studies
*
Address for correspondence: Yanping Dong, National Center of Linguistics and Applied Linguistics, Guangdong University of Foreign Studies, Baiyun Dadao North 2#, Guangzhou 510420, Chinaypdong@gdufs.edu.cn

Abstract

Two experiments were conducted to test the hypothesis that the parallel processing of the target language (TL) during source language (SL) comprehension in interpreting may be influenced by two factors: (i) link strength from SL to TL, and (ii) the interpreter's cognitive resources supplement to TL processing during SL comprehension. The influence of the first factor was supported by the contrasting performance on bidirectional SL and TL interpreting tasks by unbalanced bilingual student interpreters, and the second factor was supported by the contrasting performance between participants’ two developmental stages in interpreting. Implications are discussed.

Type
Research Notes
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

We thank reviewers for detailed comments and insightful suggestions on previous drafts. We also thank Prof. Shen ZOU from Shanghai International Studies University for providing us the 2009 and 2010 national average scores for TEM4 and TEM8 tests, and graduate students from Guangwai Brain and Language Lab for providing assistance in data collection. We are grateful to all the participants and colleagues who helped with the study. This research was supported by grants from the Chinese Ministry of Education (2009JJD740007) and the National Social Science Foundation of China (10BYY010), and the New Century Talents Program by the Chinese Ministry of Education.

References

Aaronson, D., & Scarborough, H. S. (1976). Performance theories for sentence coding: Some quantitative evidence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 2, 5670.Google Scholar
Blumenfeld, H. K., & Marian, V. (2007). Constraints on parallel activation in bilingual spoken language processing: Examining proficiency and lexical status using eye-tracking. Language and Cognitive Processes, 22, 633660.Google Scholar
Christoffels, I. K., De Groot, A. M. B., & Kroll, J. F. (2006). Memory and language skills in simultaneous interpreters: The role of expertise and language proficiency. Journal of Memory and Language, 54, 324345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christoffels, I. K., De Groot, A. M. B., & Waldorp, L. J. (2003). Basic skills in a complex task: A graphical model relating memory and lexical retrieval to simultaneous interpreting. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 6, 201211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daneman, M., & Carpenter, P. A. (1980). Individual differences in working memory and reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19, 450466.Google Scholar
Daneman, M., & Carpenter, P. A. (1983). Individual differences in integrating information between and within sentences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 9, 561584.Google Scholar
De Groot, A. M. B., & Nas, G. L. J. (1991). Lexical representation of cognates and noncognates in compound bilinguals. Journal of Memory and Language, 30, 90123.Google Scholar
Dijkstra, T., Grainger, J., & Van Heuven, W. J. B. (1999). Recognition of cognates and interlingual homographs: The neglected role of phonology. Journal of Memory and Language, 41, 496518.Google Scholar
Dijkstra, T., Miwa, K., Brummelhuis, B., Sappelli, M., & Baayen, H. (2010). How cross-language similarity and task demands affect cognate facilitation. Journal of Memory and Language, 62, 284301.Google Scholar
Dong, Y., Gui, S., & MacWhinney, B. (2005). Shared and separate meanings in the bilingual mental lexicon. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 8, 221238.Google Scholar
Elston-Gütler, K. E., Paulmann, S., & Kotz, S. A. (2005). Who's in control? Proficiency and L1 influence on L2 processing. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 17, 15931610.Google Scholar
Gibson, E. (1998). Linguistic complexity: Locality of syntactic dependencies. Cognition, 68, 176.Google Scholar
Grosjean, F. (2001). The bilingual's language modes. In Nicol, J. L. (ed.), One mind, two languages: Bilingual language processing, pp. 122. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hoshino, N., & Kroll, J. F. (2008). Cognate effects in picture naming: Does cross-language activation survive a change of script? Cognition, 106, 501511.Google Scholar
Jin, Y. (2010). Is working memory working in consecutive interpreting? Ph.D. dissertation, The University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1980). A theory of reading: From eye fixations to comprehension. Psychological Review, 87, 329354.Google Scholar
Just, M. A., Carpenter, P. A., Keller, T. A., Eddy, W. F., & Thulborn, K. R. (1996). Brain activation modulated by sentence comprehension. Science, 274, 114116.Google Scholar
Just, M. A., Carpenter, P. A., & Woolley, J. D. (1982). Paradigms and processes in reading comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 111, 228238.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
King, J., & Just, M. A. (1991). Individual differences in syntactic processing: The role of working memory. Journal of Memory and Language, 30, 580602.Google Scholar
Kroll, J. F., & Stewart, E. (1994). Category interference in translation and picture naming: Evidence for asymmetric connections between bilingual memory representations. Journal of Memory and Language, 33, 149174.Google Scholar
Libben, M. R., & Titone, D. A. (2009). Bilingual lexical access in context: Evidence from eye movements during reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35, 381390.Google Scholar
Lin, J., & Dong, Y. (2011). When does language reformulation start in Chinese–English consecutive interpreting. Journal of Foreign Languages, 34, 5663.Google Scholar
Macizo, P., & Bajo, M. T. (2004). When translation makes the difference: Sentence processing in reading and translation. Psicológica, 25, 181205.Google Scholar
Macizo, P., & Bajo, M. T. (2006). Reading for repetition and reading for tranlation: Do they involve the same processes? Cognition, 99, 134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marian, V., & Spivey, M. (2003). Competing activation in bilingual language processing: Within- and between-language competition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 6, 97115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moon, J., & Jiang, N. (2012). Non-selective lexical access in different-script bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 15, 173180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruiz, C., Paredes, N., Macizo, P., & Bajo, M. T. (2008). Activation of lexical and syntactic target language properties in translation. Acta Psychologica, 128, 490500.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sholl, A., Sankaranarayanan, A., & Kroll, J. F. (1995). Transfer between picture naming and translation: A test of asymmetries in bilingual memory. Psychological Science, 6, 4549.Google Scholar
Van Assche, E., Drieghe, D., Duyck, W., Welvaert, M., & Hartsuiker, R. J. (2011). The influence of semantic constrains on bilingual word recognition during sentence reading. Journal of Memory and Language, 64, 88107.Google Scholar
Van Hell, J. G., & De Groot, A. M. B. (2008). Sentence context modulates visual word recognition and translation in bilinguals. Acta Psychologica, 128, 431451.Google Scholar
Van Hell, J. G., & Dijkstra, T. (2002). Foreign language knowledge can influence native language performance in exclusively native contexts. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9, 780789.Google Scholar