Band 52, Heft 2 - Special issue: “Language processing in translation”: Guest Editor: Boguslawa Whyatt

Keystroke logging has demonstrated that a translator’s text production can be broken down into units separated by pause boundaries (Dragsted 2004, 2005, 2010). Reading research has not identified analogous boundaries, as the only interruptions in a reader’s visual attention to a text are often only blinks. However, in an experimental setup with tracking of a translator’s gaze movements across a screen showing the source text and (emerging) target text, gaze data show the translator’s shifts of visual attention between the two texts. Can such shifts be seen as an index of content processing units? And do such shifts give us more accurate information about segmentation or more information than keystroke intervals? Using a rather poorly calibrated recording of just one translator’s translation of a single sentence (within a longer task) for illustration, the paper seeks to tentatively explore the feasibility of identifying segments, understood as processing units, on the basis of gaze shifts, and to inquire into what motivates gaze shifts. It also seeks to illustrate how much our interpretation of gaze representations, not least suboptimal representations, depend on a theory of reading.

Although Jakobson’s (1959) seminal classification of translation into three kinds: interlingual, intralingual and intersemiotic has been widely accepted in Translation Studies, so far most research interest has focused on interlingual translation, defined as “translation proper”. Intralingual translation, more often understood as rewording, paraphrasing or reformulation within the same language, is a less prototypical kind of translation, yet we believe that the underlying mental operations needed to perform both tasks include similar processing stages. Bearing in mind the lack of research comparing inter-and intralingual translation we designed the ParaTrans project in which we investigate how translators make decisions in both tasks. In this article we present the results of a comparative analysis of processing effort and cognitive rhythm demonstrated by professional translators who were asked to translate and paraphrase similar texts. Having collected three streams of translation process data with such tools as key-logging, eye-tracking and screen-capture software, we are able to draw some tentative conclusions concerning the similarities and differences between language processing for interlingual translation and intralingual paraphrasing. The results confirm a higher processing effort in interlingual translation most likely due to the need to switch between languages.

In this paper we present preliminary results of the study on the cognitive load in intralingual and interlingual respeaking. We tested 57 subjects from three groups: interpreters, translators and controls while respeaking 5-minute videos in two language combinations: Polish to Polish (intralingual) and English to Polish (interlingual). Using two measures of cognitive load: self-report and EEG (Emotiv), we found that in most cases cognitive load was higher in interlingual respeaking. Self-reported mental effort that the participants had to expend to complete the respeaking tasks was lower in the group of interpreters, suggesting some parallels between interpreting and respeaking competences. EEG measures showed significant differences between respeaking tasks and experimental groups in cognitive load over time.

As some scholars view inter-and intra-lingual translation as a parallel activity, it is vital to establish to what extent the products of these processes are alike, and whether the processes themselves differ. This paper investigates stylistic simplification, a frequently hypothesised translation universal which involves, among others, breaking up long sentences in the process of translation (Laviosa 2002). One of the parameters commonly used in the investigations of simplification in translations is the average sentence length. In the present study we focus on sentence length to see if the tendency to incorporate stylistic simplification is equally present in the products of inter-and intralingual translation; what phases of the translation process are decisive for sentence length; whether the scope of consultation with the source text affects sentence length. Finally, we will try to verify if average sentence length is dependent on the level of translation experience.

Professional interpreters employed by international institutions usually work into their L1 from their L2, while freelance interpreters tend to work both into and from their L1. A study was devised to see if the long-term interpreting unidirectional practice (in the L2–L1 direction only), in contrast to bidirectional practice (in the L2–L1 and L1–L2 direction), influences the speed of lexical retrieval manifested through shorter translation latencies. Forty-eight professional conference interpreters produced oral translations of nouns presented in isolation, in high context constraint sentences and in low context constraint sentences. Contrary to predictions, unidirectional interpreters did not manifest directionality asymmetry and their L2–L1 translation latencies were not shorter than L1–L2 translation latencies. Surprisingly, the L2–L1 direction advantage was found in the group of bidirectional interpreters. The data suggest that the dominant directionality in interpreting practice has little impact on the strength of interlingual lexical links in the interpreter’s mental lexicon or that other factors (such as language use, exposure and immersion) might offset any such impact. The study also revealed an expected context effect, which shows that interpreters use semantic constraint to anticipate sentence-final words.

The question of interpreter aptitude has been widely discussed in Interpreting Studies (e.g. Lambert 1991; Moser-Mercer 1994; Mackintosh 1999). Language command and cognitive skills have often been treated by interpreter trainers as the main determinants of an interpreter’s future success. However, in recent years, more and more attention from interpreting scholars has been devoted to psycho-affective factors, such as motivation, anxiety or stress resistance (e.g. Timarová and Ungoed-Thomas 2008; Rosiers et al. 2011; Bontempo and Napier 2011). This paper presents the results of a pilot study, the main objective of which was to examine whether the speed of speaker’s delivery influences the level of stress experienced by interpreting trainees during a simultaneous interpreting task. To this end, heart rate and blood pressure data were collected. The participants were asked to interpret two speeches from English into Polish. The author hypothesised that while interpreting a faster speech the participants would experience a higher level of stress than when they interpreted a slower speech. The hypothesis was corroborated only for heart rate values. No statistically significant differences were observed for either systolic or diastolic blood pressure. The study offers valuable insight into the question of stress experienced by interpreting trainees.

The paper reports on the first pilot study planned within a broader interdisciplinary research project on translator’s personality profile viewed from the psychological and cognitive perspectives. The study aims to test the assumption that there is a link between personality features and translation performance. It is our initial attempt to incorporate translation process research and product evaluation into the investigation of personality factors involved in translation. Two major directions of analysis have been selected: personality traits as related to the quality of the translation product, and cognitive functions as related to the process of translation. The tentative conclusions confirm the idea that personality characteristics are important building blocks for further development of translation competence and expertise.

Translation process research (TPR) efforts seem at times unconcerned with the theoretical foundations they need to interpret their results. A pervasive theoretical approach within TPR has been the mind-as-computer view. This approach has fostered both mechanistic and functional explanations of the translation process, including semantic notions of meaning, unrealistic constructs of the mental lexicon, and reified notions of equivalence. Some consequences of the approach are illustrated with discussions in the realm of translation quality assessment (automated and combined metrics, rubrics based on error categorization, and the impact of human variables and factors) and the monitor model hypothesis and its recent developments. Alternative approaches that draw from 4EA cognition are sketched that suggest that meaning is encyclopedic; that it is a process that cannot be measured; that the mental lexicon is only an abstraction of a part of (world-) knowledge; and that the tendency to choose default translations follows from the very structure of the brain/mind and the minimax principle.