Working Memory and Note Quantity: Their Relationship with Consecutive Interpreting in Proficient Bilinguals. Implications for Aptitude Tests of Interpreting

Mojtaba Amini; Azizollah Dabaghi; Dariush Nejadansari

doi:10.30827/sendebar.v31i0.11822

Autores/as

Mojtaba Amini The University of Isfahan
Azizollah Dabaghi The University of Isfahan
Dariush Nejadansari The University of Isfahan

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.30827/sendebar.v31i0.11822

Palabras clave:

Interpretación consecutiva (CI), memoria de trabajo (WM), toma de notas, cantidad de notas, prueba de aptitud

Resumen

El presente estudio examina la asociación entre la memoria de trabajo (MT) y la cantidad de notas y su relación con el rendimiento de la interpretación consecutiva (IC) para evaluar su eficiencia predictiva para las pruebas de aptitud en IC. Para seguir los objetivos del estudio, se administraron dos tareas de WM y una tarea de CI a 30 estudiantes de traducción de máster. Los resultados indicaron una relación positiva y significativa entre una de las medidas de WM (rango de lectura) y la cantidad de notas. Además, hubo una relación significativa entre ambas medidas de rendimiento de WM y CI, y también entre la cantidad de medidas y el rendimiento de CI. Además, los resultados del análisis de regresión indicaron que ambas medidas de WM eran predictores del desempeño de IC, mientras que la variable “cantidad de medida”; no era un predictor. Con base en los resultados, se demuestra además que WM es un componente eficiente en las pruebas de aptitud, mientras que la cantidad de medidas no cumplió completamente con los criterios y fue rechazada como un criterio fiable y no pudo incluirse como un subcomponente en las pruebas de aptitud.

Descargas

Los datos de descargas todavía no están disponibles.

Biografía del autor/a

Mojtaba Amini, The University of Isfahan

PhD Candidate in Translation and Interpreting Studies, Department of English Language and Literature

Azizollah Dabaghi, The University of Isfahan

Associate Professor, Department of English Language and Literature

Dariush Nejadansari, The University of Isfahan

Assistant Professor, Department of English Language and Literature

Citas

Abuín González, Marta (2012). The language of consecutive interpreters’ notes: differences across levels of expertise. Interpreting 14 (1), 55-72.

Alexieva, Bistra (1993). Aptitude tests and intertextuality in simultaneous interpreting. The Interpreters’ Newsletter 5, 8–12.

Andres, Dörte (2002). Konsekutivdolmetschen und notation. Frankrurt: Lang University.

Babcock, Laura and Vallesi, Antonino (2017). Are simultaneous interpreters expert bilinguals, unique bilinguals, or both?. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 20 (2), 403-417.

Baddeley, Alan D. and Hitch, Graham (1974). Working memory. The psychology of learning and motivation. New York, NY: Academicp.

Baddeley, Alan D. (2000). The episodic buffer: a new component of working memory? Trends in cognitive sciences 4 (11), 417-423.

Bontempo, Karen and Napier, Jemina (2011). Evaluating emotional stability as a predictor of interpreter competence and aptitude for interpreting. Interpreting 13 (1), 85-105.

Bui, Dung C. and Myerson, Joel (2014). The role of working memory abilities in lecture note-taking. Learning and Individual Differences 33, 12-22.

Cardoen, Hanne (2012). The effect of note-taking on target-text fluency. In Emerging research in Translation Studies: Selected papers of the CETRA Research Summer School, G. González Núñez, Y. Khaled and T. Voinova (eds.), 1-22. Leuven: CETRA.

Chen, Sijia (2016). Note taking in consecutive interpreting: A review with special focus on Chinese and English literature. The Journal of Specialised Translation 26 (1), 151-171.

Chen, Sijia (2107). Note-taking in consecutive interpreting: New data from pen recording. Translation & Interpreting 9 (1), 4-23.

Chen, Sijia (2018). A pen-eye-voice approach towards the process of note-taking and consecutive interpreting: An experimental design. International Journal of Comparative Literature and Translation Studies 6 (2), 1-8.

Chmiel, Agnieszka (2016). In search of the working memory advantage in conference interpreting–Training, experience and task effects. International Journal of Bilingualism 22 (3), 371-384.

Chincotta, Dino and Underwood, Geoffrey (1998). Simultaneous interpreters and the effect of concurrent articulation on immediate memory: A bilingual digit span study. Interpreting 3 (1), 1-20.

Christoffels, Ingrid K., De Groot, Annette MB and Waldorp, Lourens J. (2003). Basic skills in a complex task: A graphical model relating memory and lexical retrieval to simultaneous interpreting. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 6 (3), 201-211.

Christoffels, Ingrid K., De Groot, Annette MB and Kroll Judith F. (2006). Memory and language skills in simultaneous interpreters: The role of expertise and language proficiency. Journal of Memory and Language 54 (3), 324-345.

Cohn, Elchanan, Cohn, Sharon and Bradley, James (1995). Notetaking, working memory, and learning in principles of economics. The Journal of Economic Education 26 (4), 291-307.

Dam, Helle V. (2004a). Interpreters’ notes. Interpreting 6 (1), 3-17.

Dam, Helle V. (2004b). Interpreters’ notes: On the choice of form and language. In Claims, Changes and Challenges in Translation Studies, G. Hansen, K. Malmkjær and D. Gile (eds), 251-261. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Dam, Helle V. (2007). What makes interpreters’ notes efficient? In Doubts and Directions in Translation Studies: Selected contributions from the EST Congress, Lisbon 2004, Y. Gambier, M. Shlesinger and R. Stolze (eds.), 183-197. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Dam, Helle V. Engberg, Jan and Schjoldager, Anne (2005). Modelling semantic networks on source and target texts in consecutive interpreting: A contribution to the study of interpreters’ notes. In Knowledge systems and translation, H. V. Dam, J. Engberg and H. Gerzymisch-Arbogast (eds.), Vol. 7, 227-254. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Daneman, Meredyth and Carpenter, Patricia A. (1980). Individual differences in working memory and reading. Journal of verbal learning and verbal behavior 19 (4), 450-466.

Darò, Valeria (1995). Attentional, auditory and memory indexes as prerequisite for simultaneous interpreting. In Topics in Interpreting Research, J. Tommola (ed.), 3-10. Turku: University of Turku.

Dastyar, Vorya (2018). Dictionary of Education and Assessment in Translation and Interpreting Studies (TIS). Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

Di Vesta, Francis J. and Gray, G. Susan (1973). Listening and note taking: II. Immediate and delayed recall as functions of variations in thematic continuity, note taking, and length of listening-review intervals. Journal of Educational Psychology 64 (3), 278.

Dong, Yanping and Cai, Rendong (2015). Working memory in interpreting: a commentary on theoretical models. In Working Memory in Second Language Acquisition and Processing, Z. Wen, M. Borges Mota and A. McNeill (eds.), 63-81. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.

Dong, Yanping, Liu, Yuhua and Cai, Rendong (2018). How does consecutive interpreting training influence working memory: a longitudinal study of potential links between the two. Frontiers in psychology 9, 875.

Donovan, Clare (2003). Entrance exam testing for Conference Interpretation Courses: How important is it?. FORUM. Revue internationale d’interprétation et de traduction/International Journal of Interpretation and Translation 1 (2), 17-44.

Gambrell, Simoné Eden (2018). Crafting an effective test: devising a model of aptitude testing for interpreter training. MA Thesis. Stellenbosch: Stellenbosch University.

Gerver, David, Longley, Patricia, Long, John and Lambert, Sylvie (1989). Selection Tests for Trainee Conference Interpreters. Meta: Translators’ Journal 34 (4), 724-735

Hadwin, Allyson Fiona, Kirby, John R. and Woodhouse, Rosamund A. (1999). Individual differences in notetaking, summarization, and learning from lectures. Alberta Journal of Educational Research 45, 1-17.

Her, Huiling (2001). Notetaking in basic interpretation class: An initial investigation. Studies of translation and interpretation 6, 53-77.

Hiltunen, Sinikka, Pääkkönen, Rauni, Vik, Gun-Viol and Krause Christina M. (2016). On interpreters’ working memory and executive control. International Journal of Bilingualism 20 (3), 297-314.

Hiltunen, Sinikka and Vik, Gun-Viol (2017). Interpreters–experts in careful listening and efficient encoding? Findings of a prose recall test. International Journal of Bilingualism 21 (2), 194-212.

Hodáková, Soňa (2009). Pamat V Simultannom a Konzekutivnom tlmoceni. [Memory in Simultaneous and Consecutive Interpreting.] Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation. Nitra: Konstantin Filozof University.

Injoque-Ricle, Irene, Barreyro, Juan Pablo, Formoso, Jesica and Jaichenco, Virginia I (2015). Expertise, working memory and articulatory suppression effect: Their relation with simultaneous interpreting performance. Advances in cognitive psychology 11 (2), 56.

Khatib, Fuad (2003). The Relation between Working Memory and Consecutive Interpreting performance. Unpublished MA. Thesis. Tehran: Allameh Tabatabai University.

Khodadadi, Mojtaba and Amani, Hossein (2014). WORKING MEMORY WIS Software. Institute for Behavioral & Cognitive Sciences. Tehran, Islamic Republic of Iran.

Khodadadi, Mojtaba, Asad Zadeh, Hassan, Kalantar Ghoreishi, Monir and Amani, Hossein (2014). Working Memory Test. Daneman, M. & Carpenter Software. Institute for Behavioral & Cognitive Sciences. Tehran, Islamic Republic of Iran.

Kiewra, Kenneth A., Benton Stephen L. and Lewis Lance B. (1987). Qualitative aspects of note taking and their relationship with information-processing ability and academic achievement. Journal of Instructional Psychology 14, 110–117.

Kiewra, Kenneth A. and Benton, Stephen L. (1988). The relationship between information-processing ability and notetaking. Contemporary educational psychology 13 (1), 33-44.

Köpke, Barbara and Nespoulous, Jean-Luc (2006). Working memory performance in expert and novice interpreters. Interpreting 8 (1), 1-23.

Lambert, Sylvie (1991). Aptitude testing for simultaneous interpretation at the University of Ottawa. Meta: journal des traducteurs/Meta: Translators’ Journal 36 (4) (1991), 586-594.

Lin, Yumeng, Lv, Qianxi and Liang, Junying (2018). Predicting fluency with language proficiency, working memory, and directionality in simultaneous interpreting. Frontiers in psychology 9, 1543.

Liu, Minhua (2001). Expertise in Simultaneous Interpreting: A Working Memory Analysis. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, the University of Texas at Austin.

Liu, Minhua., Schallert, Diane L. and Carroll, Patrick J. (2004). Working Memory and Expertise in Simultaneous Interpreting. Interpreting 6 (1), 19–42.

López Gómez, María José, Bajo Molina Teresa, Padilla Benítez Presentación and Santiago de Torres, Julio (2007). Predicting proficiency in signed language interpreting: A preliminary study. Interpreting 9 (1), 71-93.

Lorek, Joanna, Centifanti, Luna, CM., Lyons, Minna and Thorley, Craig (2019). The impact of individual differences on jurors’ note taking during trials and recall of trial evidence, and the association between the type of evidence recalled and verdicts. PloS one 14 (2): e0212491.

Lung, Rachel (2003). Taking “notes” seriously in the interpretation classroom. In La evaluación de la calidad en interpretación: investigación. Ángela Collados Aís, Maria Manuela. Fernández Sánchez and Daniel. Gile (eds.), 199-205. Granada: Comares.

Mahmoodzadeh, Kambiz (1992). Consecutive interpreting: Its principals and techniques. In Teaching translation and interpreting: training, talent and experience. Cay Dollerup and Ann Loddeggard (eds.), 231-236. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Marani, Rasoul and Heidari Tabrizi, Hossein (2017). Professional interpreters’ notes in Persian-English consecutive interpreting on the choice of form and language. Research in English Language Pedagogy 5 (2), 133-146.

Mayor, María Jesús Blasco (2015). L2 proficiency as predictor of aptitude for interpreting: An empirical study. Translation and Interpreting Studies. The Journal of the American Translation and Interpreting Studies Association 10 (1), 108-132.

McIntyre, Susan (1992). Lecture note taking, information processing, and academic achievement. Journal of College Reading and Learning 25, 7–17.

Padilla, Presentacion, Bajo, Maria Teresa, Cañas, Jose Juan and Padilla, Francisca (1995). Cognitive processes of memory in simultaneous interpretation. In Topics in Interpreting Research. Jorma Tommola (Ed.), 61-71. Turku: University of Turku Press.

Peverly, Stephen T., Vekaria, Pooja C., Reddington, Lindsay A., Sumowski, James F., Johnson, Kamauru R. and Ramsay, Crystal M. (2013). The relationship of handwriting speed, working memory, language comprehension and outlines to lecture note-taking and test-taking among college students. Applied Cognitive Psychology 27, 115–126.

Pöchhacker, Franz (2004). Introducing Interpreting Studies. London and New York: Routledge.

Rosiers, Alexandra, Eyckmans, June and Bauwens, Daniel (2011). A story of attitudes and aptitudes?: Investigating individual difference variables within the context of interpreting. Interpreting 13 (1), 53-69.

Russo, Mariachiara (2014). Testing aptitude for interpreting: The predictive value of oral paraphrasing, with synonyms and coherence as assessment parameters. Interpreting 16 (1), 1-18.

Russo, Mariachiara and Pippa, Salvador (2004). Aptitude to interpreting: Preliminary results of a testing methodology based on paraphrase. Meta 49 (2), 409–432.

Skaaden, Hanne (1999). Lexical knowledge and interpreter aptitude. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 9 (1), 77-97.

Stone, Christopher A. (2017). Sign language interpreter aptitude: The trials and tribulations of a longitudinal study. Translation & Interpreting 9 (1), 72-87.

Su, Wei. (2015). Aptitude for interpreting, edited by Franz Pöchhacker and Minhua Liu, Amsterdam, John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2014, v+ 183 pp., US $128.00 (hardback), ISBN 978-90-272-4256-3., The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 9 (3), 364-366.

Szabó, Csilla (2006). Language choice in note-taking for consecutive interpreting. Interpreting 8 (2), 129-147.

Timarová, Sarka and Ungoed-Thomas, Harry (2008). Admission Testing for Interpreting Courses. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 2 (1), 29-46.

Timarova, Sarka, Cenkova, Ivana, Meylaerts, Reine, Hertog, E., Szmalec, Arnaud and Duyck, Wouter (2014). Simultaneous Interpreting and Working Memory Executive Control. Interpreting 1 (2), 139-168.

Tiselius, Elisabet (2009). Revisiting Carroll’s Scales. In Testing and Assessment in Translation and Interpreting Studies. Claudia V. Angelelli and Holly E. Jacobson (eds.), 95-121. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Tombaugh, Tom. N. (2006). A comprehensive review of the Paced Auditory Serial Addition Test (PASAT). Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology 21, 53–76.

Tzou, Yeh-Zu, Eslami, Zohreh R., Chen, Hsin-Chin and Vaid, Jyotsna (2012). Effects of Language Proficiency and Degree of Formal Training in Simultaneous Interpreting on Working Memory and Interpreting Performance: Evidence from Mandarin-English speakers. International Journal of Bilingualism 16 (2), 213-227.

Wang, Jihong (2016). The relationship between working memory capacity and simultaneous interpreting performance: a mixed methods study on professional Auslan/English interpreters. International Journal of Research and Practice in Interpreting 18 (1), 1-33.

Wen, Hao and Dong, Yanping (2019). How does interpreting experience enhance working memory and short-term memory: A meta-analysis. Journal of Cognitive Psychology 31 (8), 769-784.

Yamada, Hiroko (2018). Validity of Note-taking for New Consecutive Interpreting Learners: An Empirical Study of University Interpretation Courses. Theory and Practice in Language Studies 8 (11), 1387-1396.

Yenkimaleki, Mahmood and van Heuven, Vincent J. (2017). The effect of memory training on consecutive interpreting performance by interpreter trainees: An experimental study. FORUM. Revue internationale d’interprétation et de traduction/International Journal of Interpretation and Translation 15 (1), 157-172.