Cover not available

Article published In: Babel
Vol. 64:5/6 (2018) ► pp.792–818

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required

Propositional information loss in English-to-Chinese simultaneous conference interpreting

A corpus-based study

 | Beijing Foreign Studies University
Published online: 22 February 2019
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/babel.00070.lu
Abstract
Simultaneous Interpreting (SI) as a profession has been gaining momentum in China, but little has been researched on Chinese professional conference interpreting on a basis of large quantity of empirical data. This study adopts an information-based SI fidelity assessment approach to probe into the propositional information loss in an SI corpus of seventeen English(B)-Chinese(A) simultaneous interpreters’ interpretations, and through stimulated retrospective interviews of three conference interpreters. Results show that operational constraints (concurrent listening and speaking, time constraint and incremental processing), source language factors (speed, information density, accent, linguistic complexity, technicality, etc) and interpreting direction (B to A), etc, account for typical propositional omission, incompletion or error.
Résumé
L’interprétation simultanée (IS) en tant que profession a progressé en Chine, mais il existe peu d’études sur l’interprétation de conférence professionnelle chinoise, basées sur une grande quantité de données empiriques. Cette étude adopte une approche permettant d’évaluer la fidélité de l’IS par rapport aux informations, dans le but d’examiner la perte d’informations propositionnelles dans un corpus de dix-sept interprétations simultanées de l’anglais(B) en chinois(A) et au travers d’entretiens rétrospectifs stimulés de trois interprètes de conférence. Les résultats montrent que les contraintes opérationnelles (écouter et parler simultanément, contraintes de temps et traitement incrémentiel), les facteurs propres à la langue source (vitesse, densité des informations, accent, complexité linguistique, technicité, etc.) et le sens de l’interprétation (de B à A), etc, expliquent les omissions propositionnelles typiques, les éléments incomplets ou les erreurs.
Article outline
  • 1.Fidelity assessment in simultaneous interpreting (SI)
    • 1.1Traditional approaches
    • 1.2Information-based assessment
  • 2.Propositional information loss: Corpus data
    • 2.1The corpus
    • 2.2The data
  • 3.Propositional information loss: Causes and mechanisms
    • 3.1Corpus-based quantitative study
      • 3.1.1Annotation of source language variable levels
      • 3.1.2From information loss to variable levels
      • 3.1.3Between-clip analysis
      • 3.1.4Within-clip and within-group analysis
      • 3.1.5From variable levels to information loss
    • 3.2Corpus-based qualitative study
      • 3.2.1Propositional omission
        • (1)Time constraint
        • (2)Processing difficulties
      • 3.2.2Propositional incompletion
        • (1)Processing difficulties
        • (2)Time constraint
      • 3.2.3Propositional error
        • (1)Incomprehension
        • (2)Miscomprehension
  • 4.Findings and discussions
  • 5.Conclusions
  • Acknowledgements
  • References
References (61)
References
Alexieva, Bistra. 1999. “Understanding the Source Language Text in Simultaneous Interpreting”. The Interpreters’ Newsletter 91: 45–59.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Altman, Janet. 1994. “Error Analysis in the Teaching of Simultaneous Interpreting: A Pilot Study”. In Bridging the Gap: Empirical Research in Simultaneous Interpretation, ed. by Sylvie Lambert; and Barbara Moser-Mercer, 25–38. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Anderson, Linda. 1994. “Simultaneous Interpretation: Contextual and Translation Aspects”. In Bridging the Gap: Empirical Research in Simultaneous Interpretation, ed. by Sylvie Lambert; and Barbara Moser-Mercer, 101–120. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Baker, William J. 1980. “Epilogue: An ‘Information Structure’ View of Language”. In Experimental Linguistics: Integration of Theories and Applications, ed. by Gary D. Prideaux; Bruce L. Derwing; and William J. Baker, 293–307. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Barik, Henri C. 1971. “A Description of Various Types of Omissions, Additions and Errors of Translation Encountered in Simultaneous Interpretation”. Meta 16 (4): 199–210. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1975. “Simultaneous Interpretation: Qualitative and Linguistic Data”. Language and Speech 18 (3): 272–297. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bartłomiejczyk, Magdalena. 2007. “Interpreting Quality as Perceived by Trainee Interpreters: Self-evaluation”. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 1 (2): 247–267. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2010. “Effects of Short Intensive Practice on Interpreter Trainees’ Performance”. In Why Translation Studies Matters, ed. by Daniel Gile; Gyde Hansen; and Nike K. Pokorn, 183–194. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Buck, Gary. 1990. “The Testing of Second Language Listening Comprehension”. Ph.D dissertation. Lancaster: University of Lancaster.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bühler, Hildegund. 1985. “Conference Interpreting: A Multichannel Communication Phenomenon”. Meta 30 (1): 49–54. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chang, Chia-Chien; and Diane L. Schallert. 2007. “The Impact of Directionality on Chinese/English Simultaneous Interpreting”. Interpreting 9 (2): 137–176. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clark, Herbert H.; and Thomas T. Wasow. 1998. “Repeating Words in Spontaneous Speech”. Cognitive Psychology 371: 201–242. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Darò, Valeria.; and Franco Fabbro. 1994. “Verbal Memory during Simultaneous Interpretation: Effects of Phonological Interference”. Applied Linguistics 15 (4): 365–381. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dillinger, Michael. 1989. Component Processes of Simultaneous Interpreting Ph.D Dissertation. Montreal: McGill University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Falbo, Caterina. 2002. “Error Analysis: A Research Tool”. In Perspectives on Interpreting, ed. by Giuliana Garzone; Peter Mead; and Maurizio Viezzi, 111–127. Forlì: Clueb.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Frauenfelder, Ulrich; and Herbert Schriefers. 1997. “A Psycholinguistic Perspective on Simultaneous Interpretation”. Interpreting 2 (1–2): 55–89. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Garzone, Giuliana. 2002. “Quality and Norms in Interpretation”. In Interpreting in the 21st Century: Challenges and Opportunities, ed. by Giuliana Garzone; and Maurizio Viezzi, 107–119. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gerver, David. 1969/2002. “The Effects of Source Language Presentation Rate on the Performance of Simultaneous Conference Interpreters”. In The Interpreting Studies Reader, ed. by Franz Pöchhacker; and Miriam Shlesinger, 53–66. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1974. “Simultaneous Listening and Speaking and Retention of Prose”. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 26 (3): 337–341. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1999a. “Variability in the Perception of Fidelity in Simultaneous Interpretation”. Hermes 221: 51–79.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1999b. “Testing the Effort Models’ Tightrope Hypothesis in Simultaneous Interpreting – A Contribution”. Hermes 231: 153–172.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2015. “The Contributions of Cognitive Psychology and Cognitive Linguistics to Conference Interpreting: A Critical Analysis”. In Psycholinguistic and Cognitive Inquiries into Translation and Interpreting, ed. by Aline Ferreira; and John W. Schwieter, 41–64. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goh, Christine. 2000. “A Cognitive Perspective on Language Learners’ Listening Comprehension Problems”. System 281: 55–75. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hayashi, Takuo. 1991. “Interactive Processing of Words in Connected Speech in L1 and L2”. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 291: 151–160.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Just, Marcel A.; and Patricia A. Carpenter. 1980. “A Theory of Reading: From Eye Fixations to Comprehension”. Psychological Review 871: 329–354. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kalina, Sylvia. 2002. “Quality in Interpreting and Its Prerequisites: A Framework for a Comprehensive View”. In Interpreting in the 21st Century: Challenges and Opportunities, ed. by Giuliana Garzone; and Maurizio Viezzi, 121–130. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2005. “Quality Assessment for Interpreting Processes”. Meta 50 (2): 768–784. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kim, Hye-Rim. 2005. “Linguistic Characteristics and Interpretation Strategy Based on EVS Analysis of Korean-Chinese, Korean-Japanese Interpretation”. Meta 50 (4). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kurz, Ingrid. 1993. “Conference Interpretation: Expectations of Different User Groups”. The Interpreters’ Newsletter 51: 13–21.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lambert, Sylvie. 1988. “Information Processing among Conference Interpreters: A Test of the Depth-of-Processing Hypothesis”. Meta 33 (3): 377–387. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lambert, Sylvie; Valeria Darò; and Franco Fabbro. 1995. “Focalized Attention on Input vs. Output during Simultaneous Interpretation: Possibly a Waste of Effort!” Meta 40 (1): 39–46. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lambrecht, Knud. 1994. Information Structure and Sentence Form: Topic, Focus, and the Mental Representations of Discourse Referents. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey. 1981. Semantics: The Study of Meaning. (2nd edition). Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lin, I-hsin; Chang Feng-lan; and Kuo Feng-lan. 2013. “The Impact of Non-native Accented English on Rendition Accuracy in Simultaneous Interpreting”. Translation and Interpreting 5 (2): 30–44.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Liu, Minhua; Diane L. Schallert; and Patrick J. Caroll. 2004. “Working Memories and Expertise in Simultaneous Interpreting”. Interpreting 6 (1): 19–42. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lu, Xinchao; and Wang Lidi. 2015. “Interpreters’ Turn-taking and Output Quality in English-Chinese Simultaneous Interpreting”. Foreign Language Teaching and Research 47 (4): 585–596.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Massaro, Dominic W.; and Gregg C. Oden. 1995. “Independence of Lexical Context and Phonological Information in Speech Perception”. Journal of Experimental Psychology 21 (4): 1053–1064.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Massaro, Dominic W.; and Trevor H. Chen. 2008. “The Motor Theory of Speech Perception Revisited”. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 15 (2): 453–457. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mead, Peter. 2005. “Methodological Issues in the Study of Interpreters’ Fluency”. The Interpreters’ Newsletter 131: 39–63.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Moser-Mercer, Barbara. 1996. “Quality in Interpreting: Some Methodological Issues”. The Interpreters’ Newsletter 71: 43–55.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pöchhacker, Franz. 2001. “Quality Assessment in Conference and Community Interpreting”. Meta 46 (2): 410–425. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2004. Introducing Interpreting Studies. London: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pym, Anthony. 2008. “On Omission in Simultaneous Interpreting: Risk Analysis of a Hidden Effort”. In Efforts and Models in Interpreting and Translation Research: A Tribute to Daniel Gile, ed. by Gyde Hansen; Andrew Chesterman; and Heidrun Gerzymisch-Arbogast, 83–105. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2002. “A Methodology for the Analysis of Interpretation Corpora”. In Interpreting in the 21st Century: Challenges and Opportunities, ed. by Giuliana Garzone; and Maurizio Viezzi, 29–45. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shlesinger, Miriam. 1997. “Quality in Simultaneous Interpreting”. In Conference Interpreting: Current Trends in Research, ed. by Yves Gambier; Daniel Gile; and Christopher Taylor, 123–131. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2003. “Effects of Presentation Rate on Working Memory in Simultaneous Interpreting”. The Interpreters’ Newsletter 121: 37–49.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shreve, Gregory Monroe; Isabel Lacruz; and Erik Angelone. 2011. “Sight Translation and Speech Disfluency”. In Methods and Strategies of Process Research: Integrative Approaches in Translation Studies, ed. by Cecilia Alvstad; Adelina Hild; and Elisabet Tiselius, 93–120. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sperber, Dan; and Deirdre Wilson. 1986/1995. Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tommola, Jorma; and Marketta Helevä. 1998. “Language Direction and Source Text Complexity: Effects on Trainee Performance in Simultaneous Interpreting”. In Unity in Diversity? Current Trends in Translation Studies, ed. by Lynne Bowker; Michael Cronin; Dorothy Kenny; and Jennifer Pearson, 177–186. Manchester: St Jerome.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Traxler, Matthew J. 2012. Introduction to Psycholinguistics. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Xu, Jiajin; and Jia Yunlong. 2009. Readability Analyzer 1.0. Beijing: National Research Center for Foreign Language Education (Beijing Foreign Studies University).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yang, Jun. 2004. “A Review of Studies on Disfluencies in Speech Production”. Foreign Language Teaching and Research (4): 278–284.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (4)

Cited by four other publications

Du, Meng & Binhua Wang
2025. Cognitive processing in simultaneous interpreting with synchronous captioning: An eye-tracking study of Chinese head-final noun phrases with varied dependency distances. System 133 ► pp. 103761 ff. DOI logo
Lu, Xinchao
2025. The effectiveness of ChatGPT-assisted Lexical-syntactic Flexibility practice for interpreting competence and quality: the case of Chinese-to-English consecutive interpreting. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 19:3-4 ► pp. 405 ff. DOI logo
Ouyang, Lingwei, Qianxi Lv & Junying Liang
2021. Coh-Metrix Model-Based Automatic Assessment of Interpreting Quality. In Testing and Assessment of Interpreting [New Frontiers in Translation Studies, ], ► pp. 179 ff. DOI logo
Abdel Latif, Muhammad M. M.
2020. Translation/Interpreting Product Research. In Translator and Interpreter Education Research [New Frontiers in Translation Studies, ], ► pp. 111 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 14 november 2025. 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.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue