Article published In: Interpreting
Vol. 25:2 (2023) ► pp.186–210
Simultaneous interpreting experience enhances the use of case markers for prediction in Turkish
Published online: 22 September 2022
https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.00085.ozk
https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.00085.ozk
Abstract
This study investigated individual differences in prediction during language comprehension in professional and student Turkish (A)–English (B) simultaneous interpreters as a function of simultaneous interpreting (SI) experience and working memory capacity (WMC). A Turkish visual-world eye-tracking prediction task examined whether the accusative versus the nominative case markers on the initial nouns of sentences could be used as cues to predicting an upcoming argument. The participants’ WMC was measured using an automated operation span task. We found a prediction effect (a significantly higher increase in fixations to the plausible agent with time in the accusative than in the nominative condition) for the professionals, but not for the students. WMC contributed positively to the prediction effect in the professionals. Our findings indicate an SI-related advantage for prediction in professional versus student interpreters. Importantly, the present findings revealed an SI-related advantage in a prediction task that did not require interpreting.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 1.1SI as a potential context for training prediction in professional interpreters
- 1.2SI as a potential task for enhancing domain-general cognitive skills
- 1.3The present study
- 2.Materials and methods
- 2.1Participants
- 2.2Eye-tracking task
- 2.3Working memory capacity
- 2.4Data analysis
- 3.Results
- 3.1Prediction in professionals and students
- 3.2Contribution of WMC to prediction in professionals and students
- 4.Discussion
- Notes
References
References (72)
AIIC (2019). The AIIC A-B-C. [URL] (accessed 6 July 2022).
Allopenna, P. D., Magnuson, J. S. & Tanenhaus, M. K. (1998). Tracking the time course of spoken word recognition using eye movements: Evidence for continuous mapping models. Journal of Memory and Language 38 (4), 419–439.
Altmann, G. T. M. (2011). Language can mediate eye movement control within 100 milliseconds, regardless of whether there is anything to move the eyes to. Acta Psychologica 137 (2), 190–200.
Amos, R. M. & Pickering, M. J. (2020). A theory of prediction in simultaneous interpreting. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 23 (4), 706–715.
Amos, R. M., Seeber, K. G. & Pickering, M. J. (2022). Prediction during simultaneous interpreting: Evidence from the visual-world paradigm. Cognition, 2201, 104987.
Babcock, L. & Vallesi, A. (2017). Are simultaneous interpreters expert bilinguals, unique bilinguals, or both? Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 20 (2), 403–417.
Baguley, T. (2012). Serious stats: A guide to advanced statistics for the behavioral sciences. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Barr, D. J. (2008). Analyzing ‘visual world’ eye-tracking data using multilevel logistic regression. Journal of Memory and Language 59 (4), 457–474.
Barr, D. J., Levy, R., Scheepers, C. & Tily, H. J. (2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language 68 (3), 255–278.
Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B. & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software 67 (1), 1–48.
Borovsky, A., Elman, J. L. & Fernald, A. (2012). Knowing a lot for one’s age: Vocabulary skill and not age is associated with anticipatory incremental sentence interpretation in children and adults. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 112 (4), 417–436.
Brouwer, S., Özkan, D. & Küntay, A. C. (2019). Verb-based prediction during language processing: The case of Dutch and Turkish. Journal of Child Language 46 (1), 80–97.
Brown, M., Salverda, A. P., Dilley, L. C. & Tanenhaus, M. K. (2011). Expectations from preceding prosody influence segmentation in online sentence processing. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 18 (6), 1189–1196.
Brunyé, T. T., Carney, P. A., Allison, K. H., Shapiro, L. G., Weaver, D. L. & Elmore, J. G. (2014). Eye movements as an index of pathologist visual expertise: A pilot study. PLoS ONE 9 (8), e103447.
Bybee, J. L. (1985). Morphology: A study of the relation between meaning and form. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Bybee, J. (1995). Regular morphology and the lexicon. Language and Cognitive Processes 10 (5), 425–455.
Chernov, G. V. (2004). Inference and anticipation in simultaneous interpreting: A probability-prediction model. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Chernov, V. M. (1994). Message redundancy and message anticipation in simultaneous interpreting. In S. Lambert & B. Moser-Mercer (Eds.), Bridging the gap: Empirical research in simultaneous interpretation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 139–154.
Chmiel, A. (2021). Effects of simultaneous interpreting experience and training on anticipation, as measured by word-translation latencies. Interpreting 23 (1), 18–44.
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 (3), 324–345.
Cooper, R. M. (1974). The control of eye fixation by the meaning of spoken language: A new methodology for the real-time investigation of speech perception, memory, and language processing. Cognitive Psychology 6 (1), 84–107.
Fan, D. C., Collart, A. & Chan, S-H. (2022). When two languages are competing: An ERP study of sentence processing in expert and novice interpreters. Interpreting 24 (1), 1–37.
García, A. M. (2014). The interpreter advantage hypothesis: Preliminary data patterns and empirically motivated questions. Translation and Interpreting Studies 9 (2), 219–238.
García, A. M., Muñoz, E. & Kogan, B. (2019). Taxing the bilingual mind: Effects of simultaneous interpreting experience on verbal and executive mechanisms. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 23 (4), 729–739.
Gerver, D., Longley, P., Long, J. & Lambert, S. (1984). Selecting trainee conference interpreters: A preliminary study. Journal of Occupational Psychology 57 (1), 17–31.
Göksun, T., Küntay, A. C. & Naigles, L. R. (2008). Turkish children use morphosyntactic bootstrapping in interpreting verb meaning. Journal of Child Language 35 (2), 291–323.
Hintz, F., Meyer, A. S. & Huettig, F. (2017). Predictors of verb-mediated anticipatory eye movements in the visual world. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 43 (9), 1352–1374.
Huettig, F. & Altmann, G. T. M. (2004). The online processing of ambiguous and unambiguous words in context: Evidence from head-mounted eye-tracking. In M. Carreiras & C. Clifton (Eds.), The on-line study of sentence comprehension: Eyetracking, ERP and beyond. New York: Psychology Press, 187–207.
Huettig, F. & Janse, E. (2016). Individual differences in working memory and processing speed predict anticipatory spoken language processing in the visual world. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience 31 (1), 80–93.
Huettig, F. & Mani, N. (2016). Is prediction necessary to understand language? Probably not. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience 31 (1), 19–31.
Huettig, F. & Pickering, M. J. (2019). Literacy advantages beyond reading: Prediction of spoken language. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 23 (6), 464–475.
Huettig, F., Singh, N. & Mishra, R. K. (2011). Language-mediated visual orienting behavior in low and high literates. Frontiers in Psychology 21, 2851.
Injoque-Ricle, I., Barreyro, J. P., Formoso, J. & Jaichenco, V. I. (2015). Expertise, working memory and articulatory suppression effect: Their relation with simultaneous interpreting performance. Advances in Cognitive Psychology 11 (2), 56–63.
Ito, A., Pickering, M. J. & Corley, M. (2018). Investigating the time-course of phonological prediction in native and non-native speakers of English: A visual world eye-tracking study. Journal of Memory and Language 981, 1–11.
Ito, A. & Sakai, H. (2021). Everyday language exposure shapes prediction of specific words in listening comprehension: A visual world eye-tracking study. Frontiers in Psychology 121, 2401.
Jörg, U. (1997). Bridging the gap: Verb anticipation in German–English simultaneous interpreting. In M. Snell-Hornby, Z. Jettmarova & K. Kaindl (Eds.), Translation as intercultural communication: Selected papers from the EST Congress, Prague 1995. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 217–228.
Kamide, Y., Altmann, G. T. M. & Haywood, S. L. (2003). The time-course of prediction in incremental sentence processing: Evidence from anticipatory eye movements. Journal of Memory and Language 491, 133–156.
Kamide, Y., Scheppers, C. & Altmann, G. T. M. (2003). Integration of syntactic and semantic information in predictive processing: Cross-linguistic evidence from German and English. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 32 (1), 38–55.
Köpke, B. & Nespoulous, J. (2006). Working memory performance in expert and novice interpreters. Interpreting 8 (1), 1–23.
Langacker, R. (1988). A usage-based model. In B. Rudzka-Ostyn (Ed.), Topics in cognitive linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Lederer, M. (1981). La traduction simultanée: Expérience et théorie: Paris: Minard Lettres Modernes.
Lewis, R. L., Vasishth, S. & Van Dyke, J. A. (2006). Computational principles of working memory in sentence comprehension. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 10 (10), 447–454.
Lin, Y., Lv, Q. & Liang, J. (2018). Predicting fluency with language proficiency, working memory, and directionality in simultaneous interpreting. Frontiers in Psychology 9 (1543).
Liu, Y., Hintz, F., Liang, J. & Huettig, F. (2022). Prediction in challenging situations: Most bilinguals can predict upcoming semantically-related words in their L1 source language when interpreting. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 1–15.
Liu, M., Schallert, D. L. & Carroll, P. J. (2004). Working memory and expertise in simultaneous interpreting. Interpreting 6 (1), 19–42.
Lozano-Argüelles, C. & Sagarra, N. (2021). Interpreting experience enhances the use of lexical stress and syllabic structure to predict L2 word endings. Applied Psycholinguistics 42 (5), 1135–1157.
Matsumoto, H., Terao, Y., Yugeta, A., Fukuda, H., Emoto, M., Furubayashi, T., Okano, T., Hanajima, R. & Ugawa, Y. (2011). Where do neurologists look when viewing brain CT images? An eye-tracking study involving stroke cases. PLoS ONE 6 (12), e28928.
Mellinger, C. & Hanson, T. (2019). Meta-analyses of simultaneous interpreting and working memory. Interpreting 21 (2), 165–195.
Mishra, R. K., Singh, N., Pandey, A. & Huettig, F. (2012). Spoken language-mediated anticipatory eye-movements are modulated by reading ability: Evidence from Indian low and high literates. Journal of Eye Movement Research 5 (1).
Moser-Mercer, B., Frauenfelder, U. H., Casado, B. & Künzli, A. (2000). Searching to define expertise in interpreting. In B. Englund Dimitrova & K. Hyltenstam (Eds.), Language processing and simultaneous interpreting: Interdisciplinary perspectives. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Özge, D., Küntay, A. & Snedeker, J. (2019). Why wait for the verb? Turkish speaking children use case markers for incremental language comprehension. Cognition 1831, 152–180.
Özge, D., Marinis, T. & Zeyrek, D. (2013). Object-first orders in Turkish do not pose a challenge during processing. In U. Özge (Ed.), Proceedings of the 8th Workshop on Altaic Formal Linguistics. Cambridge, MA: MIT, 269–280.
Padilla, P., Bajo, M. T., Cañas, J. J. & Padilla, F. (1995). Cognitive processes of memory in simultaneous interpretation. In J. Tommola (Ed.), Topics in interpreting research. Turku: University of Turku Centre for Translation and Interpreting, 61–71.
Padilla, F., Bajo, M. T. & Macizo, P. (2005). Articulatory suppression in language interpretation: Working memory capacity, dual tasking and word knowledge. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 8 (3), 207–219.
R Core Team (2021). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. [URL] (accessed 6 July 2022).
Riccardi, A. (1996). Language-specific strategies in simultaneous interpreting. In C. Dollerup & V. Appel (Eds.), Teaching translation and interpreting 31. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 213–222.
Schneider, W., Eschman, A. & Zuccolotto, A. (2002). E-Prime user’s guide. Pittsburgh: Psychology Software Tools Inc.
Seeber, K. G. & Kerzel, D. (2011). Cognitive load in simultaneous interpreting: Model meets data. International Journal of Bilingualism 16 (2), 228–242.
Setton, R. (2005). So what is so interesting about simultaneous interpreting? Skase Journal of Translation and Interpretation 1 (1), 70–84.
Signorelli, T. M., Haarmann, H. J. & Obler, L. K. (2011). Working memory in simultaneous interpreters: Effects of task and age. International Journal of Bilingualism 16 (2), 198–212.
Stavrakaki, S., Megari, K., Kosmidis, M. H., Apostolidou, M. & Takou, E. (2012). Working memory and verbal fluency in simultaneous interpreters. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology 34 (6), 624–633.
Steedman, M. & Baldridge, J. (2011). Combinatory categorial grammar. In R. D. Borsley & K. Börjars (Eds.), Non-transformational syntax. Oxford: Blackwell, 181–224.
Tanenhaus, M. K., Spivey-Knowlton, M. J., Eberhard, K. M. & Sedivy, J. C. (1995). Integration of visual and linguistic information in spoken language comprehension. Science 268 (5217), 1632–1634.
Timarová, Š., Čeňková, I., Meylaerts, R., Hertog, E., Szmalec, A. & Duyck, W. (2015). Simultaneous interpreting and working memory capacity. In A. Ferreira & J. W. Schwieter (Eds.), Psycholinguistic and cognitive inquiries into translation and interpreting. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 101–126.
Turner, M. L. & Engle, R. W. (1989). Is working memory capacity task dependent? Journal of Memory and Language 281, 127–154.
Tzou, Y. Z., Eslami, Z. R., Chen, H. C. & Vaid, J. (2011). Effect 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.
Unsworth, N., Heitz, R. P., Schrock, J. C. & Engle, R. W. (2005). An automated version of the operation span task. Behavior Research Methods 37 (3), 498–505.
Wen, H. & Dong, Y. (2019). How does interpreting experience enhance working memory and short-term memory? A meta-analysis. Journal of Cognitive Psychology 31 (8), 769–784.
Yudes, C., Macizo, P. & Bajo, T. (2011). The influence of expertise in simultaneous interpreting on non-verbal executive processes. Frontiers in Psychology 2 (309).
Yudes, C., Macizo, P., Morales, L. & Bajo, M. T. (2013). Comprehension and error monitoring in simultaneous interpreters. Applied Psycholinguistics 34 (5), 1039–1057.
Zhang, W. & Yu, D. (2019). A duet and/or a concerto? Simultaneous interpreters’ working memory and interpreting expertise. Babel 65 (4), 519–537.
Cited by (4)
Cited by four other publications
Hodzik, Ena, Deniz Özkan & Ebru Diriker
2025. Simultaneous interpreting experience enhances semantic prediction in Turkish. Target. International Journal of Translation Studies 37:4 ► pp. 627 ff.
Hodzik, Ena, Semra Özdemir, Nesrin Conker & Orhan Bilgin
Amos, Rhona M., Kilian G. Seeber & Martin J. Pickering
2023. Student interpreters predict meaning while simultaneously interpreting - even before training. Interpreting. International Journal of Research and Practice in Interpreting 25:2 ► pp. 211 ff.
Hodzik, Ena
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 12 december 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.
