Retrospective protocols in simultaneous interpreting: Testing the effect of retrieval cues

Ewa Gumul

Abstract


Retrospection in simultaneous interpreting research often uses either (1) transcripts of the source text or (2) recordings of the target texts as retrieval cues. This study tested their influence on the informativeness and the accuracy of retrospective reports in addition to the verbosity of the interpreters. The study also set out to examine the participants’ perception of the cueing stimuli. The participants in the study were 36 trainee interpreters, who took part in an experiment consisting of interpreting a speech simultaneously and performing self-retrospection immediately after the interpreting task. They were divided into two groups: group A, which was exposed to a source-text transcript as the retrieval cue during retrospection, and group B, which relied on target-text recordings. The results suggest that the differences between the two retrieval cues may be less marked than is generally assumed: the three parameters of verbosity, informativeness and accuracy do not display statistically significant differences between the two experimental conditions. However, some discrepancies can be observed as far as the participants’ perception of the cueing stimuli is concerned. The results also suggest that idiosyncratic reporting styles might have more impact on the retrospective reports than the type of cueing administered.

Keywords


Simultaneous interpreting; trainee interpreters; process research; retrospective protocols; retrieval cues

Full Text:

PDF HTML

References


Barghout, A., Ruiz R. L., & Varela. M. (2015). The influence of speed on omissions in simultaneous interpretation. An experimental study. Babel, 61(3), 305–334. https://doi.org/10.1075/babel.61.3.01bar

Bartłomiejczyk, M. (2006). Strategies of simultaneous interpreting and directionality. Interpreting, 8(2), 149–174. https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.8.2.03bar

Bartłomiejczyk, M. (2007). Introspective methods in conference interpreting research. In J. Arabski, (Ed.), Challenging tasks for psycholinguistics in the new century: Proceedings of the 7th Congress of International Society of Applied Psycholinguistics. (CD edition). Katowice.

Brzeziński, J. (2008). Badania eksperymentalne w psychologii i pedagogice. Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar.

Buchweitz, A., & Alves, F. (2006). Cognitive adaptation in translation: An interface between language direction, time, and recursiveness in target text production. Letras de Hoje, 41, 241–272.

Büttner, O. (2008). Tracing cognitive processes at the point of purchase: The validity of concurrent and retrospective verbal reports, In K. J. Perks & P. Shukla (Eds.), Marketing landscapes: A pause for thought: Proceedings of the 37th EMAC conference 2008 [CD ROM] (pp. 1–8). European Marketing Academy.

Büttner, O., & Silberer, G. (2008). Video-cued thought protocols: A method for tracing cognitive processes at the point of purchase, In T. Lowry (Ed.), Brick and mortar shopping in the 21st century (pp. 221–241). Lawrence Erlbaum.

Chang, C., & Schallert, D. (2007). The impact of directionality on Chinese/English simultaneous interpreting. Interpreting, 9(2), 137–176. https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.9.2.02cha

Englund D. B., & Tiselius, E. (2009). Exploring retrospection as a research method for studying the translation process and the interpreting process. In I. M. Mees, F. Alves, & S. Göpferich (Eds.), Methodology, technology and innovation in translation process research (pp. 109–134). Samfundslitteratur.

Englund, D. B., & Tiselius, E. (2014). Retrospection in interpreting and translation: Explaining the process?, Monti. Special Issue – Minding Translation, 1, 177–200. https://doi.org/10.6035/MonTI.2014.ne1.5

Ericsson, K. A. (2003). Valid and non-reactive verbalization of thoughts during performance of tasks: Towards a solution to the central problems of introspection as a source of scientific data. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 10(9–10), 1–18.

Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1980), Verbal reports as data. Psychological Review, 87(3), 215–251. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.87.3.215

Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1993). Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data (2nd ed.). MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/5657.001.0001

Gile, D. (2009). Basic concepts and models for interpreter and translator training (Rev. ed.). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.8

Gumul, E. (2006). Explicitation in simultaneous interpreting: A strategy or a by-product of language mediation?, Across Languages and Cultures, 7(2), 171–190. https://doi.org/10.1556/Acr.7.2006.2.2

Gumul, E. (2017). Explicitation in simultaneous interpreting: A study into explicitating behaviour of trainee interpreters. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Śląskiego.

Hansen, G. (2005). Experience and emotion in empirical translation research with think-aloud and retrospection. Meta, 50(2), 511–521. https://doi.org/10.7202/010997ar

Hild, A. (2015). Retrospective protocols. In F. Pöchhacker (Ed.), Routledge encyclopedia of interpreting studies (pp. 351–353). Routledge.

Ivanova, A. (1999). Discourse processing during simultaneous interpreting: An expertise approach [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Cambridge.

Ivanova, A. (2000). The use of retrospection in research on simultaneous interpreting. In S. Tirkkonen-Condit & R. Jääskeläinen (Eds.), Tapping and mapping the processes of translation and interpreting: Outlooks on empirical research (pp. 27–52). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.37.05iva

Leanza, Y. (2005). Role of community interpreters in pediatrics as seen by interpreters, physicians and researchers. Interpreting, 7(2), 167–192. https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.7.2.03lea

Li, C. (2010). Coping strategies for fast delivery in simultaneous interpretation. JoSTrans: The Journal of Specialised Translation, 13, 19–25.

Mead, P. (2002). Exploring hesitation in consecutive interpreting: An empirical study. In G. Garzone & M. Viezzi (Eds.), Interpreting in the 21st century: Challenges and opportunities (pp. 73–82). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.43.08mea

Napier, J. (2004). Interpreting omissions: A new perspective. InterpretingI, 6(2), 117–142. https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.6.2.02nap

Russell, D., & Winston, B. (2014). Tapping into the interpreting process: Using participant reports to inform the interpreting process in educational settings. Translation & Interpreting, 6(1), 102–127. https://doi.org/10.12807/ti.106201.2014.a06

Seeber, K. (2015). Cognitive approaches. In F. Pöchhacker (Ed.), Routledge encyclopedia of interpreting studies (pp. 56–60). Routledge.

Shamy, M., & de Pedro Ricoy, R. (2017). Retrospective protocols: Tapping into the minds of interpreting trainees. Translation & Interpreting, 9(1), 51–71. https://doi.org/10.12807/ti.109201.2017.a05

Tang, F. (2018). Explicitation in consecutive interpreting. John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.135

Tiselius, E., & Jenset, G. B. (2011). Process and product in simultaneous interpreting: What they tell us about experience and expertise. In C. Alvstad, A. Hild, & E. Tiselius (Eds.), Methods and strategies of process research: Integrative approaches in translation studies (pp. 269–300). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.94.20tis

Vik-Tuovinen, G.-V. (2002). Retrospection as a method of studying the process of simultaneous interpreting. In G. Garzone & M. Viezzi (Eds.), Interpreting in the 21st century: Challenges and opportunities (pp. 63–71). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.43.07vik