Aptitude testing over the years

Russo, Mariachiara

doi:10.1075/intp.13.1.02rus

Cited by 43 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 21 publications

(71 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The sheer complexity of interpreting as extreme language use (Christoffels et al, 2006) also gives rise to the question in psychological domains about whether interpreters possess some special abilities that allow them to interpret successfully (Mackintosh, 1985; Christoffels et al, 2006; Russo, 2011). This question has led to empirical efforts to identify the qualities that set interpreters apart from novice or non-interpreters (Ericsson, 2000; Moser-Mercer et al, 2000; Liu et al, 2004; Christoffels et al, 2006; Cai et al, 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dependency Distance Differences across Interpreting Types: Implications for Cognitive Demand

Liang

Fang

et al. 2017

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Interpreting is generally recognized as a particularly demanding language processing task for the cognitive system. Dependency distance, the linear distance between two syntactically related words in a sentence, is an index of sentence complexity and is also able to reflect the cognitive constraints during various tasks. In the current research, we examine the difference in dependency distance among three interpreting types, namely, simultaneous interpreting, consecutive interpreting and read-out translated speech based on a treebank comprising these types of interpreting output texts with dependency annotation. Results show that different interpreting renditions yield different dependency distances, and consecutive interpreting texts entail the smallest dependency distance other than those of simultaneous interpreting and read-out translated speech, suggesting that consecutive interpreting bears heavier cognitive demands than simultaneous interpreting. The current research suggests for the first time that interpreting is an extremely demanding cognitive task that can further mediate the dependency distance of output sentences. Such findings may be due to the minimization of dependency distance under cognitive constraints.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dependency Distance Differences across Interpreting Types: Implications for Cognitive Demand

Liang

Fang

et al. 2017

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Summarising—an important skill in achieving synchrony in AD—has been listed as an important competence of audio describers (E. I. Fernández et al, 2015; Ibáñez Moreno & Vermeulen, 2017; Matamala & Orero, 2007; Orero, 2005), and the ability to summarise well has also been recognised as an important skill in interpreter training (Russo, 2011; Setton & Dawrant, 2016). It is expected that students may improve the quality of their interpreting by learning how to achieve “synchronisation with images” in AD practice.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment criteria in audio describer training: An investigation of learner perceptions in a university interpreting programme in Hong Kong of China

Yan,

Luo

2023

Interpreting and Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Audio description (AD), which renders images into words, is an important subject in the field of translation studies. Audio describer training (ADT) is provided in university translation programmes. However, research on AD pedagogy remains limited, and there are even fewer studies on AD learners. Based on the commonalities between AD and interpreting, especially in terms of quality assessment criteria, this study explored students’ perceptions of ADT and interpreter training in a postgraduate programme in Hong Kong of China. An Audio Description Rating Scale (ADRS) was designed to collect students’ perceptions of ADT, with a focus on quality assessment criteria. Thirty-six students participated in the study. The results show that three particular criteria of AD were identified as the most difficult to achieve: “no unjustified addition,” “appropriate language styles,” and “synchronisation with images.” Furthermore, significant correlations were found between students’ perceptions of certain AD and interpreting criteria, and between interpreting proficiency and AD learning. Individual differences were also recognised in AD learners. The findings shed light on the interactions between the learning of AD and interpreting. The study is expected to inspire trainers to develop more diverse and refined integrations of ADT into existing translation programmes.

show abstract

“…One more significant finding to interpreting instructors and researchers is that summarizing performance at the beginning of interpreting training predicted the development of interpreting performance during the training. As is known, B-to-A interpreting is a commonly-used aptitude test task in selecting candidates for interpreting training (e.g., Keiser, 1978;Russo, 2011), and yet it may not be efficient in selecting those who have no interpreting training before but have strong potentials (e.g., language proficiency, general knowledge, personal traits) of being a good interpreter.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How Does Student Interpreters’ Interpreting Performance Relate to Their Performance in Summarizing?

Li¹

2018

IJLC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summarizing used as an exercise in interpreting training mainly aims to promote interpreting efficiency. So far, however, how student interpreters' interpreting performance relates to their performance in summarizing remains obscure, let alone how the relation may change during interpreting training. The current study thus takes on a longitudinal approach, investigating 62 student interpreters' performance in a consecutive interpreting task from Language B/L2 to Language A/L1 and their performance in a post-interpreting summarizing task (in Language A) at two stages (the beginning and the end) of their first-year interpreting training. Quantitative analyses resulted in three major findings: (1) Student interpreters had better performance both in interpreting and in summarizing at the end of interpreting training than at the beginning;(2) Student interpreters' performance in interpreting had a significant positive correlation with their performance in summarizing, with the correlation becoming stronger at the end of interpreting training than at the beginning; (3) Student interpreters' performance in summarizing at the beginning of interpreting training significantly predicted their development in interpreting performance (both overall interpreting performance and performance in information accuracy and completeness). Pedagogical implications are discussed.

show abstract

Aptitude testing over the years

Cited by 43 publications

References 21 publications

Dependency Distance Differences across Interpreting Types: Implications for Cognitive Demand

Dependency Distance Differences across Interpreting Types: Implications for Cognitive Demand

Assessment criteria in audio describer training: An investigation of learner perceptions in a university interpreting programme in Hong Kong of China

How Does Student Interpreters’ Interpreting Performance Relate to Their Performance in Summarizing?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About