When the ear leads the eye – the use of text during simultaneous interpretation

ABSTRACT

In our study we analyse the online processing of visual-verbal input during simultaneous interpreting with text. To that end, we compared 15 professional interpreters’ eye movements during simultaneous interpreting with text (SIMTXT) to a baseline collected during reading while listening (RWL). We found that interpreters have a preference for a visual lead during RWL, following the pattern well-documented in silent and oral reading studies. During SIMTXT, in contrast, interpreters show a clear preference for a visual lag. We tentatively conclude that during SIMTXT the visual input might be used first and foremost to support the production of the output rather than the comprehension of the input. Importantly, we submit that the availability of the written text of the orally presented discourse might negatively affect predictive processing.

KEYWORDS:

• Simultaneous interpreting with text
• multi-sensory input
• visual lag
• predictive processing

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1 With an additional complication for the interpreter who has to compare the two sources, whereby auditory input (i.e. what the speaker actually says) usually takes precedence over visual input (i.e., what the speaker planned to say).

2 In reading studies, the abbreviation EVS (for eye-voice span) was introduced to quantify the distance that the eye is ahead of the voice during oral reading (Buswell, 1920); in interpreting studies, the same abbreviation EVS (for ear-voice span) was introduced to quantify the distance by which the interpreter’s output lags behind the original (Paneth, 1957/2002). In order to avoid confusion, we will not use the abbreviation.

3 We currently do not know to which extent interpreters allocate the same amount of attention to the processing of both sources of input during SIMTXT or whether they have a preference for auditory or visual processing.

4 It is understood that SI is a process going far beyond the sequential translation of words and that N may well represent a larger unit of meaning, such as a phrase or clause.

Additional information

Funding

This research was supported by the University of Geneva’s COMAD [grant numbers 11/17 & 16/22]. A. Hervais-Adelman is supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation [grant number PP_163726].