Meaning assembly in simultaneous interpretation

Setton, Robin

doi:10.1075/intp.3.2.03set

Cited by 69 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The last two decades have, in fact, seen great progress in the cognitivetheoretical and empirical foundation of interpreting research in general (see for instance Gile 1988Gile , 1991Gile , 1995Gran & Dodds 1989;Pöchhacker 1994;Kohn & Kalina 1996;Danks et al 1997;Kalina 1998;Setton 1998). However, the findings from recent cognitive research have not been applied to the specific field of notetaking.…”

Section: Sense As a Central Notion In The Traditional Viewmentioning

confidence: 94%

(Non-)Sense in note-taking for consecutive interpreting

Albl-Mikasa

2008

INTP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper applies cognitive theories of text and language processing, and in particular relevance theory, to the analysis of notes in consecutive interpreting. In contrast to the pre-cognitive view, in which note-taking is seen mainly as a memory-supporting technique, the process of note-taking is described as the reception and production of a notation text. Adding the relevance-theoretical constructs of explicature and implicature to the general account of cognitive text processing as coherence building and the construction of a mental representation at local and global levels, this approach allows for the comparison of source, notation and target texts with respect to the underlying propositional representation, and shows how the sense of highly fragmentary notation texts is recovered in consecutive interpreting. The paper is based on an empirical study involving consecutive interpretations (English-German) by five trainee interpreters. The analysis shows that the interpreters operate relatively closely along micropropositional lines when processing the source, notation and target texts, with the explicature regularly having the same propositional form as the corresponding proposition in the source text.A key feature of all forms of interpreting is that the interpreters try to understand the source text's sense by processing its conceptual content rather than the words as such. In consecutive interpreting, this raises the question as to how the information extracted in the process is transmitted via the interim phase of note-taking to target text production. In the pre-cognitive view, under which note-taking is some kind of memory-supporting technique, the answers remain inconclusive due to an unclear conception of the underlying relationship between sense and its linguistic representation. This is where the cognitive theory of text and language processing comes in. From this perspective, the process of understanding is described as

show abstract

Section: Sense As a Central Notion In The Traditional Viewmentioning

confidence: 94%

(Non-)Sense in note-taking for consecutive interpreting

Albl-Mikasa

2008

INTP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The conference interpreting definition of anticipation does not reflect the psychophysiologists' view of anticipation as a particular mental activity, neither does it correspond to the cognitive view that many interpreting researchers themselves hold of anticipation (Le Ny, 1978;Lederer, 1981;Gile, 1985;Kalina, 1992;Setton, 1998 and1999;VanBesien, 1999and De Bot, 2000. Le Ny (1978: 295), for instance, suggests the idea that anticipation is an ongoing activity which runs parallel to the perception of the incoming speech sounds and their semantic analysis.…”

Section: Towards a Cognitive Definition Of Anticipationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…From a psycholinguistic point of view, Chernov saw anticipatíon as the result of message redundancy (1992 and 1994). Later, Setton (1998Setton ( : 174, 1999) discussed instances of anticipatíon within his coherent model covering all actívity in SI, i.e. a cognitive-pragmatic approach conflating both the top-down and the bottom-up approaches in studies on conference interpreting and relevance theory.…”

Section: A Brief Surveymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The last strategy, however, seems to be inspired mainly by the kind of data that are commonly used for discussions of anticipation: most of them are from interpreüng from Germán into French or EngUsh, i.e. from an SOV-into an SVO-íanguage (Wilss, 1978;Le Ny, 1978;Lederer, 1981;Gile, 1985;Van Dam, 1989;Setton, 1999and Van Besien, 1999and 2001. There is, however, no a priori reason why anücipaüon could not be adopted when interpreüng from a verb-first or head-noun-first structure 5 into an SOV-language.…”

Section: Anticipation Goalsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Anticipation in conference interpreting: a cognitive process

Vandepitte¹

2001

RAEI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In conference interpretation research, anticipation is usually seen as the oral production of a particular part of a message in special circumstances. In psychophysiological research, however, anticipation is a mental process. The article presents a revised defmition of anticipation that takes account of both approaches. It does so in terms of delibérate enrichment, a conceptual tool from relevance theory. Anticipation in conference interpreting is found to yield a high number of strengthenings rather than deletions, additions or contextual implications. This is a cognitive aspect which is typical of interpreting and distinguishes it from other communication events.

show abstract

“…Simultaneous interpretation: a cognitive-pragmatic analysis (Setton, 1999) 4.99E−04 New demands on interpreting and the learning curve in interpreter training (Setton, 2006) 5.67E−05 Meaning assembly in simultaneous interpreting (Setton, 1998) 5.45E−05 Experiments in the application of discourse studies to interpreter training (Setton, 1994) 5.45E−05 The Geneva (ETI) perceptive on interpretation research (Setton & Moser-Mercer, 2000) 4.27E−05 Table 7 The most influential works of Barbara Moser-Mercer.…”

Section: Cited Work Pagerank Scoresmentioning

confidence: 99%

A survey of Chinese interpreting studies: who influences who …and why?

Pekelis

2015

PeerJ Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper describes how scholars in Chinese Interpreting Studies (CIS) interact with each other and form discrete circles of influence. It also discusses what it means to be an influential scholar in the community, and the relationship between an author's choice of research topic and his academic influence. The study examines an all-but-exhaustive collection of 59,303 citations from 1,289 MA theses, 32 doctoral dissertations and 2,909 research papers, combining traditional citation analysis with the newer Social Network Analysis to paint a panorama of CIS. It concludes that the community cannot be broadly divided into Liberal Arts and Empirical Science camps; rather, it comprises several distinct communities with various defining features. The analysis also reveals that the top Western influencers have an array of academic backgrounds and research interests across many different disciplines, whereas their Chinese counterparts are predominantly focused on Interpreting Studies. Last but not least, there is found to be a positive correlation between choosing non-mainstream research topics and having a high level of academic influence in the community.

show abstract

Meaning assembly in simultaneous interpretation

Cited by 69 publications

References 0 publications

(Non-)Sense in note-taking for consecutive interpreting

(Non-)Sense in note-taking for consecutive interpreting

Anticipation in conference interpreting: a cognitive process

A survey of Chinese interpreting studies: who influences who …and why?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About