Publication | Closed Access
Effect of language proficiency and degree of formal training in simultaneous interpreting on working memory and interpreting performance: Evidence from Mandarin–English speakers
122
Citations
17
References
2011
Year
Second Language LearningMultilingualismLanguage DevelopmentLanguage EducationMemory SpanPsycholinguisticsInterpreting PerformanceBilingual Language DevelopmentLanguage LearningLanguage ProficiencyFormal TrainingSecond Language AcquisitionWorking MemoryBilingualismLanguage StudiesInterpretation Studies (Medical Interpreting)Health SciencesSecond Language EducationCognitive ScienceTask-based Language TeachingForeign Language LearningBilingual EducationSi PerformanceSecond Language StudiesMandarin–english SpeakersLanguage ComprehensionForeign Language Acquisition
The study investigated how second‑language proficiency and the duration of formal simultaneous‑interpreting training influence interpreting performance and working‑memory capacity in Mandarin–English student interpreters. Participants included 11 one‑year and 9 two‑year trained students and 16 untrained bilingual controls, whose SI performance and working‑memory span were measured and compared. Two‑year students performed better than one‑year students and controls, and higher L2 proficiency and working‑memory span correlated with superior SI performance; trained and untrained students both exceeded controls on reading span, indicating that language proficiency rather than working memory drives interpreting skill gains.
The influence of second language proficiency and length of formal training in interpretation on simultaneous interpreting (SI) performance and working memory was examined in Mandarin–English student interpreters with one year ( n = 11) or two years of formal training in interpretation ( n = 9) and in 16 Mandarin–English untrained bilingual controls. SI performance was significantly better in Year 2 than in Year 1 student interpreters, and in Year 1 interpreters relative to bilingual controls. SI performance was also better in advanced L2 users and in high-memory span individuals, whether trained or not in SI. Both Year 1 and Year 2 students outperformed bilingual controls in L1 and L2 reading span. Although Year 2 students tended to show higher working memory span than Year 1 students, the difference was not significant. Finally, working memory span was higher in individuals with greater L2 proficiency. It is concluded that differences in language proficiency may underlie observed differences in both interpreting performance and working memory and that language processing skills (rather than working memory) may be enhanced by formal training in interpreting.
| Year | Citations | |
|---|---|---|
Page 1
Page 1