27.289, Review: Applied Ling; Cog Sci; Pragmatics; Translation: Liu, Pöchhacker (2014)

The LINGUIST List via LINGUIST linguist at listserv.linguistlist.org
Thu Jan 14 20:24:10 UTC 2016


LINGUIST List: Vol-27-289. Thu Jan 14 2016. ISSN: 1069 - 4875.

Subject: 27.289, Review: Applied Ling; Cog Sci; Pragmatics; Translation: Liu, Pöchhacker (2014)

Moderators: linguist at linguistlist.org (Damir Cavar, Malgorzata E. Cavar)
Reviews: reviews at linguistlist.org (Anthony Aristar, Helen Aristar-Dry, Sara Couture)
Homepage: http://linguistlist.org

*****************    LINGUIST List Support    *****************
                   25 years of LINGUIST List!
Please support the LL editors and operation with a donation at:
           http://funddrive.linguistlist.org/donate/

Editor for this issue: Sara  Couture <sara at linguistlist.org>
================================================================


Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2016 15:23:40
From: Diana Gorman Jamrozik [dgorman at colum.edu]
Subject: Aptitude for Interpreting

 
Discuss this message:
http://linguistlist.org/pubs/reviews/get-review.cfm?subid=36073217


Book announced at http://linguistlist.org/issues/25/25-4430.html

EDITOR: Franz  Pöchhacker
EDITOR: Minhua  Liu
TITLE: Aptitude for Interpreting
SERIES TITLE: Benjamins Current Topics 68
PUBLISHER: John Benjamins
YEAR: 2014

REVIEWER: Diana Gorman Jamrozik, Columbia College Chicago

Reviews Editor: Helen Aristar-Dry

SUMMARY

“Aptitude for Interpreting”, edited by Franz Pöchhacker and Minhua Liu, is
comprised of seven papers presented at the international symposium “Aptitude
for Interpreting: Towards Reliable Admission Testing” at Lessius University
College in 2008 and published as a Special Issue of “Interpreting” (13:1,
2011), and two papers from authors present at that symposium which were later
published in “Interpreting” (16:1, 2014). Interpreting requires a highly
complex skill set of both linguistic abilities and specific personality
traits, and there is a dearth of research that attempts to parse out the key
traits that, if found through aptitude testing, can predict successful
completion of an interpreting program. This matter is a particular concern as
programmatic failure is costly to students and universities. This volume
attempts to address these concerns by beginning with an historical review of
interpreting aptitude research, and then including eight empirical studies
that report on recent advances in aptitude test design and implementation.

Chapter 1: Aptitude testing over the years (Mariachiara Russo)

In the first chapter, Russo offers an overview of the literature on aptitude
testing for potential interpreters since the 1950’s, including studies on
signed language and spoken language interpreting. She states that interpreter
practitioners’ and educators’ perceptions of the qualities needed to succeed
as an interpreter have remained fairly consistent over the years, including
linguistic fluency, strong memory skills, and cultural understanding. Russo
reviews aptitude tests that have been used by interpreting programs to screen
applicants, and notes that many published studies have not correlated aptitude
test results with the ability to complete an interpreting program, and
therefore the ability of an aptitude test to predict potential success is
often still in question. Many tests also ignore non-linguistics traits of
successful interpreters like motivation, and others are subjective or require
large investments of time and resources. One minor issue with this chapter is
that a few short quotes are in French without English translation; however,
Russo’s overview sets the stage for the other eight chapters in the volume by
clearly describing the daunting task of attempting to test for interpreter
aptitude.

Chapter 2: Learning styles, motivation and cognitive flexibility in
interpreter training (Šárka Timarová and Heidi Salaets)

This chapter reports on a study of the non-linguistic traits of learning
styles, motivation and anxiety tolerance, and cognitive flexibility as they
relate to interpreting aptitude. Through the administration of the Inventory
of Learning Styles (ILS) which is a questionnaire on learning style
preferences, the Achievement Motivation Test (AMT) which is a self-report
survey on motivation and anxiety tolerance, and the Wisconsin Card Sorting
Test (WCST) which tests cognitive abilities like mental flexibility and
decision making skills, Timarová and Salaets looked at students who completed
a language program and who were accepted to a one year Master’s degree in
interpreting and translating, and students accepted to a post-Master’s degree
conference interpreting program, and compared these groups with a control
group of potential applicants to an interpreting program, i.e. students in
their final year of a three-year language Bachelor’s program at Lessius
University College. The aim of the study was to ascertain if there are common
traits that potential applicants possess, and to see if these tests could
serve as predictors to successfully completing a conference interpreting
program. Results show that the two groups of interpreting students scored
higher in cognitive flexibility on the WCST, and professed to marginally
higher motivation and a greater tolerance to anxiety on the self-reported AMT
than the control group. Of the fourteen students in the conference
interpreting program, eight passed; however there was not a statistical
significant difference between the passing and failing students’ results on
their initial aptitude tests. While Timarová and Salaets admit that further
research is needed, this well constructed study offers a welcome glimpse at
students at various stages of interpreter training.

Chapter 3: A story of attitudes and aptitudes? Investigating individual
difference variables within the context of interpreting (Alexandra Rosiers,
June Eyckmans and Daniel Bauwens)

Rosiers, Eyckmans and Bauwens’ research focuses on the individual difference
(ID) variables of linguistic self-confidence, motivation, and language anxiety
of thirty five students in their third year of the three year English language
Bachelor in Applied Linguistics program at Erasmus University College.  Twelve
of those tested self-selected to continue to an interpreting Master’s program,
and the other students chose a translation Master’s program. The authors’
goals were to ascertain if there are different personality traits that
distinguish interpretation students from translation students, and if so,
whether these trait differences would affect performance on a sight
translation exam.  To study the ID variables, two self-report questionnaires
were used: the Self-Perceived Communication Competence (SPCC) questionnaire,
and the Attitude/ Motivation Test Battery (AMTB). Students were then asked to
perform a sight translation between their A (native) language of Dutch and
their B (working non-native) language of English. Results show key personality
trait differences between the interpretation and translation students. 
Interpretation students self-report much higher oral linguistic skills on the
SPCC and very little language anxiety on the AMTB as compared to translation
students.  (Both groups reported similar language proficiency for other
linguistic skills like reading and writing, and motivation levels were similar
among the participants.) While marked differences in ID traits were found
between the two groups, no statistical differences were found in the students’
performances on the sight translation exam. Both translation and
interpretation students performed at similar levels, despite their ID
variables. The authors acknowledge that more research is needed, perhaps to
see if the ID variables can predict success in consecutive interpreting or
simultaneous interpreting tasks.  As it stands, Rosiers, Eyckmans and Bauwens
successfully show that there are clear self-reported ID differences between
interpretation and translation students.

Chapter 4: Cognitive and motivational contributors to aptitude: A study of
spoken and signed language interpreting students (Sherry Shaw)

In this chapter, Shaw builds on her previous research that compares aptitudes
and personality traits of students in spoken language (SP) programs and signed
language (SL) programs. Drawing twenty nine SP students and eighteen SL
students from Charles University (SP), Karl-Franzens-University (SP and SL),
Lessius University College (SP) and the University of Utrecht (SL), Shaw
investigated cognitive skills and motivation levels of potential interpreters.
An international team of scholars reviewed numerous testing instruments, and
concluded that the CNS Vital Signs (CNSVS) which tests neurocognitive skills
like verbal memory and visual memory through computerized activities, and the
Achievement Motivation Inventory (AMI) in which students self-report
motivation skills like confidence in success and mental flexibility would be
used for this study. (The AMI was used by Timarová and Salaets in this
volume.) Results show that the SP and SL students display similar results
across most of the tests used. Significant differences include that the SL
students have better visual memory, advanced students (both SL and SP) showed
a higher eagerness to learn, and all four groups (beginning SL and SP and
advanced SL and SP) had different results on flow (concentration). While not
statistically significant, SL students display slightly less perseverance and
desire for status. Shaw cautions against generalizing her work and advises
further study; however her on-going comparison of SP and SL students offers
interesting insights into the cognitive processes involved in interpreting in
different modalities.

Chapter 5: Evaluating emotional stability as a predictor of interpreter
competence and aptitude for interpreting (Karen Bontempo and Jemina Napier)

Bontempo and Napier follow up previous work as well in this study by looking
at the personality traits of 110 credentialed interpreters of Australian Sign
Language (Auslan) in an effort to ascertain predictive qualities of successful
interpreters.  The interpreters completed a ten page twenty two question
survey that collected demographic information and then surveyed the
personality traits of goal orientation through a goal orientation scale
developed by Button et. al. (1996), self-efficacy measured by the New General
Self-Efficacy Scale, and negative affectivity through the Positive and
Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS). A low score on the PANAS equals a high
tolerance for stressful situations.  These three factors were compared to the
interpreters’ self-report on their perceived interpreting competence. Results
show that only a low negative affectivity correlated with a high self-reported
competence; the other two factors did not appear to be predictors of perceived
skill. Bontempo and Napier’s results are based on an impressive number of
respondents (110/257 credentialed Auslan interpreters); however the authors
caution that because there are still so many questions related to the
relationship of personality traits and successfully becoming an interpreter,
“at this stage… it may be unwise to implement formal personality testing in
program admission screening” (p. 102). 

Chapter 6: Domain-general cognitive abilities and simultaneous interpreting
skill (Brooke N. Macnamara, Adam B. Moore, Judy A Kegl and Andrew R. A.
Conway)

Macnamara et. al. report on a study which finds correlations between multiple
cognitive abilities and personality traits to interpreter skill level.  Prior
to testing, twenty-nine practicing interpreters were rated for ASL/English
interpreting skill level, and fifteen were classified as highly skilled, while
fourteen were classified as less skilled.  The interpreters were then tested
for cognitive abilities such as memory, psychomotor speed and mental
flexibility through the following performance measures: the Raven’s Advanced
Progressive Matrices, the Symmetry Span, Letter Comparison, Pattern
Comparison, Connections Test A, Connections Test B, and the Wisconsin Card
Sorting Test (WCST), and were tested for personality traits such as risk
tolerance and reward sensitivity by use of the BAS, the BIS and the Need for
Cognition Scale. (The WCST was used by Timarová and Salaets in this volume.)
Macnamara et. al. analyzed the individual test results, however the authors
were especially focused on seeing which combinations of abilities can predict
skill level in interpreting. They found that when looking at interpreters’
mental flexibility, processing speed, risk tolerance, the ability to quickly
switch tasks, and to a lesser extent psychomotor speed together, “the current
study was able to correctly classify 76.9% of the highly skilled interpreters
and 90.69% of the less skilled interpreters” (p. 123). Strong results such as
these offer exciting insights into the mental processes involved in
interpreting. Further research by use of these measurements is needed with
beginning level interpreting students to see if these traits can predict
successful program completion and skill accreditation. 

Chapter 7: Testing aptitude for interpreting: The predictive value of oral
paraphrasing, with synonyms and coherence as assessment parameters
(Mariachiara Russo)

Russo follows up on previous research (Russo and Pippa, 2004) which found that
students’ use of synonyms and syntactic coherence in real time oral
paraphrasing were predictors of programmatic success. In this chapter, Russo
reports on a follow up study with a larger sample size. The author, along with
two other evaluators, rated the Italian to Italian real time oral paraphrasing
of sixty-four admitted students to the University of Bologna’s two-year
interpreting program for synonym use and syntactic coherence. During the
course of their two year program, these students had to complete six
interpreting exam sessions, and could resit for exams not passed. Russo
compared the evaluations of the paraphrasing entrance exam to the average
results of each of the six exam sessions and to the number of times it took
students to pass the exams. While this follow up study did not corroborate
Russo and Pippa’s earlier findings regarding syntactic coherence, it did find
that students’ ability to quickly produce synonyms within the context of
paraphrasing did correlate to successful program completion. The use of
synonyms on entrance exams was a strong predictor especially of whether
students would be able to pass exams on the first try (71% of “fast” students)
or need to resit (80% of “slow” students). Russo cautions that other
researchers question whether intra-lingual paraphrasing is a comparable skill
to interpreting. However, these results are encouraging, as there are economic
consequences to students not passing exams their first time.

Chapter 8: Assessing aptitude for interpreting: The SynCloze test (Franz
Pöchhacker)

Pöchhacker reports on a multiyear study of admitted students in the three year
language Bachelor’s program at the University of Vienna. The SynCloze test, an
exam that was given during week three of an introductory course in
interpretation to 127 students in four separate cohort years, measures
students’ ability to quickly fill in the blanks of a German text with
twenty-four end of sentence gaps. The quantity and quality of answers were
tabulated along with speed of response, which was added as a bonus to the base
quantity/ quality score. A control group of eleven Master’s level interpreting
students also took the SynCloze test. As was predicted, the advanced students
scored significantly higher than the BA students, with more completions of
higher quality and faster response rates. The SynCloze test was also able to
accurately distinguish students for whom German is their A (native) or B
(non-native working) language. Pöchhacker then compared the SynCloze test
results with the students’ grades on the interpreting course’s final short
German to German consecutive interpretation.  One of the four test groups’
results were deemed skewed due to the difficulty of the source material that
term. The SynCloze test predicted success in a statistically significant way
with the second group, but only moderately with the third and fourth test
groups. While the results were not as conclusive as hoped, Pöchhacker’s
attempt to develop a valid screening test that can be realistically
implemented with limited time and monetary resources is appreciated. The
author cautions that aptitude screening might not ever fully predict
completion rates in an interpreting program due to students’ extra-curricular
circumstances and that “aptitude for interpreting is a multidimensional
construct” (p. 160).

Chapter 9: Putting interpreting admissions exams to the test: the MA KD
Germersheim project (Catherine Chabasse and Stephane Kader)

In the final chapter of this volume, Chabasse and Kader report on the
effectiveness and ease of use of three different admissions exams tested on
twenty four students admitted to the Master’s program in conference
interpreting at the University of Mainz. In an attempt to streamline and
maximize the effectiveness of admissions processes, the researchers
administered the SynCloze test (described in the previous chapter of this
volume) in students’ A and B languages, Chabasse’s cognitive shadowing test in
their A language in which students answer a series of questions while
simultaneously listening to the next question, and Timarová’s personalized
cloze test in which students shadow/ paraphrase a text simultaneously. The
authors then tracked these students’ success on subsequent consecutive and
simultaneous interpreting exams in the program, with a particular interest in
the simultaneous interpreting results. Chabasse and Kader conclude that a
shortened version of the cognitive shadowing test would be the most effective
admissions exam for several reasons: unlike the other two exams, it can be
scored live, thus minimizing the evaluation time of potentially large numbers
of prospective students; its results were significant in terms of success on
both consecutive and simultaneous interpreting exams; and it is administered
in an interpreting booth yet the test does not require students to have any
previous training in interpretation skills to take it. The authors recommend
that any admissions test include an in-booth segment to simulate actual
conference interpreting conditions. This study’s detailed testing and
comparison of these three admissions exams should prove beneficial to
interpreter educators.

EVALUATION

The authors in this volume are to be commended for tackling the formidable
task of attempting to analyze which specific skills can be used for aptitude
tests to predict future success as an interpreter. There are economic and
ethical concerns to accepting students into interpreter programs who may not
succeed, which makes this research highly current and vital. While none of the
studies have definitive answers to these concerns (and while it may not be
possible to ever have definitive answers due to the intricacies of the
interpreting process and differences in human cognition and personalities),
each study in “Aptitude for Interpreting” moves the field of interpreters
education closer to finding effective ways to screen applicants. I believe
that interpreter educators will find these studies highly relevant to their
struggle to successfully screen students for potential interpreting skills, as
the researchers agree on key linguistic and cognitive skills involved in
interpreting.  Previous to these studies, there was a dearth of research on
common personality traits that successful interpreters possess. Seeing all of
the research presented in this volume as a whole, one common personality trait
noted in several of the studies (Timarová and Salaets, Bontempo and Napier,
Macnamara et. al., and, tangentially, Rosiers, Eyckmans and Bauwens) was that
an interpreter’s ability to handle stress seemed to be a “soft skill” found in
most interpreters who participated in the studies.

It is encouraging that so many of the studies followed up on previous
investigations, as there is a great need for research with larger sample sizes
and validity testing. As an interpreter educator in a signed language
interpreting program, I appreciated that most of the studies either included
signed languages directly or indirectly through their literature reviews.
Overall, I strongly recommend this thought provoking book to interpreter
educators.

REFERENCES

Button, Scott B., John E. Mathieu, and Dennis M. Zajac. 1996. Goal orientation
in organizational research: A conceptual and empirical foundation.
Organizational behavior and human decision processes 67(1), 26-48.

Russo, Mariachiara and Salvador Pippa. 2004. Aptitude to interpreting:
Preliminary results of a testing methodology based on paraphrase. Meta 49(2),
409-432.


ABOUT THE REVIEWER

Diana Gorman Jamrozik is Associate Professor of American Sign Language at
Columbia College Chicago, where she teaches upper level undergraduate
translation and interpretation courses. A nationally certified American Sign
Language (ASL) interpreter, she holds an MA (1998) in Interpretation from
Gallaudet University, and an MA (2013) in Linguistics from Northeastern
Illinois University. Diana’s research interests include translation processes,
turn-taking in ASL, and fingerspelled word recognition.





------------------------------------------------------------------------------

*****************    LINGUIST List Support    *****************
Please support the LL editors and operation with a donation at:
            http://funddrive.linguistlist.org/donate/
 


----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-27-289	
----------------------------------------------------------







More information about the LINGUIST mailing list