A Cognitive Psycholinguistic Analysis of Formulation Errors in Simultaneous Interpretation

Document Type : Academic research papers

Authors

1 The Faculty of Women for Arts, Science and Education- Ain Shams University - Egypt

2 Associate Professor of Linguistics Faculty of Women Ain Shams University, Egypt

3 Faculty of Education Ain Shams University, Egypt

Abstract

This study is an interdisciplinary investigation of the output produced by Egyptian interpreters and trainees simultaneously interpreting from Arabic into English four inaugural speeches; namely, President El-Sisi (2014, June 3), President Adli (2013, July 4), President Morsi (2012, July 24) and President Mubarak (1981, November 9). A triangulated approach is integrated into the theoretical framework: the Effort model, as categorized by Gile (2009), the Speech Production Model, as proposed by Levelt (1999) along with Error Analysis Taxonomies, as classified by Dulay et al. (1982), James (1998), and Ellis (2008). The research aims at demonstrating how speech production stages (i.e., conceptualization, formulation, articulation and self-monitoring) along with the cognitive processing capacity requirements (i.e., Listening and Analysis, Memory, Production, Coordination Effort) account for locating errors in the Target output, and accordingly determine the most triggering linguistic level (e.g., lexical-semantic, syntactic, morphological and phonological) for Egyptian interpreters. To achieve this objective, errors are collected and descriptively analyzed. The study hypothesizes that experienced interpreters, due to their greater expertise, have better task performance resulting in fewer linguistic errors. However, the analysis conducted demonstrated a contrasting outcome. Despite the interpreters’ experience, the trainees demonstrated a lower overall frequency of linguistic errors. Notably, the lexical-semantic formulation has proven to be causing the most challenging cognitive load. Results confirmed that errors are attributed to the processing capacity and saturation level. Therefore, the interpreter’s maximum cognitive capacity must be equal to or exceed the total processing requirement of the task; otherwise, problems are likely to be triggered.

Keywords

Main Subjects