Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

How interpreting training may enhance semantic integration in general language processing (instead of language processing during interpreting) was not clear, and its neural correlates remained unexplored. Two groups of university students with different amounts of interpreting training experience (more-IE and less-IE) performed a second language (L2) reading task, in which the target sentence ended with three types of lateralized words: expected words, words of related semantic violation (related violation), and words of unrelated semantic violation (unrelated violation). N400 responses elicited by the final words were used to index semantic integration. Two major findings suggested potential contributions of interpreting training to L2 semantic integration. First, the more-IE group exhibited smaller N400 amplitudes than the less-IE group for expected words, and no group differences were obtained for the two violations. Second, N400 amplitudes for related violations were generally smaller than those for unrelated violations in the right visual field, and this difference was more fully captured (more broadly distributed over the scalp) in the more-IE group than in the less-IE group. Therefore, smaller N400 amplitudes for expected words but not for violations, and broader scalp distribution of the differences between related and unrelated violations constitute the neural correlates for the potential contributions of interpreting training to general L2 semantic integration. The results also suggest possible connections between different types of language experience.

Keywords

Interpreting training interpreter advantage semantic integration second language processing N400

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Babcock

Vallesi

(2017). Are simultaneous interpreters expert bilinguals, unique bilinguals, or both? Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 20(2), 403–417.

Bajo

M. T.

Padilla

(2000). Comprehension processes in simultaneous interpreting. In Chesterman

Salvador

N. G. S.

Gambier

(Eds.), Translation in context (pp. 127–142). John Benjamins Publishing.

Bartłomiejczyk

(2006). Strategies of simultaneous interpreting and directionality. Interpreting, 8(2), 149–174.

Becker

Schubert

Strobach

Gallinat

Kühn

(2016). Simultaneous interpreters vs. professional multilingual controls: Group differences in cognitive control as well as brain structure and function. NeuroImage, 134, 250–260.

Cai

Dong

Zhao

Lin

(2015). Factors contributing to individual differences in the development of consecutive interpreting competence for beginner student interpreters. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 9(1), 104–120.

Daneman

Carpenter

P. A.

(1983). Individual differences in integrating information between and within sentences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 9(4), 561–584.

De Loye

Beaucousin

Bohec

A. L.

Blanchet

Kostova

. (2013). An event-related potential study of predictive and integrative semantic context processing in subjects with schizotypal traits. Psychophysiology, 50(11), 1109–1119.

Dong

(2018). Complex dynamic systems in students of interpreting training. Translation and interpreting studies. The Journal of the American Translation and Interpreting Studies Association, 13(2), 185–207.

Dong

(2020). Attentional control in interpreting: A model of language control and processing control. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 23(4), 716–728.

10.

Dong

Zhao

(2019). Acquisition of interpreting strategies by student interpreters. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 13(4), 408–425.

11.

Dong

Liu

(2016). Classes in translating and interpreting produce differential gains in switching and updating. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, Article 1297.

12.

Dong

Zhong

(2017). Interpreting experience enhances early attentional processing, conflict monitoring and interference suppression along the time course of processing. Neuropsychologia, 95, 193–203.

13.

Dong

Zhong

(2019). The intense bilingual experience of interpreting and its neurocognitive consequences. In Schwieter

J. W.

(Ed.), The handbook of the neuroscience of multilingualism (pp. 685–700). John Wiley.

14.

Federmeier

K. D.

Kutas

(1999a). Right words and left words: Electrophysiological evidence for hemispheric differences in meaning processing. Cognitive Brain Research, 8(3), 373–392.

15.

Federmeier

K. D.

Kutas

(1999b). A rose by any other name: Long-term memory structure and sentence processing. Journal of Memory and Language, 41(4), 469–495.

16.

Federmeier

K. D.

McLennan

D. B.

de Ochoa

Kutas

(2002). The impact of semantic memory organization and sentence context information on spoken language processing by younger and older adults: An ERP study. Psychophysiology, 39(2), 133–146.

17.

García

A. M.

Muñoz

Kogan

(2020). Taxing the bilingual mind: Effects of simultaneous interpreting experience on verbal and executive mechanisms. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 23(4), 729–739.

18.

Gile

(1997). Conference interpreting as a cognitive management problem. In Danks

J. H.

Shreve

G. M.

Fountain

S. B.

McBeath

M. K.

(Eds.), Cognitive processes in translation and interpreting (pp. 196–214). SAGE.

19.

Green

D. W.

Abutalebi

(2013). Language control in bilinguals: The adaptive control hypothesis. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 25(5), 515–530.

20.

Hagoort

Hald

Bastiaansen

Petersson

K. M.

(2004). Integration of word meaning and world knowledge in language comprehension. Science, 304(5669), 438–441.

21.

Hahne

(2001). What’s different in second-language processing? Evidence from event-related brain potentials. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 30(3), 251–266.

22.

Zhang

Tsai

Puls

(2014). Language history questionnaire (LHQ 2.0): A new dynamic web-based research tool. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 17(3), 673–680.

23.

Lozano-Argüelles

Sagarra

Casillas

J. V.

(2020). Slowly but surely: Interpreting facilitates L2 morphological anticipation based on suprasegmental and segmental information. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 23(4), 752–762.

24.

Martin

C. D.

García

Breton

Thierry

Costa

(2014). From literal meaning to veracity in two hundred milliseconds. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8, Article 40.

25.

Martin

C. D.

García

Breton

Thierry

Costa

(2016). World knowledge integration during second language comprehension. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 31(2), 206–216.

26.

Mellinger

C. D.

Hanson

T. A.

(2019). Meta-analyses of simultaneous interpreting and working memory. Interpreting, 21(2), 165–195.

27.

Newman

A. J.

Tremblay

Nichols

E. S.

Neville

H. J.

Ullman

M. T.

(2011). The influence of language proficiency on lexical semantic processing in native and late learners of English. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 24(5), 1205–1223.

28.

Nieuwland

Barr

Bartolozzi

Busch-Moreno

Donaldson

Ferguson

H. J.

. . . Ito

(2019). Dissociable effects of prediction and integration during language comprehension: Evidence from a large-scale study using brain potentials. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 375(1791), 20180522.

29.

Salisbury

D. F.

(2004). Semantic memory and verbal working memory correlates of N400 to subordinate homographs. Brain and Cognition, 55(2), 396–399.

30.

Signorelli

T. M.

Haarmann

H. J.

Obler

L. K.

(2012). Working memory in simultaneous interpreters: Effects of task and age. International Journal of Bilingualism, 16(2), 198–212.

31.

Strobach

Becker

Schubert

Kühn

(2015). Better dual-task processing in simultaneous interpreters. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, Article 1590.

32.

Syndicate

L. E.

(2001). Quick Placement Test 2 (pp. 1–15). Oxford University Press; University of Cambridge Local Examinations Syndicate.

33.

Wen

Dong

(2019). How does interpreting experience enhance working memory and short-term memory: A meta-analysis. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 31(8), 769–784.

34.

Woumans

Ceuleers

Van der Linden

Szmalec

Duyck

(2015). Verbal and nonverbal cognitive control in bilinguals and interpreters. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 41(5), 1579–1586.

35.

Yang

Zhang

(2020). How working memory capacity modulates the time course of semantic integration at sentence and discourse level. Neuropsychologia, 140, 107383.

36.

Yudes

Macizo

Bajo

(2011). The influence of expertise in simultaneous interpreting on non-verbal executive processes. Frontiers in Psychology, 2, Article 309.

37.

Yudes

Macizo

Morales

Bajo

M. T.

(2013). Comprehension and error monitoring in simultaneous interpreters. Applied Psycholinguistics, 34(5), 1039–1057.

38.

Zhao

Dong

(2020). The early presence and developmental trend of interpreter advantages in cognitive flexibility: Effects from task differences and L2 proficiency. Translation, Cognition & Behavior, 3(2), 241–262.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.02 MB

Neural correlates of contributions of interpreting training to second language semantic integration

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material