Abstract
Simultaneous interpretation is an impressive cognitive feat which necessitates the simultaneous use of two languages and therefore begs the question: how is language management accomplished during interpretation? One possibility is that both languages are maintained active and inhibitory control is reduced. To examine whether inhibitory control is reduced after experience with interpretation, students with varying experience were assessed on a three language switching paradigm. This paradigm provides an empirical measure of the inhibition applied to abandoned languages, the n-2 repetition cost. The groups showed different patterns of n-2 repetition costs across the three languages. These differences, however, were not connected to experience with interpretation. Instead, they may be due to other language characteristics. Specifically, the L2 n-2 repetition cost negatively correlated with self-rated oral L2 proficiency, suggesting that language proficiency may affect the use of inhibitory control. The differences seen in the L1 n-2 repetition cost, alternatively, may be due to the differing predominant interactional contexts of the groups. These results suggest that language control may be more complex than previously thought, with different mechanisms used for different languages. Further, these data represent the first use of the n-2 repetition cost as a measure to compare language control between groups.
Highlights
Response time (RT) data were analyzed using a mixed effects four-way ANOVA with trial type (n-2 repetition, n-2 non-repetition) and language of the current trial (L1, L2, L3) as within-subjects factors and training and recent simultaneous interpretation (SI) practice as betweensubjects factors
As the factors related to experience with SI did not unequivocally explain the variation of n-2 repetition costs, we explored the role of other language characteristics
The aim of the present study was to begin to understand how languages are controlled during SI by investigating the hypothesis that inhibitory control does not play a large role
Summary
In every situation they encounter, they have to select the appropriate language to use. This task is complicated by the fact that both languages are always available, and create interference (see Kroll et al, 2015 for a review). Bilinguals rarely use the unintended language (Gollan et al, 2011) and mixing of languages is usually done with intention. Understanding how bilinguals accomplish this feat of language control has been the focus of a multitude of studies over the past three decades and several theoretical accounts have emerged.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
