Ear–voice span in simultaneous interpreting

Abstract Ear–voice span (EVS) has been recognised as reflecting the cognitive processes involved in simultaneous interpreting. This article reports on a study examining the influence on fluctuations in EVS of text-specific factors, interpreter-specific factors and individual variation. We used naturalistic data from the Polish Interpreting Corpus (PINC), a 20,000-token bidirectional Polish–English corpus of interpretations from the European Parliament. We fitted two linear mixed-effects models and analysed the models’ random variance structure. Our findings show that EVS is modulated by interpreting direction, speech delivery type, source and target text speech rate, interpreter experience, selected word types, the position of a sentence in a text and the position of a word in a sentence. Contrary to expectations, we found no effect of interpreter working memory on EVS. Likewise, EVS was not found to be shortened for numbers and proper names and was inconsistently modulated by gender. Finally, we also saw that individual variation was a source of EVS modulation.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Interpreting International Journal of Research and Practice in Interpreting
Published
2025-02-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.00116.jan
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Interpreting and Communication in Healthcare
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
5.63
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Ear–voice span in simultaneous interpreting

Agnieszka Chmiel, Przemysław Janikowski
2 citations
Interpreting International Journal of Research and Practice in Interpreting
Interpreting and Communication in Healthcare
5.63
article

Ear–voice span in simultaneous interpreting

Agnieszka Chmiel, Przemysław Janikowski
article en
2 citations

Abstract

Abstract Ear–voice span (EVS) has been recognised as reflecting the cognitive processes involved in simultaneous interpreting. This article reports on a study examining the influence on fluctuations in EVS of text-specific factors, interpreter-specific factors and individual variation. We used naturalistic data from the Polish Interpreting Corpus (PINC), a 20,000-token bidirectional Polish–English corpus of interpretations from the European Parliament. We fitted two linear mixed-effects models and analysed the models’ random variance structure. Our findings show that EVS is modulated by interpreting direction, speech delivery type, source and target text speech rate, interpreter experience, selected word types, the position of a sentence in a text and the position of a word in a sentence. Contrary to expectations, we found no effect of interpreter working memory on EVS. Likewise, EVS was not found to be shortened for numbers and proper names and was inconsistently modulated by gender. Finally, we also saw that individual variation was a source of EVS modulation.

Interpreting International Journal of Research and Practice in InterpretingVol. 27(1)
Ghent University Hospital (BE), Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań (PL), Zhejiang Gongshang University (CN), University of Silesia in Katowice (PL)
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Interpreting and Communication in Healthcare
5.63
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.