Effects of raters’ nativeness and interpreting expertise on the assessment of speech fluency and comprehensibility of interpreter trainees

Abstract Speech fluency and comprehensibility have been examined more thoroughly in L1 and L2 research than in interpreting studies. We studied the fluency and comprehensibility of 25 interpreter trainees, whose spontaneous English speech samples were rated on 9-point scales by 6 American and 6 Persian judges, who were either interpreting experts or lays. Samples were rated once as originally recorded, and a month later with the silent pauses edited out. Native English judges proved less lenient (−.21) in their fluency ratings than the Persians; no nativeness effect was found for comprehensibility. Editing out pauses increased the fluency ratings (+.71) across all four rater groups but comprehensibility was not significantly affected (+.10). Both American and Persian experts rated the edited versions as more fluent (+1.80) than lays (+1.03). Experts may judge fluency more analytically, which will be helpful to them when providing feedback.