ABSTRACT
Numerous spoken language conference interpreters and interpreter educators strongly advocate simultaneous interpreting from interpreters’ non-native language (B) into their native language (A), whereas some spoken language interpreter practitioners and educators argue that A-to-B simultaneous interpreting is better in terms of quality. While some survey studies have found that most professional spoken language conference interpreters prefer working from B into A, several survey studies have revealed that the majority of signed language interpreters prefer working from a spoken language (A) into a signed language (B for the vast majority of signed language interpreters). Moreover, some experimental studies showed that professional spoken language interpreters’ B-to-A simultaneous interpretation was more accurate, grammatical, and idiomatic than their A-to-B simultaneous interpretation.
Empirical studies on directionality effects on signed language interpreting performance have yielded mixed results. However, a consistent finding is that highly experienced non-native signer interpreters’ spoken-to-signed language (A-to-B) simultaneous interpretation was as good as their signed-to-spoken language (B-to-A) simultaneous interpretation in terms of accuracy and delivery features. Some empirical evidence shows that spoken and signed language interpreters need to enhance their non-native language proficiency throughout their career. Unsurprisingly, empirical studies have revealed that spoken and signed language interpreters who have two native languages are not significantly affected by directionality.
