1. ISMAIL QEMALI UNIVERSITY
COLLEGE OF HUMAN SCIENCES
FOREIGN LANGUAGES DEPARTMENT
MASTER OF SCIENCES IN TRANSLATION AND INTERPRETATION
RESEARCH WORK
MTI 536 RESEARCH METHODS IN T&I
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LAG TIME AND RETENTION IN SIMULTANEOUS
INTERPRETING
by
DENIS LLAMBRO
A research work submitted
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
Fall Term
February 2014
Course Instructor
ERIDA PRIFTI, MA
Lecturer in Translation and Interpretation Studies

2. 1. Introduction
1. a . Background
The field of interpreting is represented as a very complex tax. During the way for succeeding in
transmitting accurate information the interpreter comes across different problems. In order to
produce information of a very good quality it is of great importance to deal with these aspects and
problems and find any solutions to them. In the process of simultaneous interpreting, the issue
which is worthy dealing with is the relationship between the speaker’s utterance and the retention
of the interpreter. While observing some of the videos in which interpreters deal with different kind
of materials it emerged that the lag time, or the ear-voice span is different in different interpreters.
In some of them the lag time is zero, in some others it goes two or even three seconds. Furthermore,
the retention of the interpreter plays a decisive role in the process of transmitting accurate
information. As a result, the smaller the lag time between the speaker and the interpreter, the
greater the number of words transmitted. Of great importance in this research work is to find
whether there is a correlation between the lag time and the retention of the interpreter, and if this
correlation exist at what degree it influences the interpreter’s memory and information production.
1. b. Significance of the study
This topic is of great importance to be studied due to the fact that it focuses closely on the
correlation between lag time and the interpreter’s retention trying to find out how does this
correlation affects both these variables. Based on the close observation of the videos of ten
interpreters in the simultaneous interpreting it is found out that the lag time changes from
interpreter to interpreter, and this change it is transmitted to the quality of information processed.
In order to find the relationship between these two variables, i.e. the relationship between variable
A (lag time) and variable B (retention) it is considered as necessary an accurate measurement of
the number of milliseconds of lag time relating it to the retention of the interpreter. Furthermore, in
order to conclude with an accurate hypothesis in this research work it is of great importance to find
how does lag time affects retention. In addition to this investigation it is observed that the larger
the lag time, the smaller the retention of the interpreter. As a result, the observer comes with the

3. hypothesis that the variable B (retention) depends on variable A (lag time). In this research work
based on videos in simultaneous interpreting the scope is to come with the conclusion that lag time
affects negatively retention. The results coming out of this research work will give their
contribution to enlarge the field of interpreting, especially in these aspects, also, will give ideas for
further research based on lag time and retention.
1. c. Research questions
Some of the questions raised in this research work are as following:
Do lag time and retention correlate with each other? How do they affect each other? What does it
mean an invisible lag time and how does it affect the quality of interpreting? Is there any fixed lag
time which enables the interpreter to produce quality interpreting? Which is the relation between
number of words produced by the interpreter and the lag time per second? How does this research
work contribute to the field of interpreting?
1.d. The conditions related to this study are as following:
1. Variable A changes variable B in a unidirectional causal relationship.
2. Variable A exercises a direct influence on variable B.
3. The effect of variable A to variable B should be noticed in each of the cases taken.
4. The variable A is predictable for variable B.
2. Definition of terminology
In this paper it is planned to cover a detailed explanation regarding Lag time and Retention in the
field of simultaneous interpreting.
Lag time: According to Maximilian dictionary, lag time is the amount of time between two related
events.
Retention: According to Maximilian dictionary, retention is the ability to remember ideas or facts.

4. Variable: According to Oxford Dictionary, variable is an element, feature, or factor that is liable to
vary or change: there are too many variables involved to make any meaningful predictions
3. Literature review
For a better understanding of this research work, and its concepts it is of great importance to take
into the consideration the literature concerned with lag time and retention due to the fact that the
results of this research work should be in accordance with the previous studies and investigations.
Interpreting activity is strictly connected with time constraint (Gumul and Lyda, 2007). Also, time
lag is represented as an inseparable aspect of simultaneous interpreting performance. The durance
of time lag depends on particular variables, such as language combination, discourse type, speech
delivery rate, information density, redundancy or word order (Yagi 2000).As a result, according to
Christoffels and de Groot work in “Listenin while talking: The retention of prose under articulatory
suppression in relation to simultaneous interpreting” the simultaneous interpreting is represented as
a cognitive task where many processes happen in the same time. The interpreter has to
comprehend the source text, store it in the short memory and reproduce the text in the target
language (2005). In addition, this gathering of information, its storage and its reproduction is a very
complex process and occur in a short period of time. According to Christoffels and de Groot there is
a gap between the moment of information acquisition and its transformation in target language
called lag time that happens in an average of two seconds (2004). Furthermore, according to Cokley
in the case when both, source and target languages have similar structures, it happens that the lag
time may be shorter and as a result even the information processed is more accurate, but, in the
case when there is an obvious distinction between two structures, the lag time becomes longer
which causes a shorter retention (1986). During the investigation in previous studies based on lag
time and retention it observed that different scholars have different approaches concerning the
average of lag time. According to Paneth investigation the lag time varies between 2 and 4 seconds
declaring that the interpreter expresses not what he hears, but what he has heard (1957/2012). In
advance, according to Goldman-Eisler the lag time units have a syntactic nature, which means that
these units are compound of a total predicative expression (noun phrase + verb phrase). According
to Ono T., et al. in the research based on the measurement of lag time in simultaneous interpreting
between Japanese to English and vice versa, the delay is affected by the differences of the respective
languages which take part in the process of interpreting. In addition, in interpreting from German

5. to English, we must take into the consideration the fact that the verb in German is placed at the end
of the sentence. It means that the interpreter should wait until the speaker finishes the sentence
before delivering the target text. As a result, the lag time increases, and the retention shortens.
4.Methodology:
In order to realize an accurate study and come out with reliable results, there is of great importance
the use of research methods. In addition, to make the topic clear, and to better understand
especially the two variables (lag time and retention) there has been made adequate research
regarding the works of different authors that have contributed in the field of interpreting. Taking
into consideration the fact that this topic was discussed by a considerable number of authors, then,
there was made a research regarding the experiments and observations conducting by these
authors, concerning firstly, lag time and then retention. By the previous studies there was seen that
lag time was an important factor in the process of simultaneous interpreting. Also, the information
regarding retention showed that it was different from interpreter to interpreter, and changed even
from language to language as well.
Having gathered enough information for both, lag time and retention, there was the moment to
arrange this information and see how both these variables correlate with each other, and which
affects the other, because these results would be important in supporting the previous hypothesis
that the variable B (retention) depends on variable A (lag time).
After dealing with theoretical work, the last step of this observation which will prove or disapprove
the hypothesis raised, is the practical one.
As a result, this observation will be based on videos recorded from students of master of sciences in
interpreting. In advance, there will be made a careful examination of each video, measuring in
milliseconds the lag time between the speaker and the interpreter. Taking into consideration each
video and the results taken from them there will be seen how retention is affected by lag time.

6. 5. Practical Part
Video
Link
Modality
Duration
1
https://www.youtube.com/wa
tch?v=5krijMhnGrM
SI ENG>ALB
7:42
Nr of Pauses
29
Lag time per second
0.5,0.5,2,1.5,1,1.5,1.5,2.5,3,12.5,2,1.5,
3,2 ,3,1,2.5,2,3.5,2,1.5,2,3,1.5
,2,1,3,0.5,1.5,
2
https://www.youtube.com/wa
SI ENG>ALB
7:32
34
0.5,1,2,1.5,1,2.5,1,2,2.5,3,2,3,1,3.5,2,2.
5,2,1,2.5,2,1.5,3.5,2,1.5,2,1, 2.5, 1.5,2,
tch?v=MaednQSyub8
3, 3.5, 2.5, 2,1.5,
3
SI ENG>ALB
7:22
31
0.5, 2.5, 2.5, 2, 1.5, 0.5, 2.5, 1.5, 2.5, 2,
http://www.youtube.com/wat
3.5, 2.5, 1.5, 2, 3, 2.5, 1, 2, 1.5.
ch?v=llhVTzrD9sA
4
https://www.youtube.com/wa
tch?v=8jaEODE3dMw
0.5, 0.5, 1,1, 1.5, 1, 0.5, 2, 1,2, 0.5, 2, 3,
SI ENG>ALB
7:34
35
1, 2, 0.5, 3, 0.5, 1, 0.5, 4.5, 2, 3, 2, 2.5,
1.5, 2.5, 2, 2, 0.5, 3, 2, 3.5, 3.5, 3.5, 3,
3.5, 2.5, 3, 1.5, 2, 3.5, 2.5, 2.5, 3, 2.5,
3,2
5
https://www.youtube.com/wa
tch?v=E5SGqKGPKwg
SI ENG>ALB
6:55
32
0.5, 0.5, 1, 1, 2, 1.5, 2, 0.5, 1, 0.5, 1.5, 2,
1, 1.5, 2, 1.5, 2, 1, 2.5, 3, 2.5, 2, 1, 2.5,
1.5, 2, 1,5, 2.5, 3, 2, 3, 1.5,
6
https://www.youtube.com/wa
tch?v=nBIk5aKLeTA
SI ENG>ALB
7:42
41
2, 1.5, 1, 3, 3.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 1, 3, 3.5, 3, 2,
3, 2.5, 3, 4.5, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 1.5, 2.5, 6, 2, 5,
6, 3, 3.5, 2, 3, 3, 3.5, 3, 3.5, 1.5, 1, 4,
2,1.5, 3, 4,
7
https://www.youtube.com/wa
tch?v=6aAAgvInMUg
SI ENG>ALB
7:02
33
0.5, 1, 1.5, 0.5, 1, 2, 1, 0.5, 1, 1, 2, 1.5,
1, 1.5, 0.5, 1.5, 1, 2.5, 1, 1.5, 1.5, 2, 1,5,
2.5, 1, 2, 1.5, 1, 0.5, 2, 1.5, 3, 2, 1.5,
8
https://www.youtube.com/wa
SI ENG>ALB
7:31
31
0.5, 1, 2, 1.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2, 1.5, 3, 2, 2,
2.5, 0.5, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 1.5, 3, 2, 1.5, 2, 2, 3,
tch?v=AeD07LGyYn0
2.5, 3, 2, 1.5, 0.5, 1.5, 2, 1
9
https://www.youtube.com/wa
tch?v=Y1IE73mOa6o
SI ENG>ALB
7:56
32
1, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 1.5, 2, 1.5, 2, 2, 1, 1.5,
2.5, 2.5, 3, 1.5, 4, 2.5, 2.5, 4, 2, 4.5, 3,
1.5, 3, 2, 3, 3.5, 4, 3.5, 2, 2.5
10
https://www.youtube.com/wa
tch?v=0jJodyZt-wQ
SI ENG>ALB
7:28
33
1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 2.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 1.5, 1.5, 2,
3, 3.5, 3, 2.5, 2.5, 4, 2.5, 2, 4, 2.5, 5,2, 3,
3.5, 3.5, 3.5, 4, 3.5, 4, 3.5, 3, 3.5,

7. Video
Approximate Lag
Importance of detail lost
time per sec
in the whole speech
Impact on memory:
Level of impact on
performance
1
1.93
Significant
Minimal
Low
2
2.01
Significant
Minimal
Low
3
1.85
Significant
Minimal
Low
4
2.31
Critical
Considerable
High
5
1.64
Irrelevant
Inconsiderable
Irrelevant
6
2.76
Critical
Considerable
High
7
1.43
Irrelevant
Inconsiderable
Irrelevant
8
1.77
Irrelevant
Inconsiderable
Irrelevant
9
2.32
Critical
Considerable
High
10
2.92
Critical
Considerable
High
Average
2.08
Average lag time effect on retention
Lag time
Impact on retention Information lost
Interpreting performance
1.43-1.77
Insignificant
Irrelevant
Excellent
1.85-2.01
Minimal
Significant
Good
2.31-2.92
Critical
Essential
Unsatisfying

8. 6. Results:
I.
By observing the first video, it was noticed that the interpreter has made short pauses, (0.53 seconds), with an average lag time of (1.93), having a positive impact on retention. Due to
the relevant lag time (1.93), the interpreter has omitted significant information of the
speech, resulting in a quiet good performance.
II. By observing the second video, it was noticed that the interpreter has made short pauses,
(0.5-3.5 seconds), with an average lag time of (2.01) having a positive impact on retention.
Due to the relevant lag time (2.01), the interpreter has omitted significant information on
the speech, resulting in a quiet good performance.
III. By observing the third video, it was noticed that the interpreter has made short pauses,
(0.5-3.5 seconds), with an average lag time of (1.85) having a positive impact on Retention.
Nevertheless, the relevant lag time in this case, (1.85), has not resulted in a very good
interpreting, considering the fact that there is loss of significant details of the speech.
IV. By observing the fourth video, it was noticed that the interpreter has made long pauses,
(0.5-4.5 seconds), with an average lag time of (2.31) causing a negative impact on retention.
Due to the relevant lag time, (2.31), there is loss of essential information, resulting in a not
good enough interpreting.
V. By observing the fifth video, it was noticed that the interpreter has made short pauses, (0.53 seconds), with an average lag time of (1.64) having a positive impact on retention. Due to
the lag time, (1.64), being constant in remembering, the interpreter has omitted irrelevant
information on the speech, resulting in a satisfying interpreting.
VI. By observing the sixth video, it was noticed that the interpreter has made in most of cases
long pauses, (1-6 seconds), with an average lag time of (2.76) causing a negative impact on
performance. Due to the relevant lag time, (2.76), the interpreter has omitted critical
information on the speech, and has affected performance in interpreting, with an inaccuracy
in interpreting. Another aspect that should be taken into consideration is the fact that the
interpreter was involved emotionally in the interpreting task, which is an issue that does
not demonstrate professionalism.

9. VII. By observing the seventh video, it was noticed that the interpreter has made short pauses,
(0.5-2.5 seconds), with an average lag time of (1.43), having a positive impact on retention.
Due to the lag time, (1.43), the interpreter has omitted irrelevant information on the speech,
resulting in a satisfying interpreting.
VIII.
By observing the eighth video, it was noticed that the interpreter has made short
pauses, (0.5-3 seconds), with an average lag time of (1.77) having a positive impact on
retention. Due to the relevant lag time, (1.77) the interpreter has not omitted any relevant
information of the speech, resulting in a satisfying interpreting.
IX. By observing the ninth video, it was noticed that the interpreter has made long pauses, (0.54.5 seconds), with an average lag time of (2.32) causing a negative impact on the retention
and the performance as result of information that were lost. Due to the relevant lag time,
(2.32), the interpreter has omitted information which is critical to be interpreted for the
speech. the interpreter has omitted critical information on the speech.
X. By observing the tenth video, it was noticed that the interpreter has made long pauses (1-4
seconds), with an average lag time of (2.92) seconds, causing a negative impact on the
retention and the performance as result of information that were lost. Due to the relevant
lag time, (2.92), the interpreter has omitted information which is critical to be interpreted
for the speech. Another aspect that should be taken into consideration is the fact that the
interpreter was involved emotionally in the interpreting task, which is an issue that does
not demonstrate professionalism.

10. 7.Conclusion:
After dealing with materials of different sources concerning the topic, the researcher came with the
hypothesis that between lag time and retention exist a correlation. Different experiments and
observations done for the purpose of this topic come with the conclusion that lags time changes
from interpreter to interpreter, according even to the differences in language structures. Also, this
change is reflected to retention. As a result, it is reflected that the larger the lag time, the shorter the
retention, which means, less words transmitted by the interpreter.
In the practical part of this observation, from the results taken from the accurate measurement of
lag time and retention of videos in simultaneous interpreting there is proved that there is a
correlation between lag time and retention. The results answer the hypothesis that the variable B
(retention), depends on variable A (lag time). Also, variable A (lag time) changes variable B
(retention) in a unidirectional causal relationship, and has a direct influence on variable B. The
conclusion of this research work is that lag time affects negatively retention. That is of great
importance to say that this research work contributes to the field of simultaneous interpreting,
giving additional information for further investigations.

11. 8. Limitations to the study:
In the observations of the videos in simultaneous interpreting which will be used in this research
work certain limitations will be taken into consideration:
a. This is not an experiment in real life but an observation from videos taken in you tube,
recorded by students of master of interpretation.
b. External factors should be taken into consideration: the setting is at home; internet
connection problems, noise.
c. The participants are not professional interpreters but students of master.
9. Annotated Bibliography
1.COKLEY D. 1986. The effect of lag time on interpreter errors.
http://doug.stringham.net/uvuasl/3350/3350_cokely_effectsoflagtime.pdf
This source provides efficient data about the effect that lag time has on the errors committed by the
interpreter during the act of interpreting.
2.CHRISTOFFELS K. I., de GROOT M. B. A. Handbook of Bilingualism: Psycholinguistic Approaches:
Simultaneous interpreting, A cognitive perspective.
http://books.google.al/books?hl=en&lr=&id=2fzBDptA5NMC&oi=fnd&pg=PA454&dq=lag+time+in
+simultaneous+interpreting&ots=Pn6tCfXJlk&sig=4c3cOFDMMdGTI96f7X8I8L3Bmg&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=lag%20time%20in%20simultaneous%20interpreting&f=false
This source provides necessary data about the lag time and retention correlation in simultaneous
interpreting process.
3. Goldman-Eisler, F. (1972) Segmentation of Input in Simultaneous Translation, in Pöchhacker
and Shlesinger (eds) 2002: 69-76.Cited in Gao W. (2011) Coherence in simultaneous interpreting an idealized cognitive model perspective.
http://www.ros.hw.ac.uk/bitstream/10399/2504/1/GaoW_1111_sml.pdf

12. 4. Paneth, E. (1957/2002) An investigation into conference interpreting. In Pöchhacker and
Shlesinger (eds) 31-40. Cited in Gao W. (2011) Coherence in simultaneous interpreting - an
idealized cognitive model perspective.
http://www.ros.hw.ac.uk/bitstream/10399/2504/1/GaoW_1111_sml.pdf
5.Ono T., Tohyama H., Matsubara Sh. Construction and Analysis of Word-level Time-aligned.
Simultaneous Interpretation Corpus.
http://www.lrec-conf.org/proceedings/lrec2008/pdf/860_paper.pdf
6. Gumul E., Lyda A. (2007). The time constraint in conference interpreting: Simultaneous vs.
Consecutive.
http://jaits.sakura.ne.jp/Articles/%93%AF%8E%9E%82%C6%92%80%8E%9F%82%CC%8E%9
E%8A%D4.pdf
7. Y a g i, S. M. 2000. ‘‘Studying Style in Simultaneous Interpretation’’. Meta 45(3), 520–547.
http://www.erudit.org/revue/meta/2000/v45/n3/004626ar.pdf
8. Lag time 2013. In Maximilian Dictionary.com. Retrieved November 18, 2013.
http://www.macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/british/time-lag
9. Retention 2013. In Maximilian Dictionary.com. Retrieved November 18, 2013.
http://www.macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/british/retention
10. Variable 2013. In Oxford Dictionary.com Retrieved November 18,2013.
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/variable?q=variable
11.Bani A. En-Sq, Simultaneous Interpreting. July, 2013.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5krijMhnGrM
12. Bita, D. En-Sq, Simultaneous Interpreting. July, 2013
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MaednQSyub8
13.Tenaj, A. En-Sq, Simultaneous Interpreting. July, 2013.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llhVTzrD9sA
14.Shehaj, D. En-Sq, Simultaneous Interpreting. July, 2013.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8jaEODE3dMw
15.Llambro, D. Exam En-Sq, Simultaneous Interpreting. July, 2013.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E5SGqKGPKwg
16.Hoxha, F. Exam En-Sq, Simultaneous Interpreting. July, 2013
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xNIwTfHDICQ

13. 17. Sadedini, XH. Exam En-Sq, Simultaneous Interpreting. July, 2013
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nBIk5aKLeTA
18. Alushi, A. Exam En-Sq, Simultaneous Interpreting. July, 2013
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6aAAgvInMUg
19. Peco, E. Exam En-Sq, Simultaneous Interpreting. July, 2013
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AeD07LGyYn020.B
Beqo, M. Exam En-Sq, Simultaneous Interpreting. July, 2013
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y1IE73mOa6o