AWEJ for Translation & Literary Studies, Volume 8, Number 1. February 2024 Pp. 15-43

Exploring Theoretical Dimensions in Interpreting Studies: A Comprehensive Overview

Translation Department, College of Languages and Translation
Imam Mohammad Ibn Saud Islamic University (IMSIU)
Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
Email: danaalsuhaim1@gmail.com


This paper undertakes a rigorous examination of interpreting theories, seeking to enhance the theoretical understanding of interpreting studies. Recognizing diverse interpretations influenced by theorists’ experiences, education, and cultural backgrounds, the research aims to provide a comprehensive summary of existing literature. The study focuses on three main aspects: interpreting as a product, interpreting as a process, and the interpreter’s role. Through systematic classification, the paper minimizes potential confusion among scholars by organizing theories coherently. Examining interpreting as a product involves a detailed review of corpus-based and discourse-analysis studies, offering nuanced insights into their conceptual frameworks. For interpreting as a process, the paper explores prominent theories such as Relevance Theory, Think-aloud Protocol, and Interpretive theories, highlighting their contributions to the interpretive process. The outcome is a consolidated and organized overview of interpreting theories, serving as a valuable resource for scholars and researchers navigating the theoretical landscape of interpreting studies. By systematically categorizing and summarizing the literature, the study will advance our understanding of diverse perspectives and establish itself as an efficient reference for interpreting studies and research. Ultimately, the paper aims to facilitate future research endeavors by bringing together and reviewing interpreting theories dispersed across various sources, contributing to the ongoing advancement of the discipline.

Cite as:

Al-Suhaim, D. S. (2024). Exploring Theoretical Dimensions in Interpreting Studies: A Comprehensive Overview. Arab World English Journal for Translation & Literary Studies 8 (1): 15-43


Alexieva, B. (1997). A typology of interpreter-mediated events. The Translator, 3(2), 153–174.

Anderson, R., & Bruce W. (1976) Perspectives on the role of interpreter. In R. W. Brislin (ed.), Translation: Applications and Research (pp. 208-228). New York: Gardner Press.

Babayev, J. (2023). Cognitive aspects of simultaneous and consecutive interpretations. Interdisciplinary Science Studies, (1).‏

Baert, P. (2006). Role. In A. Harrington, B. I. Marshall & H.-P. Müller (eds.), Encyclopedia of Social Theory (pp. 524-526). London/New York: Routledge.

Baker, M. (1993). Corpus linguistics and translation studies: Implications and applications. In M. Baker, G. Francis & E. Tognini-Bonelli (eds.), Text and Technology: In Honour of John Sinclair (pp. 233-250). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Bale, R. (2013) Undergraduate consecutive interpreting and lexical knowledge: The role of spoken corpora. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 7(1), 27–50.

Barbizet, J. (1968). Les bases neuro-anatomiques de la genèse de la signification dans le langage oral. In R. Husson, J. Barbizet, J. Cauhépé, P. Debray, P. Laget & A. Sauvageot (eds.), Mécanismes Cérébraux du Langage Oral et Structure des Langues (pp.51-61). Paris: Masson.

Barsky, R. F. (1996). The interpreter as intercultural agent in Convention refugee hearings. The Translator, 2(1), 45–63.

Bartłomiejczyk, M., & Stachowiak-Szymczak, K. (2021). Modes of conference interpreting: Simultaneous and consecutive. In The Routledge Handbook of Conference Interpreting (pp. 19-33). Routledge.

Beeby, A., Rodríguez, I. P., & Sánchez-Gijón, P. (eds.). (2009). Corpus Use and Translating: Corpus Use for Learning to Translate and Learning Corpus Use to Translate. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Bendazzoli, C. (2018). Corpus-based Interpreting Studies: Past, Present and Future Developments of a (Wired) Cottage Industry. In M. Russo, C. Bendazzoli, & B.  Defrancq (eds.), Making Way in Corpus-based Interpreting Studies: New Frontiers in Translation Studies (pp. 1-19). Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-6199-8_1

Bernardini, S., & Castagnoli, S. (2008). Corpora for translator education and translation practice. In E. Yuste (ed.), Topics in Language Resources for Translation and Localisation (pp. 39-55). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Calhoun, C. (2002). Dictionary of the Social Sciences. New York: Oxford University Press.

Cencini, M. (2002). On the importance of an encoding standard for corpus-based interpreting studies: Extending the TEI scheme. CULT2K. Special Issue of InTRALinea. Available at www.intralinea. org/specials/article/1678

Chang, C., & Schallert, D. L. (2007). The impact of directionality on Chinese/English simultaneous interpreting. Interpreting, 9(2), 137–176.

Chen, S. (2022). The process and product of note-taking and consecutive interpreting: empirical data from professionals and students, Perspectives, 30(2), 258-274, DOI: 10.1080/0907676X.2021.1909626

Chesterman, A. (1993). From “is”to “ought”: Laws, norms and strategies in translation studies. Target, 5(1), 1–20.

Christoffels, I. K., & de Groot, A. M. B. (2005). Simultaneous interpreting: A cognitive perspective. In J. F. Kroll & A. M. B. de Groot (eds.), Handbook of Bilingualism: Psycholinguistic Approaches (pp. 454-479). New York: Oxford University Press.

Colonomos, B. (1997). Pedagogical model of the interpreting process. Retrieved from http://intrpr. info/library/colonomos-crp-pink. pdf.‏

De Groot, A. M. (2011). Language and cognition in bilinguals and multilinguals: An introduction. Psychology Press.‏

Diriker, E. (2004). De-/Re-Contextualizing Conference Interpreting: Interpreters in the Ivory Tower? Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1996). Protocol Analysis: Verbal Reports as Data. Cambridge, MA/London: MIT Press.

Garzone, G. (2002). Quality and norms in interpretation. In G. Garzone & M. Viezzi (eds.), Interpreting in the 21st Century: Challenges and Opportunities (pp. 107-119). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Gentile, A., Ozolins, U., & Vasilakakos, M. (1996). Liaison Interpreting: A Handbook. Melbourne: Melbourne University Press.

Gerver, D. (1975). A psychological approach to simultaneous interpreting. Meta, 20(2), 119–128.

Gerver, D. (1976). Empirical studies of simultaneous interpretation: A review and a model. In R. W. Brislin (ed.), Translation: Applications and Research (pp. 165-207). New York: Gardner Press.

Gerver, D. (1981). Frames for interpreting. In E. Foulke (ed.), Proceedings of the IXth World Congress of FIT (pp. 371-380). Warsaw: Interpress.

Gile, D. (1983). Des difficultés de langue en interprétation simultanée. Traduire, 117, 2–8.

Gile, D. (1985). Le modèle d’efforts et l’équilibre d’interprétation en interprétation simultanée. Meta, 30(1), 44–48.

Gile, D. (1995). Basic Concepts and Models for Interpreter and Translator Training. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Gile, D. (1997). Conference interpreting as a cognitive management problem. In J. E. Danks, G. M. Shreve, S. B. Fountain & M. K. McBeath (eds.), Cognitive Processes in Translation and Interpreting (pp. 196-214). Thousand Oaks/London/New Delhi: Sage.

Gile, D. (1999). Testing the Effort Models’ tightrope hypothesis in simultaneous interpreting – a contribution. Hermes: Journal of Linguistics, 23, 153–172.

Gile, D. (2009). Basic Concepts and Models for Interpreter and Translator Training (Rev. ed.). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Goffman, E. (1967). Interaction Ritual: Essays on Face-to-Face Behavior. New York: Pantheon.

Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J. L. Morgan (eds.), Syntax and Semantics (Vol. 3: Speech Acts, pp. 41-58). New York: Academic Press.

Grosjean, F. (1997). Processing mixed language: Issues, findings, and models. In A. M. B. de Groot & J. F. Kroll (eds.), Tutorials in Bilingualism: Psycholinguistic Perspectives (pp. 225-254). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Grosjean, F. (2001). The bilingual’s language modes. In J. L. Nicol (ed.), One Mind, Two Languages: Bilingual Language Processing (pp. 1-22). Oxford/Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Hale, S. (1997c). The treatment of register variation in court interpreting. The Translator, 3(1), 39–54.

Hale, S. (2004). The Discourse of Court Interpreting: Discourse Practices of the Law, the Witness and the Interpreter. Amsterdam: John Benjamins ‏

Hale, S. (2014). Interpreting culture. Dealing with cross-cultural issues in court interpreting. Perspectives22(3), 321-331.‏

Han, L., Lu, J., & Tian, Y. (2023). Momentary engagement in simultaneous versus consecutive interpreting: through the lens of translanguaging and CDST. Frontiers in psychology14, 1180379.‏

Hoffman, R. & Militello, G. (2009). Perspectives on Cognitive Task Analysis: Historical Origins and Modern Communities of Practice. New York: Psychology Press.

Inghilleri, M. (2003). Habitus, field and discourse: Interpreting as a socially situated activity. Target, 15(2), 243–268.

Ivanova, A. (1999). Discourse Processing during Simultaneous Interpreting: An Expertise Approach, (Unpublished Doctoral dissertation). University of Cambridge.

Ivanova, A. (2000). The use of retrospection in research on simultaneous interpretation. In S. Tirkkonen-Condit & R. Jääskeläinen (eds.), Tapping and Mapping the Processes of Translation and Interpretation (pp. 27-52). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Janssen, S., Van Vuuren, M., & De Jong, M. D. (2016). Informal mentoring at work: A review and suggestions for future research. International journal of management reviews, 18(4), 498-517.‏

Kajzer-Wietrzny, M. (2013). Idiosyncratic features of interpreting style. New Voices in Translation Studies9(1), 38-52.‏

Kaufert, J. & Koolage, W. (1984). Role conflict among ‘culture brokers’: The experience of native Canadian medical interpreters. Social Science & Medicine, 18(3), 283–286.

Knapp-Potthoff, A. & Knapp, K. (1986). Interweaving two discourses: The difficult task of the non-professional interpreter. In J. House & S. Blum-Kulka (eds.), Interlingual and Intercultural Communication (pp. 151-168). Tübingen: Gunter Narr.

Kohn, K. & Kalina, S. (1996). The strategic dimension of interpreting. Meta, 41(1), 118–138.

Ledere, M. (2003). The Interpretive Model (N.Larche, Trans.) (2nd Ed.). London & New York: Routledge.

Lederer, M. (1976/2014). Synecdoque et traduction. Etudes de Linguistique Appliquée 24, 13–41. Repr. in D. Seleskovitch & M. Lederer (2014) Interpréter pour Traduire (5th ed.) as “Implicite et explicite”. Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 86–9.

Lederer, M. (1978). Simultaneous interpretation – units of meaning and other features. In D. Gerver & H. W. Sinaiko (eds.) Language Interpretation and Communication (pp. 323-332). New York/ London: Plenum Press.

Lederer, M. (1981). La Traduction Simultanée – Expérience et Théorie [Simultaneous translation – experience and theory]. Paris: Minard Lettres Modernes.

Lederer, M. (2002). Correspondances et équivalences – faits de langue et faits de discours en traduction. In F. Israël (ed.), Identité, Altérité, Équivalence: La Traduction comme Relation [Identity, Otherness, Equivalence: Translation as a Relationship]. Paris: Minard lettres modernes, 17–34.

Levelt, W. & Florès d’Arcais, G. (1978). Studies in the Perception of Language. New York/Toronto: John Wiley and Sons.

Lin, Y., Lei, T., Lonergan, J., Chen, J., Xiao, X. & Zhang, Y. (1999). Interpreting for Tomorrow (Teachers’ Book) [Xinbian yingyu kouyi jiaocheng (jiaoshi yong shu)]. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.

Miller, G. (1956). The magical number seven plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63, 81–97.

Monacelli, C. (2009). Self-Preservation in Simultaneous Interpreting: Surviving the Role. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Morris, R. (2010). Images of the court interpreter: Professional identity, role definition and self-image. Translation and Interpreting Studies. The Journal of the American Translation and Interpreting Studies Association5(1), 20-40.‏

Napier, J. (2002). Sign Language Interpreting: Linguistic Coping Strategies. Coleford, UK: Douglas McLean.

Napier, J. (2004b). Interpreting omissions: A new perspective. Interpreting 6(2), 117–142.

Niemants, S. (2012). The transcription of interpreting data. Interpreting 14 (2), 165–191.

Paas, F. & Van Merriënboer, J.(1993). The efficiency of instructional conditions: An approach to combine mental effort and performance measures. Human Factors, 35 (4), 737–743.

Paradis, M. (1994). Toward a neurolinguistic theory of simultaneous interpreting: The framework. International Journal of Psycholinguistics, 10 (3), 319–335.

Paradis, M. (2004). A Neurolinguistic Theory of Bilingualism. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Petite, C. (2005). Evidence of repair mechanisms in simultaneous interpreting: A corpus-based analysis. Interpreting, 7(1), 27–49.

Piaget, J. (1967). La Psychologie de l’Intelligence [The Psychology of Intelligence]. Paris: Armand Colin.

Pöchhacker, F. (2005). From operation to action: Process-orientation in interpreting studies. Meta50(2), 682-695.‏

Pöchhacker, F. (2015). Evolution of interpreting research. The Routledge handbook of interpreting, 74-88.

Pöchhacker, F. (2022). Introducing Interpreting Studies (3rd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003186472

Pöchhacker, F. (Ed.). (2015). Routledge Encyclopedia of Interpreting Studies. London, United Kingdom: Routledge.

Pointurier-Pournin, S. (2014). L’interprétation en Langue des Signes Française: Contraintes, Tactiques, Efforts [Interpreting in French Sign Language: Constraints, Tactics, Efforts], (Unpublished Doctoral dissertation). Université Sorbonne Nouvelle – Paris 3.

Pöllabauer, S. (2004). Interpreting in asylum hearings: Issues of role, responsibility and power. Interpreting6(2), 143-180.‏

Power, M. (1986). A technique for measuring processing load during speech production. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 15(5), 371–382.

Roy, C. (1993). The problem with definitions, descriptions and the role metaphors of interpreters. Journal of Interpretation, 6, 127–154.

Roy, C. (1993/2002). The problem with definitions, descriptions and the role metaphors of interpreters. In F. Pöchhacker & M. Shlesinger (eds), The Interpreting Studies Reader (pp. 345-353). London/ New York: Routledge.

Rudvin, M., & Tomassini, E. (2011). Interpreting in the Community and Workplace. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.

Russo, M. & Sandrelli, A. (2006). Looking for lexical patterns in a trilingual corpus of source and interpreted speeches: Extended analysis of EPIC (European Parliament Interpreting Corpus). Forum, 4(1), 221–255.

Russo, M., Bernardini, S., Ferraresi, C., & Defrancq, B. (2018). Building interpreting and intermodal corpora: A how-to for a formidable task. Making way in corpus-based interpreting studies, 21-42.‏

Sandrelli, A. (2010). Corpus-based interpreting studies and interpreter training: A modest proposal. In L. N. Zybatow (ed.) Translationswissenschaft – Stand und Perspektiven. Innsbrucker Ringvorlesungen zur Translationswissenschaft VI. [Translation studies – status and perspectives. Innsbruck Lecture Series on Translation Studies VI]. Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 69–90.

Schjoldager, A. (2017). An Exploratory Study of Translational Norms in Simultaneous Interpreting: Methodological Reflections. HERMES – Journal of Language and Communication in Business, 8(14), 65. https://doi.org/10.7146/hjlcb.v8i14.25096.

Schneider, P. (1992). Interpreter/conciliator, an evolving function. In E. F. Losa (ed.) Frontiers. Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Conference of the American Translators Association (pp. 57-64), November 4–8, 1992, San Diego, California. Medford, NJ: Learned Information.

Seeber, K. & Kerzel, D. (2012). Cognitive load in simultaneous interpreting: Model meets data. International Journal of Bilingualism, 16(2), 228–242.

Seeber, K. (2011). Cognitive load in simultaneous interpreting: Existing theories—new models. Interpreting13(2), 176-204.‏

Seeber, K. (2013). Cognitive load in simultaneous interpreting: Measures and methods. Target, 25(1), 18–32.

Seleskovitch, D. (1968). L’Interprète dans les Conférences Internationales – Problèmes de Langage et de Communication [The Interpreter in International Conferences – Language and Communication Problems]. Paris: Minard lettres modernes.

Seleskovitch, D. (1975). Language, Langues et Mémoire – Étude de la Prise de Notes en Interprétation Consécutive. Préface de Jean Monnet [Language, Languages ​​and Memory – Study of Note-Taking in Consecutive Interpretation. Preface by Jean Monnet]. Paris: Minard lettres modernes.

Seleskovitch, D. (1978). Language and cognition. In D. Gerver & H. W. Sinaiko (eds.), Language Interpretation and Communication (pp. 333-341). New York: Plenum Press.

Sergio, F. & Falbo, C. (eds) (2012). Breaking Ground in Corpus-Based Interpreting Studies. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.

Sergio, F. (1998). Notes on cultural mediation. The Interpreters’ Newsletter, 8, 151–168.

Setton, R. (2002). Seleskovitch: A radical pragmatist before her time. The Translator, 8(1), 117–124.

Setton, R. (2006). Context in simultaneous interpretation. Journal of Pragmatics38(3), 374-389.

Setton, R. (2011). Corpus-based Interpreting Studies (CIS): Overview and prospects. In A. Kruger, K. Wallmach & J. Munday (eds.), Corpus-based Translation Studies: Research and Applications (pp. 33-75). London/New York: Continuum.

Shannon, C. (2001). A mathematical theory of communication. ACM SIGMOBILE mobile computing and communications review5(1), 3-55.‏

Shiryaev, A. (1979). Sinkhronnyi perevod. Deyatelnost sinkhronnogo perevodchika i metodika prepodavaniya sinkhronnogo perevoda [Simultaneous Interpreting: The Simultaneous Interpreter’s Work and Methodology of Teaching Simultaneous Interpreting]. Moscow: Voenizdat.

Shlesinger, M. (1995). Shifts in cohesion in simultaneous interpreting. The Translator, 1(2), 193–214.

Shlesinger, M. (1998). Corpus-based interpreting studies as an offshoot of corpus-based translation studies. Meta 43(4), 486–493.

Shlesinger, M. (2008). Towards a definition of Interpretese: An intermodal, corpus-based study. In G. Hansen, A. Chesterman & H. Gerzymisch-Arbogast (eds) Efforts and Models in Interpreting and Translation Research: A Tribute to Daniel Gile. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 237–253.

Smirnov, S. (1997). An overview of liaison interpreting. Perspectives: Studies in Translatology5(2), 211-226.‏

Sperber, D. & Wilson, D. (1986/95). Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.

Tate, G. & Turner, G. (2002). The code and the culture: Sign language interpreting – in search of the new breed’s ethics. In F. Pöchhacker & M. Shlesinger (eds.), The Interpreting Studies Reader (pp. 372-385). London: Routledge.

Tebble, H. (1999). The tenor of consultant physicians: Implications for medical interpreting. The Translator, 5(2), 179–199.

Tebble, H. (2013). Researching medical interpreting: An applied linguistics perspective. In E. Winston & C. Monikowski (eds.), Evolving Paradigms in Interpreter Education (pp. 42-75). Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.

Tiselius, E. & Jenset, G. (2011). Process and product in simultaneous interpreting: What they tell us about experience and expertise. In C. Alvstad, A. Hild & E. Tiselius (eds.), Methods and Strategies of Process Research: Integrative Approaches in Translation Studies (pp. 269-300). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Tohyama, H. & Matsubara, S. (2006). Development of web-based teaching material for simultaneous interpreting learners using bilingual speech corpus. In E. Pearson & P. Bohman (eds.), Proceedings of ED-MEDIA 2006: World Conference on Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, Orlando, Florida, USA, June 26–30. Chesapeake, VA: AACE, 2906–2911. www. editlib.org/p/23420

Van Dijk, T. & Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies of Discourse Comprehension. New York: Academic Press.

Vik-Tuovinen, G. (2002). Retrospection as a method of studying the process of simultaneous interpreting. In S. Tirkkonen-Condit & R. Jääskeläinen (eds.), Tapping and Mapping the Processes of Translation and Interpreting (pp. 63-71). Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 63–71.

Williams, J. (2013). Theories of translation. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Xie, B. & Salvendy, G. (2000). Prediction of mental workload in single and multiple tasks environments. International Journal of Cognitive Ergonomics, 4(3), 213–242.

Xu, T. (2023). Examining the Link between Personality Traits, Cognitive Performance, and Consecutive Interpreting (Doctoral dissertation, University of Wales Trinity Saint David).‏

Yin, B., Chen, F., Ruiz, N. & Ambikairajah, E. (2008). Speech-based cognitive load monitoring system. In Proceedings of the 2008 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing. Las Vegas, NV: ICASSP, 2041–2044.

Zanettin, F., Bernardini, S. & Stewart, D. (eds.). (2003) Corpora in Translator Education. Manchester/Northampton: St Jerome.

Бектемирова, Б. (2022). Importance of working memory in simultaneous interpretation. Переводоведение: проблемы, решения и перспективы, (1), 258-259.‏


Dr. Dana Al-Suhaim is an assistant professor of Translation and Interpreting Studies. Research interests include Audiovisual translation, Interpreting Studies, and Translation Studies.
ORCiD ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2717-3257