Communication is the cornerstone of mental healthcare. In the UK, many people who will need access to mental health services do not possess English as their first language. In this editorial, we seek to examine current policy and guidance with respect to interpreting in mental healthcare, and explore the benefits and challenges of interpretation and the ethical implications to consider. We focus on how mental health services could better engage with interpreters as cultural brokers to understand cultural expressions of distress. We conclude by suggesting an education and research agenda which could decrease ethnic disparities in mental healthcare.

Interpreters are hypothesized to anticipate the source language (SL) in comprehension and the target language (TL) in production to facilitate timely delivery. In two experiments, we examined whether interpreters make more predictions in SL comprehension in consecutive interpreting than in regular language comprehension and whether such enhanced prediction (if any) is constrained by cognitive resources. Participants were quicker at reading a predictable versus unpredictable critical word and/or following words (e.g., Without the sunglasses/hat, the sun will hurt your eyes on the beach, where eyes is the critical word), and the prediction effect was larger when they read to later interpret (into Chinese) than to later recall. The enhanced prediction in reading to interpret disappeared when the cognitive load was high, suggesting that SL prediction in interpreting requires cognitive resources. Our findings suggest that, when cognitive resources allow, interpreters engage in enhanced linguistic prediction in SL comprehension to facilitate the delivery of interpreting.

Prediction underlies many life’s situations including language. Monolinguals and advanced L2 learners use prosodic cues such as stress and tone in a word’s first syllable to predict the word’s suffix. To determine whether the same findings extend to words with non-morphological endings, we investigate whether Spanish monolinguals and advanced learners of Spanish with and without interpreting experience use stress (stressed, unstressed) and syllabic structure (CV, CVC) in a word’s initial syllable to predict its ending. This is crucial to understand whether associations underlying prediction are morphophonolexical associations or purely phonolexical. Interpreters were included due to their extensive experience predicting incoming speech. Participants completed an eye-tracking study where they listened to a sentence while seeing two words and selected the word they heard. Results revealed that monolinguals and interpreters predicted word endings under all conditions, but non-interpreters only predicted in the CVC oxytone condition. These findings are relevant for (1) prediction accounts, showing that phonolexical associations trigger prediction; (2) phonological models, revealing that stress and syllable information in the initial syllable are key for accessing and predicting meaning; and (3) L2 processing models, indicating that L2 learners with interpreting experience use suprasegmental information to access and predict lexical items similar to monolinguals.

Previous studies have investigated the cognitive processes of simultaneous interpreting and translation using eye-tracking. No study has yet utilized eye-tracking to investigate cognitive load and cognitive effort in dialogue interpreting. An eye-tracking study was conducted on two groups of interpreters (experienced and inexperienced) with varying language backgrounds during a staged dialogue interpreting session. The aim of the study was to explore gaze patterns in dialogue interpreting in relation to the interpreters’ action and translation direction. The results indicated there were differences in gaze patterns depending on the action and the language used. Participants averted gaze more when interpreting into the allophone language (the L2 for a majority of the participants in this study). This may indicate that interpreting into L2 in a dialogue may involve more cognitive effort than interpreting into L1. Finally, gaze patterns did not differ significantly between inexperienced and experienced dialogue interpreters.

Adult foreign language acquisition is challenging, and the degree of success varies among individuals. Anatomical differences in brain structure prior to training can partly explain why some learn more than others. We followed a sample of conscript interpreters undergoing intense language training to study learning-related changes in white-matter microstructure (FA, MD, RD and AD) and associations between differences in brain structure prior to training with acquired language proficiency. No evidence for changes in white matter microstructure relative to a control group was found. Starting values of RD, AD and MD were positively related to final test scores of language proficiency, corroborating earlier findings in the field and highlighting the need for further study of how initial brain structure influences and interacts with learning outcomes.

The adaptive control hypothesis predicts adaptation of control mechanisms as a response to intensive language use in bilinguals. The present study aims to investigate this hypothesis in two memory experiments with professional and student interpreters. In experiment 1, we compared a group of interpreting students to translation students using a reading span task to test working memory (WM) and a digit span task to test short-term memory (STM). In experiment 2, we added a group of professional interpreters and compared them with the participants in experiment 1. Training-related improvement was found for WM but not for STM, with no differences between both student groups. Professional interpreters with over 20 years of interpreting experience showed better performance than translation students but not than interpreting students both on WM and STM. The results are discussed in light of the framework of interpreting as a type of extreme bilingualism.

Interpreting is a complex bilingual task, placing high demands on both language control (i.e., source language not interfering in target language production) and processing control (i.e., multi-tasking carried out in concert under time pressure). On the basis of empirical evidence in the literature, we propose an attentional control model to account for both language control and processing control. Specifically, language control in interpreting is achieved by a structural framework of language-modality connections (established in interpreting training and stored as task schema), and by focused attention that helps build, strengthen and adapt the framework through monitoring, target enhancement, task disengagement, shifting, and working memory. In contrast, processing control in interpreting is achieved by divided attention via coordination and working memory, and by language processing efficiency that includes mastery of both languages and the appropriate use of interpreting strategies. Implications of this model for general bilingual language control are discussed.

Native speakers use suprasegmental information to predict words, but less is known about segmental information. Moreover, anticipatory studies with non-native speakers are scarce and mix proficiency with anticipatory experience. To address these limitations, we investigated whether Spanish monolinguals and advanced English learners of Spanish use suprasegmentals (stress: oxytone, paroxytone) and segmentals (syllabic structure: CVC, CV) to predict word suffixes, and whether increased anticipatory experience acquired via interpreting will facilitate anticipation in non-interpreting L2 situations. Eye-tracking data revealed that: (1) the three groups made use of the linguistic variables, and L2 groups did not anticipate in CV paroxytones; (2) everybody anticipated better with the less frequent conditions (oxytones, CVC) having fewer lexical competitors; (3) monolinguals anticipated earlier than L2 learners; and (4) interpreters anticipated at a faster rate in some conditions. These findings indicate that less frequent suprasegmental and segmental information and anticipatory experience facilitate native and non-native spoken word prediction.

Two experiments were conducted to test the hypothesis that the parallel processing of the target language (TL) during source language (SL) comprehension in interpreting may be influenced by two factors: (i) link strength from SL to TL, and (ii) the interpreter's cognitive resources supplement to TL processing during SL comprehension. The influence of the first factor was supported by the contrasting performance on bidirectional SL and TL interpreting tasks by unbalanced bilingual student interpreters, and the second factor was supported by the contrasting performance between participants’ two developmental stages in interpreting. Implications are discussed.

Spoken language (unimodal) interpreters often prefer to interpret from their non-dominant language (L2) into their native language (L1). Anecdotally, signed language (bimodal) interpreters express the opposite bias, preferring to interpret from L1 (spoken language) into L2 (signed language). We conducted a large survey study (N = 1,359) of both unimodal and bimodal interpreters that confirmed these preferences. The L1 to L2 direction preference was stronger for novice than expert bimodal interpreters, while novice and expert unimodal interpreters did not differ from each other. The results indicated that the different direction preferences for bimodal and unimodal interpreters cannot be explained by language production–comprehension asymmetries or by work or training experiences. We suggest that modality and language-specific features of signed languages drive the directionality preferences of bimodal interpreters. Specifically, we propose that fingerspelling, transcoding (literal word-for-word translation), self-monitoring, and consumers’ linguistic variation influence the preference of bimodal interpreters for working into their L2.