______________________________________________________________________________________________ 1

SUMMARY OF ACADEMIC ACCOMPLISHMENTS

1. Name: Agnieszka Chmiel 2. Academic degrees, titles 2004 Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań, School of English – Doctor of Philosophy in linguistics Title of Ph.D. thesis: Neurocognitive plausibility of conference interpreting. Applications of

cognitive neuroscience to interpreting research, supervisor: prof. UAM dr hab. Alicja Pisarska. 2000 Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań, Master of Arts (English Philology), Conference

Interpreting Programme Title of M.A. thesis: Cerebral representation of languages in bilinguals and simultaneous interpreters, supervisor: prof. UAM dr hab. Alicja Pisarska.

Postgraduate studies, certificates: 2015 Training in research team management, SKILLS Programme, Foundation for Polish Science 2015 Training in advanced academic writing, SKILLS Programme, Foundation for Polish Science 2013 E-learning basics for AMU academics 2004 Postgraduate Programme in Voice Training for Academic Teachers 3. Employment in academic institutions 2004-2012 Assistant Professor, Department of Translation Studies, School of English, Adam Mickiewicz

University in Poznań since 2012 Assistant Professor, Department of Translation Studies, Faculty of English, Adam Mickiewicz

University in Poznań

______________________________________________________________________________________________ 2

4. Academic achievement stipulated in Art. 16.2 of the Act of 14 March 2003 on academic degrees and academic title as well as the degrees and title in arts (Polish Journal of Laws 2016, Item. 882 as amended): a) title of academic achievement: A series of publications entitled: The conference interpreter’s mind: Linguistic processing and working memory b) publications in the series:

1. Chmiel, Agnieszka. 2012. “Pamięć operacyjna tłumaczy konferencyjnych mierzona metodą RSPAN.” In: Kompetencje tłumacza, Maria Piotrowska (Ed.), 137-154. Kraków: Tertium. (chapter in an edited volume, length in publishing sheets: 1.0)

2. Chmiel, Agnieszka. 2016. “In search of the working memory advantage in conference interpreting – Training, experience and task effects.” International Journal of Bilingualism. 1-14. doi: 10.1177/1367006916681082. (article in a journal – A list according to the Polish Ministry of Science and Higher Education – 35 points, Impact Factor 2016: 0.974; length in publishing sheets: 1.3)

3. Chmiel, Agnieszka. 2018. “Meaning and words in the conference interpreter’s mind: Effects of interpreter training and experience in a semantic priming study.” Translation, Cognition & Behavior, 1(1): 21-41. (article in a journal, length in publishing sheets: 1.4; inaugural issue of a new journal, article by invitation)

4. Chmiel, Agnieszka. 2016. “Directionality and context effects in word translation tasks performed by conference interpreters.” Poznan Studies in Contemporary Linguistics 52(2): 269-295. (article in a journal – A list according to the Polish Ministry of Science and Higher Education – 15 points, Impact Factor 2015: 0.093; length in publishing sheets: 1.6)

5. Lijewska, Agnieszka and Agnieszka Chmiel. 2015. “Cognate facilitation in sentence context – translation production by interpreting trainees and non-interpreting trilinguals.” International Journal of Multilingualism 12(3): 358-375. (article in a journal – C list according to the Polish Ministry of Science and Higher Education – 25 points, length in publishing sheets: 1.7; contribution to authorship: 40%)

6. Chmiel, Agnieszka and Iwona Mazur. 2013. “Eye tracking sight translation performed by trainee interpreters.” In: Tracks and Treks in Translation Studies, Catherine Way, Sonia Vandepitte, Reine Meylaerts and Magdalena Bartłomiejczyk (Eds.), 189-205. Amsterdam / Philadelphia: Benjamins. (chapter in an edited volume, length in publishing sheets: 1.0; contribution to authorship: 50%)

7. Chmiel, Agnieszka, Agnieszka Lijewska, Agnieszka Szarkowska and Łukasz Dutka. 2017. “Paraphrasing in respeaking – comparing linguistic competence of interpreters, translators

______________________________________________________________________________________________ 3

and bilinguals.” Perspectives. Studies in Translation Theory and Practice: 1-20. doi: 10.1080/0907676x.2017.1394331. (article in a journal – C list according to the Polish Ministry of Science and Higher Education – 20 points, length in publishing sheets: 1.6; contribution to authorship: 45%)

8. Chmiel, Agnieszka, Agnieszka Szarkowska, Danijel Koržinek, Agnieszka Lijewska, Łukasz Dutka, Łukasz Brocki and Krzysztof Marasek. 2017. “Ear–voice span and pauses in intra- and interlingual respeaking: An exploratory study into temporal aspects of the respeaking process.” Applied Psycholinguistics 38(5): 1201-1227. doi: 10.1017/s0142716417000108. (article in a journal – A list according to the Polish Ministry of Science and Higher Education – 30 points, Impact Factor 2016: 1.970; length in publishing sheets: 2.3; contribution to authorship: 30%)

c) summary of objectives, results and potential implications of the academic achievement My academic achievement is a series of eight thematically related publications entitled: The conference interpreter’s mind: Linguistic processing and working memory with a total length of 12.9 publishing sheets. The series is a comprehensive study of the influence of interpreter training and experience on linguistic processing and memory. My research has focused on answering the question if and to what extent the specific way of processing two languages in conference interpreting leads to a potential linguistic and cognitive interpreter advantage over bilinguals without any experience in conference interpreting. I have decided to examine if the extreme language control and constant switching between two linguistic systems, which happens during conference interpreting, boosts information processing through, for instance, improved memory, faster word comprehension or faster lexical production. This question is parallel to the issue of the bilingual advantage over monolinguals due to constant control of two linguistic systems, a question very popular now among many psycholinguists.

All publications in the series are based on empirical research in which I focus on differences between experimental groups (such as: professional conference interpreters, interpreting trainees at various levels of advancement, written translators, bi- and trilinguals without interpreting experience) compared in various combinations in my search to prove the existence of interpreter advantage in cognitive and linguistic processing. I search for these differences in working memory (publications 1 and 2), word comprehension (publication 3), lexical production (publications 4 and 5), sight translation (publication 6) and respeaking as a task similar to interpreting (publications 7 and 8). I have used an interdisciplinary approach and various research methods in my studies (working memory tests, semantic priming, word translation, text interpreting, eye-tracking). I have analysed experimental data with advanced statistical tools, mainly linear mixed models that reflect individual differences better than the traditional analysis of variance.

The whole series of publications is a multidimensional contribution to our understanding of the effect of interpreting experience on linguistic processing and working memory. It generates a synergy effect between Translation Studies and psycholinguistics by applying psycholinguistic methodology to the study of linguistic processing and working memory in the interpreting mind. Working memory Publications (1) and (2) are an attempt to answer the question if the conference interpreters’ professional experience and interpreter training translates into better working memory.

The publication entitled: “Pamięć operacyjna tłumaczy konferencyjnych mierzona metodą

______________________________________________________________________________________________ 4

RSPAN” (Working memory of conference interpreters as measured by RSPAN) (1) describes a study in which I used an experimental method involving remembering letters in the right sequence and a simultaneous sentence sense judgment task. The latter task involves the phonological loop and makes it impossible to subvocally rehearse the letters to improve remembering. Because two languages are processed by interpreters (especially in simultaneous interpreting) when their phonological loop is engaged (by simultaneous analysis of the source text that they hear and production of the target text), I predicted that more experienced conference interpreters (working for the EU institutions) would obtain better results in the memory test than conference interpreting trainees. The participants performed the memory task in English. The predictions were not confirmed and the result seems to suggest that the interpreter’s cognitive advantage does not exit, is not visible in the applied task or does not manifest itself when professionals are compared to would-be interpreters during training. As a result, a comparison with another control group is necessary.

The study described in the first publication served as a pilot study for a more advanced study design described in the publication entitled: “In search of the working memory advantage in conference interpreting – Training, experience and task effects” (2). The study was conducted thanks to external funding in two projects: “Working memory and lexical processing in conference interpreting” (Opus 2013/11/B/HS6/01539 funded by the National Science Centre – I was the Principal Investigator in this project) and “Lexical processing and mental lexicon of bi- and trilingual conference interpreters” (N N104 010637 funded by the Ministry of Science and Higher Education – I was a researcher in this project). This study compared professional interpreters, interpreting trainees and bilinguals without interpreting experience in order to disentangle the effects of experience and training (which was not possible in the study described in the first publication). The article describes two experiments. The first one was a replication of the study from the first article but it involved three experimental groups mentioned above (interpreting trainees were tested in a longitudinal design – at the beginning and at the end of a two-year conference interpreting programme). Interpreters outperformed beginner trainees but did not differ from advanced trainees. The results were also interesting when the control group of bilinguals was compared with trainees: the trainees did not differ from bilinguals at the beginning of the training but did obtain better results in the English RSPAN task after two years of training. The memory improvement rate amounted to 13% and trainees with a higher rate of working memory improvement also received better final examination grades.

I manipulated other variables (language and task type) in the second experiment. Because the previous studies used a memory test with a visual presentation of stimuli in a foreign language, the second experiment aimed at testing if interpreter advantage depends on the language, modality and stimulus type. This time, I decided to compare professionals and bilinguals. For the purpose of the study, I created a Polish version of the RSPAN task and another Polish test in which the participants remembered words they heard while simultaneously judging the sense of auditorily presented sentences (listening span test). This time interpreter advantage was visible in both tasks while the professionals themselves obtained similar results regardless of the (visual or auditory) modality. I also showed that professionals obtained better memory results in the native language by comparing their English RSPAN test from the first experiment with the Polish RSPAN test.

To the best of my knowledge, the study is the first study in the area of Translation Studies that disentangles the effect of training and the effect of experience by examining professional interpreters and, longitudinally, interpreting trainees tested twice – at the beginning and at the end of a two-year programme in conference interpreting. The results suggest that the working memory does improve with interpreter training and does not undergo any major change later as a result of interpreting experience. Such knowledge can be used in interpreter training. Since the trainees did not differ from the control group at the beginning of their training good working memory should not be a prerequisite when recruiting interpreting trainees. At

______________________________________________________________________________________________ 5

the same time, it is worth including working memory training in the curriculum since improved working memory is associated with better final examination grades. Word comprehension My next publication entitled: “Meaning and words in the conference interpreter’s mind: Effects of interpreter training and experience in a semantic priming study” (3) examined the effect of interpreter training and experience on a single component of lexical processing, i.e. word comprehension. I used a semantic priming paradigm in the study. Semantic priming is a classic method used in psycholinguistics – participants judge if a string of letters is a word. If the string that is a word is preceded by a word semantically related to it, the lexical decision is faster thanks to the semantic activation triggered by the preceding word (the prime). If the prime is not semantically related the lexical decision takes longer. Such a phenomenon has been shown in psycholinguistics both within the same language and cross-linguistically (i.e. the prime in one language primes the target word in another language). Thus, semantic priming helps examine the structure of the mental lexicon of bilinguals. I decided that this could be a good tool to examine interlingual connections in the interpreter’s mind since the interpreter is an extreme case of a bilingual. To the best of my knowledge, this is the first study that uses priming and compares professional conference interpreters to a control group of bilinguals and interpreting trainees (tested longitudinally – at the beginning and at the end of a two-year programme). The experiment was conducted in the previously mentioned project I managed entitled: “Working memory and lexical processing in conference interpreting” (project no. 2013/11/B/HS6/01539 funded by the National Science Centre).

The study showed the effect of training in both directions, i.e. trainees recognised Polish and English words at the end of the training programme faster than at the beginning. Moreover, all groups recognised Polish words faster than the English ones, which seems to suggest that the native language advantage remains unaffected regardless of the interpreting experience. The semantic priming effect was confirmed only in the L1-L2 direction for all groups, which leads to a conclusion that interpreter experience and training do not affect interlingual lexical links to such an extent as to show the priming effect in the L2-L1 direction. I used mixed linear models to analyse the data and found no interactions, i.e. no differences in the way the words were processed by various groups of participants. The findings did not confirm the hypothesis about the interpreter advantage in word comprehension but the prediction about the effect of training on word recognition speed was confirmed. Thus, it seems that word recognition is a rather basic task and the effect of interpreter experience could be visible only in more complex linguistic processes. To examine that possibility further, I focused on lexical production in sentence context, sight translation and respeaking in my subsequent experiments. Lexical production in sentence context The article entitled: “Directionality and context effects in word translation tasks performed by conference interpreters” (4) describes a study conducted as part of the two previously mentioned projects (project no. 2013/11/B/HS6/01539 funded by the National Science Centre and project no. N N104 010637 funded by the Ministry of Science and Higher Education). The aim of the study was to examine if the speed of lexical access and word translation in various sentence contexts is affected by interpreting experience. I compared conference interpreters working for the European Union institutions (unidirectional interpreters for whom English-Polish interpreting constitutes 95% of their work between these two languages) with interpreters from the Polish national market (bidirectional interpreters who work equally frequently from

______________________________________________________________________________________________ 6

English into Polish and from Polish into English). I manipulated two variables in the study: interpreting direction (Polish-English and English-Polish) and sentence context (no context, low context constraint and high context constraint that facilitated prediction of the sentence-final to-be-translated word). The analysis showed the effect of direction (interpreting into the foreign language took longer than interpreting into Polish, but only in the case of bidirectional interpreters) and the effect of context (words in the high context constraint were translated faster than in the low context constraint and no context condition). Thus, it turned out that, contrary to my predictions, directional asymmetry in professional practice does not affect the interlingual lexical links in the interpreter’s mental lexicon while other factors, such as daily language use, exposition to a language and immersion in a given linguistic environment, might be of importance. Therefore, although interpreters from the Polish market work in their professional settings less into their native language than the EU interpreters, they were faster in the L2-L1 condition of the experiment than in the L1-L2 condition because they are immersed in the Polish speaking environment. On the other hand, the EU interpreters, who are immersed in the multilingual environment of the EU institutions in Brussels, translated equally fast into both directions although they are not bidirectional interpreters. An interesting finding brought by the experiment is also the use of context constraint by the interpreters: words at the end of sentences with a constrained context that enabled their anticipation were translated faster than words in the low context constraint. The results obtained in controlled experimental conditions confirmed the existence of anticipation in interpreting, a phenomenon widely recognised in the literature.

My next publication, co-authored with Dr. Agnieszka Lijewska, entitled: “Cognate facilitation in sentence context – translation production by interpreting trainees and non-interpreting trilinguals” (5) used a similar experimental procedure. The participants (trilingual conference interpreting trainees and a control group including trilinguals without interpreting experience) were asked to interpret a sentence-final word in a low or high context constraint. The words, half of which were German-English cognates, were translated from English (the participants’ L3) into German (L2) or Polish (L1). The aim of the study was to examine if cognates would be translated faster, if sentence context would affect cognate translation and if interpreting trainees would outperform controls by using sentence context. The analysis showed cognate effect and sentence context effect but did not show the advantage of interpreting trainees over controls. Oral word translation from L3 to L2 turned out to pose many problems to all participants. The lack of group effect might be explained by the type of interpreter training – it focused on interpreting between Polish and German and not on interpreting from English into German and Polish. Interlingual links (between Polish and German lexemes) created through interpreter training did not contribute to faster activation of links with the third language, which resulted in the lack of training effect in the applied task. The lack of advantage of the interpreter trainees over the control group could also be potentially explained by the low intensity of training – the trainees participated only in 150 contact hours over one year. Such small exposition to interpreting practice might not translate into differences in lexical production in sentence context when the third language is processed in combination with L1 and L2. Sight translation The article entitled: “Eye tracking sight translation performed by trainee interpreters” (6), which I co-authored with Dr. Iwona Mazur, describes a study that used eye-tracking to examine if text reading patters in sight translation differ depending on interpreter training. We compared eye movements of two groups of more and less advanced interpreting trainees. In order to study the cognitive load in sight translation, we prepared a Polish text with a few areas of interest. These included simple subject-verb-object (SVO) sentences that could be translated into English without syntactic reformulation and complex non-SVO

______________________________________________________________________________________________ 7

sentences that required a word order change in the target language in the majority of cases. We predicted that simple sentences would generate lower cognitive load operationalised as less numerous and shorter fixations as compared with those for complex sentences. We were also interested in low frequency lexical items. The statistical analysis showed that despite numerical differences both groups of trainees differed neither as regards eye-tracking measures (fixation count, fixation length, total viewing time) nor as regards sight translation time. We also found that our simple sentences generated more cognitive load (longer fixations) as compared with more complex sentenced due to lower readability (calculated on the basis of sentence and word length). Thus, the reading patterns were affected not only by the sentence structure but also by the length of words contained in that sentence. A one-year difference in interpreter training did not manifest itself in eye-tracking measures and the translation time. It might seem that such conclusion is at a variance with the effect of training shown in publications (2) and (3). However, one should remember about differences in study samples. In this study both groups were already undergoing training (the less advanced group had completed almost a year-long training and the more advanced group had completed almost a two-year long training). Thus, interpreter training was a between-group variable here. In the studies described in publications (2) and (3), the trainees were tested longitudinally and with a longer interval (thus, the training was a within-subject factor). The study described in publication (6) was one of the first studies applying eye-tracking to examine sight translation and has shown many research avenues, such as the triangulation of eye-tracking process-based data with product-based data. Respeaking In my search for the existence of interpreter advantage in linguistic processing, I have taken an interest in respeaking, a method of live subtitling for the deaf and hard of hearing. The respeaker repeats what is heard so that the utterances are processed into subtitles by speech recognition software. Respeaking resembles simultaneous interpreting because both of these tasks involve simultaneous listening to the source text and repetition of its meaning in the same language (in interlingual respeaking) or in the target language (in simultaneous interpreting and interlingual respeaking). It is thus reasonable to predict that persons with interpreting experience will deal better with respeaking-related tasks than persons without such experience. Such predictions were examined in experiments described in two co-authored publications produced as a result of the National Science Centre project no. 2013/11/B/HS2/02762 led by Dr. Agnieszka Szarkowska from the University of Warsaw. The project was entitled: “Respeaking – the process, competences, quality” and I was one of the research team members. The article entitled: “Paraphrasing in respeaking – comparing linguistic competence of interpreters, translators and bilinguals” (7) describes an experimental study involving three groups: interpreters, translators and bilinguals without any interpreting or translation experience. We asked the participants to intralingually paraphrase Polish sentences with semantic redundancies (e.g. drinks not containing any alcohol), oral discourse markers (e.g. well, actually) and false starts (according to the classification by Majewska-Tworek 2014). Paraphrases were produced simultaneously or in a delayed condition (after listening to the whole sentence). Our analysis of paraphrasing quality showed a difference between groups only in the case of semantic redundancies. Interpreters were more successful in eliminating redundancies and replacing them with more succinct expressions. Our quantitative analysis involved paraphrasing latency as compared to the stimulus sentence (which was similar to EVS, or ear-voice span, i.e. the interpreter’s delay in relation to the source text in simultaneous interpreting). We did not find any group effects, which means that interpreting experience does not translate directly into the speed of intralingual paraphrasing. Semantic redundancies were more difficult to eliminate than oral discourse markers and false starts across all experimental groups, which can be explained through the need for more

______________________________________________________________________________________________ 8

profound semantic analysis in the case of semantic redundancies. This has been one of the first studies on respeaking conducted in controlled experimental conditions. The other publication entitled: “Ear-voice span and pauses in intra- and interlingual respeaking: An exploratory study into temporal aspects of the respeaking process” (8) describes two experiments in which the same experimental groups were asked to perform intra- and interlingual respeaking. Our dependent variables included ear-voice span (EVS) and pauses in respeaking. The first experiment compared intra- and interlingual respeaking. We found that English-Polish respeaking was too difficult a task for the control group of bilinguals without interpreting and/or translation experience. Translators and interpreters did finish the task. Interlingual respeaking was also more difficult for them – they had longer EVS and longer pauses in this condition. We did not find the advantage of interpreters in this task which may result from differences between respeaking and simultaneous interpreting (such as the need to vocalise punctuation marks in respeaking so that they are visible in the text created by the software from the respeaker’s recognised speech). In the second experiment, interpreters and bilinguals performed intralingual respeaking of various genres of TV shows (speech, news, a political chat show). The analysis showed that interpreters outperformed bilinguals only in the case of one out of three dependent variables. The interpreters did not differ from the control group as regards the ear-voice span and did not apply shorter pauses in their utterances. They only differed in the pause ratio, i.e. they manifested a higher ratio of the pause length in the original speech to the pause length in the respoken text, which means that they used fewer additional pauses in respeaking as compared to the bilingual group. This finding might be explained through a better use of pauses occurring in the original: interpreters used the speakers’ pauses to produce their utterances, similarly to a usual behaviour in simultaneous interpreting. The study also showed interesting relations between the type of show and temporal aspects of respeaking: we found the longest EVS for news, shorter for the speech and the shortest for the political chat show. The first two texts are scripted. The study results have thus direct implications for the practice of respeaking: due to the difficulties with scripted texts shown in the study, such texts should be made available to respeakers in advance, if possible. Both studies showed no significant advantage of interpreters over the remaining two groups. The only differences were related to the interpreters’ better coping with text reduction and more advantageous use of pauses in the source text when producing their own utterances. This means that the experience in linguistic processing under temporal constraints in the form of interpreting (especially simultaneous interpreting) does not translate into respeaking quality and speed. It was previously assumed that due to similarities between conference interpreting and respeaking it would be easier to train interpreters to become high quality respeakers. Our study shows that it is not necessarily the case and that individuals without interpreting experience have – following appropriate training – equally high chances of pursuing a successful career as respeakers. To conclude, the series of experimental studies I conducted has shown a limited linguistic and cognitive advantage of bilinguals with interpreting experience. Working memory improves with interpreter training but does not undergo any further significant improvement due to professional experience. The research has not identified any interpreter advantage in basic linguistic processing (such as word comprehension). It can also be concluded that interpreter experience may lead to advantage only in a given language pair and is domain-specific while it does not translate into other domains even if they are similar (such as respeaking). Symmetric directionality in the interpreter practice, i.e. interpreting both from the native language to the foreign language and from the foreign language to the native one, does not weaken the native language advantage. The research has also shown how eye-tracking methodology can be used to study sight translation and how to examine the phenomenon of anticipation by using a psycholinguistic study design.

______________________________________________________________________________________________ 9

5. Other academic achievements My other academic achievements since the award of the Ph.D. degree in 2004 include: two co-authored monographs, 11 articles in journals, 16 chapters in edited collections, two research reports and one co-edited collected volume. I have given talks at 42 scientific conferences (25 in Poland and 17 abroad). I have participated in 6 national and 4 international research projects (I was the principal investigator in one national project and I headed the Polish team in two international projects). My research interests can be divided into four main areas: audio description, audiovisual translation, interpreter training and the process of interpreting. 5.1. Audio description Audio description as a type of intersemiotic audiovisual translation that makes media accessible to the blind and visually impaired is – alongside conference interpreting – an important part of my research interests. So far, I have participated in two national and two international projects related to audio description. I have co-authored one monograph, 4 articles and 6 chapters in collected volumes. The monograph entitled “Audiodeskrypcja” (Audio description) (II.B.1) is a pioneering comprehensive research-based publication on audio description in Polish. The book describes all research directions related to audio description, AD script elements, reflection of filmic language in audio description, the language of description and technical aspects. The book includes numerous examples from scripts selected from a corpus of almost one hundred Polish and English audio described films analysed for the needs of the monograph. My research on audio description focuses mainly on the reception of various types of descriptions by target users, i.e. people with vision dysfunctions (II.A.1, II.C.7, II.C.10, II.C.19). I have frequently described methodological problems related to accessing potential respondents and to the study design. I have also shown how such hurdles can be overcome. By using a methodology applied to study cultural differences in interpreting a film, I have attempted to answer the question if it is possible to unify European audio description standards (II.A.3, II.A.5, II.C.9). Sighted viewers from ten European countries described a film, their descriptions were analysed in accordance with various criteria (such as subjectivity of descriptions, interpretation of events, narrative development). The research shows that events are interpreted but the describers avoid blatantly subjective descriptions. Such conclusions can be directly applied to the creation of audio description. Certain interpretations (such as naming emotions) do not have to be avoided if a more objective description is impossible due to temporal constraints. I have used eye-tracking to research the perception of sighted viewers in order to reflect this perception in audio description (II.B.3 and II.C.2). When comparing standard audio description to an audio description based on eye-tracking data, the blind respondents found the latter one to be better and more effective. I also analysed Polish audio descriptions (II.C.11) and described audio describer’s competences (II.B.2) that have to be included in AD training. I have also analysed academic and non-academic training of audio describers in Europe in the ongoing ADLAB PRO project that focuses on creating training materials for audio describers (II.C.18). 5.2. Audiovisual translation My research on other types of audiovisual translation beyond audio description (dubbing and voiceover) has focused mainly on technical constraints and strategies when translating culture specific items. In a co-authored article II.A.2, we analysed a voiceover translation of a political series. The quantitative analysis

______________________________________________________________________________________________ 10

focused on technical aspects (such as temporal constraints, text reduction, lexis) and the qualitative analysis focused on critical points in the translator’s decision-making process (culture specific items, metaphors). Our research shows that the translator first tries to meet the technical demands and then – if possible – find the best translation solutions for the critical points. Article II.C.6 analyses the synchronisation of voiceover with dialogues and describes a voiceover translation course in the Postgraduate Studies in Audiovisual Translation at the AMU Faculty of English, a programme that I created and headed. In article II.C.13, I analysed a network of culture-specific associations in dubbing in the context of the Polish audiovisual translation market and the polysystem of films. 5.3. Interpreter training Interpreter training is one of the most important research areas in my academic career. I have co-edited one book, authored 2 papers in journals and 5 chapters in collected volumes. I have researched basically every aspect of conference interpreter training, starting with early stages (II.C.17), through consecutive interpreting – development of memory (II.C.4) and note-taking (II.A.4), up to simultaneous interpreting – processing problem triggers in the source text (II.C.5) and practising isolated skills in the advanced course (II.B.4). The high point of my research in the field of interpreter training was the planning and the co-editing of a coherent collected volume entitled: “Dydaktyka tłumaczenia ustnego” (Conference interpreter training) (II.C.1) which is the first such comprehensive book on the Polish market. It includes both theoretical foundations for developing individual interpreting skills and proposals for training activities. A co-authored publication (II.C.8) on training interpreters in a virtual reality was the outcome of the European project entitled: IVY – Interpreting in Virtual Reality. One of the latest publications (II.C.3) focuses on the newest trends in interpreter training, i.e. project-based and situated learning. 5.4. The process of interpreting My research on the process of interpreting, disseminated through 4 papers and 3 chapters, focuses on various parts of this process: the essence of cooperation in the booth during simultaneous interpreting and the application of this knowledge to interpreter training (II.A.6), the use of visualisations and various types of memory (episodic, semantic and working memory) in the process of interpreting (II.B.5, II.C.15, II.B.7), the development of subskills in interpreting and automation of subprocesses involved in interpreting (II.B.6) and the development of lexical fluency throughout interpreter training (II.C.14). One of the most important publications in my academic record is a chapter (II.C.12) in a renowned book series entitled Benjamins Translation Library published by Benjamins. The chapter discusses the synergy effect that can be generated by conducting interdisciplinary research combining interpreting and psycholinguistics. More light can be shed on subprocesses of interpreting in a controlled way by using psycholinguistic methods in the Translation Studies and more information can be found about linguistic processing in the mind under extreme circumstances (as in the interpreting booth) by using conference interpreters as a research sample in psycholinguistics. Such an approach has – in a sense – shaped my research philosophy and my academic achievement is a direct result of that since each of the articles in the series combines psycholinguistics with Translation Studies and uses the synergy effect. My research can also be seen as a reflection of interdisciplinarity trends currently much valued in Translation Studies.

______________________________________________________________________________________________ 11

5.5. Development of research methods and skills Since my research is interdisciplinary and combines Translation Studies and psycholinguistics, I have significantly developed my research skills as regards the planning of experiments, matching of stimuli, control of confounding variables, selection of study designs and statistical analyses. I have participated in statistics training programmes and I have learnt to analyse experimental data through linear mixed models. This method is now favoured in psycholinguistics over the traditional analysis of variance since it deals better with individual variance. Linear mixed models are also becoming more popular in Translation Studies (mainly in publications about translation corpora). I use E-Prime software to create and run psycholinguistic experiments, I use Experiment Builder and Data Viewer to create and analyse eye-tracking experiments and I use R software environment for statistical analysis of quantitative data. 6. Other achievements 6.1. National and international cooperation I have cooperated with Polish and foreign researchers in national and international projects for years. I have worked with scholars from the University of Warsaw and the Polish-Japanese Academy of Information Technology in the project entitled: “Respeaking – the process, competences, quality” funded by the National Science Centre. I have cooperated with the University of Surrey, the University of Cyprus, Bangor University (Wales), Eberhard Karls Universität Tübingen and Bar-Ilan University in Israel in a consortium of partners for the European project IVY. The consortium of partners for ADLAB and ADLAB PRO project includes the University of Trieste, Autonomous University in Barcelona and the University of Antwerp. I have also cooperated with non-academic partners in these projects (Bayerischer Rundfunk from Germany, VRT from Belgium and Senza Barriere from Italy in ADLAB; Utopian Voices from the UK, Soundfocus from the Netherlands and RTV Slovenija from Slovenia in ADLAB PRO). I have participated in numerous international conferences, I have been member of scientific committees of some of them. I have received the Marie Curie Conference Scholarship twice to participate in MuTra conferences. I frequently review conference abstracts and manuscripts for Polish and international journals and publishers (including Benjamins, Routledge, International Journal of Communication, British Journal of Visual Impairment, Perspectives: Studies in Translatology, JoSTrans The Journal of Specialised Translation). I have peer-reviewed project proposals for the National Programme for the Development of Humanities, the National Science Centre, the US National Science Foundation and Vrije Universiteit Brussel. I am a member of the European Society for Translation Studies. In 2011-2017, I was a member of the EST Event Grant Committee that awarded grants for translation studies conferences. I am also a member of the Consortium for Translation Education Research and the European Association for Studies in Screen Translation. I have also been accepted to the TREC (Translation, Research, Empiricism, Cognition) thematic network that associates translation scholars specialising in empirical studies. I am an active member of INTERMEDIA, a national research group that includes audiovisual translation scholars and organises a conference in various academic centres in Poland. I co-organised the last INTERMEDIA conference in Poznań in 2017. Apart from the organisation of the INTERMEDIA conference, I also co-organised a session at the Congress of the European Society for Translation Studies in Aarhus, Denmark in 2016. I am recognised in the international community of translation scholars since I have been invited to review three foreign doctoral dissertations. I was an external reviewer and committee head at the Ph.D. viva of Katarzyna Sepielak at the Autonomous University in Barcelona (UAB), I reviewed the doctoral dissertations of Sijia Chen at Macquarie University in Sydney and Nina Reviers at the University of Antwerp. These dissertations focused on experimental or corpus studies

______________________________________________________________________________________________ 12

in audiovisual translation and interpreting. My activities related to making media accessible to the blind and visually impaired through audio description have included cooperation with the Mazovian Association for the Disabled De Facto and the Audio Description Foundation. I co-authored audio description scripts for the Polish Film Festival in Gdynia and “Integration You and Me” Festival in Koszalin. 6.2. Academic teaching My academic teaching experience includes both translation studies classes (M.A. seminar, courses for the translation and conference interpreting programmes) and English as a foreign language. My greatest academic teaching achievement is the creation of the Postgraduate Studies in Audiovisual Translation at AMU Faculty of English in 2010. I invited practising audiovisual translators and teachers from other academic centres to join the teaching team for this programme. I was the head of this programme and I am now currently involved in refreshing its didactic offer in cooperation with the audiovisual translation industry. I co-created the Postgraduate Programme in Community Interpreting together with Prof. UAM dr hab. Alicja Pisarska and Dr. Iwona Mazur. I coordinated the programme partially in 2007-2009. I have supervised 35 M.A. theses, I have reviewed 19 B.A. and M.A. theses (including one M.Phil. thesis at Macquire University in Sydney that I reviewed as an external examiner). I have also served as an auxiliary supervisor for three Ph.D. theses. I am involved in the activities of the Faculty, I was a member of the Faculty of English Strategy Development Team, new M.A. programme development team. I currently coordinate students’ internships, I have chaired EFL examination committees in many examination sessions.

6.3. Dissemination of research results I have given 6 guest talks (at the University of Trieste, La Sapienza University in Rome, the Scientific Centre of the Polish Academy of Sciences in Rome, Adam Mickiewicz Univeristy in Poznań, Kazimierz Wielki University in Bydgoszcz, Stanisław Staszic University of Applied Sciences in Piła). I have disseminated knowledge about the process of conference interpreting and the work of the conference interpreter through various forms of knowledge dissemination at the university: for instance, at the Science Festival, the Researchers’ Night, Open Lectures of the Faculty of English, meetings of the Department of Translation Studies and meetings at the Faculty of English. I have organised numerous presentations and workshops in the simultaneous interpreting laboratory for students of senior and junior high schools and students of other universities. I have headed the Translation Studies Group of the Faculty of English Reading Club for many years. I have invited guests from Polish and foreign universities and translators and interpreters from the European Union institutions. In order to disseminate results of the ADLAB PRO project, I organised the ADLAB PRO Multiplier Event – a workshop devoted to audio description training. 6.4. Other activities It is important to practice various types of translation in my work of a translation scholar. As a result, I can use practical expertise in research and teaching. I have worked as translator and conference interpreter since 2000, I also have experience in audiovisual translation – audio description, voiceover and subtitling. Although my research engagements make it impossible to work intensively as a professional translator I

tend to follow the latest trends. In 2017, I assisted in enrolment of audiovisualtranslators and participated

in an internal training organised by one of the largest US providers of translation services for leading film

studios and VOD platforms.

,fu'u-,-k Oa4/

t.)