Available at

§
STU06 stands out as the percentage of close and 
divergent renditions is almost similar (32.20% vs. 30.51%) 
o N + subclause: very low percentage of close renditions (45.28%) 
and high percentage of divergent renditions (24.42%) and of 
reduced renditions (21.23%) 
® definitely the most challenging 
pattern for interpreter trainees as less than half of the 
occurrences were correctly translated 
§
Two students stand out as their percentage of divergent 
renditions is higher than their percentage of close 
renditions: STU04 and STU06 
Single-word terms: 
- High percentage of close renditions (71.87%) and low percentage of 
divergent renditions (10.20%) 
® manageable linguistic items and not 

---

Results and discussion 
 
page 84 
the most challenging linguistic items for interpreter trainees 
- Two students stand out: 
o STU02: lowest percentage of close renditions (62.96%) and 
highest percentage of divergent renditions (22.22%) 
® least 
accurate performance 
o STU06: highest percentage of close renditions (88.89%) and 
lowest percentage of divergent renditions (11.11%) 
® most 
accurate performance 
Numbers: 
- Very high percentage of close renditions (78.86%) and low percentage 
of divergent renditions (9.63%) 
® most manageable linguistic item for 
interpreter trainees 
- Two students stand out: 
o STU04: lowest percentage of close renditions (69.23%) and 
highest percentage of divergent renditions (15.38%) 
® least 
accurate performance 
o STU02: highest percentage of close renditions (88.89%) and 
quite low percentage of divergent renditions (11.11%, which is 
above the average percentage) 
® most accurate performance 
Proper names: 
- Quite high percentage of close renditions (68.66%), surprisingly high 
percentage of zero renditions (14.21%) 
® manageable linguistic item 
but potential source of high cognitive load due to the difficulty of 
retaining the proper name in the short-term memory 
- Two students stand out: 

---

Results and discussion 
 
page 85 
o STU06: lowest percentage of close renditions (42.86%) and 
highest percentage of divergent renditions (28.57%) 
® least 
accurate performance 
o STU01: highest percentage of close renditions (73.33%) and 
lowest percentage of divergent renditions (0%) 
® most accurate 
performance 
As I said at the beginning of this section, it is important to analyse the percentage 
of close and divergent renditions in order to answer the first research question as 
these two types of rendition give clear evidence on the quality of the interpretation.
The different analyses carried out in the present study demonstrate that complex