國立臺灣師範大學博碩士論文全文系統

簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

回結果列表

研究生：	洪筱雯
論文名稱：	口譯訓練對同步口譯表現之影響 The Influence of Interpretation Training on Simultaneous Interpretation Performance
指導教授：	李櫻 Li, Ing
學位類別：	碩士 Master
系所名稱：	翻譯研究所 Graduate Institute of Translation and Interpretation
論文出版年：	2002
畢業學年度：	90
語文別：	中文
中文關鍵詞：	口譯訓練、同步口譯
論文種類：	學術論文
相關次數：	點閱：282 下載：63
分享至:	分享至facebook 分享至twitter

查詢本校圖書館目錄查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統勘誤回報

本研究旨在探討口譯訓練的成效, 藉由兩組譯者: 10位受過兩年口譯訓練且通過專業考的學生與10位即將接受口譯訓練的新生, 針對同一篇講稿所做的口譯表現加以評估, 研究其完整度, 準確度, 忠實度和流暢度是否存在明顯的差異。重要研究發現如下: (1) 受過訓練的譯者所呈現的譯文較為完整, 同時也較為準確和忠實; 流暢度更是存在明顯的差異。(2) 組內的個別差異往往比兩組之間的差異來得大。(3) 就遺漏的訊息與口譯的錯誤內容加以分析, 兩組譯者呈現高度相似性。根據研究結果, 口譯訓練對於譯文的完整度, 準確度, 和忠實度只有些許的影響, 但對於譯者的流暢度則有極大的助益。

This study evaluates the influence of SI training based on the corpus data collected from the speech production by trained and untrained interpreters. The assessment includes not only the content-based criteria, i.e. completeness, accuracy and fidelity, but also speech delivery. Quantitative and qualitative analysis are both attempted to disclose a better picture of the truth. The major findings of this study are: (1) Trained interpreters showed only a marginal advantage over untrained interpreters in terms of completeness and accuracy. In fluency, however, a noticeable gap is found between trained and untrained interpreters as the subjects with interpretation training tend to deliver their interpretations much more smoothly without excessive disruptions. (2) Variance within the same group, however, is much greater than difference between groups, especially for untrained interpreters. (3) A striking similarity is observed between groups in omission types, error types and types of speech disruptions. According to the research findings in this study, the effect of interpretation training is not strong in completeness or accuracy but in fluency.

Acknowledgements……………………………….……………………………………i
Abstracts………………………………………………………………………………ii
Table of Contents…………………………………………………………………..…iii
List of Tables ..……………………………………………………………………….vi
List of Figures……………………………………………………………..vii

CHAPTER 1   INTRODUCTION	1
1 Background of the Study	1
2 Purpose of the Study	4
3 Organization of the Study	5

CHAPTER 2   LIERATURE REVIEW	7
1 Previous Research on SI Training	7
2 Mike Dillinger’s SI Study	9
2.1. Subjects and Materials	9
2.2 Evaluation Method	10
2.3 Assessment Criteria	12
2.3.1 Syntactic Processing	12
2.3.2 Proposition Generating	13
2.3.3 Frame Processing	14
2.3.4 Text Structure	16
2.4 Research Findings	17
3 Assessment of Dillinger’s Research	18
4 Barik’s SI Research	20
4.1 Subjects and Materials	20
4.2 Assessment Criteria and Evaluation Method	21
4.2.1 Omissions	21
4.2.2 Additions	22
4.2.3 Substitutions and Errors	23
4.3 Research Findings	23
5 Assessment of Barik’s research	27



CHAPTER 3   METHODOLOGY	31
1 Nature of the Study	31
2 Assumptions	32
2.1 SI Training	33
2.2 Language Proficiency	34
2.3 Knowledge of the Subject Matter	35
3 Research Design	36
3.1 Scope of Research	36
3.2 Subjects	37
3.3 The Speech Text	39
3.4 Procedure	41
4. Assessment	42
4.1. Assessment Criteria	44
4.2 Assessment Method	45
4.2.1 Completeness	46
4.2.2 Accuracy	49
4.2.3 Fidelity	52
4.2.4 Fluency	52
5 Research Limitations	53
5.1 Deviations from Standard Interpreting Practice	53
5.2 Exclusion of SI Users as Evaluators	54
5.3 Lack of a Comprehensive Set of Parameters	55
5.4 Lack of Long-Term Observation	56

CHAPTER 4   RESEARCH FINDINGS	57
1 Comparison of Speech Production in Terms of Completeness	57
1.1 Comparison of Completeness	58
1.1.1 Between Groups	58
1.1.2 Between Interpreters	59
1. 2 Comparison of Completeness Types	60
1.3 Comparison of Omission Types	61
1.4 Content Analysis of Omissions	66
2 Comparison of Speech Production in Terms of Accuracy	75
2.1 Comparison of Accuracy	76
2.1.1 Between Groups	76
2.1.2 Between Interpreters	76
2.2 Comparison of Error Types	77
2.3 Content Analysis of Errors	78
3 Comparison of Speech Production in Terms of Fidelity	84
3.1 Between Groups	84
3.2 Between Interpreters	85
4 Comparison of Speech Production in Terms of Fluency	86
4.1 Comparison of Fluency	86
4.1.1 Between Groups	86
4.1.2 Between Interpreters	87
4.2 Types of Speech Disruptions	88
5 Discussion	92
5.1 Interaction between Completeness and Accuracy	92
5.2 Interaction between Fluency and Completeness	93
5.3 Interaction between Fluency and Accuracy	94
6 Summary	95

CHAPTER 5   CONCLUSION	97
1 Major Findings	97
2 Implications	100
3 Limitations and Suggestions for Further Studies	102

REFERENCES	104
Appendix I   Speech Text	109
Appendix II   Samples	112
Appendix III.  Evaluation Sheets	153

















List of Tables


Table 3.1 Subject Interpreters’ TOFEL Scores	35
Table 4.1 Completeness Rate for Each Individual Interpreter	59
Table 4.2 Distribution of Renderings in Regard to Completeness	60
Table 4.3 Distribution of Omission Content Types	71
Table 4.4 Accuracy Rate for Each Individual Interpreter	77
Table 4.5 Comparison of Inaccurate Renderings	77
Table 4.6 Fidelity Rate for Each Individual Interpreter	85
Table 4.7 Number of Speech Disruptions for Each Individual Interpreter	88
Table 4.8 Completeness and Accuracy Rates	92
Table 4.9 Completeness and Fluency Rates	94
Table 4.10 Accuracy and Fluency Rates	95



List of Figures

Figure 4.1 Omission Rate of Content Types	72
Figure 4.2 Frequency of Error Categories	84
Figure 4.3 Number of Speech Disruptions	87
Figure 4.4 Comparison of Disruption Types Between Groups	88
                                

Andres, D. (2000). Konsekutivdolmetschen und Notizen. Empirische Untersuchung
mentaler Prozesse bei Anfangern in der Dolmetscherausbildung und
professionellen Dolmetschern, thesis, University of Vienna.
Barik, H. (1969). A Study of Simultaneous Interpretation. Psychology Department,
University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation.)
Barik, H. C. (1991). A description of various types of omissions, additions and errors
of translation encountered in simultaneous interpretation. Meta XVI(4), 199-210.
Barik, H. C. (1994). A description of various types of omissions, additions and errors
of translation encountered in simultaneous interpretation. In S. Lambert &
Moser-Mercer (Eds.), Bridging the gap. Empirical research in simultaneous
interpretation (121-137). Amersterdam: John Benjamins.
Beaugrande, Robert-Alain de & Wolfgang U. Dressler. (1981). Introduction to Text
Linguistics. London: Longman.
Bennett, Gillian. (1986). Narrative as expository discourse. Journal of American
Folklore, 99:394, 415-434.
Buehler, H. (1986). Linguistics (semantic) and extra-linguistic(pragmatic) criteria for
the evaluation of conference interpretation and interpreters. Multilingua 5.
231-235. Chafe, Wallace L. 1980. (ed.) The Pear Story: Cognitive, Cultural, and
Linguistic Aspects of Narrative Production. Norwood, NJ: Ablex
Chen, May M. (1990). Cohesive Devices in Spoken Chinese Narrative Discourse. Unpublished M.A. thesis, National Taiwan Normal University.
Chernov, G. (1985). Interpretation research in the Soviet Union: results and
prospects. Translators and their Positions in Society. Proceedings of the Xth
World Congress of FIT (H. Buhler, ed.) Vienna, Braumuller, pp.169-177.
Chin, Wei-yun. (1999). Narrative Structure in Spoken Mandarin. Unpublished M.A.
thesis, National Taiwan Normal University.
Corder, S.P. (1981). Error Analysis and Interlanguage. Oxford University Press.
Coulthard, Malcolm. (1985). An Introduction to Discourse Analysis. London:
Longman.
Dejean le Feal, K. (1990). Some thoughts on the evaluation of simultaneous
interpretation. Interpreting –Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow (D. and M. Bowen, eds.), Binghamton (NY), SUNY, pp. 154-160.
Dillilnger, M. (1989). Component Process of Simultaneous Interpretating. Department
of Educational Psychology, McGill University, Montreal, Canada. (Unpublished
Doctoral Dissertation.)
Dillilnger, M. (1994). Comprehension during interpreting: What do interpreters
know that bilinguals don’t? In S. Lambert & Moser-Mercer (Eds.), Bridging the
gap. Empirical research in simultaneous interpretation (155-189). Amersterdam:
John Benjamins.
Ericsson, K. and H. Simon. (1984). Protocol Analysis: Verbal Reports as Data.
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Fraisse, Paul, Jean Piaget and Maurice Reuchlin. (1989). Traite de psychologie
experimentale, Vol. I: Histoire et methode. Paris: PUF. Sixth Edition.
Gerver, D. (1976). Empirical studies of simultaneous interpretation: A review and a
model. R. Brislin, ed. Translation: Application and Research. New York:
Gardner. 165-207.
Gile, D. (1988). “An Overview of Conference Interpretation Research and Theory”.
D. Hammond, ed. American Translators Association Conference 1988. Medford,
NJ: Learned Information. 363-372.
Gile, D. (1989). La Communication Linguistique en Reunion Multilingue – Les
Difficultes de la Transmission Informationelle en Interpretation Simultanee.
Universite de Paris III. (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation.)
Gile, D. (1990). Scientific research vs. personal theories in the investigation of
interpretation”. Laura Gran & Christopher Taylor, ed. Aspects of Applied and
Experimental Research on Conference Interpretation. Round Table on
Interpretation Research, November 16, 1989. University of Trieste, Italy. 28-41.
Gile, D. (1991). “Methodological Aspects of Interpretation and Translation Research”.
Target 3:2. 153-174.
Gile, D. (1991). “A Communication-Oriented Analysis of Quality,” Translation: Theory and Practice. ATA Scholarly Monograph Series (M.L. Larson eds.), Binghamton (NY), SUNY, vol. 5, 00. 188-200.
Gile, D. (1995). Basic Concepts and Models for Interpreter and Translator Training.
Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Gile, D. (1998). “Observational Studies and Experimental Studies in the Investigation
Of Conference Interpreting”. Target, 10:1. 69-93.
Henry, R. and D. Henry. (1987). International Bibliography of Interpretation.
Sudbury, Ontario, Canada: Laurentian University.
Herbert, Jean. (1952). Manuel de l’Interprete. Geneva: Georg.
Kopczyski, A. (1983). Deviation in conference interpreting. A. Kopczynski, ed.
The Mission of the Translator Today and Tomorrow. Polska Angencja Interpress.
401.
Kurz, I. (1989). Conference interpreting: user expectations. ATA – Proceedings of
the 30th Annual Conference. Medford, NJ: Learned Information Inc. 143-148.
Labov, W., & J. Waletzky. (1967). Narrative analysis: oral version of personal
experience,” Essays on the Verbal and visual Arts, J.Helms, (ed.) 12-44.
Seattle: University of Washington Press.
Labov, Williams. (1972). The transformation of experience in narrative syntax.
Language in the Inner City. 354-396. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania
Press.
Lawson, E. (1967). Attention and simultaneous translation”. Language and Speech
10. 29-35.
Longley, P. (1978). An integrated programme for training interpreters. D. Gerver
and W. H. Sinaiko, eds. Language Interpretation and Communication. New
York: Plenum Press. 45-46.
MacDonald, J. and Carpenter, P. (1981). Simultaneous translation: idiom
interpretation and parsing heuristics. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal
Behavior 20:2. 231-247.
Mackintosh, J. (1985). The Kintsch and van Dijk model of discourse
comprehension and production applied to the interpretation process. Meta
XXX: 1. 37-43.
Meak, L. 1983. La Selezione dell’Informazione per Interpretazione Simultanea della
Literatura Media. Trieste, Universita degli Studi di Trieste, Scuola Superiore
di Lingue Moderne per Interpreti e Traduttori. (Unpublished monograph.)
Moser, P. (1996). Expectations of users of conference interpreting. Interpreting 1/2, pp. 145-178.
Ng, B.C. (1992). End users’ subjective reaction to the performance of student
interpreters. The Interpreters’ Newsletter, Special Issue 1, pp. 35-41.
Pochhacker, F. (1994). Quality assurance in simultaneous interpreting. Teaching
Translation and Interpreting 2: Insight, Aims, Visions; Papers from the Second Language International Conference (Elsinore, Denmark, June 4-6, 1993), Amsterdam/Philadelphia, John Benjamins, pp. 233-242.
Schriffin, Deborah. (1987). Discourse Markers. Cambridge. Cambridge University
Press.
Seleskovitch, D. (1968). L’interprete dans les conferences internationals. Paris. Lettres
modernes. Minard.
Seleskovitch, Danica. (1978). Interpreting for International Conferences. Washington,
D.C.: Pen and Booth.
Shlesinger, M. (1997). Quality in simultaneous interpreting. Conference
Interpreting: Current Trends in Research (Y. Gambier, D. Gile and C. Taylor,
eds), Amsterdam and Philadelphia, John Benjamins, pp. 123-131.
Stenzel, C. (1983). Simultaneous Interpretation-Groundwork Towards a Comprehensive
Model. University of London. (Unpublished Masters’ Thesis.)
Tanen, Deborah. (1993). Framing in Discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Thompson, Sandra A. (1987). ‘Subordination’ and narrative event structure.
Coherence and Grounding in Discourse, Russell S. Tomlin, (ed.) 435-454.
Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Tsai, S. I. (1996). Gambits in Mandarin Spoken Discourse. Unpublished M.A. thesis,
National Taiwan Normal University.
Tsao, Feng-fu. (1979). A Functional Study of Topic in Chinese: The First Step Towards
Wald, Benji. (1987). Cross-clause relations and temporal sequence in narrative and
beyond,” Coherence and Grounding in Discourse, Russell S. Tomlin, (ed.) 481-
512. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

相關論文