研究生: |
楊素瑄 Yang, Su-Hsuan |
---|---|
論文名稱: |
聾人使用手語翻譯服務經驗之探究 The Perspective of Deaf Individuals’ Experience in Using Sign Language Interpreting Service |
指導教授: |
劉秀丹
Liu, Hsiu-Tan |
學位類別: |
碩士 Master |
系所名稱: |
復健諮商研究所 Graduate Institute of Rehabilitation Counseling |
論文出版年: | 2019 |
畢業學年度: | 107 |
語文別: | 中文 |
論文頁數: | 159 |
中文關鍵詞: | 聾人 、手語翻譯服務 、臺灣手語 、生態系統理論 、深度訪談 |
英文關鍵詞: | Deaf, sign language interpreting services, Taiwan Sign Language, Ecological Systems Theory, in-depth interview |
DOI URL: | http://doi.org/10.6345/NTNU201900473 |
論文種類: | 學術論文 |
相關次數: | 點閱:342 下載:28 |
分享至: |
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 |
隨著身心障礙者權利公約的落實,手語翻譯服務從「社會福利」提高到「基本人權維護」的層次。而回顧過往文獻,對於手語翻譯員職涯、手語翻譯服務體制的議題多有討論,卻少有從聾人觀點探討手語翻譯服務的研究,因此研究者以聾人為研究對象,將研究問題聚焦於:(一)在手語翻譯服務的行政流程中,聾人的經驗、想法和感受如何?和(二)手語翻譯服務進行的過程中,聾人的經驗、想法和感受為何?
研究方法方面,研究者採立意取樣和滾雪球的方式,招募六位受訪者,以半結構式的深度訪談收集資料,接著將受訪者原始的手語表達影像資料轉譯成描述性文字後,進行編碼以分類近似概念。
研究結果顯現:(一)行政流程方面的經驗是:讓聾人感到滿意的有表單設計清楚、聯繫管道多元、顧及聾人個別化需求;而讓聾人認為須改善的是窗口未統一、審核機制未深入評估、服務滿意度調查流於形式。(二)手語翻譯服務方面聾人的經驗是:正向經驗包含手語翻譯員使用聾人習慣的手語溝通方法,手形清楚、轉譯語句精練易懂,並搭配非手部的信號,以及會主動留意聾人的表情變化與需求;負向經驗則是手語翻譯員未做到同步、確實、雙向的翻譯,和未盡客觀中立角色,以及現場權威人士和旁觀者的行為與眼光,導致權益受限或感受不佳。
從研究結果覺察到「與聾人手語翻譯服務經驗息息相關的環境因素眾多」,故以生態系統理論進行綜合討論,各系統的影響元素有:(一)聾人個人系統特質;(二)微視系統的家人、朋友和手語翻譯志工;(三)中系統的手語翻譯員,翻譯服務現場的權威人士和其他在場者;還有(四)鉅視系統的翻譯服務承辦窗口、制度與政策、主流文化與社會期待。
最後,研究者嘗試對(一)未來相關研究的主題、對象與方法,以及(二)手語翻譯實務在制度面、窗口辦理、手語翻譯員服務與資訊平權倡議,提出相關建議。
The implementation of Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities elevates the status of sign language interpreting services to a new height—from the level of " social welfare " to that of "the protection of fundamental human rights" for the Deaf. Moreover, in the review of the relevant literature, it was discovered that there are many discussions about the career of sign language interpreters and the system of this professional, but few studies from the perspective of Deaf individuals. Therefore, this study invited Deaf individuals as interviewees, and focused on the following two questions. How are the experiences of the Deaf individuals applying for the sign language interpreting services, and how is it going on after the service end? In addition, during the sign language interpreting services, what do the Deaf individuals think and how do they feel?
Methods of understanding the two issues above-mentioned were six individual semi-structured interviews which were conducted by purposive and snowball sampling. After Taiwan Sign Language was translated into Chinese descriptive transcripts, the dialogues were coded and classified.
The results indicated that during the administration process, clear and simple designed forms, diversified contact pipelines, and individualization services satisfied interviewees. On the other hand, inconsistent contact people, rough examine mechanism, and the service satisfaction survey becoming just a formality were what they suggested to be improved. When sign language interpreting services were offered, if the interpreters used either Taiwan Sign Language or Manually Coded Chinese which the recipients were used to, kept hand shapes clearly, converted spoken languages into sign language sentences which could be grasped easily, shown nonmanual signals vividly, or the interpreters proactively paid attention to the facial expression of the recipients to sense whether they understood or not, they would bring out positive experiences to the Deaf individuals. However, if the interpreters did not interpret synchronously, accurately, impartially or could not lead two-way communication successfully, they might bring out negative experiences to them. Besides, the behavior of the authorities and the gaze of onlookers besides might limit the Deaf individuals' equal rights and have them feel embarrassed.
The findings from this research show that the Deaf individuals' experiences of sign language interpreting services are related to various environmental factors. Thus, the Ecological Systems Theory was used for a comprehensive discussion. The elements in each system include the characteristics of the Deaf individuals, microsystem: family members, friends, and volunteers who could provide interpreting services, mesosystem: sign language interpreters, or authorities and other participants on-site, and macrosystem: the service contacts, policies and legal rules, mainstream culture and social desirability.
Implications for future research regarding sign language interpreting service and suggestions for the service system will be discussed.
一、中文文獻
丁立芬(2018):手語文化在臺灣。載於汪其楣(主編),歸零與無限(42-53頁)。臺北市:聯合文學。
文化部(2017年7月23日):文化部「國家語言發展法(草案)」全國場公聽會登場 鄭麗君:將儘速完成「國家語言發展法」立法。文化新聞。取自:https://www.moc.gov.tw/informationlist_250.html
許天威(2010):台灣地區手語翻譯服務推廣成效調查與建議。內政部委託中華民國聲暉聯合會執行研究計畫報告書。臺中:中華民國聲暉聯合會。
邢敏華(1994):我對聽障生「最少限制環境」與「聾文化」的看法。特教園丁,9(4),35-38。
江儀安(2012):從特質、環境及態度探討聽覺障礙者就業之困境。桃竹區特殊教育,19,17-23。
朱柔若(譯)(2000):社會研究方法─質化與量化取向(原作者: W. L. Neuman)。臺北:智揚。
身心障礙者權利公約施行法(2014):中華民國103年8月20日總統華總(一)義字第10300123071號令制定公布。
身心障礙者權益保障法(2015):中華民國104年12月16日總統華總(一)義字第10400146761號令修正公布。
身心障礙學生支持服務辦法(2013):中華民國102年9月27日教育部臺教學(四)字第1020139818B號令修正發布。
李育逢(2016):「同步聽打」落實聽覺障礙學生資訊平權的理想與實踐—以國立臺灣大學畢業典禮為例。學生事務與輔導,55(2),66-72。
李振輝(1997):聽語障無障礙環境與手語翻譯員制度,福利社會,61,15-21。
宋曉真與邢敏華(2006):聾父母與聽小孩家庭的溝通和教養問題研究。特殊教育與復健學報,15,105-126。
余貞誼(2005):質性研究如何進行深度訪談與建立互信關係。婦研縱橫,76,31-47。
余珮瑩(2008):聽覺機能障礙者就業困境之研究。國立中正大學勞工所學位論文。
汪飛雪(2006):談手語翻譯應具備的技能。遼寧師專學報(社會科學版),2006(5),33-35。
林宜玲(2013):手語翻譯支持系統—以臺北市為例。聽障教育期刊,12,13-14。
林金定,嚴嘉楓與陳美花(2005):質性研究方法:訪談模式與實施步驟分析。身心障礙研究季刊,3(2),122-136。
林寶貴(2004):溝通障礙:理論與實務。臺北:心理。
孟繁玲(2013):我國手語翻譯專業教育的現狀、問題及對策。中州大學學報,30(3),87-90。
孟繁玲與韓路展(2015):我國高校手語翻譯職業現況分析—以中州大學為例。中州大學學報,32(2),112-116。
邱炳坤、李俊杰、李欣霓、黃美珍、楊宗文、陳子軒⋯⋯與顏伽如(譯)(2018):質性研究:設計及實施指南(原作者:S. B. Merriam & E. J. Tisdell)。臺北:五南(原著出版年代:2015)。
社團法人台灣手語翻譯協會(2018年3月):台灣手語翻譯員道德規範【官方網站會員大會紀錄】。取自:http://taslifamily.org/台灣手語翻譯員道德規範/
韋斯林、王巧麗、賈遠娥與陳飛霞(2017):教師學科教學能力模型的建構—基於扎根理論的10位特級教師的深度訪談。教師教育研究,29(4),84-91。
胡幼慧(2008):質性研究:理論、方法及本土女性研究實例。臺北:巨流。
胡叡克(2013):臺灣手語翻譯:邁向職業平等之路。臺灣師範大學翻譯研究所學位論文。
范麗娟(1994):深度訪談簡介。戶外遊憩研究,7(2),25-35。
香港聾人福利促進會(2019):手語傳譯服務、 手語培訓及發展。跨越聽障,共創新天(2017-2018週年報告),50-53。取自:https://www.deaf.org.hk/documents/annual/HKSD_AnnualReport_2017_2018.pdf
孫曉娥(2012):深度訪談研究方法的實證論析。西安交通大學學報 (社會科學版),32(3),101-106。
國家語言發展法草案:【會議記錄】,行政院第 3583 次會議(2018年1月4日)。
國家語言發展法(2019):中華民國108年1月9日總統華總(一)義字第10800003831號令制定公布。
張芬芬(2010):質性資料分析的五步驟:在抽象階梯上爬升。初等教育學刊,35,87-120。
張菡穎(2008):由句法探討手語聽障生書面語閱讀的現象。中央大學學習與教學研究所學位論文。
張榮興(2014):聾情覓意:我所看見的聾人教育。臺北:文鶴。
張寧生(2012):手語語地位的確立與中國大陸手語翻譯職業化進程的開創史。華節學院學報:綜合版,30(2),53-56。
張寧生與任海濱(2015):手語翻譯概論。鄭州:鄭州大學出版社。
許維素(2006):聽障者擇偶及婚姻適應歷程之研究。國立暨南國際大學輔導與諮商研究所學位論文。
張曉梅(2018年6月):翻譯碩士專業手語翻譯課程的教學實踐與思考。手語翻譯專業建設與人才培養國際研討會發表,吉林華僑外國語學院。
郭俊弘(2008):教育手語翻譯員的角色與職責。國小特殊教育,46,77-84。
郭昭吟、尹賢琪與李宜昌(2016):探討遠端抗生素審核中心之可行性—以個別深度訪談南區地區醫院為例。醫療資訊雜誌,25(4),35-50。
推動身心障礙者職務再設計服務實施計畫(2017):中華民國106年10月11日勞動部勞動發特字第10605160791號令修正發布。
游政諺(2014):成人聽覺障礙者的就醫經驗之研究。中正大學社會福利學系學位論文。
游政諺與陳孝平(2015):就一路關卡多:成人聽覺障礙者的就醫經驗之研究。臺灣社會福利學刊,12(2),145-184。
鈕文英(2012):質性研究方法與論文寫作。臺北:雙葉。
陳小娟與邢敏華(譯)(2007):失聰者:心理、教育及社會轉變中的觀點 (原作者:J. F. Andrews, I. W. Leigh & M. T. Weiner)。臺北:心理(原著出版年代:2004)
陳向明(2000):質的研究方法與社會科學研究。北京:教育科學。
陳志榮(2012):聾文化教學對啟聰學校高職部學生聾文化認同學習成效之研究。國立彰化師範大學特殊教育學系特殊教育行政碩士班學位論文。
陳育含(譯)(2010):訪談研究法(原作者:S. Kvale)。臺北:韋伯文化國際(原著作年代:2008)
陳詩翰(2013):成年聾人美術館參訪經驗的困境與對策。國立彰化師範大學美術學系學位論文。
張淑品(2011):就讀普通學校聽障學生的自我認同。特殊教育季刊,118,62-69。
黃玉枝、顧玉山與林靖宜(2007):學前聽障兒童雙語教育實施成效之研究。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告(編號:NSC 94-2413-H-153-015)。
黃琪雯(譯)(2015):沒有聲音的愛(原著者:V. Poulain)。臺北:寶瓶文化。(原著作年代:2014)
劉秀丹、曾進興與張勝成(2006):啟聰學校學生文法手語,自然手語及書面語故事理解能力之研究。特殊教育研究學刊,30,113-133。
劉秀丹與曾進興(2007):文法手語構詞語句法特性對聾生詞義與句義理解的影響。特殊教育研究學刊,32(1),77-92。
劉秀丹、曾進興與劉俊榮(2009):自然手語與文法手語的詞彙記憶廣度比較。特殊教育研究學刊,34(3),25-45。
葉乃靜(2012):圖書館學與資訊科學大辭典:質性研究。國家教育研究院。取自http://terms.naer.edu.tw/detail/1678706/
萬文隆(2004):深度訪談在質性研究中的應用。生活科技教育月刊,37(4),17-23。
潘淑滿(2003):質性研究:理論與應用。臺北市:心理。
翟宗悌(2015):聽覺障礙者/聾人的心理諮商。輔導季刊,51(4),50-60。
聶湘怡(2018年9月):你所不知道的手語翻譯員困境?!【線上新聞】。取自:
https://www.laf.org.tw/index.php?action=LAFBaoBao-detail&tag=242,364&id=171
羅裕群與陳志遠(2014):以數位科技輔具改善溝通障礙。實踐博雅學報,21,53-80。
蘇芳柳(2000):大學校院手語翻譯服務之研究—以一私立大學為例。特殊教育研究學刊,19,235-252。
聾視聞(2017年3月):中華民國聾人協會理事長牛暄文3月18日上午在台南舉行的文化部國家語言發展法草案公聽會上發言,表達聾人意見,爭取「台灣手語列入國家語言」,獲得熱烈掌聲和支持。取自:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3p9f0X4qT0
二、外文文獻
Allyn, W., William, B., Alexandra K. A., & Kevin. S. (2018). Listening to deaf consumers: Reconciling the dilemmas of physiological fixes, cultural alienation, and inadvertent market-place exclusion. Marketing and Public Policy Conference Proceedings, 10-12.
Anderson, M. L., Craig, W., Kelly, S., & Ziedonis, D. M. (2017). Deaf people’s help-seeking following trauma: Experiences with and recommendations for the Massachusetts behavioral health care system. Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice, and Policy, 9(2), 239.
Andrew S. (2013, October 10). There's No Such Thing as a Normal Family. [Interview conducted by Johann G., Julia K] Retrieved from https://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/andrew-solomon-discusses-his-book-far-from-the-tree-a-926925.html
Atherton, M. (2009). A feeling as much as a place: Leisure, Deaf clubs and the British Deaf community. Leisure Studies, 28(4), 443-454.
Avon, A. (2006). Watching films, learning language, experiencing culture: An account of Deaf culture through history and popular films. The Journal of Popular Culture, 39(2), 185-204.
Barnett, S., Klein, J. D., Pollard Jr, R. Q., Samar, V., Schlehofer, D., Starr, M., ... & Pearson, T. A. (2011). Community participatory research with deaf sign language users to identify health inequities. American Journal of Public Health, 101(12), 2235-2238.
Berge, S. S. (2018). How sign language interpreters use multimodal actions to coordinate turn-taking in group work between deaf and hearing upper secondary school students. Interpreting, 20(1), 96-125.
Berge, S. S. & Ytterhus, B. (2015). Deaf and hearing high-school students’ expectations for the role of educational sign-language interpreter. Society, Health and Vulnerability, 6, 1-26.
Bontempo, K., Napier, J., Hayes, L., & Brashear, V. (2014). Does personality matter? An international study of sign language interpreter disposition. Translation and Interpreting, 6(1), 23-46.
Boyce, C., & Neale, P. (2006). Conducting in-depth interviews: A guide for designing and conducting in-depth interviews for evaluation input. Watertown, MA: Pathfinder Press.
Breen, J. S. (2015). On-demand American Sign Language interpreting Services: Social policy development in the Yukon. Sign Language Studies, 15(3), 348-361.
Brice, P. J. (2002). Ethical issues in working with deaf children, adolescents, and their families. In V. Gutman (Ed.), Ethics in Mental Health and Deafness (pp. 52-67). Washington, D.C.: Galludet University Press.
Broesterhuizen, M. (2005). Faith in Deaf culture. Theological Studies, 66(2), 304-329.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1992). Ecological systems theory. In R. Vasta (Ed.), Six theories of child development: Revised formulations and current issues (pp.187-249). London, England: Jessica Kingsley Press.
Brunson, J. L. (2007). Your case will now be heard: Sign language interpreters as problematic accommodations in legal interactions. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 13(1), 77-91.
Cataldi, S. (2018). A proposal for the analysis of the relational dimension in the interview techniques: A pilot study on in-depth interviews and focus groups. Quality and Quantity, 52(1), 295-312.
Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (2006). Retrived from http://www.un.org/disabilities/
Crump, C. J., & Hamerdinger, S. H. (2017). Understanding etiology of hearing loss as a contributor to language dysfluency and its impact on assessment and treatment of people who are deaf in mental health settings. Community Mental Health Journal, 53(8), 922-928.
De Bruin, E., & Brugmans, P. (2006). The psychotherapist and the sign language interpreter. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 11(3), 360-368.
De Clerck, G. A. (2011). Fostering deaf people's empowerment: The Cameroonian Deaf community and epistemological equity. Third World Quarterly, 32(8), 1419-1435.
Druel, V., Hayet, H., Esman, L., Clavel, M., & Bugat, M. E. R. (2018). Assessment of cancers’ diagnostic stage in a Deaf community-survey about 4363 deaf patients recorded in French units. BMC Cancer, 18(1), 93.
Ecological systems theory. (2018). Salem press encyclopedia of science. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ers&AN=113931287&lang=zh-tw&site=eds-live
Freebody, P., & Power, D. (2001). Interviewing deaf adults in postsecondary educational settings: Stories, cultures, and life histories. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 6(2), 130-142.
Hadjikakou, K., & Nikolaraizi, M. (2011). Deaf clubs today: Do they still have a role to play? The cases of Cyprus and Greece. American Annals of the Deaf, 155(5), 605-617.
Henning, M. A., Krägeloh, C. U., Sameshima, S., Shepherd, D., Shepherd, G., & Billington, R. (2011). Access to New Zealand sign language interpreters and quality of life for the Deaf: A pilot study. Disability and Rehabilitation, 33(25-26), 2559-2566.
Hommes, R. E., Borash, A. I., Hartwig, K., & DeGracia, D. (2018). American Sign Language interpreters’ perceptions of barriers to healthcare communication in deaf and hard of hearing patients. Journal of Community Health, 43(5), 956-961.
Jassal, Y. R. (2017). Learning about Deaf culture: More accessible than previously thought. American Annals of the Deaf, 161(5), 583-584.
Kayess, R., & French, P. (2008). Out of darkness into light? Introducing the convention on the rights of persons with disabilities. Human Rights Law Review, 8(1), 1-34.
Kemmery, M. A., & Compton, M. V. (2014). Are you Deaf or hard of hearing? Which do you go by: Perceptions of identity in families of students with hearing loss. The Volta Review, 114(2), 157-192.
Kushalnagar, P., Engleman, A., & Sadler, G. (2018). Deaf patient-provider communication and lung cancer screening: Health information national trends survey in American Sign Language (HINTS-ASL). Patient Education and Counseling, 101(7), 1232-1239.
Kushalnagar, P., McKee, M., Smith, S. R., Hopper, M., Kavin, D., & Atcherson, S. R. (2014). Conceptual model for quality of life among adults with congenital or early deafness. Disability and Health Journal, 7(3), 350-355.
Leigh, I. W., Andrews, J. F., & Harris, R. (2016). Deaf culture: Exploring Deaf communities in the United States. San Diego, CA: Plural Press.
Marschark, M., & Spencer, P. E. (2010). The Oxford handbook of deaf studies, language, and education, Volume 2. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Mauldin, L. (2018). " Coming out" rhetoric in disability studies: Exploring the limits of analogy by looking at its fit with the Deaf experience. Disability Studies Quarterly, 38(2).
McKee, M. M., Barnett, S. L., Block, R. C., & Pearson, T. A. (2011). Impact of communication on preventive services among deaf American Sign Language users. American journal of preventive medicine, 41(1), 75-79.
Milena, Z. R., Dainora, G., & Alin, S. (2008). Qualitative research methods: A comparison between focus-group and in-depth interview. Annals of the University of Oradea, Economic Science Series, 17(4), 1279-1283.
Napier, J. (2004). Sign language interpreter training, testing, and accreditation: An international comparison. American Annals of the Deaf, 149(4), 350-359.
Nonaka, A. M. (2016). Legal and ethical imperatives for using certified sign language interpreters in health care settings: How to “do no harm” when “it’s (all) Greek” (sign language) to you. Care Management Journals, 17(3), 114-128.
Pabsch, A. (2017). Sign language legislation as a tool for sustainability. American Annals of the Deaf, 162(4), 365-376.
Rivas, R., & G-L, M. (2016). Exploring culture through in-depth interviews: Is it useful to ask people about what they think, mean, and do? Cinta de Moebio. Revista de Epistemología de Ciencias Sociales, 57, 316-329.
Rosenthal, M. (2016). Qualitative research methods: Why, when, and how to conduct interviews and focus groups in pharmacy research. Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning, 8(4), 509-516.
Santos, C. M. S. M. (2011). Supervising sign language interpreters students. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 29, 5-12.
Schmitt, P. (2017). Representations of sign language, Deaf people, and interpreters in the arts and the media. Sign Language Studies, 18(1), 130-147.
Siple, P., & Fischer, S. D. (1991). Theoretical issues in sign language research, Volume 2: Psychology. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
Spiggle, S. (1994). Analysis and interpretation of qualitative data in consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 21(3), 491-503.
Stokar, H., & Orwat, J. (2018). Hearing managers of deaf workers: A phenomenological investigation in the restaurant industry. American Annals of the Deaf, 163(1), 13-34.
Stone, C. A. (2017). Sign language interpreter aptitude: The trials and tribulations of a longitudinal study. Translation and Interpreting, 9(1), 72-87.
Terry, D. R., Lê, Q., & Nguyen, H. B. (2016). Moving forward with dignity: Exploring health awareness in an isolated Deaf community of Australia. Disability and Health Journal, 9(2), 281-288.
Vernon, M., L. J. Raifman, S. F. Greenberg, & B. Moteiro. (2001). Forensic pretrial police interviews of deaf suspects avoiding legal pitfalls. Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 24, 43-59.
Xiao, X., Chen, X., & Palmer, J. L. (2015). Chinese deaf viewers’ comprehension of sign language interpreting on television: An experimental study. Interpreting, 17(1), 91-117.
日本手話通訳士協会(2014):The situation of sign language interpretation in Japan. Retrieved from
http://www.jasli.jp/pdf/Presentation%20for%20Macau%20(2014)%20Situation%20of%20JSLI.pdf