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：	張荷青 Chang, Ho-ching
論文名稱：	語言能力與視譯訓練對視譯表現的影響 The Influence of Language Proficiency and Sight Translation Training toward Sight Translation Performance
指導教授：	陳子瑋 Chen, Tze-Wei
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：	語言能力、視譯訓練
論文種類：	學術論文
相關次數：	點閱：223 下載：64
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

本文旨在探討不同語言能力與視譯訓練對視譯表現的影響，以期對視譯本身及如何改善其訓練有更進一步的了解。本研究的評估標準為：一忠實度（fidelity）－又細分為誤譯（miss-interpretation）、刪減訊息（omissions）、怪中文（unnatural Chinese）等。二順譯（ST chunking）－包括順句驅動（chunk-moving）、句構連結（chunk-connection）等。三表達（delivery）－意指重複語（backtracks）、填充語（fillers）、停頓（pauses）、時間控制（time）等。主要的研究發現如下：一視譯訓練在良好語言能力的輔助下可以造就最佳的視譯表現。二對視譯表現而言，語言能力的影響高於視譯訓練。三語言能力應為視譯訓練的基石。

This research probes into the influence of subjects’ different language proficiency and Sight Translation training toward their Sight Translation performances, so as to learn more about Sight Translation and how to improve its training. The evaluation criteria in this research are: 1) fidelity, which is divided into miss-interpretation, omissions, and unnatural Chinese; 2) sight translation chunking, which includes chunk-moving, and chunk-connection; 3) delivery, which covers backtracks, fillers, pauses, and time. The major findings are: 1) sight translation training, with the help of high language proficiency, makes the best ST performance 2) language proficiency has more influence on ST performance than ST training 3) language proficiency should be the prerequisite of ST training.

Table of Contents

Title Page                                             i
Approval Page                                         ii
Acknowledgements                                     iii
Abstract                                              iv
Table of Contents                                       v
List of Tables                                          x
List of Figures                                         xi
Chapter One  Introduction                               1
1.1	The Definition of Sight Translation                  1
1.2	Sight Translation in Conference Interpreting           2
1.3	Research Background                             4
1.4	Research Objectives                              5
1.5	Research Framework                              6
1.6	Thesis Outline                                   7
Chapter Two   Literature Review                            9
      2.1 General Issues on Sight Translation                  9
         2.1.1 The Importance of Sight Translation            10
         2.1.2 Gile’s Effort Model for Sight Translation        11
         2.1.3 Information Retention                       13
         2.1.4 Eye Movements                            14
         2.1.5 Sight Translation Training                  15
      2.2 Sight Translation vs. Simultaneous Interpretation     17
         2.2.1 Error Analysis                            18
         2.2.2 Interferences                             25
         2.2.3 Delivery                                 27
      2.3 Sight Translation vs. Consecutive Interpretation      28
      2.4 English vs. Chinese Sentence Structure             28
Chapter Three  Methodology                             32
      3.1 Nature of the Study                             32
      3.2 Scope of the Research                           34
      3.3 Assumptions                                  35
         3.3.1 Subjects’ language Proficiency               36
         3.3.2 The Disturbances in this Study               37
      3.4 Research Design                               38
         3.4.1 The Structure of the Case Study              38
         3.4.2 The Speech text                           39
         3.4.3 Subjects’ Processing Capacity                41
         3.4.4 The Pilot Study                            43
         3.4.5 Definition of Fidelity                       44
         3.4.6 Definition of ST Chunking                   45
         3.4.7 Definition of Delivery                      47
         3.4.8 Evaluation Criteria                         48
      3.5 Implementation                               49
         3.5.1 Subjects’ Groupings                       49
         3.5.2 Subjects’ Background                      50
         3.5.3 Sample Size                              54
         3.5.4 Implementation                           54
      3.6 Research Limitations                           55
         3.6.1 Gray Areas in Evaluation                   55
         3.6.2 Missing Audience                         56
         3.6.3 Limited Sample Size                       56
         3.6.4 Limited Scope                            57
         3.6.5 Other Limitations                          58
Chapter Four  Research Findings                          60
      4.1 Comparisons of Fidelity                         61
         4.1.1 The Segmentation of Meaning units           62
         4.1.2 Comparisons of Miss-interpretation
              among the Groups                            63
         4.1.3 Comparisons of Omissions among the Groups   65
         4.1.4 Comparisons of Unnatural Chinese
among the Groups                         67
         4.1.5 Implications for ST Training                 68
      4.2 Comparisons of ST Chunking                     69
         4.2.1 The Skills of Chunking                      70
         4.2.2 Comparisons of Chunk-moving among the Groups  71
         4.2.3 Comparisons of Chunk-connection
among the Groups                           72
         4.2.4 Implications for ST Training                   74
      4.3 Comparisons of Delivery                          75
         4.3.1 Backtracks, Fillers, Pauses and Time   75
         4.3.2 Comparisons of Backtracks among the Groups     76
         4.3.3 Comparisons of Fillers among the Groups         77
         4.3.4 Comparisons of Pauses among the Groups         78
         4.3.5 Comparisons of Time Spent among the Groups     80
         4.3.6 General Findings                             81
         4.3.7 Implications for Training                       82
      4.4 Discussion                                       82
         4.4.1 The Influence of Language Proficiency            82
         4.4.2 The Influence of ST Training                    83
         4.4.3 Language Proficiency vs. ST training             84
         4.4.4 Mere Concepts vs. Intensive Training             85
         4.4.5 Implications for Future ST Training              86
      4.5 Suggestions for Future Improvement                  86
         4.5.1 The Differences within the Same Group           87
         4.5.2 Their Notes, Slashes, and Psychology             87
Chapter Five  Conclusion                                   88
      5.1 Research Results                                 88
      5.2 Implications for ST Training                        91
      5.3 Room for Improvement                            92
      5.4 Suggestions for Future Studies                       93
References                                                94
Appendix A                                              101
Appendix B                                              102
Appendix C                                              105
Appendix D                                              107
Appendix E                                              111
Appendix F                                              115
Appendix G                                              118
Appendix H                                              119
Appendix I                                               120
Appendix J                                               121

List of Tables
Table 3.1  Background Information of Group A Subjects       51
Table 3.2  Background Information of Group B Subjects       52
Table 3.3  Background Information of Group C Subjects       53
Table 4.1  Chunks of the complex sentences moved too far
by the 3 groups                               71
Table 4.2  The unsuccessful connections made by the 3 groups  73
Table 4.3  Average time spent by the three groups respectively    80


List of Figures
Figure 4.1 The comparison of miss-interpreted units
among the groups                              64
Figure 4.2 The comparison of omissions among the groups         66
Figure 4.3 The comparison of translationese units among the groups  67
Figure 4.4 Numbers of backtracks made by the three groups        77
Figure 4.5 Numbers of Fillers used by the three groups            78
Figure 4.6 Numbers of pauses made by the three groups           79
                                

References
In English:
Adriessen, J.J. and A. H. de Voogd. “Analysis of Eye Movements Patterns in Silent Reading.” IPO, Annual Report 8 (1973): 29-34.
Alexieva, Bistra. “The Optimum Text in Simultaneous Interpreting: A Cognitive Approach to Interpreting Training”. Teaching Translation and Interpreting-Training, Talent, and Experience. Ed. Cay Dollerup and Anne Loddegaard. Denmark: John Benjamins B.V. 1992. 221-229.
Al-khanji, Rajai, Said El-shiyab, and Riyadh Hussein. “On the Use of Compensatory Strategies in Simultaneous Interpretation”. Meta XLV, 3 (2000): 548-557.
Altman, Janet. “Error Analysis in The Teaching of Simultaneous Interpretation: A Pilot Study”. Bridging the Gap. Ed. Sylvie Lambert and Barbara Moser-mercer. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 1994. 25-38.
Barik, Henri C. “A Description of Various Types of Omissions, Additions and Errors of Translation Encountered in Simultaneous Interpretation”. Bridging the Gap. Ed. Sylvie Lambert and Barbara Moser-mercer. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 1994. 121-138.
Chang, Wu-chang, Director of English Department, NTNU. Telephone interview. 10 Jan. 2002.
Chernov, Ghelly V. “Message Redundancy and Message Anticipation in Simultaneous Interpretation”. Bridging the Gap. Ed. Sylvie Lambert and Barbara Moser-mercer. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 1994. 139-154.
Cowie, A.P., ed. Phraseology: Theory, Analysis, and Applications. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998.
Craik F.I.M and R.S. Lockhart. “Levels of Processing: A Framework for Memory Research.” Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 11 (1972): 671-684.
Dillinger, Mike. “Comprehension during Interpreting: What do interpreters know that Bilinguals don’t?” Bridging the Gap. Ed. Sylvie Lambert and Barbara Moser-mercer. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 1994. 155-190.
Fromkin, Victoria and Robert Rodman. An Introduction to Language. 6th ed. Orlando: Harcourt Brace College Publishers, 1998.
Gerver D. “Simultaneous Listening and Speaking and Retention of Prose.” Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 26 (1974): 337-341
Gibaldi, Joseph. MLA Handbook for Writers of Research Papers. 4th ed. New York: The Modern Language Association of America, 1995.
Gile, Daniel. “Observational Studies and Experimental Studies in the Investigation of Conference interpreting.” Target 10:1 (1998): 69-93.
Gile, Daniel. “Conference Interpreting as a Cognitive Management Problem”.
Cognitive Processes in Translation and Interpreting. Ed. Joseph H. Danks et al. California: SAGE Publications Inc., 1997. 196-214.
Gile, Daniel. Basic Concepts and Models for Interpreter and Translator Training. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 1995.
Gile, Daniel. “Methodological Aspects of Interpretation and Translation Research”. Bridging the Gap. Ed. Sylvie Lambert and Barbara Moser-mercer. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 1994. 39-56.
Gläser, Rosemarie. “The Stylistic Potential of Phraseological Units in the Light of Genre Analysis.” Phraseology: Theory, Analysis, and Applications. Ed. Cowie, A.P. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998. 125-127.
He, Jishen. “English-Chinese Machine Translation: Theories and practice.” Diss. The University of Georgia, 1993.
Her, Emily. “Binary Error Analysis of Sight Translation from English into Chinese and its Pedagogical Implications.” Studies of Interpretation and Translation Vol. 2 (1997): 111-135.
IRN Bulletin, the. Ed. Daniel Gile. 20, 21 (June, Sep., 2000). Online. Internet. 12 Dec. 2001.
Jones, Roderick. Conference Interpreting Explained. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing, 1998.
Lambert, S. “Information Processing Among Conference Interpreters: A Test of the Depth-of-Processing Hypothesis.” The Theoretical and Practical Aspects of Teaching Conference Interpretation Ed. L. Gran and J. Dodds. Udine: Campanotto Editore, 1989.
Lee, Pey-chih. “A Study of Note-taking in Consecutive Interpretation – Students’ Learning Behavior.” Thesis. National Taiwan Normal U, 2000.
Li, Yunxing. “The Sentence Group: The Key Discoursal Level in Translation Teaching”. Teaching Translation and Interpreting 3-New Horizons. Ed. Cay Dollerup and Vibeke Appel. Denmark: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 1996. 111-117.
Marquez, Alex and Marta Marquez. The New Interpreters Handbook. California: Iberia Language Press, 1987.
Massaro, D.W., ed. Understanding Language: An Information Processing Analysis of Speech Perception, Reading and Psycholinguistics. New York: Academic Press, 1975. “An Information Processing Model of Understanding Speech.” Language Interpretation and Communication. Ed. D. Gerver and H.W. Sinaiko. New York: Plenum Press, 1978.
McConkie, G.W. Eye Movements and Perception during Reading. Ed. K. Rayner. New York: Academic Press, 1983.
Miller, George A. “The magic number seven, plus or minus two”. Psychological Review 63 (1956): 81-97.
Moser-mercer, Barbara. “Beyond Curiosity-Can Interpreting Research Meet the Challenge?” Cognitive Processes in Translation and Interpreting. Ed. Joseph H. Danks et al. California: SAGE Publications Inc., 1997. 176-195.
Neuman, William Lawrence. Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. 1991. Massachusetts: A Pearson Education Company, 2000.
Rayner, K. and A. Pollatsek. “Eye Movements in Reading: A Tutorial Review.” Attention and Performance XII. Ed. M. Coltheart. Hove: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1987.
Setton, Robin. “Experiments in the Application of Discourse Studies to Interpreter Training”. Teaching Translation and Interpreting 2. 1997.
Setton, Robin. A Pragmatic Theory of Simultaneous Interpretation. Diss. The Chinese U of Hong Kong, 1997. Hong Kong: UMI, 1997. 9819120.
Shreve, Gregory M. & Diamond, Bruce J. 1997. “Cognitive Processes in Translation and Interpreting- Critical Issues”. Cognitive Processes in Translation and Interpreting. Ed. Joseph H. Danks et al. California: SAGE Publications Inc., 1997. 233-251.
Snelling, D.C. Interpretation: Theory versus Practice. Scuola Superiore di Lingue Moderne, Trieste, 1983.
Viezzi, Maurizio. “Sight Translation, Simultaneous Interpretation and Information Retention”. Aspects of Applied and Experimental Research on Conference Interpretation. Ed. Laura Gran and Christopher Taylor. 1990. 54-60.
Viezzi, Maurizio. “Information Retention as a Parameter for the Comparison of Sight Translation and Simultaneous Interpretation: an Experimental Study”. The Interpreters’ Newsletter No. 2 (1989): 65-69.
Viezzi, Maurizio. “Sight Translation: An Experimental Analysis”. Aspects of English. Ed. John M. Dodds. 109-140.
Weber, Wilhelm K. “The Importance of Sight Translation in an Interpreter Training Program”. Interpreting—Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow. (ATA Scholarly Monograph Series, Vol. 4) (1990): 44-52.
Weber, Wilhelm K. Training Translators and Conference Interpreters. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Regents, 1984.
Ying, Chung-hui. “Redundant Elements in Prepared Speech and Simultaneous Interpretation.” Thesis. National Taiwan Normal U, 2001.

In Chinese:
張武昌等主持，八十四年度基礎科目英文考科試題研發工作計畫研究報告─高中常用字彙表─。大學入學考試中心，1998。
張維為，英漢同聲傳譯。中國對外翻譯出版公司，1999。
湯麗明，大學「口譯入門」課程英譯中視譯練習之運用與教學建議，翻譯學研究集刊創刊號，1996。
楊承淑，口譯教學研究－理論與實踐。台北：輔仁大學，2000。
劉宓慶，英漢翻譯訓練手冊。台北：書林，1997。
駐紐約台北經濟文化辦事處文化組，1988-1997背景資料調查分析報告－TOEFL分數。網路，2001年11月26日。網址：http://www.taipei.org/cultural_division/univ/7.htm

簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

相關論文