研究生: |
林逸欣 I-Hsin Lin |
---|---|
論文名稱: |
中英口譯能力考試英語測驗題型適用性研究 The Use of English Proficiency Test Activities in Interpretation Proficiency Examination |
指導教授: |
張嘉泓
Chang, Chia-Hung |
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: | 2009 |
畢業學年度: | 97 |
語文別: | 中文 |
論文頁數: | 127 |
中文關鍵詞: | 口譯能力考試 、英語測驗 、題型 、適用性 |
英文關鍵詞: | Interpretation Proficiency Examination, English Proficiency Test, Test Activities, Applicability |
論文種類: | 學術論文 |
相關次數: | 點閱:199 下載:25 |
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 |
有鑑於口譯考試施測及評分過程,所耗費的人力與時間頗鉅,多數口譯考試係以第一階段的英文能力測驗作為篩選機制,先篩選出可能具備口譯能力的考生,再進入口譯實務測驗階段。然而,英文能力考試能否確實篩選出具有口譯能力的考生,實取決於題型設計能否充分反映口譯工作所需之特定能力。本研究首先整理兩岸三個較具代表性的「中英文翻譯能力考試」第一階段使用題型,再以文獻回顧評估各題型,篩選出「聽寫填空」、「聽力簡答與筆記」、與「聽寫摘要」三個可能適用於翻譯能力考試第一階段測驗的題型,以及「逐字聽寫」與「聽力簡答題」兩個對照題型。本研究以實驗的方式,對「受過口譯訓練」及「未受過口譯訓練」的受測者施測,以瞭解受測者的成績表現是否受到不同題型的影響。
實驗結果顯示,「未受過口譯訓練」的受測者,在「聽寫填空」題型的表現較「逐字聽寫」差,但「受過口譯訓練」受測者在兩題型的表現沒有落差;「未受過口譯訓練」的受測者,在「聽力簡答與筆記」題型的表現較「聽力簡答」差,但「受過口譯訓練」受測者在兩題型的表現沒有落差;「未受過口譯訓練」受測者在「聽寫摘要」題型的表現明顯低於「受過口譯訓練」的受測者。據此推論,「聽寫填空」、「聽力簡答與筆記」、與「聽寫摘要」三個題型,除可測試語文能力之外,亦能反映逐步口譯所須具備的部分「非語言」能力,能夠篩選出「具有口譯能力」的受測者,可能較適用於口譯考試第一階段測驗。
Given the laborious nature of interpretation testing and its scoring process, most interpretation exams adopt language proficiency tests in the first phase as a screening mechanism. However, whether or not a language proficiency test can effectively single out examinees most prone to possess interpretation abilities relies on the test design. Based on the literature, the present research assessed all test activities employed in the first phase of three of the most representative English-Chinese interpretation exams, and identified ‘spot dictation’, ‘short-answer listening comprehension with note-taking’, and ‘summary’ as potentially applicable test activities as compared to ‘verbatim dictation’ and ‘short-answer listening comprehension’. All the test activities were then administered to both ‘participants trained in interpretation’ and ‘participants never trained in interpretation’ so as to observe if differences in test activities have an impact on the participants’ performance.
The result shows ‘participants never trained in interpretation’ perform better in ‘verbatim dictation’ than in ‘spot dictation’, while ‘participants trained in interpretation’ perform equally well in both; ‘participants never trained in interpretation’ perform better in ‘short-answer listening comprehension’ than in ‘short-answer listening comprehension with note-taking’, while ‘participants trained in interpretation’ perform equally well in both; ‘participants trained in interpretation’ outperform ‘participants never trained in interpretation’ in ‘summary’ activity. It is thus argued that ‘spot dictation’, ‘short-answer listening comprehension with note-taking’, and ‘summary’ may be more applicable for screening purposes since they not only assess language abilities but reflect part of the ‘non-linguistic’ abilities required for consecutive interpretation.
英文
Alderson, J.C. et al. 1995. Language Test Construction and Evaluation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bernstein, J. & Barbier, I. 2000. ‘Design and development parameters for a rapid automatic screening test for prospective simultaneous interpreters’. Interpreting, Vol. 5/2, pp. 221-238.
Brown, H.D. 1994. Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy. London: Prentice Hall Regents.
Brown, H.D. 2004. Language Assessment: Principles and Classroom Practices. New York: Pearson Education, Inc.
Brown, J.D. & Hudson, T. 2002. Criterion-referenced Language Testing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Buck, G. 2001. Assessing Listening. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cohen, A.D. 1998. ‘Strategies and processes in test taking and SLA’ In L.F. Bachman & A.D. Cohen (eds.), Interfaces Between Second Language Acquisition and Language Testing Research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Davies, A. 1990. Principles of Language Testing. Oxford: Basil Blackwell Ltd.
Gile, D. 1995. Basic Concepts and Models for Interpreter and Translator Training. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Hansen, C. and Jensen, C. 1994. ‘Evaluating lecture comprehension’ In J. Flowerdew (ed.), Academic Listening. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hughes, A. 1989. Testing for Language Teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Jones, R. 1998. Conference Interpreting Explained. Manchester: St. Jerome.
McNamara, T. 2000. Language Testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Mahmoodzadeh, K. 1994. ‘Consecutive interpreting: its principles and techniques’. In C. Dollerup & A. Lindegaard (eds.), Teaching Translation and Interpreting: Training, Talent and Experience. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Ozben, R.T. 1993. ‘Considerations on the note-taking process during consecutive interpretation from Italian into Turkish’. The Interpreters’ Newsletter, Vol. 5, pp. 42-48.
Pochhacker, F. 2004. Introducing Interpreting Studies. London: Routledge.
Rost, M. 1994. ‘On-line summaries as representations of lecture understanding’. In J. Flowerdew (ed.), Academic Listening. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Seleskovitch, D. 1994. Interpreting for International Conferences. Trans. S. Dailey & E.N. McMillan. Washington, D.C.: Pen and Booth.
Verma, G.K. & Mallick, K. 1999. Researching Education: Perspectives and Techniques. London: Falmer Press.
Weber, W.K. 1984. Training Translators and Conference Interpreters. Orlando: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc.
Weir, C.J. 1993. Understanding and Developing Language Tests. Hemel Hempstead: Prentice Hall International Ltd.
Weir, C.J. 2005. Language Testing and Validation. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
中文
上海市高校浦東繼續教育中心與上海市外語口譯資料證書教育委員會編,2006. 英語高級口譯資格證書實考試卷彙編3. 上海: 上海交通大學出版社.
仲偉合,2003. ‘口譯訓練: 模式、內容、方法’ 於蔡小紅(主編),口譯研究新探. 九龍: 開益出版社.
李國辰,2000. ‘課堂口譯的基本問題’. 翻譯學研究集刊, Vol. 5, pp. 121-129.
李翠芳,1996. ‘大學部口譯課程的教學規劃’. 翻譯學研究集刊, Vol. 1, pp. 117-140.
何慧玲,2001. ‘大學口譯課程筆記的學習與教法探討’. 翻譯學研究集刊, Vol. 6,
pp. 53-77.
周兆祥,1997. 專業翻譯. 香港: 商業印書館有限公司.
芮敏,2003. ‘關聯理論與口譯理解策略’於蔡小紅(主編),口譯研究新探. 九龍: 開益出版社.
勒代雷 (Lederer, M.),2003. ‘口譯教學的原則和方法’. 陳穗湘與陳湘蓉譯. 於蔡小紅(主編),口譯研究新探. 九龍: 開益出版社.
馮之林與黃躍文,2003. ‘連續傳譯口譯技能分解訓練的理論依據、做法和實證研究’於蔡小紅(主編),口譯研究新探. 九龍: 開益出版社.
黃向榮,2003. ‘口譯中的理解’於蔡小紅(主編),口譯研究新探. 九龍: 開益出版社.
張凱,2002. 語言測驗理論與實踐. 北京: 北京語言文化大學出版社.
赫伯 (Herbert, J.),1982. 口譯須知. 孫慧雙譯. 北京: 外語教學與研究出版社.
蔡小紅(主編),2003. 口譯研究新探. 九龍: 開益出版社.
蔡小紅,2003. ‘交替傳譯過程及能力發展-對中國法語譯員和學生的交替傳譯活動進行實證研究’. 於蔡小紅(主編),口譯研究新探. 九龍: 開益出版社.
劉和平,2003. ‘思維科學與口譯程序’於蔡小紅(主編),口譯研究新探. 九龍: 開益出版社.
劉敏華,1993. 逐步口譯與筆記-理論、實踐與教學. 台北: 輔仁大學.
劉敏華,2002. ‘口譯教學與外於語教學’. 翻譯學研究集刊, Vol. 7, pp. 323-339.
劉敏華,2008. ‘建立國家中英文逐步口譯能力考試評分與命題機制第二期研究’於國立編譯館,2008台灣翻譯研討會: 翻譯能力評鑑經驗交流. 台北,28 November 2008. 台北: 國立編譯館.
盧敏主編,2007. 英語二級口譯真題詳解. 北京: 外文出版社.
網站
AIIC http://www.aiic.net/
Last accessed 30/11/2008.
Lesson 1 School of Englishhttp://lesson1.it/course-information/cefr-level-comparison/ Last accessed 30/11/2008.
Vancouver English Center http://secure.vec.bc.ca/toefl-equivalency-table.cfm
Last accessed 30/11/2008.
中華民國教育部 http://intra.tpml.edu.tw/study/upload/downloads/table2.pdf
Last accessed 30/11/2008.
教育部國際文化教育事業處
http://www.edu.tw/files/site_content/B0003/970925-out.pdf
Last accessed 30/11/2008.
無優考網 (簡體)
http://www.51test.net/show/380229.html
Last accessed 30/11/2008.