臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

同步口譯訓練是個漫長且複雜的過程，但僅有少數文獻聚焦於探討學生在同步口譯訓練過程中的學習歷程。然而，如果能深入探究學生在不同訓練階段的表現狀況，學生能更清楚地知道在學習的過程中須達到的近期學習目標為何，畢竟專業同步口譯員的養成需要長時間的培養，因此短期目標的設定對於學生在漫長的學習過程能帶來更大的學習動力。本研究旨在探索並比較學生經過半年以及一年半的同步口譯訓練後之口譯譯文產出，並使用台灣中英文翻譯能力檢定考試中流暢度與忠實度之兩大評分標準檢視兩篇口譯實作練習。研究發現流暢度在兩種不同訓練時間的學生之間並無太大的差別，然而在忠實度上，訓練時間為一年半之學生在省略（omission）及扭曲（distortion）有較佳的表現。因此，透過半年的同步口譯訓練，大多數的學生能成功地做到同步聽與說之任務，但就忠實度而言，就需要較長的訓練時間來達到較佳的忠實度品質。

The simultaneous interpretation training for students is a long and complex process, and only a few research focused on the difference among student interpreters’ performance per se in the learning progression. However, if this comparison could be made, students could have a clearer picture of what level they need to attain in the near future. Thus, this thesis aims to explore the performance difference between students who have been trained for different lengths – from half a year to one and a half years, examining their output mainly with the evaluation standard of Certification Program for Translators and Interpreters in Taiwan. It is found that there is no significant difference in terms of intelligibility while as for fidelity, there are two marked differences in terms of omission and distortion that the longer the training length is, the better the quality of fidelity would be. Therefore, this may imply that the majority of students can equip themselves with the skill of listening and speaking simultaneously after being trained for half a year. But it requires a longer length of training to improve the quality of fidelity, especially for omission and distortion.

Chapter 1: Introduction 1
Chapter 2: Literature Review 4
2.1 Quality Assessment 4
2.1.1 Evaluation Perspectives 5
2.1.2 Evaluation Items 6
2.1.2.1 Logical Cohesion of utterance 8
2.1.2.2 Fidelity 9
2.1.2.3 Intelligibility 11
2.1.3 Evaluation Unit 13
2.1.4 Evaluation Approaches 15
2.1.4.1 Scoring Rubric 15
2.1.4.2 Error Analysis 17
2.2 Components in Simultaneous Interpreting 19
Chapter 3: Methodology 22
3.1 Subjects 22
3.2 Materials 23
3.3 Procedure 23
3.4 Recording Analysis 25
3.4.1 Evaluation of Logical Cohesion of Utterance 27
3.4.2 Evaluation of Pauses 28
3.4.3 Evaluation of Fillers 28
3.4.4 Evaluation of Repetitions 29
3.4.5 Evaluation of Backtracking 30
3.4.6 Evaluation of Fidelity 31
3.5 Research Limitations 32
Chapter 4: Results and Discussion 34
4.1 Analysis of Intelligibility 34
4.1.1 Logical Cohesion of Utterance 34
4.1.2 Pauses 37
4.1.4 Repetition 42
4.1.5 Backtracking 43
4.1.5.1 Revision 43
4.1.5.2 Paraphrasing 45
4.2 Analysis of Fidelity – Recording 1 49
4.2.1 Omission 49
4.2.2 Addition 52
4.2.3 Misinterpretation 55
4.2.4 Distortion 56
4.3 Analysis of Fidelity – Recording 2 57
4.3.1 Omission 57
4.3.2 Addition 60
4.3.3 Misinterpretation 62
4.3.4 Distortion 63
4.4 Discussion 64
Conclusion 69
References 72
Appendix 1 80
Appendix 2 83

楊承淑（2005）。同步口譯的翻譯單位與訊息結構。翻譯學研究集刊，9，235-268。
劉敏華、葉舒白（2006）。口譯評分客觀化初探：採用量表的可能性。 國立編譯館館刊，34(4)，345-382。
劉敏華、張武昌、林世華、陳碧珠、葉書白、駱香潔（2005）。
「建立國家翻譯人才評鑑標準第三期研究」成果報告。台北：國立編譯館。
AIIC. (1982). Practical Guide for Professional Interpreters. Geneva: AIIC.
Altman, Janet. (1994). Error analysis in the teaching of simultaneous interpretation. In Lambert, Sylvie and Barbara Moser-Mercer (Ed.), Bridging the gap: Empirical research in simultaneous interpretation (pp. 25-38). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Anderson, J. R. (1995). Cognitive psychology and its implications. New York: W.H. Freeman.
Arnold, D., Balkan, L., Lee Humphreys, R., Meijer, S., & Sadler, L. (1994). Machine translation: An introductory guide. [Electronic version]. Manchester/Oxford: NCC Blackwell.
Baddeley, A. (2000). Working memory and language processing. In B. E.
Dimitrova & K. Hyltenstam (Ed.), Language processing and simultaneous interpreting: interdisciplinary perspectives (pp. 1-16). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Baddeley, A. (2002). Working memory and language: an overview. Journal of Communication Disorders, 36(3), 189-208.
Barik, H. C. (1971). A description of various types of omissions, additions and errors of translation encountered in simultaneous interpretation. Meta: Translators' Journal, 16(4), 199-210.
Bühler, H. (1986). Linguistic (semantic) and extra-linguistic (pragmatic) criteria for the evaluation of conference interpretation and interpreters. Multilingua, 5(4), 231 – 236.
Carrol, B. J. (1966). An experiment in evaluating the quality of translations. Mechanical Translation and Computational Linguistics, 9(3 & 4), 55-66.
Cecot, M. (2001). Pauses in simultaneous interpretation: a contrastive analysis of professional interpreters' performances. The Interpreters' Newsletter, 11, 63-85.
Chernov, G. V. (1979). Semantic aspects of psycholinguistic research in simultaneous interpretation. Language and Speech, 22(3), 277-295.
Chernov, G. V. (1994). Message redundancy and message anticipation in simultaneous interpretation. In Lambert, Sylvie and Barbara Moser-Mercer (Ed.), Bridging the gap: Empirical research in simultaneous interpretation (pp. 25-38). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Chiaro, D., and Nocella G. (2004). Interpreters' perception of linguistic and non-linguistic factors affecting quality: A survey through the World Wide Web. Meta: Translators' Journal, 49(2), 278-293.
Clifford, A. (2005). Putting the exam to the test: psychometric validation and interpreter certification. Interpreting, 7:1, 97–131.
Christoffels, I. K., De Groot, Annette M. B., and Kroll, Judith F. (2006). Memory and language skills in simultaneous interpreters: The role of expertise and language proficiency. Journal of Memory and Language, 54(3), 324-345.
Corder, S. P. (1981). Error analysis and interlanguge. Oxford University Press.
De Bot, K. (2000). Simultaneous interpreting as language production. In B. E. Dimitrova & K. Hyltenstam (Ed.), Language processing and simultaneous interpreting: Interdisciplinary perspectives (pp. 65-88). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Emery G. P. (2004). Translation, equivalence and fidelity: A pragmatic approach. Babel, 15(2), 143-167.
Eugene Nida. (1983). Style and discourse. Cape Town: United Bible Societies.
Gile, D. (1995). Basic concepts and models for interpreter and translator training. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Gile, D. (1999). Testing the effort models' tightrope hypothesis in simultaneous interpreting — A contribution. Hermes, 23, 153-172.
Gerver, D. (1976). Empirical studies of simultaneous interpretation: a review and a model. In R.W. Brislin (Ed.), Translation: Applications and research (pp. 165-207). New York: Gardner.
Goffman, E. (1981). Forms of talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Halliday, M. A. K., and Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London: Longman.
Kalina, S. (1994). Analyzing interpreters' performance: Methods and problems. In C. Dollerup and A. Lindegaard (Ed.), Teaching translation and interpreting 2 (Vol. 5, pp. 225-232). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Kalina, S. (2002). Quality in interpreting and its prerequisites: A framework for a comprehensive view. In G. Garzone and M. Viezzi (Ed.), Interpreting in the 21st century: Challenges and opportunities (pp. 121-130). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Kopczynski, A. (1994). Quality in Conference Interpreting: Some Pragmatic Problems. In M. S. Hornby, F. Pöchhacker, and K. Kaindl (Ed.), Translation studies: And interdiscipline (Vol. 2, pp. 189-198). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Kurz, I. (1993). Conference interpretation: Expectations of different user groups. The Interpreters' Newsletter, 5, 13-21.
Kurz, I. (2001). Conference interpreting: Quality in the ears of the user. Meta: Translators' Journal, 46(2), 394-409.
Lederer, M. (1978). Simultaneous interpretation: Units of meaning and other features. In D. Gerver and H. W. Sinaiko (Ed.), Language interpretation and communication (pp. 323-332). New York: Plenum Press.
Liu, M., Schallert, Diane L., and Carroll, Patrick J. (2004). Working memory and expertise in simultaneous interpreting. Interpreting, 6(1), 19-42.
McLaughlin, B. (1995). Aptitude from an information processing perspective. Language Testing, 12(3), 370-387.
Mead, P. (2002). Exploring hesitation in consecutive interpreting: an empirical study. In G. Garzone and M. Viezzi (Ed.), Interpreting in the 21st century: Challenges and opportunities (pp. 73-82). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Mead P. (2005). Methodological issues in the study of interpreters’ fluency. The Interpreters’ Newsletter, 13, 39-3
Meng, J. G. (2005). A discourse analysis and context in translation studies. Language and Translation (Chinese), 81, 64-66.
Miller, G. A. (1963). Language and communication. New York, Toronto: McHraw-Hill.
Morgan, J.L., and Sellner, M.B. (1980). Discourse and linguistic theory. In R.J. Spiro, B.C. Bruce, and W.F. Brewer (Eds.) Theoretical Issues in Reading Comprehension (pp. 165-200). Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Moser, P. (1996). Survey: Expectations of users of conference interpretation. Interpreting, 1(2), 145-178.
Moser B. (1978). Simultaneous interpretation: a hypothetical model and its practical application. In D. Gerver, and H. W. Sinaiko (Ed.), Language Interpretation and Communication, Nato Conference Series, Series III: Human Factors (pp. 353-368). New York and London: Plenum Press.
Moser-Mercer, B. (1993). Skill components in simultaneous interpreting. In Y. Gambier, D. Gile and C. Taylor (Ed.), Conference interpreting: Current trends in research (pp. 133-147). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Moser-Mercer, B. (1996). Quality in interpreting: Some methodological issues. The Interpreters' Newsletter, 7, 43-55.
Moser-Mercer, B., Frauenfelder, U., Casado, B., and Künzli, A. (2000). Searching to define expertise in interpreting. In E. Dimitrova, Birgitta and K. Hyltenstam (Ed.), Language processing and simultaneous interpreting: Interdisciplinary perspectives (pp. 107-131). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Nagao, M., Tsujii, j., & Nakamura, J. (1985). The Japanese government project for machine translation [Electronic version.] Computational Linguistics, 11(2-3), 91-109.
Nießen, S., och, F. J., Leusch, G., & Ney, H. (2000). An evaluation tool for machine translation: Fast evaluation for MT research [Electronic version]. Proceedings of the 2nd international Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (pp. 39-45).
Pöchhacker, F. (1994). Quality assurance in simultaneous interpreting. In C. Dollerup and A. Lindegaard (Ed.), Teaching translation and interpreting 2 (pp. 233-242). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Pöchhacker, F. (2002). Quality assessment in conference and community interpreting. Meta: Translator's Journal, 46(2), 410-425.
Rennert, S. (2010). The impact of fluency on the subjective assessment of interpreting quality. The Interpreters' Newsletter, 15, 101-115.
Riccardi, A. (2002). Evaluation in Interpretation: Macrocriteria and Microcriteria. In E. Hung (Ed.), Teaching translation and interpretation 4 (pp. 115-126). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Setton, R. (1999). Simultaneous interpretation: A cognitive-pragmatic analysis. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Setton, R. (2002). A methodology for the analysis of interpretation corpora. In G. Garzone and M. Viezzi (Ed.), Interpreting in the 21st century: Challenges and opportunities (pp. 29-45). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Schjoldager, A. (1995). Assessment of simultaneous interpreting. In C. Dollerup, and A. Lindegaard (Ed.), Teaching translation and interpreting 3 (Vol. 16, pp. 187-195). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Seleskovitch, D. (1978). Language and cognition. In D. Gerver and H. W. Sinaiko (Ed.), Language interpretation and communication (pp. 333-342). New York: Plenum Press.
Shlesinger, M. (1997). Quality in simultaneous interpreting. In Y. Gambier, D. Gile, and C. Taylor (Ed.), Conference interpreting: Current trends in research (pp. 123-131). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Sinclair, J. M. (1993). Written discourse structure. In J. M. Sinclair, M. Hoey & G. Fox (Ed.), Techniques of Description: Spoken and Written Discourse (pp. 6-31). London and New York: Routledge.
Tissi, B. (2000). Silent pauses and disfluencies in simultaneous interpretation: a descriptive analysis. The Interpreters’ Newsletter 10, 103-127.
Vuorikoski, A. R. (1993) Simultaneous interpretation – User experience and expecation. In C. Picken (Ed.), Translation – the vital link. Proceeding ot the XIIIth Congress of FIT (pp. 317-327). London: Institute of Translation and Interpreting.