臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

本研究建構一個同步口譯學生自評工具，且將此工具應用於筆者同步口譯模擬會議之錯誤 分析，此建構工具指導使用者應用由筆者設計且囊括三步驟循環評測的評測表，評測的三 步驟分別是:辨識錯誤類型、分析起因及提出解決辦法。三步驟循環自評工具，利用巴瑞 克 (Barik) 的同步口譯錯誤類別:漏譯 (omission)、增譯 (addition) 及替換和錯誤 (substitutions & errors) 進行錯誤分析。接著，筆者應用此三步驟循環自評工具於個人的一 場同步口譯模擬會議中，應用結果顯示此三步驟循環自評工具確實對於學生口譯員找出自 身弱點並改進有幫助。然而，此三步驟循環自評工具的分類並不夠完善，因其中有一種增 譯錯誤無法利用巴瑞克 (Barik) 的增譯類別進行分類。此外，筆者發現口譯錯誤的起因是 相關連的，且進一步回溯發現漏譯錯誤是其他錯誤的起源。最後，此研究探討解決辦法以 增進同步口譯的表現，如分割、加接、刪除、移位和抄寫。結語，三步驟循環自評工具經 應用後，筆者認為此工具可以有效協助學生口譯員自我評測同步口譯的表現。

The study proposes a student self-assessment Tool for simultaneous interpreting (SI), and applies the Tool on error analysis of the researcher’s SI performance at a mock conference. The proposed Tool guides the users to walk through three steps of circular assessment, which are embodied in an assessment form designed by the researcher. The three steps of the assessment are identifying error types, analyzing causes, and proposing solutions. The 3-Step Circular Self-Assessment Tool allows the users to perform error analysis utilizing Barik’s categorization of interpreting errors in SI: omission, addition, and substitutions and errors. Next, the researcher of this study applies the 3-Step Circular Self-Assessment Tool to assess her own SI performance at a mock conference. The result of the application shows that 3-Step Circular Self-Assessment Tool, the proposed self-assessment Tool, is indeed helpful in that it allows student interpreters to find out their weaknesses, and further improve them. Nevertheless, the categorization of the 3-Step Circular Self-Assessment Tool is not exhaustive enough since one type of addition error cannot be categorized with Barik’s category of addition. Furthermore, the researcher found that the causes of the interpreting errors are interrelated, and further traced back to find that omission errors can be the origin of the other error types. Finally, this study discusses solutions to improve SI performance, such as segmentation, adjunction, deletion, adjusting word order, and duplication. In conclusion, the 3-Step Circular Self-Assessment Tool can effectively facilitate self-assessment of SI performance for student interpreters.

Table of Contents
摘要...................................................................................................................................i
Abstract............................................................................................................................ii
Acknowledgement...........................................................................................................iv
Table of contents..............................................................................................................v
List of tables...................................................................................................................vii
List of figures.................................................................................................................viii
List of in-text examples ..................................................................................................ix
Chapter 1 Introduction.....................................................................................................1
1.1 Research background.................................................................................................1
1.2 Research objectives and questions............................................................................2
1.3 Outline of study..........................................................................................................3
Chapter 2 Literature Review ...........................................................................................4
2.1 Self-assessment in interpreting training....................................................................4
2.2 Barik’s categorization of interpreting errors in simultaneous interpreting ...............6
2.3 Ear-voice span in simultaneous interpreting ...........................................................12
2.4 Language-specific difficulty between English and Chinese in simultaneous
interpreting.....................................................................................................................14
2.5 Syntactic linearity in English and Chinese simultaneous interpreting......................16
Chapter 3 Methods........................................................................................................21
3.1 The 3-Step Circular Self-Assessment Tool..............................................................21
3.2 The case study: Assessing SI performance in the mock conference .....................26
3.2.1 The background and the participant of the case study........................................27
3.2.2 Procedures...........................................................................................................28
Chapter 4 The Application of Three-Step Circular Self-Assessment Tool....................31
4.1 Step 1: identify error types......................................................................................31
4.1.1 Omission types found in case A and case B.........................................................32
4.1.2 Addition types found in case A and case B..........................................................39
4.1.3 Types of substitutions and errors found in case A and case B............................47
4.2 Step 2: analyzing possible causes..........................................................................62
4.2.1 Possible causes of delay omission.......................................................................63
4.2.2 Possible causes of visual material-derived addition............................................71
4.2.3 Possible causes of gross phrasing change.........................................................75
4.3 Step 3: proposing solutions...................................................................................82
Chapter 5 Conclusion...................................................................................................87
5.1 Summary of the proposed Tool and its application.................................................87
5.2 Research significance.............................................................................................91
5.3 Limitations and suggestions...................................................................................92
References...................................................................................................................94
Appendix I The 3-steps Circular Assessment Tool.......................................................99

Altman, J. (1994). Error analysis in the teaching of simultaneous interpreting: A pilot study. In S. Lambert, & B. Moser-Mercer (Eds.), Bridging the gap: Empirical research in simultaneous interpretation (pp. 25-38). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Explanation of error categories. (2017). American Translators Association. Retrieved from https://www.atanet.org/certification/aboutexams_error.php
Barik, H. C. (1994). A descriptive of various types of omissions, additions and errors of translation encountered in simultaneous interpretation. In S. Lambert, & B. Moser-Mercer (Eds.), Bridging the gap: Empirical research in simultaneous interpretation (pp.121-137). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins.
Chang, A. L. (2009). Ear-voice-span and target language rendition in Chinese to English simultaneous interpretation. Studies of Translation and Interpretation, (12), 177-217. http://dx.doi.org/10.29786/STI.200907.0006
Chang, C. C. (2005). Directionality in Chinese/English simultaneous interpreting: Impact on performance and strategy use. Unpublished doctor of philosophy’s dissertation, The University of Texas at Austin, TX.
Chen, C. H. (2012). Ear-voice span and performance in English to Chinese simultaneous interpretation. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Changhua University of Education, Changhua. Retrieved August 10, 2019, from https://hdl.handle.net/11296/99jj3m
Chen, Q., & Ke, Q. (2008). On translating English attributive clauses into Chinese. Canadian Social Science, 14 (6), 35-40.
Chen, Y., Song, Z., & Wu, C. (2015). Syntactic linearity as a strategy in simultaneous interpreting: a case study on English-Chinese interpretation. T & I Review,5, 29-69.Chernov, S. (2016). At the dawn of simultaneous interpreting in the USSR: Filling some gaps in history. In K. Takeda, & J. Baigorri-Jalon (Eds.), New insights in the history of interpreting (pp. 135-165). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Chomsky, N. (1995). The minimalist program. Cambridge: The MIT Press. Christoffels, I. K. (2004). Cognitive studies in simultaneous interpreting. Enschede:
PrintPartners Ipskamp.
Fowler, Y. (2007). Formative assessment: Using peer and self-assessment in interpreting
training. In C. Wadensjo, B. E. Englund Dimitrova, & A. L. Nilsson (Eds.), The critical link 4: Professionalisation of interpreting in the community (pp. 253-262). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Gerver, D. (1969). The effects of source language presentation rate on the performance of simultaneous conference interpreters. In F. Pöchhacker & M. Shlesinger (Eds.), The interpreting studies reader (pp. 52-66). New York: Routledge.
Gile, D. (1997). Conference interpreting as a cognitve management problem. In J. H. Danks, G. M. Shreve, S. B. Fountain & M. K. McBeath (Eds.), Cognitive processes in translation and interpreting (pp. 196-214). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Gile, D. (2009). Basic concepts and models for interpreters and translator training (2nd ed.). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Gile, D. (2011). Errors, omissions and infelicities in broadcasting interpreting: Preliminary finding from a case study. In C. Alvstad, A. Hild & E. Tiselius (Eds.), Methods and strategies of process research: Integrative approaches in translation studies (pp. 201-218). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Gile, D. (2018). Simultaneous interpreting. In S. W. Chan (Eds.), An Encyclopedia of Practical Translation and Interpreting (pp. 531-561). Hong Kong, China: The Chinese University Press.
Goldman-Eisler, F. (1972). Segmentation of input in simultaneous translation. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 1(2), 127-140.
Han, C., & Riazi, M. (2018). The accuracy of student self-assessments of English-Chinese bidirectional interpretation: A longitudinal quantitative study. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 43 (3), 386-398. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2017.1353062
Lambert, S. (1994). Foreword. In S. Lambert, & B. Moser-Mercer (Eds.), Bridging the gap: Empirical research in simultaneous interpretation (pp.5). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins.
Lee, Y. H. (2005). Self-assessment as an autonomous learning Tool in an interpretation classroom. Meta, 50(4). https://doi.org/10.7202/019869ar
Lee, T. (2002). Ear voice span in English into Korean simultaneous interpretation. Meta, 47 (4), 596–606. https://doi.org/10.7202/008039ar
Lee, Y. (2011). Comparing self-assessment and teacher’s assessment in interpreting training. T & I Review, 1, 87-111.
Li, Q. M., & Lin, S. (2010). Effort model-based study on syntactic linearity principle in sci-tech simultaneous interpretation. Journal of Chongqing Jiaotong University (Social Science Edition), 10(2), 107-110.
Machova, L. (2016). Student’s self-assessment of simultaneous interpreting: Distribution of comments on quality and processes. In J. Zehnalova, O. Molnar, &M. Kubanek (Eds.), Interchange between language and cultures: The quest for quality. (pp.103-117). Olomouc: Palacký University Olomouc.
Paneth, E. (1957). An investigation into conference interpreting. In F. Pöchhacker & M. Shlesinger (Eds.), The interpreting studies reader (pp. 30-40). New York: Routledge.
Pinazo, E. P. (2008). Self-assessment in teaching interpreting. Traduction, terminologie, redaction, 21 (1), 173-209. https://doi.org/10.7202/029690ar
Riccardi, A. (1996). Language-specific strategies in simultaneous interpreting. In C. Dollerup, & V. Appel (Eds.), Teaching translation and interpreting 3 (pp.213-222). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Riccardi, A. (1998). Interpreting strategies and creativity. In A. Beylard-Ozeroff, J. Králová & B. Moser-Mercer (Eds.), Translators' strategies and creativity (pp. 171-179). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Russo, M. (1995). Self-evaluation: The awareness of one’s own difficulties as a training Tool for simultaneous interpretation. The Interpreters’ Newsletter, 6, 75-85. Sandrelli, A. (2015). Becoming an interpreter: The role of computer technology.
MonTI, 2, 111-138. https://doi.org/10.6035/MonTI.2015.ne2.4
Setton, R. (1994). Training conference interpreters with Chinese--problems and
prospects. In R. K. Seymour & C. C. Liu (Eds.), Translation and interpreting:
bridging East and West (pp. 55-66). Hawaii: University of Hawaii Press.
Starman, A. B. (2013). The case study as a type of qualitative research. Journal of
Contemporary Educational Studies, 64 (1), 28-43.
Stauffer, L. K. (2011). ASL students’ ability to self assess ASL competency. Journal of Interpretation, 21 (1), 81-95.
Wan, H. G., & Yang, C. S. (2005). Types and rules of syntactic linearity in simultaneous interpreting. Chinese Translators Journal, 26 (3), 73-77.
Wang, B., & Gu, Y. (2016). An evidence-based exploration into the effect of language-pair specificity in English-Chinese simultaneous interpreting. Asia Pacific Translation and Intercultural Studies, 3 (2), 146-160. https://doi.org/10.1080/23306343.2016.1182238
Yang, C. S. (2002). Syntactic linearity in simultaneous interpretation: An exploration study of its operation through the use of the minimalist program. Chinese Translators Journal, 23 (6), 29-34.
Zhong, W. H. (2001). Simultaneous interpreting: Principles and training. Chinese Translators Journal, 22 (5), 39-42.