【作者】 孙序；

【导师】 柴明熲；

【作者基本信息】 上海外国语大学 ， 翻译学， 2010， 博士

【副题名】基于受训职业译员与未受训学生的对比研究

【摘要】 自二战后会议口译走上职业化发展道路以来,语言能力与口译能力的关系问题一直是口译研究的一大重点,也是区分口译教学与语言教学的一项重要尺度。以往的研究主要从两方面反映了语言能力与口译能力的关系,即口译的过程研究和专家与新手的对比研究。过程研究在信息加工心理学、认知心理学、认知语用学、神经语言学、交际学等不同学科视角下,提出了口译的过程模式,解释了口译信息处理的复杂的心理运行机制。专家与新手的对比研究通过大量的实验数据,从工作记忆、口译质量评估、口译策略、大脑偏侧化、口译笔记等多方面体现了职业译员与学生译员及非译员在离线的普通认知任务或在线的口译任务中的表现差异。然而,以往研究均未对语言能力与口译能力的关系做出有效的验证,过程研究侧重理论层面上的描述,与对比研究之间缺乏对接,同时对比研究中对语言能力变量的控制不足,因而使我们难以清晰地检测出语言能力与口译能力的差异性,进而无法准确把握口译能力之于语言能力之外的特征。本研究以语言能力与口译能力的关系为研究主线,以交替传译为研究对象,以Gile的“注意力分配模式”为理论框架,通过职业译员与学生的对比研究,对语言能力与口译能力之间的差异性做出了验证。本研究采用了量化与质化相结合的实证研究方法,由外语能力测试与模拟口译两部分组成。外语能力测试通过模拟雅思考试测定受过专业训练的职业译员与未受训练的学生的外语水平,筛选出外语水平接近的受试者并对其口译表现进行评估。口译质量评估以信息单位为主要的量化指标,同时依照信息的重要性等级区分主次信息单位,从信息忠实性、语言准确性和译语流畅性三方面对比职业译员与学生的译语质量。信息忠实性旨在考察信息传递的完整性与准确性、主次信息的传递情况以及信息传递失误的类型等。语言准确性区分了语言能力与语言使用能力在口译中的体现,从语音错误、语法错误、表达偏差及语义连贯四方面进行测评。译语流畅性以引起语流阻塞的言语标记为依据,以译语中出现的停顿、重复和修正为测量指标。质量评估的结果表明,在语言水平接近一致的前提下,职业译员与学生的口译质量存在显著差异,前者的口译质量明显优于后者。同时,研究还检测了口译过程中的一大“问题诱因”—高信息密度对口译质量造成的影响,同样以信息单位为量化指标,以单位时间区间内信息单位的数量指示信息密度的高低,发现随着信息密度的升高,职业译员与学生的信息实现率降低,并且二者之间的差距逐步拉大。此外,译语分析结果显示,高信息密度下学生在口译时产生的错误数量及严重程度均高于职业译员,前者甚至产生了整体性的语义逻辑上的错误,而后者多为局部的信息丢失或理解偏差。本研究基于“注意力分配模式”,对上述职业译员与学生的差异性的原因做出了解释,提出了交替传译的困难构成及应对机制。本文指出,交传中的困难由内部和外部困难构成,内部困难体现在口译多任务处理过程中的注意力资源有限性及资源配置的效度方面,若资源分配失衡则容易引起认知负荷“饱和”现象的产生,导致口译错误的出现。外部困难以口译过程中的“问题诱因”为特征,进一步激发注意力分配的紊乱,导致更多错误的产生。应对机制是口译员为解决内外困难所调动的心理运行机制,其作用的效果可能强化或弱化口译困难,最终影响口译的质量。据此,本文指出,职业译员与学生的差异性在于合理利用口译技能及策略,调动应对机制解决内外部困难的效度上,前者经过专业口译训练,其应对机制的作用效度优于后者。本研究是在严格控制语言能力变量的基础之上,采用专家与新手的对比研究方法对语言能力与口译能力的关系做出的首次验证。研究的结果证明,语言能力不等同于口译能力,具备双语能力不能保证合格的口译质量,因为双语能力不足以建构起以口译的技能化处理为特征的有效的困难应对机制。这一研究结果可能对我国的口译教学及专业建设提供一些实证方面的参考依据。更多还原

【Abstract】 Ever since conference interpreting embarked on professional development, the relationship between linguistic competence and interpreting competence has always been one of the key issues in the research of interpreting as well as an important benchmark that separates the teaching of interpreting from the teaching of language. Previous researches reflect the relationship mainly from two directions: the research of the interpreting process and the expert-novice comparative study. Researches of the interpreting process from different perspectives have resulted in many processing models of interpreting to describe the complicated psychological mechanism of interpreting process. Expert-novice comparative study, based on a large number of experimental data, has revealed in many ways the difference between professional interpreters and untrained students or non-interpreters when dealing with both offline cognitive tasks and online interpreting tasks. Nevertheless, previous researches did an insufficient job in testifying the relationship between linguistic competence and interpreting competence, lack of a connection between theoretical findings and empirical proof or the control of the linguistic competence variable in comparative studies. Therefore, this paper sets out to testify the difference between linguistic competence and interpreting competence in consecutive interpreting based on the theoretical framework of“Effort Model”in the paradigm of expert-novice comparative study.This paper combines quantitative analysis with qualitative analysis. First, an English test modeling after IELTS is conducted to test the foreign language ability of all testees. By comparing the performance of professional interpreters and untrained students, a baseline has been set to select proper candidates from two groups for further analysis of their interpreting task. Second, the interpreting quality of selected testees has been assessed. Based on information unit - the major quantitative index, a tentative assessment of interpreting quality is formed through three aspects: fidelity of information, accuracy of language use and fluency of expression, each with detailed analytical indices. The result of interpreting quality assessment shows that on the precondition of being at the same level of linguistic competence, there is obvious difference between professional interpreters and untrained students, with the former doing much better than the latter. Third, this research has testified the influence of high information density - one of the“problem triggers”in interpreting on the quality of interpreting. We find that along with the increasing of information density, successful information conveyance declines in both professional interpreters and untrained students, while an obvious gap widens between the two in their interpreting quality.On the basis of“Effort Model”, this paper proposes an explanation of the observed difference between professional interpreters and untrained students by stating the difficulty components during consecutive interpreting and the importance of a responsive problem-solving mechanism. Two kinds of difficulties appear in consecutive interpreting: interior ones and exterior ones. Interior difficulties are reflected in the limit of attention resources and the efficiency of attention allocation during the multi-task processing of interpreting. Any occurrence of unbalanced allocation of attention will lead to“cognitive saturation”which finally causes errors. Exterior difficulties feature“problem triggers”in interpreting which arouse further disorder of attention allocation, causing more errors to come. The responsive mechanism is a psychological mechanism activated by interpreters to solve interior and exterior problems. The efficiency of this mechanism may strengthen or diminish interpreting difficulties and exert an influence on interpreting quality at last. This paper points out that the difference between professional interpreters and untrained students lies in the proper use of interpreting skills and strategies to ensure the efficiency of the responsive mechanism. Having received professional interpreting training, professional interpreters work more efficiently with their responsive mechanisms than students.With the variable of linguistic competence tightly controlled, this paper is the first attempt to testify the relationship of linguistic competence and interpreting competence by adopting an expert-novice comparative study. The result proves that linguistic competence is not equal to interpreting competence, and bilingual ability does not ensure qualified interpreting, for the reason that bilingual ability is not sufficient to construct an efficient responsive problem-solving mechanism which features a skilled processing of interpreting. This may provide some empirical reference for the professional training of interpreting in China.更多还原