청중의 통역품질 평가에 대한 고찰
Users’ Quality Assessment Criteria in Interpreting
0
조회
0
다운로드
6
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Many studies have found that regardless of who the evaluator is― interpreter or the service user―content-related criteria are deemed the most important in assessing interpreting quality. However, it must be noted that service users, in most cases, do not understand the source language. Naturally, this means that service users are in a disadvantageous position to evaluate the content-related quality of interpreting as they cannot compare the contents of the target text against the source text. The purpose of this study is to investigate how the service user evaluates the content-related quality of interpreting without having access to the source text. Through the use of structural equation modeling, this study shows that service users depend on the form-related criteria and not on the delivery-related criteria to guess how well the original message was delivered content-wise. Furthermore, it is found that when the interpreter fails to maintain a constant rate of speech, the service users regard it as a sign of drop in sense consistency.
Abstract
Many studies have found that regardless of who the evaluator is― interpreter or the service user―content-related criteria are deemed the most important in assessing interpreting quality. However, it must be noted that service users, in most cases, do not understand the source language. Naturally, this means that service users are in a disadvantageous position to evaluate the content-related quality of interpreting as they cannot compare the contents of the target text against the source text. The purpose of this study is to investigate how the service user evaluates the content-related quality of interpreting without having access to the source text. Through the use of structural equation modeling, this study shows that service users depend on the form-related criteria and not on the delivery-related criteria to guess how well the original message was delivered content-wise. Furthermore, it is found that when the interpreter fails to maintain a constant rate of speech, the service users regard it as a sign of drop in sense consistency.
참고문헌 (20)
- 김혜림, "교육에서의 통역평가 기준에 대한 고찰: 조사연구를 중심으로", 통역과 번역, 13(2), pp.71~91 (2011), 한국통역번역학회
- 우종필, "구조방정식모델 개념과 이해" (2012), 한나래아카데미
- 정철자, "통역 평가 비교가능성: 교육상황에서의 사례연구", 통번역학연구, 16(2), pp.219~239 (2012), 통번역연구소
- Bühler, H., "Linguistic (semantic) and extralinguistic (pragmatic) criteria for the evaluation of conference interpretation and interpreters", Multilingua, 5(4), pp.231~235 (1986)
- Cheung, A., "Non-native accents and simultaneous interpreting quality perceptions", Interpreting, 15(1), pp.25~47 (2013)
- Chiaro, D., "Interpreters' perception of linguistic and non-linguistic factors affecting quality : A survey through the world wide web", Meta : Translators' Journal, 49(2), pp.278~293 (2004)
- Collados Ais, A., "The Interpreting Studies Reader", pp.327~336 (1998), Routledge
- Gile, D., "Translation: Theory and Practice. Tension and Interdependence", pp.188~200 (1991), Binghamton
- Guillot, M., "Fluency and its teaching" (1999), Multilingual Matters
- Holub, E., "Does intonation matter? The impact of monotony on listener comprehension", The Interpreters' Newsletter, 15, pp.117~126 (2010)
- Iglesias, E., "La incidencia del parámetro agradabilidad de la voz. In La evaluación de la calidad en interpretación simultánea: parámetros de incidencia" (2007), Comares
- Kalina, S., "Quality in interpreting and its prerequisites: a framework for a comprehensive view" (2002), Garzone, G. &
- Viezzi, M., "Interpreting in the 21st century", pp.121~130 (2002), John Benjamins Publishing Company
- Kurz, I., "Conference interpretation: expectations of different user groups", The Interpreters' Newsletter, 5, pp.13~21 (1993)
- Kurz, I., "Conference interpreting: quality in the ears of the user", Meta, Translators' Journal, 46(2), pp.394~409 (2001)
- "Survey on expectations of users of conference interpretation"[URL]
- Pöchhacker, F., "Quality in interpreting: widening the scope 1", pp.33~56 (2013), Editorial Comares
- Rennert, S., "The impact of fluency on the subjective assessment of interpreting quality", The Interpreters' Newsletter, 15, pp.101~115 (2010)
- Viezzi, M., "terpretation quality assessment: from theory to practice", pp.171~186 (2007)
- Zwischenberger, C., "Quality criteria in simultaneous interpreting: an international vs. a national view", The Interpreters' Newsletter, 15, pp.127~142 (2010)