Résumés
Abstract
Given the evanescent quality of the spoken word, interpreters tend to be evaluated, trained, and selected on the basis of unproven theories and preconceptions about the cognitive processes and areas of difficulty associated with their work. A gap persists between theoretical work and empirical evidence of the processes proposed by such studies. Recent developments in technology are now being applied to interpreter performance evaluation, shedding light on aspects of interpreter performance that have previously resisted systematic analysis. It is now possible to examine large volumes of language in use, in both audio and textual realms. This paper presents the MRC model for analysis of interpreter performance and a study conducted using that method for the purpose of identifying interpreter training needs. Theoretical background, the MRC model, and the study outcomes and pedagogical implications are presented.
Keywords/Mots-Clés:
- discourse analysis,
- corpus linguistics,
- audio corpora,
- interpreting,
- empirical studies
Résumé
La parole étant évanescente, les interprètes sont évalués, formés et choisis en s’appuyant sur des bases théoriques non prouvées et sur des préconceptions des processus cognitifs et des secteurs de difficultés liées au travail. Un fossé existe entre les travaux théoriques et l’évidence empirique des processus proposés par de telles études. De récents développements technologiques utilisés à présent pour l’évaluation de la performance des interprètes apporte des informations sur certains aspects de la performance des interprètes inanalysables auparavant. Il est à présent possible d’analyser d’importantes quantité de « parole » à la fois auditives et textuelles. Cet article présente le modèle MRC d’analyse de la performance des interprètes et une étude avec cette méthode dans le but de déterminer les besoins de formation des interprètes. On donne également l’histoire théorique du modèle MRC, ainsi que les conclusions et implications pédagogiques.
Parties annexes
References
- BIBER, D. (1998): Corpus Linguistics: Investigating Language Structure and Use, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
- COLLADOS AIS, Á. (1999) “Expectativas y evaluación de la calidad en interpretación de conferencias: revision de trabajos empíricos rrealizados hasta 1996”, Estudios Sobre Traducción E Interpretación 2, pp. 777-788.
- GERVER, D. (1976): “Empirical Studies of Simultaneous Interpretation: A Review and a Model” In Brislin, R. (Ed.), Translation, Application and Research, New York, Gardner Press, pp. 165-207.
- GILE, D. (1994): “Methodological Aspects of Interpretation and Translation Research”, In Lambert, S. and B. Moser-Mercer (Eds.), Bridging the Gap: Empirical Research in Simultaneous Interpretation, Amsterdam, Benjamins, pp. 39-56.
- GILE, D. (1997): “Conference Interpreting as a Cognitive Management Problem” In G.M. Shreve, J.H. Danks, S.B. Fountain & M.K. McBeath (Eds.), Cognitive Processes in Translation and Interpreting, Thousand Oaks, Sage, pp. 196-214.
- GRICE, P. H. (1975): “Logic and Conversation”, in Syntax and Semantics 3, Speech Acts P. Cole and J.L. Morgan (Eds.), pp. 43-58.
- KOPCZYNSKI, A. (1994): “Quality in Conference Interpreting: Some Pragmatic Problems”. In Lambert, S. and B. Moser-Mercer (Eds.) Bridging the Gap: Empirical Research in Simultaneous Interpretation, Amsterdam, Benjamins, pp. 87-100.
- MACWHINNEY, B. (1997): “Simultaneous Interpretatoin and the Competition Model”, In G.M. Shreve, J.H. Danks, S.B. Fountain & M.K. McBeath (Eds.), Cognitive Processes in Translation and Interpreting, Thousand Oaks, Sage, pp. 215-233.
- MOSER, B. (1977): “A Hypothetical Model and its Practical Application”, In Gerver, D & H.W. Sinaiko, Language Interpretation and Communication, New York: Plenum, pp. 353-369.
- MOSER, B. (1997): “Beyond Curiosity: Can Interpreting Research Meet the Challenge?” In G.M. Shreve, J.H. Danks, S.B. Fountain and M.K. McBeath (Eds.), Cognitive Processes in Translation and Interpreting, Thousand Oaks, Sage, pp. 176-195.
- NEUBERT, A. (1997): “Postulates for a Theory of Translatio”, In G.M. Shreve, J.H. Danks, S.B. Fountain and M.K. McBeath (Eds.), Cognitive Processes in Translation and Interpreting, Thousand Oaks, Sage, pp. 1-24.
- NIDA, E. (1964): Toward a Science of Translating, Leiden, Brill.
- NIDA, E. (1976): “A Framework for the Analysis and Evaluation of Theories of Translation”, In Brislin, R. (Ed.), Translation, Application and Research, New York, Gardner Press, pp. 47-91.
- REISS, K. and H. J. VERMEER (1984): Fundamentos para una teoría funcional de la tradución, Translation by Sandra García and Celia Martin.
- SEARLE, J. R. (1975): “Indirect Speech Acts”, in Syntax and Semantics, vol 3, Speech Acts P. Cole and J.L. Morgan (Eds.), pp. 59-82.
- SELESKOVICH, D. (1976): Interpretation, A Psychological Approach to Translating, In Brislin, R. (Ed.). Translation, Application and Research, New York, Gardner Press, pp. 47-91.
- SHLESINGER, M. (1994): “Quality in Simultaneous Interpreting”, In Conference Interpreting: Current Trends in Research Proceedings of the International Conference on Interpreting: What do we know and how?Y. Gambier, D. Gile, D. Taylor, C. (Eds.) Amsterdam, Benjamins, pp.110- 122.
- SINCLAIR, J. (1991): Corpus, Concordance, Collocation, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
- STUBBS, M. (1996): Text and Corpus Analysis, Oxford and Cambridge, Blackwell.
- TOURY, G. (1995): Descriptive Studies and Beyond, Amsterdam, Benjamins.