USING MULTIMODAL APPROACH TO INTERPRETING PERFORMANCE EVALUATION: TAKING 2016 CROSS-STRAIT CHINESE-ENGLISH INTERPRETING CONTEST AS AN EXAMPLE
Abstract
Since the establishment and development of translation and interpreting discipline in universities around the world, interpreting contests are held to (1) raise wild interests in interpreting activities; (2) promote interpreting training programs and interpreting pedagogy research; and (3) enhance individual’s language proficiency and interpreting skills. This paper, with an eye to the rubrics on Chinese-English dialogue interpreting performance in interpreting contests, adopts a multimodal approach to the examination and comparison of interpreting performance in the 2016 Cross-strait Chinese-English Interpreting Contest-The Final Round. Compared to the monomodal interpreting evaluation of language proficiency, this paper proposes a multimodal interpretation evaluation model from linguistic mode, aural mode, visual images, spatial arrangement, and kinetic movement (The New London Group, 1996). Following a comprehensive analysis of multimodalities in terms of type, orientation and value, the study shows that linguistic mode, aural mode, visual images, spatial arrangement, and kinetic movement can all contribute to the meaning-making and meaning transfer process. This paper proposes a multimodal interpreting evaluation model (MIEM) and argues that all these meaning-making and meaning transfer parameters should be taken into account in interpreting performance evaluation. The paper sheds some light on the methodological innovation for Chinese-English interpreting contest rubrics, as well as implies novel insight for interpreting evaluation in a broad sense.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Albl-Mikasa, M. (2008). (Non-) Sense in note-taking for consecutive interpreting. Interpreting, 10(2), 197-231.
Angelelli, C. V., & Jacobson, H. E. (2009). Testing and assessment in translation and interpreting studies: A call for dialogue between research and practice: John Benjamins Publishing
Baker, M. (1992). A coursebook on translation. London and New York: Routledge.
Behr, M. (2014). How to back the students–Quality, assessment & feedback. Paper presented at the To know how to suggest: approaches to teaching conference interpreting
Gambier, Y., & Van Doorslaer, L. (2010). Handbook of translation studies (Vol. 1): John Benjamins Publishing.
Gatica-Perez, D., Vinciarelli, A., & Odobez, J.-M. (2014). Nonverbal behavior analysis. Multimodal interactive systems management, 165-187.
Gile, D. (2003). Justifying the deverbalization approach in the interpreting and translation classroom. Paper presented at the FORUM. Revue internationale d’interprétation et de traduction/International Journal of Interpretation and Translation.
Gile, D. (2016). Research Methods in Interpreting. A Practical Resource. In Meta (Vol. 61, pp. 485-487).
Gillies, A. (2017). Note-taking for consecutive interpreting: A short course: Taylor & Francis.
Halliday, M. A. (1984). Language as code and language as behaviour: a systemic-functional interpretation of the nature and ontogenesis of dialogue. The semiotics of culture and language, 1, 3-35.
House, J. (2001). Translation quality assessment: Linguistic description versus social evaluation. Meta: journal des traducteurs/Meta: translators' Journal, 46(2), 243-257.
House, J. (2014a). Translation quality assessment: Past and present. In Translation: A multidisciplinary approach (pp. 241-264): Springer.
Jiménez Hurtado, C., & Soler Gallego, S. (2013). Multimodality, translation and accessibility: a corpus-based study of audio description. Perspectives, 21(4), 577-594.
Johnston, J. M., & Pennypacker, H. S. (2010). Strategies and tactics of behavioural research: Routledge.
Johnston, T., & Crasborn, O. (2006). The use of ELAN annotation software in the creation of signed language corpora. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the EMELD’06 Workshop on Digital Language Documentation: Tools and Standards: The state of the art.
Jones, R. (2014a). Conference interpreting explained: Routledge.
Jones, R. (2014b). Interpreting: A communication profession in a world of non-communication. Revue Internationale d'études en langues modernes appliquées, 7(Suppl.), 9-18.
Jones, R. H. (2012). Multimodal discourse analysis. The encyclopedia of applied linguistics.
Jones, S. E., & LeBaron, C. D. (2002). Research on the relationship between verbal and nonverbal communication: Emerging integrations. Journal of communication, 52(3), 499-521.
Kress, G., & Van Leeuwen, T. (2001). Multimodal discourse: The modes and media of contemporary communication: Edward Arnold.
Lee, J. (2008). Rating scales for interpreting performance assessment. The interpreter and translator trainer, 2(2), 165-184.
Lien, J. J., Kanade, T., Cohn, J. F., & Li, C.-C. (1998). Automated facial expression recognition based on FACS action units. Paper presented at the Proceedings Third IEEE International Conference on Automatic Face and Gesture Recognition
Lim, V. F. (2011). A systemic functional multimodal discourse analysis approach to pedagogic discourse.
Linell, P. (1997). Interpreting as communication. BENJAMINS TRANSLATION LIBRARY, 23, 49-68.
Linell, P. (1998). Approaching dialogue: Talk, interaction and contexts in dialogical perspectives (Vol. 3): John Benjamins Publishing.
Linell, P., Wadensjö, C., & Jönsson, L. (1992). Establishing communicative contact through a dialogue interpreter. Communication for Specific Purposes–Fachsprachliche Kommunikation. Ed. by A. Grinsted and J. Wagner. Tübingen: Gunter Narr, 125-142.
McNeill, D. (2000). Language and gesture (Vol. 2): Cambridge University Press.
McNeill, D. (2005). Gesture, gaze, and ground. Paper presented at the International workshop on machine learning for multimodal interaction.
Mikkelson, H. (1996). The professionalization of community interpreting. Paper presented at the Global vision: Proceedings of the 37th annual conference of the American Translators Association.
Mikkelson, H., & Jourdenais, R. (2015). The Routledge handbook of interpreting: Routledge.
Mondada, L. (2018). Multiple temporalities of language and body in interaction: Challenges for transcribing multimodality. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 51(1), 85-106.
Norris, S. (2012). Multimodal interaction analysis. The encyclopedia of applied linguistics.
O'Halloran, K. (2008). Mathematical discourse: Language, symbolism and visual images: A&C Black.
Orlando, M. (2010). Digital pen technology and consecutive interpreting: another dimension in notetaking training and assessment.
Pavez, P. (2021). Dialogic education in the interpreting classroom: action research for developing simultaneous interpreting quality assessment tools. The interpreter and translator trainer, 15 (3), 360-377.
Pérez-González, L. (2014). Multimodality in translation and interpreting studies. A companion to translation studies, 119-131.
Poyatos, F. (1997). Nonverbal Communication and Translation: New perspectives and challenges in literature, interpretation and the media (Vol. 17): John Benjamins Publishing.
Rennert, S. (2010). The impact of fluency on the subjective assessment of interpreting quality.
Riccardi, A. (2002). Evaluation in interpretation. Teaching Translation and Interpreting 4–Building Bridges, 115-126.
Seleskovitch, D. (1978). Interpreting for international conferences: Problems of language and communication: Pen & Booth.
Seleskovitch, D. (1989). Teaching conference interpreting. In P. W. Krawutschke (Ed.), Translator and interpreter training and foreign language pedagogy (pp. 76-81). Binghamton, NY: State University of New York SUNY.
Setton, R. (1994). Traing 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 and East-West Center.
Setton, R. (2011). Corpus-based interpreting studies (CIS): Overview and prospects. Corpus-based translation studies: Research and applications, 33-75.
Shlesinger, M., & Pöchhacker, F. (2002). The interpreting studies reader: Routledge.
Thibault, P. J. (1990). Social semiotics as praxis: Text, social meaning making, and Nabokov's Ada: U of Minnesota Press.
Van Leeuwen, T. (2008). Discourse and practice: New tools for critical discourse analysis: Oxford university press.
Van Leeuwen, T., & Jewitt, C. (2001). The handbook of visual analysis: Sage.
van Leuven-Zwart, K. (1990). Translation and original: Similarities and dissimilarities, II. Target. International Journal of Translation Studies, 2(1), 69-95.
Van Nes, F., Abma, T., Jonsson, H., & Deeg, D. (2010). Language differences in qualitative research: is meaning lost in translation? European journal of ageing, 7(4), 313-316.
Viezzi, M. (1996). Aspetti della qualità in interpretazione.
Zhang, M., & Feng, D. W. (2020). Introduction: Multimodal approaches to Chinese-English translation and interpreting. In Multimodal Approaches to Chinese-English Translation and Interpreting (pp. 1-15): Routledge.
第六屆海峽兩岸口譯大賽總決賽. (2022). Retrieved 19 July 2022, from https://2016crossstraitinterpreting.weebly.com/
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
ISSN 1305-578X (Online)
Copyright © 2005-2022 by Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies