Evaluation and Self-Evaluation in Simultaneous Translation - Core

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 46 (2012) 4253 – 4257

WCES 2012

Evaluation and self-evaluation in simultaneous translation: assessments methods Marilena Milcu 10, Victoriei Bd, Sibiu, 550024, Romania

Abstract

The nature of evaluation and self-evaluation in simultaneous interpretation is based on the close connection between number of variables emerge, that can damage the efficiency and the accuracy of simultaneous interpretation. The intention of our study is to propose a set of scientific methods and tools in order to offer to the interpreter the possibility of a self-assessment and the benefit of an appropriate evaluation of his work. In order to achieve these goals we used several methods, including experiments, case studies, questionnaires, evaluation scales. Research subjects are 126, students and interpreters. Research results indicate the difficulty of constructing appropriate assessment tools and self-evaluation tools because of the many components involved in this process: linguistic and cognitive factors, social and emotional ones. The study concludes that only linguistic analysis of the results of interpreting activity is not sufficient and does not provide a functional and pragmatic model of assessment and selfassessment, so we need to create specialized tools in order to realize it. 2012Published PublishedbybyElsevier Elsevier Ltd. © 2012 Ltd. Selection and/or peer review under responsibility of Prof. Dr. Hüseyin Uzunboylu Open access under CC BY-NC-ND license. Keywords: Evaluation, self-evaluation, simultaneous interpretation, assessment methods.

1. Introduction Conference interpreting deals exclusively with oral communication: rendering a message from one language into another, naturally and fluently, adopting the delivery, tone and convictions of the speaker and speaking in the first person. It should not be confused with translation which deals only with written texts. International conferences are attended by people from different backgrounds and cultures, and speaking different languages. It is the job of an interpreter to enable them to communicate with each other, not by translating every word they utter, but by conveying the ideas which they express. Simultaneous interpretation is a highly specialized area of translations, which requires accurate and complete translation, orally and at the same rate of speech as the speaker, with only a few seconds of lag time. Simultaneous interpreters must have not only complete mastery of the languages, but also of their cultures. In addition, they must have technical knowledge of the subject to be discussed, as well as the required simultaneous interpretation training, skill, and experience. Interpreting has several modes, each requiring a set of skills that are acquired over time and that must be maintained. The ability to speak two languages does not ensure that the person can interpret effectively. Metaphorically speaking, having two hands does not make someone a concert pianist, that expertise depends on how the two hands are trained (Rainof 1980). Classically speaking, essential skills for interpretation include knowledge of languages and respective cultures, the ability to listen, a good memory, and note-taking ability.

1877-0428 © 2012 Published by Elsevier Ltd. Selection and/or peer review under responsibility of Prof. Dr. Hüseyin Uzunboylu Open access under CC BY-NC-ND license. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.06.236

4254

Marilena Milcu / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 46 (2012) 4253 – 4257

2. Interpretation types Consecutive interpreting. This mode is characterized by rendering spoken messages back and forth after each person has spoken. It is defined as interpretation of an utterance after it has been completed; one person speaks at a time. The consecutive mode works well for dialogues or for question and answer sessions. It requires note-taking skills and good memory. In addition, this mode is recommended for working in educational settings, such as in oneon-one or small group meetings. Simultaneous interpreting. This mode is characterized by rendering a message from a source language into a target language almost simultaneously and slightly behind the speaker. It is defined as interpretation of an utterance while in progress. The speaker does not stop talking, and the interpreter must not stop either. This mode requires an excellent command of both languages and highly practiced pacing and memory skills. This system is used in some educational events with audio equipment for the interpreter and headsets for the target audience. Sight translation. This mode involves the verbal translation of written text on sight. It might be used for medical records, foreign birth certificates, foreign school records, or legal documents required of parents or guardians of English learners. This mode is challenging since there is generally no preparation time or materials. Paraphrasing. This mode is characterized by simplifying and summarizing what is said. This mode should not be used because it allows unintended biases, omissions, and inaccuracies to affect the final product and meaning. Interpreters should completely and accurately interpret everything that is said. Interpreting is an intense activity that requires not only knowledge and skills in both languages that are being interpreted and their respective cultures, but also the ability to provide spontaneous responses to information being exchanged verbally at an unpredictable rate of speed and register. The interpreter serves as a conduit and plays a critical role in the accurate and complete conveyance of information. 3. I Interpretation demands special skill sets that are acquired over time, often requiring several months or years of specialized training. Recruitment and training programs must be developed along with outreach, assessment, and opportunities for professional development. Specialized glossaries and reference materials in all languages should be developed or provided. Although both translation and interpretation require their own set of well-developed skills, there are three categories of common entry-level, desired qualifications that apply to both: (1) general Romanian-language literacy and an understanding of the cultural component of Romanian people; (2) proficiency in a second language (French) and an understanding of cultural aspects of the people who speak that language; (3) a general knowledge and understanding of the institutions in which the French clients need language assistance. It is important for interpreters to understand the rules, expectations, and requirements of the institutions to be served because they need to be able to communicate and work effectively with the people who work in those institutions (Fradd and Wilen 1990). extensive vocabulary in both languages, he interprets the message completely and accurately, he allows parties to speak for themselves, he refrains from interjecting personal opinions, he does not engage in side conversations, the interpreter is courteous and professional, he is experienced and able to document his qualifications. 4. Research methodology 4.1. Sample In our research we selected a group of 126 participants (students of French language), 19 to 30 years age. They study the French language at the University, in Modern Language Department, bachelor and master degree. 4.2. Other participants

Marilena Milcu / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 46 (2012) 4253 – 4257

4255

In order to accomplish our study targets, we asked the collaboration of the teachers in conference interpreting (for university professors) and of the freelance interpreters (for freelancers). They are interested in this study, because they have encountered difficulties in offering correct evaluation tools in interpreting business, due to the oral and evanescent component of this activity. 4.3. Methods Our research is based on a several methods and instruments, as follows: experiments, case studies, questionnaires, evaluation scales. 4.3.1. Research Procedure The research involved six steps: a. The experts recommend a list of twenty documentary films (10 minutes each, French to Romanian) form various fields: European politics, geopolitics, social issues, health, education and engineering. b. They selected a list of ten documentary films, based on several criteria: topics, general vs. technical language, semantically and lexically complexity, c. The experts organized the films from the most difficult to the easiest one. d. The students interpreted the films in simultaneous way. Each student had to translate three films (low, medium and high difficulty). e. The first evaluation: the experts evaluated the quality of the simultaneous interpretation, on the base of several classic assessment methods: fidelity to the original, formal accuracy, fluency in translation, meaning of the text, its intelligibility and intrinsic content. f. The second evaluation: the experts evaluated the quality of simultaneous interpreting using a new scale of evaluation. g. The students compare their results after the first and the second evaluation. h. Our research took six weeks. 5. Results Classical approach in simultaneous interpreting assessment does not offer to our student the possibility of a real evaluation of their work performance. After our research, we recommend a new set of methods and techniques of evaluation (table 1 and table 2). Table 1. Evaluation scale in simultaneous interpreting No

1.

METHODS

TECHNIQUES 1.1. Inappropriate interpreting

Error analysis in simultaneous interpreting 1.2. Interpreting which affect the expression in the target language

2.

Errors in simultaneous interpreting

2.1. Negative effect of errors on the quality of simultaneous interpreting 2.2. Language errors

INDICATORS omission addition loss of meaning unresolved references inappropriate linguistic variation low velocity no technical skills in the cabin high stress in the cabin spelling lexical items grammar text and style interpreting mistakes language mistakes

ERROR EVALUATION Major errors Minor errors

4256

3. 4.

Marilena Milcu / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 46 (2012) 4253 – 4257 Holistic method of assessment

3.1. Aspects of the student's performance

Simultaneous interpreting competence

4.1. Language variables

competences in correct interpreting knowledge of grammar lexical problems general vs. technical language from the foreign language into the native language from the native language into the foreign language

We recommend this evaluation scale for training in simultaneous interpreting, its complexity needs a high level of knowledge held by the teachers and freelance interpreters. An excellent experience is necessary. Table 2. Brief evaluation form Difficulty of films

Rendering the message from one language to another

Fluency

No lexical and grammar mistakes

Proficiency in the second language

Coping to the cabin stress

interpreter

Low Medium High

The brief evaluation form is recommended for students in their evaluation and self-evaluation. This instrument is easy to apply and offer a quick response when simultaneous interpreting assessment is required. Table 3. Research results: Performance in interpreting Difficulty of films Bachelor degree Master degree

Low Medium High Low Medium High

Rendering the message from one language to another % 21 63 16 16 59 25

Fluency % 32 47 21 22 41 37

Lexical and grammar % 18 56 36 15 41 44

Proficiency in the second language %

Coping to the cabin stress %

interpreter %

24 55 21 12 54 34

48 41 11 36 43 21

82 15 3 74 23 3

We observed a significant dissimilarity of the performance in interpreting between the bachelor degree and the master degree, due to different time experience in the field of interpreting, but also due to different level of practice. 6. Conclusions Assessment methods in simultaneous interpretation are various and not always very appropriate. We are usually tempted, even in academic field, to use a subjective perception of this activity, based on a classical approach: the as a good knowledge of the the teachers helps the student in the cabin, etc. However, in order to satisfy the clients who need a good interpreter in a company and to reduce any level of subjectivity in academic evaluation, which needs to be close to the market labour, we have to apply other assessment methods in interpretation. Our study aims to offer two specific evaluation scales, which are providing a good support for interpreting training. References Baddeley, A. D. (1993). , Presses Universitaires de Grenoble, Grenoble. Bowen, D. (1984), Steps to consecutive interpretation, Pen and Booth, Washington. Bowen, M. (1980), Bilingualism as a factor in translation and interpretation, Current Issues In Bilingual Education, Georgetown University Press, Washington.

Marilena Milcu / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 46 (2012) 4253 – 4257

4257

Brisau, A., Godijns, R., Meulelan, C. (1994), Towards a psycholinguistic profile of the interpreter, Meta, 39(1), 87-94. Carlet, L. (1998), G. V. Chernov's psycholinguistic model in simultaneous interpretation: An experimental contribution, The Interpreters' Newsletter, 8, 75-92. Chernov, G. V. (1979), Semantic aspects of psycholinguistic research in simultaneous interpretation, Language And Speech, 22(3). Chomski, N. (1957), Syntactic Structures, Mouton, The Hague. Cooper C. L., Davies R., & Tung R. L. (1982), Interpreting stress: Sources of job stress among conference interpreters, Multilingua, 1(2). Croitoru, E. (1996), Interpretation and translation, Editura Porto-Franco, Galati. Curvers, P., Klein, J., Riva, N., & Wuilmart, C. Cuadernos De Traduccion E Interpretacion, 7, EUTI, Barcelona. Daly, A. (1985), Interpreting for international satellite television, Meta, 30(1), 91-96. Durieux, Christine (2004), Approche psycholinguistique de la traduction, Psycholinguistics: a multidisciplinary science, Eropia, Paris. -27 Falbo, C. The Interpreters' Newsletter, 5, 101-106. Francis, M. (1997), The making of a conference interpreter, In K. Klaudy & J. Kohn (Eds.), Transferre Necesse Est. Proceedings Of The Second International Conference On Current Trends In Studies Of Translation And Interpreting (pp. 175-178), Scholastica, Budapest. Frauenfelder, U., Schriefers, H. (1997), A psycholinguistic perspective on simultaneous interpretation, Interpreting, 2(1-2), 55-89. Garretson, D. (1981), A psychological approach to consecutive interpretation, Meta, 26(3). Giambagli, A. Terminologie et traduction, 2(3), 305-311. Gile, D. Meta, 28(3). Gile, D. Traduire, 117. Meta, 30(4). Gile, D. Gile, Daniel (2009), Basic Concepts and Models for Interpreter and Translator Training, revised ed., John Benjamin Publishing Company, Amsterdam/Philadelphia. http://DG INTERPRETATION (DG SCIC) at the European Commission Interpreting and Conference service http://ec.europa.eu/education/languages/archive/doc/maalouf/report_fr.pdf http : //ec.europa.eu/dgs/translation/about_us/history http://www.europarl.europa.eu/ I failed because I got very nervous. Anxiety and performance in interpreter e della traduzione, , nr.11. Kernbaum, Serge (2008), , Medecine-Sciences, Flammarion, Paris. Kurz, I. (1993), Conference interpretation: Expectations of different user groups, The interpreters' newsletter, 5, 13-21. Kurz I. (1997), Interpreters: Stress and Situation-Dependent Control of Anxiety, in Transferre Necesse Est. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Current Trends in Studies of Translation and Interpreting. Ed. by K. Klaudy and J. Kohn, pp. 201-206, Scholastica, Budapest. Kurz I. (2002), Physiological stress responses during media and conference interpreting, in Interpreting in the 21st Century. Ed. by G. Garzone and M. Viezzi, pp. 195-202, John Benjamins, Amsterdam-Philadelphia. Kurtz, Ingrid, (2003), Physiological stress during simultaneous interpreting: a comparison of experts and novices, EUT Trieste. , Minard, Lettres Modernes, Paris. Lederer, M. (1981), Lederer, M. Actes Du Colloque International De , June. , Lederer, M. (1985), Lederer, M. (1994), , Hachette, Paris. Lemaire, P. (1999), Psychologie cognitive, de Boeck, Bruxelles. Lederer , M. (2006), , Lettres Modernes, Minard, Caen. Miller, G.A., Galanter, E., Pribram, K.H. (1960). Plans and the Structure of Behavio,Holt, Rinehart & Winston, New York. Milcu, M. (2010), Editura Un Moser, B. (1978), Simultaneous Interpretation: A Hypothetical Model and its Practical Application, Gerver and Sinaiko (Eds). Moser, P. (1997), Expectations of users of conference interpretation, Interpreting, 1(2). Nida, E. (1981), Translators are born, not made, The Bible Translator, vol. Riccardi A., Marinuzzi G. and Zecchin S. (1998), Interpretation and stress, The Interpreters' Newsletter 8. ,d Rozan, J.F. (1973), Seleskovitch, D. (1984), , Didier Erudition, Paris. , Meta, 30-1, pp. 19-24. Seleskovitch, D., Lederer, M. (1981), Comprendre le langage. Le point d de vue des neuropsychologues, in Actes du colloque Comprendre le langage, Collection Linguistique no 12 de Didier Erudition, Paris. pour traduire, Didier Erudition, Paris. Seleskovitch, D., Lederer, M. (1986), Seleskovitch, D., Lederer, M. (1989), , Didier Erudition, Coll. Traductologie 4, Paris. Van Hoof Henri (1962), 2 (Vol. VIII). Widlund-Fantini, Anne-