Interpreting: quality and assessment scales
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.12775/RP.2018.015Keywords
interpreting, teaching translation and interpreting, assessment, competence, qualityAbstract
Interpreting is a social phenomenon that is performed in a specific situational (and cultural) context. Effective communication plays here an essential role, whereas the assessment of this effectiveness cannot be reduced exclusively to the assessment of linguistic parameters. In this paper, two assessment scales will be presented that aim at (measurable) assessment of interpreting and can be applied as a tool in teaching interpreting as well as the assessment scale propounded by the article author on the basis of her own experience in teaching interpreting.
References
Bühler, H., 1986, „Linguistic (semantic) and extra-linguistic (pragmatic) criteria for the evaluation of conference interpretation and interpreters”, [w:] Multilingua 5, nr 4, s. 231–235.
Colina, S., 2003, Translation Teaching: From Research to The Classroom, New York – San Francisco.
Collados Aís, A., García Becerra, O., 2015, „Quality”, [w:] The Routledge Handbook of Interpreting, H. Mikkelson, R. Jourdenais (red.), London – New York, s. 368–383.
Englund Dimitrova, B., 2002, „Training and Educating the Trainers – A Key Issue in Translators’ Training”, [w:] Teaching Translation and Interpreting 4, E. Hung (red.), Amsterdam–Philadelphia, s. 73–82.
Gile, D., 2000, „The history of research into conference interpreting: A scientometric approach”, [w:] Target, nr 12(2), s. 297–321.
Gouadec, D., 2007, Translation as a profession, Amsterdam–Philadelphia.
Kadric, M., Kaindl, K., Pöchhacker, F. (red.), 2000, Translationswissenschaft, Tübingen.
Kelly, D., 2005, A Handbook for Translator Trainers. A Guide to Reflective Practice, Manchester.
Kiraly, D., 1995, Pathways to Translation. Pedagogy and Process, Kent, Ohio.
Kiraly, D., 2000, A Social Constructivist Approach to Translator Education: Empowerment from Theory to Practice, Manchester.
Kopczyński, A., 1994, „Quality in conference interpreting: Some pragmatic problems”, [w:] Bridging the gap. Empirical Research in simultaneous interpretation, S. Lambert, B. Moser-Mercer (red.), Amsterdam–Philadelphia, s. 87–100.
Kościałkowska-Okońska, E., 2017, „Setting assessment objectives vs assessment criteria in the context of teaching specialist translation”, [w:] Translatorik, Translationsdidaktik und Fremdsprachendidaktik. Herausforderungen und Perspektiven, Frankfurt am Main – Bern – Bruxelles – New York – Oxford – Warszawa – Wien, s. 63–70.
Kurz, I., 1989, „Conference Interpreting: User Expectations”, [w:] Coming of Age: Proceedings of the 30th Annual Conference of the American Translators Association, D.L. Hammond (red.), Medford – New Jersey, s. 143–148.
Kurz, I., 1993, „Conference Interpretation: Expectations of different user groups”, [w:] The Interpreter’s Newsletter., nr 5, Universita degli Studi di Trieste, s. 13–21.
Lee, J., 2008, „Rating Scales for Interpreting Performance”, [w:] The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, nr 2(2), s. 165–184.
Marrone, S., 1993, „Quality: A Shared Objective”, [w:] The Interpreter’s Newsletter, nr 5, s. 35–41.
Mesa, A.-M., 2000, „The Cultural Interpreter: An Appreciated Professional. Results of a Study on Interpreting Services: Client, Health Care Worker and Interpreter Points of View”, [w:] The Critical Link 2: Interpreters in the Community, R. Roberts, S.E. Carr (red.), Amsterdam–Philadephia, s. 67–79.
Moser, P., 1995, „Simultanes Konferenzdolmetschen. Anforderungen und Erwartungen der Benutzer. Endbericht, im Auftrag von AIIC”, [w:] SRZ Stadtund Regionalforschung: Wien.
Moser-Mercer, B., 2000, „Simultaneous interpreting: cognitive potential and limitations”, [w:] Interpreting, nr 5(2), s. 83–94.
Moser-Mercer, B., 2007, „Global cognition: Training a new breed of interpreter trainers”, [w:] Interpreting studies and beyond, F. Pöchhacker, A. Lykke Jakobsen, I.M. Mees (red.), Copenhagen, s. 89–101.
Moser-Mercer, B., 2008, „Skill acquisition in interpreting”, [w:] The interpreter and translator trainer, nr 2(1), s. 1–28.
Pöchhacker, F., 2000, „The Community Interpreter’s Task: Self-Perception and Provider Views”, [w:] The Critical Link 2: Interpreters in the Community, R. Roberts, S.E. Carr (red.), Amsterdam–Philadephia, s. 49–65.
Pöchhacker, F., 2001, „Quality Assessment in Conference and Community Interpreting”, [w:] Meta, nr 46(2), s. 410–425.
Pöchhacker, F., 2004, Introducing interpreting studies, London – New York.
Pöchhacker, F., 2013, „Researching quality: a two-pronged approach”, [w:] Quality in interpreting: Widening the scope, t. 1, O. García Becerra, E. Macarena Pradas Macías, R. Barranco-Droege (red.), Granada, s. 33–56.
Riccardi, A., 2002, „Evaluation in Interpretation: Macrocriteria and Microcriteria”, [w:] Teaching Translation and Interpreting 4. Building Bridges, E. Hung (red.), Amsterdam–Philadephia, s. 115–126.
Sawyer, D., 2004, Fundamental Aspects of Interpreter Education: Curriculum and Assessment, Amsterdam–Philadelphia.
Tryuk, M., 2012, „Ocena jakości w tłumaczeniu ustnym. Konieczny etap kształcenia tłumaczy konferencyjnych”, [w:] Lingwistyka Stosowana, nr 6, s. 45–55.
Viezzi, M., 1996, Aspetti della Qualita in Interpretazione, Trieste: SSLMIT.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
Stats
Number of views and downloads: 552
Number of citations: 0
