• 全国中文核心期刊
  • 中国人文社会科学核心期刊
  • 中文社会科学引文索引(CSSCI)来源期刊
  • 国家社会科学基金学术期刊资助入选期刊
SHANG Xiaoqi, LI Dechao. A Data-driven Approach to Exploring Weighting Schemes for Assessing Bi-directional Interpreting Performance: Evidence from Native Chinese-speaking Raters[J]. Journal of Foreign Languages, 2022, 45(3): 82-92.
Citation: SHANG Xiaoqi, LI Dechao. A Data-driven Approach to Exploring Weighting Schemes for Assessing Bi-directional Interpreting Performance: Evidence from Native Chinese-speaking Raters[J]. Journal of Foreign Languages, 2022, 45(3): 82-92.

A Data-driven Approach to Exploring Weighting Schemes for Assessing Bi-directional Interpreting Performance: Evidence from Native Chinese-speaking Raters

More Information
  • Received Date: July 19, 2021
  • Analytic rating scales are widely used for assessing interpreting.However, weighting schemes for assessing interpreting reported in previous studies have been largely conceptual and generally pre-determined.Research that investigates weighting based on empirical interpreting assessment data remains scant.And few studies to date have attempted to differentiate between language directions when it comes to weighting.To fill this gap, this study adopts a data-driven approach to exploring weighting schemes for assessing Chinese to English bi-directional interpreting performance.A total of eight raters were invited to evaluate 50 Chinese to English (C-E) interpretations and 50 English to Chinese (E-C) interpretations by trainee interpreters, using an analytic rating scale and a holistic rating scale.Data analysis suggested that: (1) fidelity was the predominant criterion in predicting the candidate's interpreting performance, regardless of interpreting direction (β1=.351 for C-E interpreting; β1=.593 for E-C interpreting); (2) delivery came second among the three assessment criteria, regardless of interpreting direction (β3 =.345 for C-E interpreting; β3 =.381 for E-C interpreting), and (3) language contributed up to 32.5 percent (β2=.325) of the variance in the candidate's interpreting performance in the C-E direction, whereas its predictive power on interpreting performance failed to be detected in the E-C interpreting direction due to statistical concerns.Implications of the findings for interpreter training and for the development and validation of assessment tools for interpreting performance are discussed at the end.

  • [1]
    Bachman, L.F. & A. Palmer. Language Testing in Practice[M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996.
    [2]
    Bartłomiejczyk, M. Strategies of simultaneous interpreting and directionality[J]. Interpreting, 2006, 8 (1): 149-174.
    [3]
    Brannen, J. Mixed Methods research: A discussion paper[M]. Southampton: ESRC National Center for Research Methods, 2005.
    [4]
    Brenna, S.E. & M. Williams. The feeling of another's knowing: Prosody and filled pauses as cues to listeners about the metacognitive states of speakers[J]. Journal of Memory and Language, 1995, 34 (3): 383-398. doi: 10.1006/jmla.1995.1017
    [5]
    Bühler, H. Linguistic (semantic) and extralinguistic (pragmatic) criteria for the evaluation of conference interpretation and interpreters[J]. Multilingua, 1986, 5 (4): 231-235. doi: 10.1515/mult.1986.5.4.231
    [6]
    Chang, C. & D. Schallert. The impact of directionality on Chinese/English simultaneous interpreting[J]. Interpreting, 2007, 9 (2): 137-176. doi: 10.1075/intp.9.2.02cha
    [7]
    Cheung, A. The effectiveness of summary training in consecutive interpreting delivery[J]. Forum, 2007, 5 (2): 1-23. doi: 10.1075/forum.5.2.01che
    [8]
    Choi, J. 2013. Assessing the impact of text length on consecutive interpreting[C] // Tsagari, D. & R. van Deemter. Assessment Issues in Language Translation and Interpreting. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 2013.85-96.
    [9]
    Clifford, A. Discourse theory and performance-based assessment: Two tools for professional interpreting[J]. Meta, 2001, 46 (2): 365-378.
    [10]
    Clifford, A. Putting the exam to the test: Psychometric validation and interpreter certification[J]. Interpreting, 2005, 7 (1): 97-131. doi: 10.1075/intp.7.1.06cli
    [11]
    Crystal, D. A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics[M]. Malden/Oxford/Carlton: Blackwell, 2008.
    [12]
    Darò, V., Lambert, S. & F. Fabbro. Conscious monitoring of attention during simultaneous interpretation[J]. Interpreting, 1996, 1 (1): 101-124. doi: 10.1075/intp.1.1.06dar
    [13]
    Donovan, C. Teaching simultaneous interpretation into B: A challenge for responsible interpreter training[C] // Godijns, R. & M. Hinderdael. Directionality in Interpreting: The 'retour' or the Native?. Gent: Communication & Cognition, 2005.147-166.
    [14]
    Fulcher, G. Testing Second Language Speaking[M]. London: Longman/ Pearson Education, 2003.
    [15]
    Gile, D. Basic Concepts and Models for Interpreter and Translator Training[M] (Revised). Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2009.
    [16]
    Green, A. & R. Hawkey. Marking assessments: Rating scales and rubrics[C] // Commbe, C., Davidson, P., O'Sullivan, B. & S. Storynoff. The Cambridge Guide to Second Language Assessment. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010.299-306.
    [17]
    Han, C. Investigating rater severity/leniency in interpreter performance testing: A multifaceted Rasch measurement approach[J]. Interpreting, 2015, 17 (2): 255-283. doi: 10.1075/intp.17.2.05han
    [18]
    Jones, R. Conference Interpreting Explained[M]. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing, 1998.
    [19]
    Knoch, U. Diagnostic assessment of writing: A comparison of two rating scales[J]. Language Testing, 2009, 26 (2): 275-304. doi: 10.1177/0265532208101008
    [20]
    Kurz, I. Conference interpreting: Quality in the ears of the user[J]. Meta, 2002, 46 (2): 394-409. doi: 10.7202/003364ar
    [21]
    Kurz, I. Conference interpretation: Expectations of different user groups[C] // Pöchhacker, F. & M. Shlesinger. Interpreting Studies Reader. London & New York: Routledge, 2002.313-324.
    [22]
    Lee, J. Rating scales for interpreting performance assessment[J]. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 2008, 2 (2): 165-184. doi: 10.1080/1750399X.2008.10798772
    [23]
    Lee, S-B. Developing an analytic scale for assessing undergraduate students' consecutive interpreting performances[J]. Interpreting, 2015, 17 (2): 226-254. doi: 10.1075/intp.17.2.04lee
    [24]
    Lee, Y-H. Comparison of error frequency in simultaneous interpretation A to B and B to A (Korean-English)[D]. Unpublished DEA (pre-doctoral) thesis, University of Geneva, 2003.
    [25]
    Linacre, J.M. A User's Guide to Facets: Rasch-model Computer Programs. [Computer software and manual]. Retrieved April 10, 2005, from www.winsteps.com.
    [26]
    Liu, M. Assessment[C] // Pöchhacker, F. Routledge Encyclopedia of Interpreting Studies. London: Routledge, 2015.20-23.
    [27]
    Ng, B.C. End users' subjective reaction to the performance of student interpreters[J]. The Interpreters' Newsletter special issue, 1992 (1): 35-41.
    [28]
    Pöchhacker, F. Quality assessment in conference and community interpreting[J]. Meta, 2001, 46 (2): 410-425.
    [29]
    Pöchhacker, F. Interpreting quality: global professional standards?[C] // Ren, W. Interpreting in the Age of Globalization: Proceedings of the 8th National Conference and International Forum on Interpreting. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press, 2012.305-318.
    [30]
    Pokorn, K. In defense of fuzziness[J]. Target, 2007, 19 (2): 327-336. doi: 10.1075/target.19.2.10pok
    [31]
    Riccardi, A. Evaluation in interpretation: Macrocriteria and microcriteria[C] // Han, E. Teaching Translation and Interpreting 4: Building Bridges. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2002.115-126.
    [32]
    Roberts, R.P. Interpreter assessment tools for different settings[C] // Roberts, R., Carr, S.E., Abraham, D. & A. Dufour. Critical Link 2: Interpreters in the Community. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2000.103-130.
    [33]
    Roy, C.B. Response to Etilvia Arjona on curriculum design[C] // McIntire, M.L. New Dialogues in Interpreter Education. Silver Spring: RID, 1984.36-42.
    [34]
    Sawyer, D.B. Fundamental Aspects of Interpreter Education: Curriculum and Assessment[M]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2004.
    [35]
    Schjoldager, A. Assessment of simultaneous interpreting[C] // Dollerup, C. & V. Appel. Teaching Translation and Interpreting 3: New Horizons. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1995.187-195.
    [36]
    Setton, R. & A. Dawrant. Conference Interpreting: A Trainer's Guide[M]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2016.
    [37]
    Shohamy, E. A Practical Handbook in Language Testing[M]. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University, 1985.
    [38]
    Skaaden, H. Assessing interpreter aptitude in a variety of languages[C] // Tsagai, D. & R. van Deemter. Assessment Issues in Language Translation and Interpreting. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 2013.35-50.
    [39]
    Tommola, J. & M. Heleva. Language direction and source text complexity: Effects on trainee performance in simultaneous interpreting[C] // Bowker, L., Cronin, M., Kenny, D. & J. Pearson. Unity in Diversity: Current Trends in Translation Studies. Manchester: St. Jerome, 1998.177-186.
    [40]
    Wang, M.W. & J. Stanley. Differential weighting: A review of methods and empirical studies[J]. Review of Educational Research, 1970, 40(5): 663-705. doi: 10.3102/00346543040005663
    [41]
    Weir, C.J. Language Testing and Validation[M]. Macmillan: Palgrave, 2005.
    [42]
    Weigle, S.C. Assessing Writing[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002.
    [43]
    Wu, F.S. How do we assess students in the interpreting examinations?[C] // Tsagari, D. & R. van Deemter. Assessment Issues in Language Translation and Interpreting. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 2013.15-33.
    [44]
    许宏晨. 第二语言研究中的统计案例分析[M]. 北京: 外语教学与研究出版社, 2013.

Catalog

    Article views (708) PDF downloads (112) Cited by()

    /

    DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
    Return
    Return