Piloting an Assessment Model of Interpreting Quality
Main Article Content
Abstract
Abstract: How to assess interpreting quality in conferences remains a question not yet satisfactorily answered. When disputes arise upon interpreters’ performance in conferences, the related parties do not have a consistent ground to base their assessment on. This research, completed under the sponsorship of the University of Languages and International Studies (ULIS, VNU) in the VNU research grant No QG.15.35 “Models for English-Vietnamese translation assessment”, has piloted Kurz’s model in 1989 with eight criteria in assessing simultaneous interpreting quality in three conferences. The findings show that this model allows comprehensive, accurate and objective assessment of interpreting quality. They also help pointing out interpreter’s strengths and weaknesses. However, there are certain limitations in the model, especially regarding large scale applicability and the incorporation of external quality factors.
Article Details
Keywords
Keywords: Interpreting, quality, assessment, Kurz, model.
References
[2] Gaiba F., Origins of simultaneous interpretation: the Nuremberg Trial, University Press: Ottawa, Canada, 1998.
[3] Kurz I., Conference Interpreting: User Expectations, ATA Proceedings of the 30th Annual Conference: 143-148, 1989.
[4] Kotler, P. and G. Armstrong., Principles of Marketin,. 6th ed., Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs (NJ), 1994.
[5] Kurz, I., Conference Interpreting: Quality in the Ears of the User. Journal des traducteurs / Meta: Translators' Journal, vol. 46, n° 2: 394-409, 2001.
[6] Kahane, E., Thoughts on the quality of interpretation, International Association of Conference Interpreters, 2000, Retrieved from http://aiic.net/page/197/thoughts-on-the-quality-of-interpretation/lang/1 on March 21st, 2016
[7] Chiaro, D. and Nocella, G. 2004. Interpreters’ perception of linguistic and non linguistic factors affecting quality: A survey through the World Wide Web, Translators' Journal, vol. 49, no2, 2004, 278-293, Retrieved from https://www.erudit.org/revue/meta/2004/v49/n2/009351ar.pdf on March 21st, 2016.
[8] Bühler, H., Linguistic (Semantic) and Extra-Linguistic (Pragmatic) Criteria for the Evaluation of Conference Interpretation and Interpreters, Multilingua 5-4: 231-235, 1986.
[9] Pöchhacker, F., Researching interpreting quality – Models and methods. Interpreting in the 21st Century – Challenges and opportunities: Selected papers from the 1st Forlì Conference on Interpreting Studies: 95-106. John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2000.
[10] Pöchhacker, F., and Zwischenberger C., Survey on quality and role: conference interpreters’ expectations and self-perceptions. International Association of Conference Interpreters. 2010, Retrieved from http://aiic.net/page/3405 on March 21st, 2016
[11] Kalina, S., Quality in interpreting and its prerequisites - A framework for a comprehensive view. Interpreting in the 21st Century – Challenges and opportunities: Selected papers from the 1st Forlì Conference on Interpreting Studies: 121-130, John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2000.
[12] Kurz, I., Conference Interpretation: Expectations of Different User Groups, The Interpreters’ Newsletter, 5: 13-21, 1993.