隨著經(jīng)濟(jì)全球化的進(jìn)程,近十年國際會(huì)議在中國有了前所未有的迅速發(fā)展。會(huì)議口譯需求巨大,然而國內(nèi)的會(huì)議口譯研究遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)不能回應(yīng)社會(huì)的需要,相關(guān)研究在數(shù)量及質(zhì)量上均落后于西方國家。從交際學(xué)角度對(duì)會(huì)議口譯進(jìn)行研究是一項(xiàng)較新的領(lǐng)域,而目前為止,這一角度進(jìn)行實(shí)證分析的研究少之又少。本文從口譯任務(wù)交流程式的不同將口譯分為獨(dú)白式口譯（單向發(fā)言口譯）與對(duì)話式口譯（雙向交流口譯）,以海姆斯的交際學(xué)論述、拉斯維爾的交際分析模型以及貝朗熱爾的“問題-程序調(diào)查表”構(gòu)建的理論模式指導(dǎo),對(duì)評(píng)估不同交流程式的口譯質(zhì)量及評(píng)估模式進(jìn)行研究。試圖回答以下三個(gè)研究問題:從交際學(xué)觀點(diǎn)分析,對(duì)話式口譯與獨(dú)白式口譯有何差異?這些差異對(duì)于質(zhì)量評(píng)估有何影響?會(huì)議口譯的獨(dú)白式口譯和對(duì)話式口譯的用戶期待有何不同?為什么會(huì)存在這些不同?基于以上,兩種口譯的評(píng)估有何差異?通過觀察兩場(chǎng)不同程式會(huì)議:單向發(fā)言口譯（演講口譯）與雙向交流口譯（商務(wù)談判口譯）,發(fā)現(xiàn)單向發(fā)言口譯與雙向交流口譯,因所涉及的因素不同,交際效果相異,其所對(duì)應(yīng)的口譯評(píng)估標(biāo)準(zhǔn)也應(yīng)隨之改變。與其把口譯現(xiàn)場(chǎng)視為語言整體不如將其看作社會(huì)實(shí)體,因?yàn)槠渲械慕浑H背景、場(chǎng)合、參與者,交際意圖、目的... 

【文章來源】：湖南大學(xué)湖南省 211工程院校 985工程院校 教育部直屬院校

【文章頁數(shù)】：81 頁

【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士

【文章目錄】：
摘要
Abstract
Chapter 1 Introduction
    1.1 Research significance
    1.2 Research purposes and questions
    1.3 Methodology
    1.4 The general organization of the thesis
Chapter 2 Literature Review
    2.1 Interpreting
        2.1.1 Defining interpreting
        2.1.2 Interpreting vs translation
    2.2 Classification of interpreting
        2.2.1 Based on working modes
        2.2.2 Based on settings
        2.2.3 Monologic mode interpreting vs dialogic mode interpreting
    2.3 Interpreting quality from the perspective of communication
        2.3.1 Basic components of communication
        2.3.2 Components of an interpreting act
        2.3.3 A communication model of interpretation
    2.4 Interpreting quality assessment
        2.4.1 Defining IQ
        2.4.2 Communication-based quality
        2.4.3 Previous studies on the assessment of interpreting quality
    2.5 Summary
Chapter 3 Theoretical Framework
    3.1 Hymes’theory of communication
    3.2 Bélanger’s “questions-programmes”communication model
        3.2.1 Lasswell’s communication model
        3.2.2 Bélanger’s “questions-programmes”
    3.3 Summary
Chapter 4 The Case Study
    4.1 Research background
    4.2 Research design
    4.3 Research methods
    4.4 Case selection
    4.5 Validity & reliability
    4.6 Data collection & processing
Chapter 5 Results and Discussions
    5.1 Analyzing interpretation in a “Hymesian”approach
        5.1.1 Analyzing the components of interpreting as a communicative events
        5.1.2 Discussion
        5.1.3 Summary
    5.2 Analyzing interpretation by applying Bélanger’s communication model
        5.2.1 Case analysis
        5.2.2 Summary
    5.3 User’s expectation questionnaire
        5.3.1 Results of the survey
        5.3.2 Statistical analysis of the two modes users’feedback
        5.3.3 Summary
    5.4 A proposed model for the process of interpreting quality assessment
        5.4.1 Monologic mode assessment process model
        5.4.2 Dialogic mode assessment process model
Conclusion
References
Appendix A 詳細(xì)中文摘要
Appendix B English-Speaking User’s Expectation Questionnaire
Appendix C 會(huì)議口譯用戶意見調(diào)查表
Appendix D Sylvia Kalina’s QA data sheet on interpreting assignments
Acknowledgements



本文編號(hào)：3351907