Cover not available
Article published In:
FORUM
Vol. 14:1 (2016) ► pp.144–164

The causes of the problems in CI in a case of Japanese EFL university students and pedagogical suggestions

| Sophia University

In the previous study (Takahashi 2010), the omission of rendition was identified as one of the student problems. In the present study, ten undergraduate students interpretation and those of two professional interpreters were compared. It was found that decreasing accuracy of interpretation of the following sentence was identified as one of the student problems. Also, it was examined that there was an interpreting unit where the participants who used natural Japanese expressions in the proceeding sentence but with fillers, resulting in omitting or substituting interpretations in the following sentence. It is suggested that some of the student participants were not able to de-verbalize the English word in the source speech, and resulting eventually in the omission and substitution. Therefore, it is recommended that students should be taught a de-verbalization process (Selescovith,1989) as part of interpreting theory.

Keywords: de-verbalization, student interpreters, problem, omission, delay
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Previous studies
  • 3.Research questions
  • 4.The study
    • 4.1Purpose of the study
    • 4.2Material
    • 4.3Participants
    • 4.4Procedure
    • 4.5Data analysis method
  • 5.Results of data analysis and discussion
  • 6.Conclusion
  • 7.Concluding remarks
  • Acknowledgements
  • References
Published online: 4 August 2016
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/forum.14.1.08tak
References
Altman, Janet
1994 “Error analysis in the teaching of simultaneous interpreting: a pilot study.” In Bridging the Gap ed. by Lambert, Sylvia and Moser-Mercer, Barbara, 25–48. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Barik, Henri C.
1971 “A Description of Various Types of Omissions, Additions, and Errors of Translation Encountered in Simultaneous Interpretation.” Meta 161, 121–137. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1975 “Simultaneous interpretation: qualitative and linguistic data.” In The interpreting studies reader, ed. by Pöchhacker, Franz and Shlesinger, Mariam, 78-92, London, New York: Routledge Language Readers.Google Scholar
Bartłomiejczyk, Magdalena
2010 “Effects of short intensive practice on interpreter trainees’ performance.” In Why translation studies matters, ed. by Gile, Daniel, Hansen, Gyde, and Pokorn, Nike, K., 183–194. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Creswell, John, W.
2008 “Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches.” Sage Publications, Incorporated.Google Scholar
Creswell, John, W., and Plano Clark, V. L.
2007 “Designing and conducting mixed methods research.” Wiley Online Library.Google Scholar
Dillinger, Mike
1994 “Comprehension during interpreting: What do interpreters know that bilinguals don’t?” In Bridging the gap: Empirical research in simultanoeus interpretation, ed. by Lambert, Sylvia, and Morser-Mercer, Barbara 155–189. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kintsch, Walter
1974 “The representation of Meaning in Memory.” Ney York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Kurz, Ingrid and Färber, B.
2003 “Anticipation in German-English simultaneous interpreting.” Forum, 1 (2), 123–150. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Liu, M., Schallert, D., and Carroll, P.
2004 “Working memory and expertise in simultaneous interpreting.” Interpreting, 6 (1): 19–42. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Newmark, Peter
1977 “Communicative and Semantic Translation.” Babel: International Journal of Translation. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1988 “A textbook of translation” Vol. 661: Prentice Hall New York.Google Scholar
Ooigawa, Tomohik and Takahashi, Kinuko
2010 “Identification of English Words Embedded in Sentences by Japanese Professional Interpreters with Different Language Experiences.” Interpreters’ Newsletter 151: 159–171.Google Scholar
Pöchhacker, Franz
2004 “Introducing Interpreting Studies.” London and New York: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Riccardi, Alexandra
2002 “Evaluation in interpretation: macrocriteria and microcriteria.” Benjamins Translation Library, 421: 115–127. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sadanobu, Toshiyuki
2010 “Uttering Fillers in Conversation.” In Journal of Phonetic Society of Japan, 14 (3): 27–39.Google Scholar
Seleskovitch, Danica
1989 “A systematic approach to teaching interpretation.” The office for official publications for European Communities, J. Harmer, Trans, Luxembourg.Google Scholar
Takahashi, Kinuko
2009 “Identifying the common problems in English-to-Japanes consecutive interpretations performed by Japanese interpreting students: A case of Japanese interpreting students.” Unpublished MA Thesis, Sophia University.Google Scholar
2012b “The problems of the interpretations that were performed by Japanese Untrained Returnee Students.” In Proceedings of Sophia University Linguistics Society 271: 1–16.Google Scholar
Tommola, Jorma and Helevä, M.
1998 “Language direction and source text complexity: Effects on trainee performance in simultaneous interpreting.” In Unity in diversity, 177–186.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

Li, Xiangdong
2024. Teaching listening for interpreting through mind mapping. Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada/Spanish Journal of Applied Linguistics 37:1 ► pp. 172 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 30 march 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.