Impacts of Directionality on Disfluency of English-Chinese Two-Way Sight Translation

Impacts of Directionality on Disfluency of English-Chinese Two-Way Sight Translation

Fan Yang, Fen Gao, Kexin Zhang
DOI: 10.4018/IJTIAL.323448
Article PDF Download
Open access articles are freely available for download

Abstract

This study explores the impacts of directionality on disfluency of sight translation (ST) between English and Chinese. The author adopts four disfluency indicators, namely silent pause (SP), filled pause (FP), repetition (Rt), and repair (Rr) to answer: (1) What are the features of disfluency in ST in two directions? (2) What is the correlation between directionality and disfluency in ST? The results show: (1) The incidence of SP is the highest in both E-C and C-E ST, followed by FP, then Rr, and finally Rt; many student interpreters do the most basic pre-task preparation poorly, leading to a large number of SPs; many SPs coincide with respiration and those over 10 seconds occur only in E-C ST; (2) There are no statistically significant differences between E-C and C-E ST in terms of the four disfluency indicators. In other words, directionality exerts no significant effect on disfluency of student interpreters' ST.
Article Preview
Top

2. Literature Review

2.1 Sight Translation

ST is a hybrid between written translation and interpreting in that the source text is written and the target text is spoken (Agrifoglio, 2004; Setton & Motta, 2007). In ST, the source text remains visually accessible to the interpreter (Gile, 1997; Agrifoglio, 2004).

Compared to CI and SI, ST has some added difficulties, and ST’s cognitive demands are in no way less than those of CI and SI. First, the information contained in written materials may mostly be much more intensive than that in improvised oral expression, and the wording in written materials is often more sophisticated, and vocabulary richer. Besides, spoken language promotes instant understanding of ideas, which written text cannot match. Second, in many cases, the speaker does not speak exactly according to the text, but uses it as an outline of the speech, with additions and deletions, or other improvisations. Third, there is serious source language interference in ST, which has been confirmed by several scholars. Gile (1997) claims that in ST, source-language interference may be greater than in CI and SI, because in translation from oral source, once uttered, the exact words articulated by the speaker die away more quickly from memory, but in ST, source text is all along presented before the sight translator.

Complete Article List

Search this Journal:
Reset
Volume 6: 1 Issue (2024)
Volume 5: 1 Issue (2023)
Volume 4: 2 Issues (2022)
Volume 3: 2 Issues (2021)
Volume 2: 2 Issues (2020)
Volume 1: 2 Issues (2019)
View Complete Journal Contents Listing