Using Propositional Analysis to Assess Interpreting Quality
Yan Lydia Ding
The University of Auckland
[av_font_icon icon=’ue84d’ font=’entypo-fontello’ style=” caption=” link=’manually,http://www.cit-asl.org/new/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/3-IJIE-9-1-Ding.pdf’ linktarget=” size=’80px’ position=’right’ color=” admin_preview_bg=” av_uid=’av-4230zm’]
[/av_font_icon] Download PDF of Complete Article (337 kb)
This article compares two methods of assessing interpreting quality: the holistic method and the proposed propositional analysis method. The author first summarizes previous research on interpreting quality, from which quality criteria were selected for holistic assessment. Following that, Turner and Greene’s (1978) proposition guideline is briefly introduced as a basis for propositional analysis. Third-year interpreting students were assigned an in-class interpreting task, and their interpreting outputs were recorded, transcribed, and assessed using both methods. Results showed that the two assessment methods agreed with each other in general; however, the propositional analysis method had a few advantages over the holistic assessment method. Propositional analysis gives educators and researchers a clearer overview of the difficulties student interpreters encounter during the interpreting process, by identifying the elements of the source text that were the most challenging for the students. Propositional analysis also facilitates metalinguistic analysis, such as the analysis of different types of propositions and specific language features, so that interpreter educators and researchers can be better informed about the cognitive process involved in interpreting process.
interpreting quality, propositional analysis, holistic assessment, quality criteria