پایان نامه ارشد رایگان درمورد Intelligence، Rate، Experimental

دانلود پایان نامه ارشد

ty Diagram for Experimental Subjects’ Posttest Scores 133
Table 4.9 Control Subjects’ SI Pretest Scores 134
Table 4.10 Experimental Subjects’ SI Pretest Scores 135
Table 4.11 T-Test Results for SI Pretest Scores 138
Table 4.12 Control Subjects’ SI Posttest Scores 139
Table 4.13 Experimental Subjects’ SI Posttest Scores 140
Table 4.14 T-Test Results for SI Posttest Scores 142
Table 4.15 Experimental Subjects’ SI Improvement Rate 145
Table 4.16 Linguistic Intelligence Scores for Experimental Subjects 147
Figure 4.5 Scatterplot Diagram for SI Improvement and Linguistic Intelligence 150
Table 4.17 Logical-Mathematical Intelligence Scores for Experimental Subjects 153
Figure 4.6 Scatterplot Diagram for SI Improvement and Logical-Mathematical Intelligence 156
Table 4.18 Visual-Spatial Intelligence Scores for Experimental Subjects 157
Figure 4.7 Scatterplot Diagram for SI Improvement and Visual-Spatial Intelligence 160
Table 4.19 Musical Intelligence Scores for Experimental Subjects 162
Figure 4.8 Scatterplot Diagram for SI Improvement and Musical Intelligence 165
Table 4.20 Bodily-Kinesthetic Intelligence Scores for Experimental Subjects 166
Figure 4.9 Scatterplot Diagram for SI Improvement and Bodily-Kinesthetic Intelligence 168
Table 4.21 Interpersonal Intelligence Scores for Experimental Subjects 170
Figure 4.10 Scatterplot Diagram for SI Improvement and Interpersonal Intelligence 172
Table 4.22 Intrapersonal Intelligence Scores for Experimental Subjects 175
Figure 4.11 Scatterplot Diagram for SI Improvement and Intrapersonal Intelligence 177
Table 4.23 Naturalist Intelligence Scores for Experimental Subjects 180
Figure 4.12 Scatterplot Diagram for SI Improvement and Naturalist Intelligence 182
Table 4.24 Correlation between MIs and SI Improvement Rate 184
Table 4.25 Experimental Subjects’ Degree of Extroversion/Introversion 186
Table 4.26 Extroversion Degree and SI Improvement Rate 187
Figure 4.13 Scatterplot Diagram for SI Improvement and Extroversion 190
Table 4.27 Introversion Degree and SI Improvement Rate 192
Figure 4.14 Scatterplot Diagram for SI Improvement and Introversion 194

Abstract

Conducted within the framework of causal research model in translation studies, the present experimental work addresses the effect of applying certain interpreter-training-specific techniques (e.g. shadowing, improvisation, anticipation, paraphrasing, split-attention exercises, memory enhancement exercises, etc.) on the quality of simultaneous interpretation by the trainees. Prior to the commencement of the experiment, a standard test of General English (IELTS) was administered to ensure homogeneity. The participants (initially 102 who were later reduced to 70) were all undergraduate translation trainees, of whom 35 received the treatment (experimental group) and the remaining 35 did not (control group). Two tests of simultaneous interpretation (a pretest and a posttest) were conducted and then rated by three raters. T-test results for the pretest (t=0.59) showed there was no significant difference between the two groups whereas t-test results for the posttest (t=5.1) indicated that the experimental group outperformed the control group significantly. Such an improvement is believed to be the outcome of the treatment. The possible relation between experimental subjects’ rate of SI improvement and their multiple intelligences was investigated: as to Gardner’s first five intelligences, no statistically significant correlation was found (verbal-linguistic: -0.03, logical-mathematical: 0.178, visual-spatial: 0.26, musical-rhythmic: 0.06, bodily-kinesthetic: 0.02) while the remaining three were observed to correlate significantly with SI improvement level (interpersonal: -0.49, intrapersonal: 0.482, naturalist: 0.446). The possible relation between SI improvement rate and Jung’s two personality types was also probed into: extroversion turned out to have a correlation of -0.08 (near zero) and introversion correlated to the extent of 0.46; a moderate positive correlation, though statistically non-significant.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Dedication…………………………….………………………..………………………..…I
Acknowledgments…………………….…………………..………………….………..II
Abbreviations……………………………………………..………………………………….III
Figures and Tables…………………………….………..…………………..…………V
Abstract……………………………………………………………………..…………VIII
Table of Contents………………………………………..……………………………..X
CHAPTER 1: Introduction
1.1 Chapter Overview 2
1.2 Introduction 2
1.3 Background of the Problem 5
1.4 Significance of the Study 7
1.5 Purpose of the Study 9
1.6 Research Questions 9
1.7 Research Hypotheses 10
1.8 Theoretical Framework 11
1.9 Limitations and Delimitations 13
CHAPTER 2: Review of the Related Literature
2.1 Chapter Overview 19
2.2 Interpreting: Definition and Modes 20
2.2.1 Simultaneous Interpreting 23
2.2.2 Consecutive Interpreting 26
2.2.3 Sight Translation 28
2.2.4 Simultaneous Interpreting with Text 31
2.2.5 Liaison Interpreting 32
2.2.6 Whispering Interpreting 32
2.2.7 Escort Interpreting 33
2.3 Simultaneous Interpreting 33
2.3.1 Gile’s Effort Model of SI 38
2.3.2 Horizontal vs. Vertical Approaches 42
2.3.3 EVS and TTS 45
2.4 Interpreter-Training Techniques 52
2.4.1 Shadowing 54
2.4.2 Sight Translation 59
2.4.3 Consecutive Interpretation 60
2.4.4 Split-Attention 62
2.4.5 Anticipation 68
2.4.6 Improvisation 74
2.4.7 Memory-Enhancement 74
2.4.8 (Simultaneous) Paraphrasing 78
2.4.9 Condensation/Compression 82
2.5 Multiple Intelligences 84
2.5.1 Verbal-Linguistic 86
2.5.2 Logical-Mathematical 87
2.5.3 Visual-Spatial 88
2.5.4 Musical-Rhythmic 88
2.5.5 Bodily-Kinesthetic 89
2.5.6 Interpersonal 90
2.5.7 Intrapersonal 90
2.5.8 Naturalist 91
2.6 Extroversion/Introversion 92
CHAPTER 3: Methodology
3.1 Chapter Overview 97
3.2 Type of Research 97
3.3 Experiment 99
3.3.1 Participants 99
3.3.1.1 Experimental Group 99
3.3.1.2 Control Group 100
3.3.2 Treatment 100
3.3.2.1 Memory-Enhancement 102
3.3.2.2 Condensation/Compression 103
3.3.2.3 Improvisation 104
3.3.2.4 Consecutive Interpretation 105
3.3.2.5 Sight Translation 106
3.3.2.6 Split-Attention 107
3.3.2.7 Shadowing 108
3.3.2.8 Anticipation 110
3.3.2.9 (Simultaneous) Paraphrasing 111
3.3.3 Instruments 112
3.3.3.1 General English Test 112
3.3.3.2 SI Pretest and Posttest 113
3.3.3.3 Multiple Intelligences Test 114
3.3.3.4 Personality Type Test 115
3.4 Data Collection and Analysis 116
3.4.1 General English Test 116
3.4.2 SI Pretest and Posttest 116
3.4.3 Multiple Intelligences and Personality Type Tests 118
CHAPTER 4: Research Findings, Data Analysis, and Discussion
4.1 Chapter Overview 121
4.2 GE Test Scores 121
4.3 SI Test Scores 124
4.3.1 Inter-Rater Reliability 124
4.3.2 Pretest, t-test 134
4.3.3 Posttest, t-test 138
4.3.4 Eta2 142
4.4 MI and SI Scores Correlation 144
4.4.1 Linguistic Intelligence and SI Improvement Rate 147
4.4.2 Logical-Mathematical Intelligence and SI Improvement Rate 153
4.4.3 Visual-Spatial Intelligence and SI Improvement Rate 157
4.4.4 Musical Intelligence and SI Improvement Rate 161
4.4.5 Bodily-Kinesthetic Intelligence and SI Improvement Rate 165
4.4.6 Interpersonal Intelligence and SI Improvement Rate 170
4.4.7 Intrapersonal Intelligence and SI Improvement Rate 174
4.4.8 Naturalist Intelligence and SI Improvement Rate 179
4.5 Personality Type and SI Scores Correlation 185
4.5.1 Extroversion and SI Improvement Rate 187
4.5.2 Introversion and SI Improvement Rate 192
CHAPTER 5: Conclusion
5.1 Chapter Overview 199
5.2 Research Questions Revisited and Answered 199
5.4 Pedagogical Implications 204
5.5 Suggestions for Further Research 207
References…………………..…………………………………………………………211
Appendices……………………..………………………………………………………221

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Chapter Overview
The present chapter outlines the whole work on a small scale. We will first look at a short introduction to and background of the problem, then the significance and purpose of the study will be briefly discussed and finally the questions, hypotheses, and theoretical framework of the present study along with the main limitation and delimitations will be stated.

1.2 Introduction
Translation, considered in its broadest sense, is a practice, with a history thought to be as long as that of mankind, which has had tremendous influences upon man’s life throughout the history. The significance of such a practice in this day and age, duly termed as the age of communication, is far from disputable especially when one considers the role played by translation in all the communications that take place in various contexts. Therefore it is easy to see why the scientific study of translation has gained an unprecedented momentum over the past couple of decades.
No one can be sure when interpreting, in its broadest sense, was first undertaken by human beings. However, it is logical to assume that interpreting is definitely older than translation since the latter came into existence after the invention of some kind of writing system while the former could have existed before that. Pöchhacker (2005, p. 682) makes the following observation in this regard:

Interpreting as the activity of enabling or facilitating communication between speakers of different languages is a millennial practice, with earliest records dating back some five-thousand years (cf. Hermann 1956/2002).

However, for numerous reasons, to be elaborated on by researchers, translation has attracted much more attention in the history than interpreting. As Pöchhacker (2004, as cited in Pöchhacker, 2005, p. 683) states “In the history of scholarship on translation, few authors have reflected specifically on what we now call ‘interpreting’.” (my emphasis) The systematic study of interpreting is rare and cannot be claimed to be older than a number of decades (cf. Seleskovitch, 1999; Shaw et al., 2004; Riccardi, 2005;

پایان نامه
Previous Entries منابع تحقیق با موضوع کارت امتیازی متوازن، ارزیابی عملکرد، رضایت شغل Next Entries پایان نامه ارشد رایگان درمورد an، interpreting، p.