同步口譯員顯化風格探討：以香港立法會為例

Abstract

口筆譯員之個人風格在翻譯過程中扮演要角，惟此觀點直到本世紀初始獲學術界重視。口譯員風格體現於遣詞用字、表達方式及非言語提示，亦能反映口譯員的偏好。值得一提的是，即便口譯員以不同方式處理類似問題，往往亦能達到同等效果；而且隸屬同一群體的口譯員也有可能呈現類似的風格取向。為進一步探討口譯員在群體內所呈現的風格，本研究以語料庫為本，分析香港立法會口譯員之顯化（explicitation）樣態。語料庫囊括時長約 11 小時的會議錄影及粵進英的口譯語料，用於分析十二位口譯員使用顯化的頻繁度（frequency）及分佈一致性（consistency）。口譯員的風格組合按三種頻繁度（稀少、豐富、極端）及兩種分佈一致性（平均、零散）歸類，再進行對比。結果顯示，口譯員在顯化頻率上呈現適度差異，而平均組與零散組的口譯員也呈現顯著差異。質性分析則顯示，顯化風格相同的口譯員之間存在一致性、變化程度和詞彙偏好的差異。文中亦提出造成風格差異的可能因素，包括口譯策略、說話的冗長程度（verbosity）及整體台風。另外，香港立法會口譯員擁有兩個風格共通點，分別為廣泛使用銜接及標示語句，以及修正稱呼語。

The study of style has only gained traction within translation and interpreting communities at the start of the 21st century, when scholars recognising that translators and interpreters play a distinct role in language mediation. In the context of interpreting, style is revealed through an interpreter’s linguistic choices, way of delivery and non- verbal cues. Interestingly, even if interpreters adopt different solutions to similar problems, the outcomes can be equally effective. In fact, stylistic patterns may become assimilated within interpreter communities, as previous empirical research has shown. Thus, examining style is essential for understanding interpreters’ behavioural patterns, both individually and collectively. To enrich the discussion of interpreters’ style as a group, this corpus-based study investigated the explicitation patterns of interpreters working in the Hong Kong Legislative Council (LegCo). The corpus drew on 11 hours of authentic LegCo meetings, interpreted from Cantonese into English. Twelve interpreters identified from the corpus were categorised based on their explicitation frequency (lean, abundant, and extreme) and consistency (consistent and sporadic). The findings indicate that LegCo interpreters’ styles moderately diverge regarding explicitation frequency. Additionally, a statistically significant difference was observed between consistent and sporadic interpreters. Qualitative analysis further revealed variations within and across stylistic categories in terms of consistency, variety, and lexical preferences. Possible influencing factors include interpreting approach, verbosity, and personal style. Two shared stylistic features were also identified: the pervasive use of cohesive and signposting devices, and modifications in salutations.