逐步口譯雙人合作模式之初探

Abstract

本研究旨在探討學生口譯員在逐步口譯中對於搭檔關係的看法，以及利用合作方法的口譯表現。實驗採用的方式包括一、單人模式；二、以筆記分工的雙人合作模式；三、將同步口譯方法融入逐步口譯的合作模式。研究者招募了八位口譯學生，並隨機分成四組，透過合作共同完成工作坊、實驗及後續實驗。工作坊在實驗前一週舉行，讓參與者熟悉合作方法。初始實驗的材料分為兩部分，每組分別採用傳統的單人逐步口譯和雙人合作模式（一人記筆記，另一人專心聆聽並根據提供的筆記輔助口譯）。研究者從各組產出的準確性及表達兩方面進行評估。然而，成對樣本t檢定顯示，無論在準確性、表達及整體表現上，兩種模式並無顯著差異。研究從半結構式訪談探討參與者對於筆記分工的雙人合作模式的看法，發現主要挑戰為個人的筆記習慣、對於搭檔的熟悉程度，以及不靠筆記的短期記憶能力。後續實驗參考訪談意見，將同步口譯搭檔的合作模式融入逐步口譯，此一方法也成為研究中第二種逐步口譯的合作模式。在這種受同步口譯啟發的逐步口譯合作模式下，合作不再限於以筆記分工；例如口譯員可以向搭檔尋求協助，搭檔也可以主動給予提示或幫忙搜尋原文中術語的對應翻譯。此模式更具靈活性，口譯員也更容易適應，把同步口譯的合作模式用於逐步口譯中，口譯員可以充分利用來源語輸入階段和產出階段之間的時間進行合作。最後，此合作模式得所有參與者的正面回饋，甚至改變了部分參與者的既定認知，不再堅信逐步口譯必為全程一人執行的工作。

This study investigated the performance and perceptions of student interpreters regarding partnership and collaborative approaches in consecutive interpreting (CI). The approaches examined included 1) conventional single-person CI mode, 2) dual-person CI mode, in which interpreter A concentrated on note-taking while interpreter B on rendering the message, and 3) simultaneous interpreting-inspired CI mode, in which interpreters A and B acted as boothmates and assisted each other when one being the passive interpreter. Eight interpreting students were recruited and randomly assigned to four groups for collaboration throughout the warm-up workshop, the experiment and the subsequent follow-up experiment. The warm-up workshop was conducted a week before the experiment to acquaint the participants with the new collaborative approach. In the initial experiment, materials were divided into two parts, each consisting of twelve long consecutive interpreting segments. Each participant interpreted one part of speech using the conventional consecutive interpreting approach and the other part using the collaborative dual-person approach, where one interpreter acted as the note-taker while the other focused on listening and rendering with the assistance of the notes provided. The interpreting output from each group was assessed by the researcher panel, considering both language (accuracy) and non-language (delivery) dimensions. However, paired samples t-tests showed no statistically significant differences in accuracy, delivery, or the overall performance between the two modes. Semi-structured interviews were conducted to explore the interpreters’ viewpoints, particularly on the collaborative dual-person approach. Results showed that note-taking habits, partner familiarity, and memory retention without notes are primary challenges in collaborative dual-person approach. A follow-up experiment, i.e., simultaneous interpreting-inspired CI mode, was conducted based on the participants’ suggestions during the interviews. This second type of collaborative dual-person approach was inspired by how interpreting partners collaborate in a booth when doing simultaneous interpreting. In this mode, the two interpreters were able to collaborate with their partner in various ways beyond note-taking. For example, the active interpreter can signal for assistance, and the passive interpreter can provide written cues or help search for terminologies. This approach is more flexible and it is easier to adapt, allowing interpreters to make the most of the time between the listening comprehension phase and the speech production phase in CI. The SI-inspired CI mode received positive feedback from all the participants and changed the minds of some who originally believed that CI is inherently solo work.