Quality Standard In Interpreting

In this thesis, the author sustains an analysis of interpreting quality from the perspective of communication, grounded on the standpoint that interpreting quality relies on a set of communication variables. Based on L.E. Sarbaugh's communication taxonomy, in which 7 key variables are labeled, a map featuring all attainable interpreting sets and communication levels is thus devised. Along with the basic criteria of interpreting, the Quality Standard Model is contrived and applied to assess interpreting quality.This thesis starts with an introduction in which the background and outline of the whole thesis are given, which is followed by four chapters and a conclusion, in which the major achievements and limitations faced are pointed out.Chapter One reviews the research on interpreting quality in an all-round way and comes to justify the necessity of researching quality from the perspective of communication. A diachronic look at the history of interpreting research covers two generations in the West and a shorter time of development in China. The quality research comes into being during the second generation in the West and now remains as one of the five main themes in a wide range. The research on interpreting quality focuses on various aspects of quality: quality as aspiration, quality as expectation and quality as variables. Features of the research evolve from being impressionist, theoretical and single-layered to being objective, empirical, and multi-perspective. The current tendency is to research interpreting quality in an interdisciplinary way towards the completion of corpus. To meet the demand, a communication-conscious analysis is thus required.A detailed analysis of interpreting and communication is provided in Chapter Two. Firstly an introduction to interpreting contains its types, components, models and makes clear its features as communication. Then a thorough comparison between interpreting and translation is made to further demonstrate interpreting as interlingual and intercultural communication. Afterwards, the study on the basic components of communication lends strong support to the author's claim that quality standard should be viewed from communication. By introducing the Relevance Theory; the author establishes the relationship between communication and quality, as expressed in the formula: Processing effort = contextual effect÷relevance. Given that the contextual effect is fixed, the more relevant, the smaller processing effort interpreters need to produce quality interpreting. Since more relevance corresponds to more smoothness and efficiency in communication, communication has a determining role in the assessment of interpreting quality. Finally, elaboration on the features of standard paves the way for the establishment of the Quality Standard Model.Chapter Three embodies the Quality Standard Model. L.E. Sarbaugh selects seven key variables in categorizing communication: number of persons involved in the communication (NP); type of channels used (CH); perceived relationship among the participants (PR); perceived intent of the communicators (PI); code systems (CS); normative patterns of beliefs and overt behaviors (NBOB); world view (WV). On the premise that interpreting is a special kind of communication, a map of interpreting variables is drawn and the communication taxonomy of interpreting is constructed. 72 sets of communication are divided by 8 levels of communication. On this basis, the author proposes the Quality Standard Model: Standard = R(Communication Level)×B. Two cases are presented, in which this model is applied, so as to justify the credibility of this model.Chapter Four expounds the implications elicited from the Quality Standard Model, concerning quality assessment by different stakeholders in the professional setting and classroom training. With this model, comparison between quality assessments of a variety of interpreting acts is thereby possible and tenable.