金懿韜

【摘要】釋意理論是研究口譯的理論之一?；仡欋屢饫碚摰膰?guó)內(nèi)外研究的歷史，有助于認(rèn)清面臨的問(wèn)題和進(jìn)一步發(fā)展的方向，促進(jìn)對(duì)口譯理論的深入研究，指導(dǎo)口譯實(shí)踐。

【關(guān)鍵詞】釋意理論 口譯研究 口譯實(shí)踐

【Reference】The Interpretive Theory is one of the theories of interpreting study.It is useful to face the problem of the interpreting research by reviewing it.And it is helpful for the further study and practice of the interpreting theory.

【Key words】the Interpretive Theory； interpreting study； practice of the interpreting theory

Introduction

The Interpretive Theory is one of the theoretical research of interpretation.It is the process of understanding of the sense of the source language text/discourse， “deverbalizing its linguistic form” and expressing the sense and the feeling in the target language.（Lederer 2003：1）[5]Deverbalization is the core of the translation process and is also the core concept of the Interpretive Theory.

1.Inception and Development of the Interpretive Theory

1.1 Inception of the Interpretive Theory.According to Xiao Xiaoyan （肖曉燕2002）[17]， theoretical research on interpretation in western countries could be divided into four stages：a） Pre-research Period （1950s- the early period of the 1960s）； b） Experimental Psychology Period （1960s-the early period of the 1970s）； c） Practitioners' Period （from the early period of the 1970s to the mid-term of the 1980s）； d） Renewal Period （since the end of the 1980s）.The first two research stages could not be called interpretation research formally because at that time researchers had no good method to guide their research.Furthermore， their research did not touch the key problem of interpretation.Later Seleskovitch and Lederer began to incorporate the findings from conference interpretation into Embodied Philosophy and personal experience， drawing greatly upon cognitive sciences and other disciplines.After more than ten years research， a set of theory which was later known as the Interpretive Theory was established.（龔龍生 2008）[11]

1.2 Development of the Interpretive Theory.In 1968 Professor Seleskovitch published her monograph Interpreting for International Conference：Problems of Language and Communication， later translated into English by Stephanie Dailey and Eric.Norman McMillan in 1978.This marks the birth of the Interpretive Theory and the preparation for the further development of the theory.（劉和平 2001b）[14].

In 1984 Seleskovitch and Professor Lederer co-published the book entitled Interpreter pour Traduire1， marking the establishment of the Interpretative Theory.（龔龍生2008）[11]

In 1994， Lederer published The Interpretive Model2， later translated into English by Ninon Larche in 2003.That marked the perfection of the Interpretive Theory.（龔龍生2008）[11]

The three books mark the process of the foundation of the Interpretive Theory.The Interpretive Theory plays the important role in Chinese and international interpretation research.The following is the brief introduction to the concepts of the Interpretive Theory.

2 Concepts of the Interpretive Theory

Here it is necessary to discuss three groups of key concepts of the Interpretive Theory—a） Translation through Interpretation； b） Translation Process with Deverbalization as its core； c） Sense， Units of Sense， Cognitive Inputs.（王斌華 2008）[16]

2.1 Translation through Interpretation.The interpretive translation is not the transcoding between two languages.It means to translate or interpret the meaning of the source language text into the target language one completely and accurately.But how could it be done？ What is the translation process？ The other two groups of concepts should be introduced.

2.2 Translation Process with Deverbalization as its Core

2.2.1 Translation Process.In her monograph （Selekscovitch 1978：9）[6]， Professor Selekscovitch mentioned three stages of the translation process which are understanding senses and feeling emotions of the source language text， “deverbalizing its linguistic form” and re-expressing its ideas and emotions in the target language.（Lederer 2003：1）[5]And the Paris School imagined this process to be a triangle.

In 1984， Professor Seleskovitch and Professor Lederer proposed “the triangular model of interpretation”3 （Selekovitch & Lederer， 1984：168， 185 cited in 張吉良 2008：19）[21]again in the book named Intérpreter pour Traduire which was written by them.In this triangular model， two ends of the triangles bottom are the source language and the target language respectively.And the top of the triangle is the sense.The transcoding， which is from the source language to the target language， is not expected.But what is expected？ That is “interpretive translation”.That is the process of comprehension of the sense of the source language discourse and reformulation of the sense and the feeling of the target language discourse.（張吉良 2008：19）[21]

The following is the illustration of “the triangular model of the interpretation”.Figure 1 is two versions of the triangular model from Professor Seleskovitch （Seleskovitch & Lederer， 1984：168， 185 cited in張吉良2008：19）[21].

Figure 1 （Seleskovitch & Lederer， 1984：168， 185 cited in 張吉良 2008：19）[21]

And now ‘deverbalization will be explained in detail.

2.2.2 Deverbalization.Deverbalization is the core of the translation process as well as the Interpretive Theory.From the above triangular model， it is clear that senses of the speaker in language 1 could be re-expressed to the listener in language 2 through deverbalization.

Deverbalization is the indispensable phase between comprehension and reformulation.Through deverbalization， linguistic form is deverbalized but sense and emotion are produced.So the following is the explanation of “sense， units of sense， cognitive inputs”.

2.3 Sense， Units of Sense， Cognitive Inputs.In the above two groups of concepts， it is mentioned that the content of translation or interpretation is the sense.And so is the goal of deverbalization.What is “sense”？ The following is the introduction of “sense”.

2.3.1 Sense.Sense is from language but beyond language.And it is the combination of the idea and the sign.Additionally， as Seleskovitch （Seleskovitch 1984：269 cited in Lederer 2003：15-16）[5]said that it is what an addresser wants to express but not anything else.And an interpreter should not do any explanation or comment casually.

2.3.2 Units of Sense.Generally speaking， a unit of sense is “[…]this fusion of the semanticisms of words and cognitive inputs[…]” （Lederer 2003：18）[5].Furthermore the length of a unit of sense is changing.And different addressees have different units of sense because of their cognitive inputs.What is “cognitive inputs”？ The explanation of the concept will be presented in the following paragraph.

2.3.3 Cognitive Inputs.To explain “cognitive inputs”， two concepts should be introduced.One is “world knowledge” and the other is “cognitive and affective inputs”.

A.Cognitive and Affective Inputs

Although the concept is called “cognitive inputs”， it is also affective.

Cognitive and affective are different but inseparable.Furthermore， according to Lederer （Lederer 2003：29）[5]， in physiology they “[…]have their origins in the brain[…]” （ibid.） and also could be inseparable.And she used the term “cognitive inputs” to express them and divided them into “world knowledge” and “contextual knowledge”.

Contextual knowledge is gained from hearing or reading a speech or a text and is stored in the short-term memory.It is short-lived.But it could “l(fā)ast long enough” for an interpreter or a translator to understand a speech or a text.（Lederer 2003：29-35）[5]

But in the thesis it is not the point to be discussed more.

The following is the explanation of “world knowledge” in detail.

B.World Knowledge

World knowledge is also called encyclopaedic knowledge.And it includes “l(fā)inguistic and extra-linguistic knowledge generally stored in the long-term memory” （Lederer 2003：29）[5].It is indispensable for the depth of understanding a speech or a discourse.Furthermore， it could be gained by “individuals through 1.their lifes experiences （empirical knowledge）， 2.language （what is learnt through reading， education， conversations， television， etc.）， 3.their own reasoning” （Lederer 2003：231）[5].And background knowledge is also “the relevant world or encyclopaedic knowledge” （ibid.）.Without world knowledge， translation or interpretation will be the transcoding.

The origin and concepts of the Interpretive Theory have been introduced.And the following is the reviewing of the research of the Interpretive Theory home and abroad.

3.Research on the Interpretive Theory Home and Abroad

3.1 Domestic Research on the Interpretive Theory.According to Zhang Jiliang （張吉良2008：21-26）[21]， the Interpretive Theory was introduced in China in the 1970s.Studies in China have two ways.One way is translation and introduction of monographs of the Interpretive Theory.The representatives are Sun Huishuang， who translated Linterprète dans les Conférences Internationales， Problèmes de Langage et de Communication written by Seleskovitch （1979） and Interpréter pour Traduire written by Seleskovitch and Lederer （1992）， Huang Weixin and Qian Huijie， who translated Linterprète dans les Conférences Internationales， Problèmes de Langage et de Communication written by Seleskovitch （1992）， Wang Jiarong， Li Xusen and Shi Meizhen， who translated Interpréter pour Traduire （1990）， etc.The other one is the theoretical research and application.The representatives are Bao Gang， Liu Heping， Cai Xiaohong etc.They did the in-depth exploration （鮑剛 1998a， 1998b； 蔡小紅 2001； 劉和平 2001a）[8][9][10][13]， and some comments on the problems with the theory （鮑剛1998a， 1998b； 劉和平2001b， 2006）[8][9][14][15].Apart from the above scholars， some other scholars， such as Xu Jun， Yuan Xiaoyi and Ke Ping， also did introduction and simple comment （袁筱一1997； 許鈞1998； 許鈞、袁筱一etc.2001）[20][18][19].Furthermore there are teachers who wrote papers about the Interpretive Theory.The papers mainly discussed the way to improve interpretation and the pedagogy of interpretation.Chinese researchers are more confined to the introduction and application； criticisms are rare. （張吉良 2008：21-26）[21]

In his writing （龔龍生2008）[11]， Gong Longsheng notes that Chinese scholars contribution plays important role in the Chinese interpretation research and even in the whole translation theory research.It is also the indispensable part of the development of the Interpretive Theory， which shows the trend and direction of Chinese and global interpretation research—attaching importance to the empirical research， focusing on the interpretation process， studying from the perspective of the interdisciplinary and so on.（龔龍生 2008）[11]

3.2 International Research on the Interpretive Theory.Theoretical research on interpretation in western countries has more than fifty years history.（李金澤2010）[12]The research could be divided into four stages which have been mentioned in Section 1.1.Stage 3 （from the early period of the 1970s to the mid-term of the 1980s）， was called the Practitioners Period.The scholars of ESIT4 were the representatives of this stage.According to Zhang Jiliangs research （張吉良2008：30）[21]， before the mid-term of the 1980s， international interpretation circle mainly focused on the pedagogy of interpretation which was created on the basis of the Interpretive Theory （Gile 1990a， 1990b）[2][3]but they did not doubt the Interpretive Theory.However， in 1986， on the international seminar with the theme “Theory and Practice of the Conference Interpretation Teaching”， many participants challenged the views of the Paris School and called on using scientific and serious way to do the research of interpretation.（Crevatin 1989； Lambert 1989； Stenzl 1989）[1][4][7].Generally speaking， the research of the Interpretive Theory in international interpretation circle does not reap much.The critical writings of the Interpretive Theory are more than the praising ones.But the comments and criticisms are mainly about research methods and attitude of the Paris School.（張吉良 2008：30-41）[21]

No one could deny the importance and historic value of the Interpretive Theory.The Interpretive Theory plays the important role in the pedagogy of interpretation and interpreters training when it is regarded as prescriptive theory though it really has problems when it is considered as explanatory theory.

4.Conclusion

From the above， the research and three groups of concepts of the Interpretive Theory have been reviewed.The importance and historic value of the Interpretive Theory could not be denied.However， it has problems when it is considered as explanatory theory.So the in-depth research of the Interpretive Theory should attach importance to the empirical research， focusing on the interpretation process， studying from the perspective of the interdisciplinary and so on.

Notes：

1 This book has no English version， but it has two Chinese versions.One is entitled《口譯理論實(shí)踐與教學(xué)》which is translated by Wang Jiarong， Li Xusen and Shi Meizhen in 1990.The other is 《口筆譯概論》 translated by Sun Huishuang in 1992.（張吉良2008：12）

2 The book also has a Chinese version which is entitled《釋意學(xué)派口筆譯理論》and translated by Liu Heping and published by China Translation and Publishing Corporation in 2001.（張吉良2008：13）

3 口譯過(guò)程的三角模型

4 ESIT即?cole Superieure dInterprètes et de Traducteurs，法國(guó)巴黎新索邦大學(xué)高等翻譯學(xué)校，簡(jiǎn)稱(chēng)巴黎高翻。成立與1957年，釋意理論就誕生在巴黎高翻的一批教師和研究人員中間。

Reference：

[1]Crevatin， F.Directions in Research Towards a Theory of Interpretation[A].In L.Gran & J.Dodds （eds.）.The Theoretical and Practical Aspects of Teaching Conference Interpretation[C].Udine：Campanotto.1989.

[2]Gile， D.Scientific Research vs.Personal Theories in the Investigation of Interpretation[A].In L.Gran & C.Taylor （eds.）.Aspects of Applied and Experimental Research on Conference Interpretation[C].Udine：Campanotto.1990a.

[3]Gile， D.Research Proposals for Interpreters[A].In L.Gran.& C.Taylor （eds.）.Aspects of Applied and Experimental Research on Conference Interpretation[C].Udine：Campanotto.1990b.

[4]Lambert， S.Recall and Recognition among Conference Interpreters[A].In L.Gran & J.Dodds （eds.）.The Theoretical and Practical Aspects of Teaching Conference Interpretation[C].Udine：Campanotto.1989.

[5]Lederer， M.Translation：the Interpretive Model[M].trans.N.Larché.Manchester：St.Jerome Publishing.2003：1-232.

[6]Seleskovitch， D.Interpreting for International Conference：Problems of Language and Communication[M].trans.S.Dailey and E.Norman McMillan.Washington：Pen and Booth.1978.

[7]Stenzl， C.From Theory to Practice and from Practice to Theory[A].In L.Gran & J.Dodds （eds.）.The Theoretical and Practical Aspects of Teaching Conference Interpretation[C].Udine：CamPanotto.1989.

[8]鮑剛.口譯程序中的語(yǔ)義問(wèn)題[J].北京第二外國(guó)語(yǔ)學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào).1998（4）：103-110.

[9]鮑剛.口譯理論概述[M].北京：旅游教育出版社.1998b.

[10]蔡小紅.交替?zhèn)髯g思維過(guò)程與能力發(fā)展—對(duì)中國(guó)法語(yǔ)譯員與學(xué)生的交替?zhèn)髯g活動(dòng)進(jìn)行的實(shí)證性研究[J].現(xiàn)代外語(yǔ).2001， （3）：276-284.

[11]龔龍生.釋意理論對(duì)我國(guó)口譯的影響[J].寧夏大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)（人文社會(huì)科學(xué)版）.2008，（4）：155-166.

[12]李金澤.國(guó)內(nèi)口譯研究的歷史與現(xiàn)狀[J].邊疆經(jīng)濟(jì)與文化. 2010，（2）：101-102.

[13]劉和平.口譯技巧—思維科學(xué)與口譯推理教學(xué)法[M].北京：中國(guó)對(duì)外翻譯出版公司.2001a.

[14]劉和平.釋意學(xué)派理論對(duì)翻譯學(xué)的主要貢獻(xiàn)—獻(xiàn)給達(dá)妮卡·賽萊絲柯維奇教授[J].中國(guó)翻譯.2001b，（4）：62-65.

[15]劉和平.法國(guó)釋意理論：質(zhì)疑與探討[J].中國(guó)翻譯.2006，（4）.

[16]王斌華.口譯即釋意？—關(guān)于釋意理論和相關(guān)爭(zhēng)議的反思[J].外語(yǔ)研究.2008，（5）：72-76.

[17]肖曉燕.西方口譯研究：歷史與現(xiàn)狀[J].外國(guó)語(yǔ).2002，（4）.

[18]許均.翻譯釋意理論辨—與賽萊斯科維奇教授談翻譯[J].中國(guó)翻譯.1998.

[19]許均，袁筱一等.當(dāng)代法國(guó)翻譯理論[M].武漢：湖北教育出版社.2001.

[20]袁筱一.論釋意理論的忠實(shí)觀念[J].外語(yǔ)研究.1997.

[21]張吉良.當(dāng)代國(guó)際口譯研究視域下的巴黎釋意學(xué)派口譯理論[D].上海：上海外國(guó)語(yǔ)大學(xué).2008：1-41.