Quality
in simultaneous interpreting is a frequently discussed concept. In the
enterprise setting, earnings conference call remains a rarely explored field.
This thesis offers a descriptive study on assessing interpreting quality from
perspectives of fidelity, fluency, and appropriacy. As the corpus, Tencent 2022
Third Quarter Result Announcement provides an ideal transcript to the author to
conduct its analysis. Interpreting is frequently done without bearing in mind
the multitude of factors that can affect the quality of interpreting. Drawing a
conclusion that the interpreter does make a lot of omissions, pauses and
hesitations posing a negative effect on the fidelity, fluency and accuracy of
the interpreting, the present author suggests that
more preparation should be done for improving performance, such as
terminologies, company background information, a reasonable speech rate, good
image and acoustic quality, and so on.
References
[1]
Bian, S.B., Guan, Z.F. and Yan, Z.P. (2021) Irrelevant Answers and Market Reaction: Evidence from Performance Briefings. Journal of Management Sciences in China, 4, 109-126. (In Chinese)
[2]
Lu, X.Z. (2015) Translation and Language Quality of English-Chinese Simultaneous Interpreters. Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 4, 585-596. (In Chinese)
[3]
Qi, T.Y. (2014) The Characteristics and Strategies of Corporate Performance Conference Interpretation. Chinese Science & Technology Translator Journal, 4, 18-20+35. (In Chinese)
[4]
Bühler, H. (1986) Linguistic (Semantic) and Extra-Linguistic (Pragmatic) Criteria for the Evaluation of Conference Interpretation and Interpreters. Multilingual, 5, 231-235.
[5]
Kurz, I. (1993) Conference Interpretation: Expectations of Different User Groups. The Interpreters’ Newsletter, 5, 13-21.
[6]
Moser-Mercer, B. (1996) Quality in Interpreting: Some Methodological Issues. Edizioni, 7, 43-55.
[7]
Pöchhacker, F. (2001) Quality Assessment in Conference and Community Interpreting. Meta, 46, 410-425. https://doi.org/10.7202/003847ar
[8]
Shlesinger, M. (1997) Quality in Simultaneous Interpreting. Benjamins Translation Library, 23, 123-132. https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.23.08shl
[9]
Viezzi, M. (2003) Interpretation Quality: A Model. In: Aís, C., et al. (Eds.), La evaluación de la Calidad en Interpretación: Investigación, 147-157.
[10]
Kalina, S. (2005) Quality Assurance for Interpreting Processes. Meta, 50, 768-784. https://doi.org/10.7202/011017ar
[11]
Grbić, N. (2008) Constructing Interpreting Quality. Interpreting, 10, 232-257. https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.10.2.04grb
[12]
Xia, G.L. (2023) Current Situation and Trend of Interpretation Evaluation Research in China: A Qualitative Study Based on NVivo (2002-2021). Shanghai Journal of Translators, 3, 49-54. (In Chinese)
[13]
Hu, Q.P. (1990) Suggestions for Quantitative Assessment of Technical Interpretation Quality. Chinese Science & Technology Translator Journal, 1, 37-40. (In Chinese)
[14]
Wu, Y.N. (2003) On the Quality Assessment of Simultaneous Interpretation. Seeker, 4, 236-238. (In Chinese)
[15]
Cai, X.H. and Fang, F.Q. (2003) On the Quality and Effect Evaluation of Interpretation. Foreign Language and Their Teaching, 3, 41-45+48. (In Chinese)
[16]
Wang, D.Z. and Wang, L.D. (2007) Quality and Control of Interpretation. Chinese Translator Journal, 4, 54-57+95. (In Chinese)
[17]
Zhang, W. (2010) Assessment of Interpreting Quality in Science and Technology: Interpretation User Perspective. Shanghai Journal of Translators, 3, 43-47. (In Chinese)
[18]
Wang, B.H. (2012) From Interpreting Standards to Interpreting Norms: An Exploration of the Construction of Interpreting Evaluation Models. Shanghai Journal of Translators, 3, 49-54. (In Chinese)
[19]
Zhang, W. (2011) A Survey on Quality Assessment of Conference Interpreting: A Comparative Analysis of Interpreters and Users. Journal of PLA University of Foreign Languages, 2, 74-79. (In Chinese)
