释意理论国内外研究的历史和状况

金懿韬

【摘要】释意理论是研究口译的理论之一。回顾释意理论的国内外研究的历史，有助于认清面临的问题和进一步发展的方向，促进对口译理论的深入研究，指导口译实践。

【关键词】释意理论 口译研究 口译实践

【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 （肖晓燕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.（龔龙生 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.（刘和平 2001b）[14].

In 1984 Seleskovitch and Professor Lederer co-published the book entitled Interpreter pour Traduire1， marking the establishment of the Interpretative Theory.（龚龙生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.（龚龙生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.（王斌华 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.（张吉良 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张吉良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 “last 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 “linguistic 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 （鲍刚 1998a， 1998b； 蔡小红 2001； 刘和平 2001a）[8][9][10][13]， and some comments on the problems with the theory （鲍刚1998a， 1998b； 刘和平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； 许钧1998； 许钧、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. （张吉良 2008：21-26）[21]

In his writing （龚龙生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.（龚龙生 2008）[11]

3.2 International Research on the Interpretive Theory.Theoretical research on interpretation in western countries has more than fifty years history.（李金泽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.（张吉良 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《口译理论实践与教学》which is translated by Wang Jiarong， Li Xusen and Shi Meizhen in 1990.The other is 《口笔译概论》 translated by Sun Huishuang in 1992.（张吉良2008：12）

2 The book also has a Chinese version which is entitled《释意学派口笔译理论》and translated by Liu Heping and published by China Translation and Publishing Corporation in 2001.（张吉良2008：13）

3 口译过程的三角模型

4 ESIT即?cole Superieure dInterprètes et de Traducteurs，法国巴黎新索邦大学高等翻译学校，简称巴黎高翻。成立与1957年，释意理论就诞生在巴黎高翻的一批教师和研究人员中间。

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]鲍刚.口译程序中的语义问题[J].北京第二外国语学院学报.1998（4）：103-110.

[9]鲍刚.口译理论概述[M].北京：旅游教育出版社.1998b.

[10]蔡小红.交替传译思维过程与能力发展—对中国法语译员与学生的交替传译活动进行的实证性研究[J].现代外语.2001， （3）：276-284.

[11]龚龙生.释意理论对我国口译的影响[J].宁夏大学学报（人文社会科学版）.2008，（4）：155-166.

[12]李金泽.国内口译研究的历史与现状[J].边疆经济与文化. 2010，（2）：101-102.

[13]刘和平.口译技巧—思维科学与口译推理教学法[M].北京：中国对外翻译出版公司.2001a.

[14]刘和平.释意学派理论对翻译学的主要贡献—献给达妮卡·赛莱丝柯维奇教授[J].中国翻译.2001b，（4）：62-65.

[15]刘和平.法国释意理论：质疑与探讨[J].中国翻译.2006，（4）.

[16]王斌华.口译即释意？—关于释意理论和相关争议的反思[J].外语研究.2008，（5）：72-76.

[17]肖晓燕.西方口译研究：历史与现状[J].外国语.2002，（4）.

[18]许均.翻译释意理论辨—与赛莱斯科维奇教授谈翻译[J].中国翻译.1998.

[19]许均，袁筱一等.当代法国翻译理论[M].武漢：湖北教育出版社.2001.

[20]袁筱一.论释意理论的忠实观念[J].外语研究.1997.

[21]张吉良.当代国际口译研究视域下的巴黎释意学派口译理论[D].上海：上海外国语大学.2008：1-41.