critique.doc

The Critique of Promoting the Consecutive Interpreting Through the Sight TranslationBy Liu Jin published in the Chinese Translators Journal March, 2011 Page 37. The purpose of the study was to investigate the effects of sight translation on promoting the consecutive interpreting. Through the paper, the author make an experimental study, with 72 students of English major in Anhui Polytechnic University with no background of interpreting, randomly assigned, but not randomly selected, into experimental and control groups. Through the pre-test, the two groups interpreting levels have no significant difference (p=0.973). Then based on the combination of the qualitative and quantitative method, the author get the data of the two groups in consecutive interpreting under the condition that the experimental group is taught with the sight translation while the other group is not. Whats more, there is a questionnaire investigation after the experiment. The score items: the fidelity, the integrity and the fluency. The result shows that the first and third item share the significant differences (p0.05). It meant that the experimental group has done a better job than the control group in fidelity and fluency. To some extent, it shows that the sight translation do benefits a lot to the consecutive interpreting because the sight translational teaching is the only independent variable in the experiment. The questionnaire investigation: the degree of acceptance to the sight translation practice, in which aspects does the sight translation improve you and arrange them in order, open questions. The conclusion is that the sight translation promotes the consecutive interpreting, therefore the English major should be taught the sight translation in their interpreting class.The research is significant to the English language teaching methodology. And the whole process is complete enough to contain the qualitative and quantitative method.The literature review is closely related with the study, but it is too brief and fails to offer the details of the previous research and theories. In the literature review part, the author compares two theory points towards the sight translation. One is approval, the other is opposition. In the review part, the author shows his view standpoint towards the former one without enough argument. And in this condition, the authors experiment is subjective in some aspect.Since all the subjects are chosen through the English major in a certain university, it is fail to prove whether the English major in other university share the same result. And the sample size is not large enough, therefore the result achieved at this level in not theoretically significant. There is a pre-test before the research while the author fails to make it clear enough. In what way does the author prove the interpreting levels of the two groups are almost the same is not mentioned in the paper. The assessment standard in the study is just based on the book Interpretation and Evaluation. There are so many researches which focus on the assessment standard of interpreting, while the author fails to state why this book and the standers are chosen. The author makes the decision only by one-time test whose cycle is too short to testify. The sight translation practice is lasted for only 8weeks, even though it is the only independent variable, people can hardly believe that the different result is just caused by the sight translation train. Then through the result, the two groups show no significant difference in the integrity point, while th