作者毕业于厦门大学英语语言文学博士学位（口译研究方向）。现为中南民族大学外语学院副教授，硕士生导师，翻译系主任，MTI中心主任。湖北省翻译工作者协会理事。2015年6月至2016年5月，在香港理工大学访学。近年先后在《中国翻译》、《上海翻译》、《外语教学理论与实践》、Across Languages and Cultures (SSCI & AHCI) 等核心期刊发表论文数篇，主持省部级以上科研项目多项。此外，作者积极参加各类学术研讨，在第10、11届全国口译大会暨国际研讨会、全球化背景下的口笔译国际研讨会、第12届中西部地区翻译理论与教学研讨会等重要学术会议上宣读论文10余次。
目錄：
Chapter 1Introduction1
1.1Motivations for the Research2
1.1.1Rational for the Research on Aptitude Testing for Interpreting2
1.1.2Rational for the Research on Personality Hardiness3
1.1.3Rational for the Research on Interpreting Anxiety and
Self-efficacy4
1.2Research Significance6
1.3Research Questions8
1.4Research Methodology8
1.5Layout of the Book9
Chapter 2Literature Review11
2.1Working Definitions11
2.1.1Defining Aptitude11
2.1.2Aptitude， Ability， Intelligence and Personality12
2.2Overview of Aptitude for Foreign Language Learning13
2.2.1Foreign Language Aptitude14
2.2.2Foreign Language Aptitude and SLA Process15
2.2.3Affective Variables in SLA17
2.3Overview of Aptitude for Interpreting25
2.3.1Research at an Earlier Stage26
2.3.2Research in More Recent Time30
2.4Overview of Personality Hardiness36
2.4.1Construct of Personality Hardiness36
2.4.2Measurement of Personality Hardiness38
2.4.3Empirical Research on Personality Hardiness39
Chapter 3Personality Hardiness and Aptitude Testing for
Interpreting44
3.1Conceptualization of Personality Hardiness44
3.1.1Underpinning in Existential Courage45
3.1.2Dimensionality45
3.1.3Personality Hardiness Model47
3.2Aptitude Testing for Interpreting48
3.2.1Necessity of Aptitude Testing for Interpreting48
3.2.2Aptitude Testing Models for Interpreting50
3.2.3Personality Hardiness and Aptitude Testing for Interpreting54
Chapter 4Research on the Effects of Personality Hardiness on
Interpreting Performance:With Interpreting Anxiety and
Self-efficacy as Intermediates57
4.1Quantitative Research60
4.1.1Participants60
4.1.2Instruments62
4.2Qualitative Research68
4.2.1Participants69
4.2.2Semi-Structured Interview Guide69
4.2.3Procedures69
4.3Data Collection and Analysis70
4.3.1Data Collection70
4.3.2Data Analysis72
4.4Results of Quantitative Research73
4.4.1Correlations between the Variables73
4.4.2Predictive Validity of Personality Hardiness76
4.4.3Mediating/Moderating Effect of Interpreting Anxiety81
4.4.4Mediating/Moderating Effect of Self-efficacy89
4.5Results of Qualitative Research94
4.5.1Information Triangulation96
4.5.2Roles of Personality Hardiness99
Chapter 5Implications of Research on the Effects of Personality Hardiness on Interpreting Performance106
5.1Correlations between Personality Hardiness and Interpreting
Performance108
5.2Predicative Validity of Personality Hardiness on Interpreting
Performance112
5.3Mediating Effect of Interpreting Anxiety114
5.3.1Personality Hardiness and Interpreting Anxiety115
5.3.2Interpreting Anxiety and Interpreting Performance117
5.4Mediating Effect of Self-efficacy120
5.4.1Personality Hardiness and Self-efficacy121
5.4.2Self-efficacy and Interpreting Performance123
5.5Personality Hardiness in Aptitude Testing for Interpreting124
Chapter 6A Tentative Framework for Personality Hardiness
Measurement in Aptitude Testing for Interpreting129
6.1Personality Hardiness and Related Personality Traits in Interpreting
Aptitude129
6.1.1Personality Hardiness and Stress-Resistance130
6.1.2Personality Hardiness and Resilience131
6.1.3Personality Hardiness and Other Stress-Resistance Qualities132
6.2Incorporating Personality Hardiness in Aptitude Testing for
Interpreting134
6.2.1Significance of Incorporating Personality Hardiness into Aptitude
Testing for Interpreting134
6.2.2A Tentative Framework for Personality Hardiness Measurement137
6.3Measurement of Personality Hardiness in Aptitude Testing for
Interpreting140
6.3.1Measurement Procedures140
6.3.2Sub-components of Personality Hardiness142
Chapter 7Conclusion146
7.1Overview of the Research146
7.2Major Findings of the Research147
7.2.1Personality Hardiness and Interpreting Anxiety148
7.2.2Personality Hardiness and Self-efficacy148
7.2.3Personality Hardiness and Interpreting Performance149
7.2.4Personality Hardiness in Interpreting Aptitude150
7.2.5Personality Hardiness Measurement in Aptitude Testing for
Interpreting151
7.3Contributions of the Research152
7.4Limitations and Future Directions153
References155
Appendix AQuestionnaire for Student Interpreters176
Appendix BScript for English-Chinese Consecutive Interpreting
Test 182
Appendix CScript for Chinese-English Consecutive Interpreting
Test 184
Appendix DIn-depth Interview Guide 186List of Figures
Figure 2.1Foundational cognitive aptitude model（adapted from Macnamara
2012: 11）31
Figure 3.1Unidimensional conception of personality hardiness（Kobasa et al.
1982a）46
Figure 3.2A hierarchical multidimensional construct of personality hardiness
（Hystad et al. 2011）46
Figure 3.3The hardiness model for performance and health enhancement
（Maddi and Kobasa 1984）48
Figure 3.4Aptitude model for simultaneous interpreting by Chabasse
（cited in Chabasse et al. 2014: 22）51
Figure 3.5Aptitude testing model for interpreting by Xing（2015: 12）52
Figure 3.6Aptitude testing model for interpreting by Zha（2016: 59）53
Figure 4.1Geographical constitution of the participants61
Figure 4.2University distribution of the participants61
Figure 4.3Relations among PH， IA and IP75
Figure 4.4Relations among PH， SE and IP76
Figure 4.5Predictive power of PH on IA78
Figure 4.6Predictive power of PH on SE79
Figure 4.7Predictive power of PH， IA and SE on IP81
Figure 4.8Mediator model82
Figure 4.9Three-stepped regression analysis model（Wen et al. 2004: 617）83
Figure 4.10Hypothetical relations between PH， IA and IP84
Figure 4.11Mediation diagram of IA on PH and IP84
Figure 4.12Mediation diagram of IA on Perseverance and IP85
Figure 4.13Mediation diagram of IA on Commitment and IP86
Figure 4.14Mediation diagram of IA on Challenge and IP86
Figure 4.15Mediation diagram of IA on Control and IP86
Figure 4.16Path diagram of moderating effect87
Figure 4.17Hypothetical relations of SE， PH and IP90
Figure 4.18Mediation diagram of SE on commitment and IP91
Figure 6.1Stress-resistance qualities structure（Zhang et al. 2006: 49）132
Figure 6.2A tentative framework for PH measurement in interpreting
aptitude testing139
List of Tables
Table 2.1Definition and specification of language aptitude（Carroll 1981）14
Table 2.2SLA processing stages and potential aptitude components
（Skehan 2002: 90）16
Table 2.3An ideal interpreter’s profile across a 40-year span
（Russo 2011: 10）27
Table 2.4Aptitudes for interpreters（Szuki 1988: 111）28
Table 2.5Knowledge and aptitudes indicating interpreting proficiency
（López et al. 2007: 78）29
Table 2.6Tests administered by the schools participating in the 1965
Paris Colloquium（Russo 2011: 15）30
Table 2.7Aptitude tests among 18 postgraduate programs in conference
interpreting（Timarová and Ungoed-Thomas 2008）34
Table 2.8Skills tested by different test types among 10 Chinese universities
（Xing 2015）35
Table 4.1Distribution of participants by gender61
Table 4.2Distribution of participants by levels of universities62
Table 4.3Distribution of participants by provinces62
Table 4.4Internal consistency of Hardiness Scale63
Table 4.5Inter-correlations among the four dimensions of personality
hardiness64
Table 4.6Internal consistency of Interpreting Anxiety Scale65
Table 4.7Internal General Self-efficacy Scale66
Table 4.8Scoring criteria for interpreting performance67
Table 4.9Interrater consecutive interpreting68
Table 4.10Pearson correlations among PH， IA and IP73
Table 4.11Pearson correlations among PH， SE and IP75
Table 4.12Model summary of multiple regression analyses for IA77
Table 4.13Model summary of multiple regression analyses for SE78
Table 4.14Model summary of multiple regression analyses for IP79
Table 4.15Model summary of linear regression analysis for IP of IA80
Table 4.16Model summary of linear regression analysis for IP of SE81
Table 4.17Mediating effect test of IA on PH and IP84
Table 4.18Mediating effect tests of IA on four dimensions and IP85
Table 4.19Moderating effect test of IA on PH and IP87
Table 4.20Moderating effect test of IA on four dimensions of PH and IP88
Table 4.21Mediating effect test of SE on PH and IP90
Table 4.22Mediating effect test of SE on four dimensions of PH and IP91
Table 4.23Moderating effect test of SE on PH and IP92
Table 4.24Moderating effect test of SE on four dimensions of PH and IP93
Table 4.25Background information about the interviewees95
Table 4.26Interviewees’ scores in the questionnaire survey96
內容試閱：
Interpreters are made not born（Mackintosh， 1999: 67）. It is believed that everybody has the potential to become an interpreter after training. Nonetheless， time constraints and financial limitations make it advisable to select applicants who need the least training. Aptitude testing for interpreting， with a purpose to admit the most promising candidates， has thus become not only a practical necessity for institutions， but also a concerned issue among interpreting researchers. Literature review and empirical survey discover that aptitude testing for interpreting attaches great importance to cognitive aptitude， such as language transfer， comprehension， analysis， and the like， which is characterized by being standardized， quantified， and replicable. Most importantly， it determines success or failure of a specific task. Comparatively， non-cognitive attributes， personality in particular， albeit recognized as important， are seldom measured， due to their complex structure and shortage of scientific measurement tools. Bearing this void in mind， I intend to focus this book on the research of personality traits in aptitude testing for interpreting， with an aim to expand objective ways of testing candidates for the requisite knowledge and skills.Personality hardiness， underpinning in existential psychology， is such a vital and valuable personality trait for interpreters. With a constellation of three crucial characteristics， namely commitment， control， and challenge， personality hardiness is presented as facilitating perception， evaluation， and coping that lead to successful resolution of the situation created by stressful events. It not only contributes to decreasing physical and psychological illness， but also conduces to improving performance under stress in a wide range of contexts from the military to medical schools and to colleges.Interpreting is a highly stress-provoking activity and interpreters normally work under great pressure. Accordingly， an ideal interpreter is expected to possess personality traits of “stress-resistance” “resilience” “psychological stamina” and “nerves of steel”， to name but a few. Apparently， personality hardiness shares similarities with the aforementioned aptitudes. Indeed， available research reveals that it is a better predictor of effective coping with stressful circumstances. Hence， I attempt to borrow this useful psychological concept—personality hardiness to interpreting studies， exploring whether it facilitates the performance of interpreters as it does among lawyers， military cadets， nurses， teachers， and so forth.Since the current research is an exploratory study of the relations between personality hardiness and interpreting performance， it is worthwhile to investigate whether there lies a mediator or moderator to affect this relationship. Given the hardiness model that it is via alleviating stress that hardiness enhances performance as well as the evidence that hardiness and self-efficacy are intimately associated， this book is devoted to an empirical investigation into the effects of personality hardiness on interpreting performance， with interpreting anxiety and self-efficacy as two intermediates. Toward this end， a quantitative method of questionnaire survey and a qualitative in-depth interview are adopted among 149 Chinese student interpreters at postgraduate level.In this book， Chapter 1 presents a succinct introduction to the research motives， questions， and methodology. In Chapter 2 and 3， relevant literature is thoroughly and critically reviewed， and a research framework is clearly unfolded. Chapter 4 introduces in detail the research designs， hypotheses， data collection procedures， and analysis methods， followed by findings pertaining to each hypothesis. In Chapter 5， an elaborated discussion on the effects of personality hardiness on interpreting performance， self-efficacy as well as interpreting anxiety is provided. With the substantiated effectiveness， a framework for personality hardiness measurement in aptitude testing for interpreting is tentatively proposed in Chapter 6， aligned with a detailed illustration on measuring tools and procedures. Chapter 7 concludes the book with a summary of major findings， significance， and suggestions for follow-up endeavors in the future. The major findings of the current research are listed as follows. Firstly， personality hardiness， interpreting anxiety， self-efficacy， and interpreting performance are interrelated. Specifically， personality hardiness is significantly negatively correlated with interpreting anxiety and positively related to self-efficacy and interpreting performance; secondly， personality hardiness is of significant predictability on interpreting performance， interpreting anxiety， and self-efficacy， respectively; thirdly， interpreting anxiety and self-efficacy play a mediating role in personality hardiness and interpreting performance linkages separately， which indicate， in addition to a direct correlation with interpreting performance， personality hardiness influences students’ interpreting performance via relieving interpreting anxiety and enhancing sense of self-efficacy. The present investigation reveals that personality hardiness is a valuable trait to student interpreters. By presenting systematically the effects of personality hardiness on interpreting performance， this book is believed to contribute theoretical as well as empirical stepping stones to understanding the position of personality hardiness in aptitude testing for interpreting， providing the stakeholders with insights or blueprints in selecting the most teachable candidates for interpreting training programs. In addition， findings of this book will shed light on personality dispositions research on interpreter performance， injecting fresh impetus to embark on a new research agenda designed to further understanding of hardiness-performance linkages in interpreters.Finally， this study， taking an interdisciplinary viewpoint of and drawing a heavy load of scholarship from research on psychology and second language acquisition， will in return lend itself to these flourishing domains in one way or another.
Many people have contributed to this book， without whom this completion would never have been possible and to whom I’m perpetually grateful.
Above all， I owe my deepest gratitude to my supervisor， Prof. Chen Jing. She not only teaches me to think critically and present clearly my arguments， guiding me with profound incisiveness and patience in writing and revising this book， but also encourages me with her words and deeds. From her， I have seen a teacher who truly concerned about students’ development and progress， a mentor who provides mental support and wise advice， as well as a friend who offers trust and help. She always imparts us how important it is to work as a team， which is a life-long benefit to me. I’m indeed thankful to Prof. Li Dechao and Prof. Wang Binhua at Hong Kong Polytechnic University for offering me a precious opportunity to study at a top-notch university with abundant academic resources and furnishing me with valuable insights. During the year at Hong Kong Polytechnic University， I have opportunities to meet Prof. Liu Minhua， Prof. Daniel Gile， Prof. Mona Baker， and Ms. Jiang Hong. Meetings with them individually or together have been the most valuable experience I have had.
I wish to give my appreciation to all the members of our admirable team: Prof. Xiao Xiaoyan， Prof. Su Wei， Prof. Han Chao， Dr. Yang Liuyan， Dr. Deng Yi， Dr. Fu Yanqi， Dr. Liu Ying， and Dr. Zhao Xiao. It is under their guidance or instruction that I am trained to do， teach， and study interpreting.
I want to acknowledge the good friends I have made mainly during my stay at Xiamen University and the Department of Chinese and Bilingual Studies（CBS）of the Hong Kong Polytechnic University. They are Chen Yuping， Dr. Fu Rongbo， Wang Ronghua， Qian Yifei， Lu Lichun， Dr. Su Yajuan， Jin Lu， Dr. Zhang Aizhen， Ren Defa， Chen Xiangmei， Hu Juan， Xiao Rui， Chen Pushun， Yang Huabo， and Fang Wenhong. I will always cherish the days we talked and laughed together when life on campus become extremely monotonous. And Zha Jianshe， Yang Xiaolin， Wang Yunhong， Lin Minfen， Ma Xingcheng， Zhang Lejin， Wang Yan， and Yu Jing in Hong Kong Polytechnic University dissolved my loneliness in the hectic Hong Kong. Their company over the past four years is a treasure to my journey of doctoral study.
Gratitude for the family support through the years of my academic pursuit could never be thoroughly expressed. I feel particularly indebted to the beloved ones: my husband， my son Anan， my parents， and my father-and mother-in-law for their unconditional love， unwavering understanding， and sustaining encouragement. I wish what I have accomplished today is worthy of their devotion.
Finally， I am also grateful to the team of Huazhong University of Science and Technology Press for their generous help， especially Song Yan. Any error is， of course， of my own making. In addition， my sincere thanks also goes to South-Central Minzu University and South-Central Minzu University Social Science Foundation; without this fund， this book would not be possible.
購物車/收銀台(0) | 在線留言板
| 付款方式
| 聯絡我們
| 運費計算
| 幫助中心 |
加入書簽
HOME
新書上架
