This article compares two methods of assessing interpreting quality: the holistic method and the proposed propositional analysis method. The author first summarizes previous research on interpreting quality, from which quality criteria were selected for holistic assessment. Following that, Turner and Greene’s (1978) proposition guideline is briefly introduced as a basis for propositional analysis. Third-year interpreting students were assigned an in-class interpreting task, and their interpreting outputs were recorded, transcribed, and assessed using both methods. Results showed that the two assessment methods agreed with each other in general; however, the propositional analysis method had a few advantages over the holistic assessment method. Propositional analysis gives educators and researchers a clearer overview of the difficulties student interpreters encounter during the interpreting process, by identifying the elements of the source text that were the most challenging for the students. Propositional analysis also facilitates metalinguistic analysis, such as the analysis of different types of propositions and specific language features, so that interpreter educators and researchers can be better informed about the cognitive process involved in the interpreting process.



To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.