认知能力与交替传译能力的关系
|
摘要
口译能力构成研究起步较晚。从研究范式上来看,口译能力研究主要借鉴外语学能研究和翻译能力构成研究的成果,认为口译能力是由一系列子能力构成。然而现有研究并没有说明这些子能力在重要性上有多大差异、这些子能力在口译训练中提高的难度差异、以及口译能力中的认知能力是否与口译表现有关联。本研究在已有研究的基础上,首先提出口译能力构成体系,阐述了认知能力的认知神经心理学基础,从而提出四个具体的研究问题：1)口译能力各项子能力在重要性上有何差异,认知能力是否是其一项重要构成要素?2)口译能力各项子能力在口译训练中提高难度有何差异,认知能力是否很难提高?3)认知能力的差异是否有助于口译员的选拔?4)认知能力的差异是否能够预测交替传译的学习效果?
本研究采取定量与定性相结合的研究方法。针对第一、第二个研究问题,本研究设计了一套调查问卷。调查的对象主要是与口译实践活动紧密相关的三类人,即职业译员、口译教师、口译学生。调查问卷在题干设计上采用Likert五级量表形式,便于对这三类人员对口译能力各项构成要素的态度进行定量研究。针对第三个研究问题,本研究采用威斯康辛卡片分类测试(WCST)收集了国内开设翻译硕士专业学位(MTI)院校的笔译硕士(MT)与口译硕士(MI)各自认知能力的相关数据,用于对比两类学生在认知能力上是否存在差异。针对第四个研究问题,本研究设计了一套交替传译测试,利用测试结果与认知能力做相关性分析,研究认知能力与口译能力的关系。
本研究采用概率抽样和非概率抽样方法,在样本的数量和地域代表性上,比以往的相关研究有较大突破。问卷调查部分共涉及包括自由译员、国家部委专职译员、翻译服务机构译员在内的31名职业译员、全国15个省份20所院校的48名专任口译教师、以及10省份16所院校的140名MI学生。为研究MT与MI学生认知能力是否存在差异,笔者收集了三所院校六个班级71名MT学生与65名MI学生的WCST数据；为了验证认知能力与交替传译学习效果之间的关系,笔者选择了三所院校三个班级54名MI学生参加了为本研究专门设计的交替传译测试。
研究结果表明：第一,口译能力各项子能力在重要性上存在差异,重要性由重到轻排序结果依次是语言能力、心理耐力、认知能力、实践能力、百科知识、口译技能、生理耐力、职业意识、交际能力、合作能力、演讲能力、工具能力,其中认知能力是口译能力的一项重要构成要素,位列第三。第二,口译能力各项子能力在口译训练中提高难易程度有明显差异,提高难易程度由重到轻排序分别为心理耐力、认知能力、实践能力、语言能力、口译技能、生理耐力、交际能力、百科知识、演讲技能、合作能力、工具能力、职业意识,其中认知能力提高的难度很大,位列第二。第三,认知能力高低的差异有助于口译员的选拔。研究的结果表明,在同一所院校内,MI学生的总体认知能力高于MT学生,两类学生在认知能力上存在显著性差异,这说明认知能力高低的差异有助于区分这两类学生。第四,认知能力的差异对交替传译学习效果有预测价值。研究结果表明三所院校MI学生的认知能力与各自的交替传译成绩成正相关,说明认知能力较高的学生比认知能力相对较低的学生更容易在交替传译学习中取得进步,认知能力的不同能有效预测交替传译学习的效果。
本研究对口译理论与实践的贡献主要体现在三个方面：第一,首次用定量的方法明确了口译能力各项子能力在重要性上的差异以及这些子能力在实践中提高的难易程度差别,完善了口译能力体系构建研究,使得口译教学重点突出,教学层次更加清晰,内容安排更加科学,可以有效避免口译教学中资源和精力的浪费,最终能够促进口译教学效果的提高。第二,从跨学科角度探讨了认知能力的认知神经心理学基础,阐释了认知能力对口译学习重要性的机理,丰富了口译理论。第三,借助心理学测量工具—威斯康辛卡片分类测试第一次将认知能力量化,验证了认知能力在预测口译学习效果上的准确性,为口译员筛选提供了新的视角。
Study on the components of interpreting competence (IC) is rather a late start. Derived from the combination of foreign language aptitude study and study on the components of translation competence, the interpreting competence includes a number of subcompetences.However, no previous study has adequately dealt with the differences of those subcompetences in terms of their importance to IC, the various challenges of improving those subcompetences in interpreting training, and the correlation between cognitive ability (CA) and interpreting performance.Based on the literature review, this paper first proposes a model of IC.Then it explores the cognitive psychological basis of CA followed by four research questions to address areas that have not been discussed in literature:1) What are the differences of those subcompetences in terms of their importance to IC, and is CA itself an important component of IC?2) What are the challenges of improving those subcompetences in interpreting training, and is CA difficult to improve?3) Is the identification of CA variance in candidates helpful in interpreter selection?4) Does CA variance have predictive value to the effect of consecutive interpreting study?
The study took a combined use of quantitative methods and qualitative methods.To address the first two research questions, a questionnaire was employed. The research participants mainly included three groups of people who were of different degrees related to interpreting activities, namely professional interpreters, interpreting teachers and students of Master of Interpreting. A5-point Likert scale was applied to the items of the questionnaire in order to quantitatively measure the attitudes of the above-mentioned three groups. To address the third research question, the data of Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST) was administered to compare the CA variances of students of Master of Translation (MT) and students of Master of Interpreting (MI) among China's MTI institutions. To address the fourth research question, a consecutive interpreting (CI) test was designed, in line with the WCST test, to examine the relationship between CI and CA.
The study employed both probability sampling and non-probability sampling, and the representativeness of sample size and sample coverage was much higher than that of the previous studies. The respondents of the questionnaire included31professional interpreters from three different agencies,48interpreting teachers from20universities in15provinces, and140MI students from16universities in10provinces. To compare the CA variances of MT and MI students, the WCST data of71MT students and65MI students from six classes of three universities were collected. To explore the correlation between CI and CA,54MI students from three classes of three universities took the CI test.
The results of the study were as follows.1) Among the subcompetences of IC listed in the order of decreasing importance, viz., language competence, psychological endurance, cognitive ability, practical ability, encyclopedic knowledge, interpreting skills, physiological endurance, professional ethics, communicative competence, cooperative ability, public speaking skills, and search-tool-use competence, cognitive ability was a fairly important one.2) Among the subcompetences of IC listed in the order of decreasing difficulty in interpreting training, viz., psychological endurance, cognitive ability, practical ability, language competence, interpreting skills, physiological endurance, communicative competence, encyclopedic knowledge, public speaking skills, cooperative ability, search-tool-use ability and professional ethics, cognitive ability was fairely hard to improve.3) CA variance is helpful in interpreter selection. The results showed that the CA levels of MI students in all three participating universities were significantly higher than those of the MT students, which proves that CA variance is helpful in distinguishing MI and MT students.4) CA variance has predictive value in CI study. The results showed that the CA levels of MI students in three universities were positively correlated with their respective CI scores, which illustrates that those students with higher CA levels are more likely to make greater progress in CI training than those with lower CA levels and CA variance has predictive value in CI study.
The contributions of the study to interpreting theory and practice are manifested in three aspects.1) The study, for the first time, differentiates the importance and improvement difficulty of twelve IC subcompetences in practice, and it helps improve the IC system, and makes the emphasis of interpreting teaching more clear and scientific, avoiding waste of resources and energy due to lack of understanding of the differences of those subcompetences. As a result, teaching efficacy will be improved.2) The nero-psychological basis of cognitive ability is explored from a cross-disciplinary respective and the underpinnings of cognitive ability to IC are explained as well, which expands interpreting theory.3) Cognitive ability is, for the first time, quantitatively measured by WCST, a psychological measurement tool and it is demonstrated that cognitive ability is positively correlated with interpreting study, thus providing a new perspective in the selection of potential interpreters.
本研究采取定量与定性相结合的研究方法。针对第一、第二个研究问题,本研究设计了一套调查问卷。调查的对象主要是与口译实践活动紧密相关的三类人,即职业译员、口译教师、口译学生。调查问卷在题干设计上采用Likert五级量表形式,便于对这三类人员对口译能力各项构成要素的态度进行定量研究。针对第三个研究问题,本研究采用威斯康辛卡片分类测试(WCST)收集了国内开设翻译硕士专业学位(MTI)院校的笔译硕士(MT)与口译硕士(MI)各自认知能力的相关数据,用于对比两类学生在认知能力上是否存在差异。针对第四个研究问题,本研究设计了一套交替传译测试,利用测试结果与认知能力做相关性分析,研究认知能力与口译能力的关系。
本研究采用概率抽样和非概率抽样方法,在样本的数量和地域代表性上,比以往的相关研究有较大突破。问卷调查部分共涉及包括自由译员、国家部委专职译员、翻译服务机构译员在内的31名职业译员、全国15个省份20所院校的48名专任口译教师、以及10省份16所院校的140名MI学生。为研究MT与MI学生认知能力是否存在差异,笔者收集了三所院校六个班级71名MT学生与65名MI学生的WCST数据；为了验证认知能力与交替传译学习效果之间的关系,笔者选择了三所院校三个班级54名MI学生参加了为本研究专门设计的交替传译测试。
研究结果表明：第一,口译能力各项子能力在重要性上存在差异,重要性由重到轻排序结果依次是语言能力、心理耐力、认知能力、实践能力、百科知识、口译技能、生理耐力、职业意识、交际能力、合作能力、演讲能力、工具能力,其中认知能力是口译能力的一项重要构成要素,位列第三。第二,口译能力各项子能力在口译训练中提高难易程度有明显差异,提高难易程度由重到轻排序分别为心理耐力、认知能力、实践能力、语言能力、口译技能、生理耐力、交际能力、百科知识、演讲技能、合作能力、工具能力、职业意识,其中认知能力提高的难度很大,位列第二。第三,认知能力高低的差异有助于口译员的选拔。研究的结果表明,在同一所院校内,MI学生的总体认知能力高于MT学生,两类学生在认知能力上存在显著性差异,这说明认知能力高低的差异有助于区分这两类学生。第四,认知能力的差异对交替传译学习效果有预测价值。研究结果表明三所院校MI学生的认知能力与各自的交替传译成绩成正相关,说明认知能力较高的学生比认知能力相对较低的学生更容易在交替传译学习中取得进步,认知能力的不同能有效预测交替传译学习的效果。
本研究对口译理论与实践的贡献主要体现在三个方面：第一,首次用定量的方法明确了口译能力各项子能力在重要性上的差异以及这些子能力在实践中提高的难易程度差别,完善了口译能力体系构建研究,使得口译教学重点突出,教学层次更加清晰,内容安排更加科学,可以有效避免口译教学中资源和精力的浪费,最终能够促进口译教学效果的提高。第二,从跨学科角度探讨了认知能力的认知神经心理学基础,阐释了认知能力对口译学习重要性的机理,丰富了口译理论。第三,借助心理学测量工具—威斯康辛卡片分类测试第一次将认知能力量化,验证了认知能力在预测口译学习效果上的准确性,为口译员筛选提供了新的视角。
Study on the components of interpreting competence (IC) is rather a late start. Derived from the combination of foreign language aptitude study and study on the components of translation competence, the interpreting competence includes a number of subcompetences.However, no previous study has adequately dealt with the differences of those subcompetences in terms of their importance to IC, the various challenges of improving those subcompetences in interpreting training, and the correlation between cognitive ability (CA) and interpreting performance.Based on the literature review, this paper first proposes a model of IC.Then it explores the cognitive psychological basis of CA followed by four research questions to address areas that have not been discussed in literature:1) What are the differences of those subcompetences in terms of their importance to IC, and is CA itself an important component of IC?2) What are the challenges of improving those subcompetences in interpreting training, and is CA difficult to improve?3) Is the identification of CA variance in candidates helpful in interpreter selection?4) Does CA variance have predictive value to the effect of consecutive interpreting study?
The study took a combined use of quantitative methods and qualitative methods.To address the first two research questions, a questionnaire was employed. The research participants mainly included three groups of people who were of different degrees related to interpreting activities, namely professional interpreters, interpreting teachers and students of Master of Interpreting. A5-point Likert scale was applied to the items of the questionnaire in order to quantitatively measure the attitudes of the above-mentioned three groups. To address the third research question, the data of Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST) was administered to compare the CA variances of students of Master of Translation (MT) and students of Master of Interpreting (MI) among China's MTI institutions. To address the fourth research question, a consecutive interpreting (CI) test was designed, in line with the WCST test, to examine the relationship between CI and CA.
The study employed both probability sampling and non-probability sampling, and the representativeness of sample size and sample coverage was much higher than that of the previous studies. The respondents of the questionnaire included31professional interpreters from three different agencies,48interpreting teachers from20universities in15provinces, and140MI students from16universities in10provinces. To compare the CA variances of MT and MI students, the WCST data of71MT students and65MI students from six classes of three universities were collected. To explore the correlation between CI and CA,54MI students from three classes of three universities took the CI test.
The results of the study were as follows.1) Among the subcompetences of IC listed in the order of decreasing importance, viz., language competence, psychological endurance, cognitive ability, practical ability, encyclopedic knowledge, interpreting skills, physiological endurance, professional ethics, communicative competence, cooperative ability, public speaking skills, and search-tool-use competence, cognitive ability was a fairly important one.2) Among the subcompetences of IC listed in the order of decreasing difficulty in interpreting training, viz., psychological endurance, cognitive ability, practical ability, language competence, interpreting skills, physiological endurance, communicative competence, encyclopedic knowledge, public speaking skills, cooperative ability, search-tool-use ability and professional ethics, cognitive ability was fairely hard to improve.3) CA variance is helpful in interpreter selection. The results showed that the CA levels of MI students in all three participating universities were significantly higher than those of the MT students, which proves that CA variance is helpful in distinguishing MI and MT students.4) CA variance has predictive value in CI study. The results showed that the CA levels of MI students in three universities were positively correlated with their respective CI scores, which illustrates that those students with higher CA levels are more likely to make greater progress in CI training than those with lower CA levels and CA variance has predictive value in CI study.
The contributions of the study to interpreting theory and practice are manifested in three aspects.1) The study, for the first time, differentiates the importance and improvement difficulty of twelve IC subcompetences in practice, and it helps improve the IC system, and makes the emphasis of interpreting teaching more clear and scientific, avoiding waste of resources and energy due to lack of understanding of the differences of those subcompetences. As a result, teaching efficacy will be improved.2) The nero-psychological basis of cognitive ability is explored from a cross-disciplinary respective and the underpinnings of cognitive ability to IC are explained as well, which expands interpreting theory.3) Cognitive ability is, for the first time, quantitatively measured by WCST, a psychological measurement tool and it is demonstrated that cognitive ability is positively correlated with interpreting study, thus providing a new perspective in the selection of potential interpreters.
引文
④ “赫伯特”在另外两个译本中被译为“尚艾柏”和“艾赫贝尔”。参看尚艾柏.1960.传译手册[M].潘大雄,译.台北：中华书局；艾赫贝尔.1982.口译须知[M].孙慧双,译..外语教学与研究出版社.
⑧ 本视频资料选自戴惠萍主编的《交替传译技能训练教程》(下册)一书,该书即将由上海外语教育出版社出版于2014年6月出版。
⑨ 该视频材料文字部分选自王宣民新浪微博“维护海洋利益应以军力作后盾走先民后军之路”一文,有改动。原文参见http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_570d193fD1012tq2.html。
[1]Anderson, J. R.1983. The Architecture of Cognition[M]. Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press.
[2]Anderson, J. R.1996. ACT:A Simple Theory of Complex Cognition[J]. American Psychologist,51(4):355-365.
[3]AIIC.2012-07-02[2013-3-10] What Kind of Personal Traits Do I Need to Be a Conference Interpreter? [EB/OL] http://aiic.net/node/2672/advice-to-would-be-interpreters/lang/12013/7/2.
[4]Alves, F. & Goncalves, J. R. A Relevance Theory Approach to the Investigation of Inferential Processes in Translation[A]. In F. Alves (ed.). Triangulating Translation: Perspectives in Process Oriented Research[C]. Amsterdam:John Benjamins,2003: 3-24.
[5]Baddeley, A. D.1986. Working Memory[M]. Oxford:Clarendon Press.
[6]Baddeley, A. D.1990. Human Memory:Theory and Practice[M]. Hove, UK:Erlbaum.
[7]Baddeley, A. D.1998. Human Memory:Theory and Rractice[M]. Revised ed. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
[8]Beeby, A. Evaluating the Development of Translation Competence[A]. In C. Schaffner, & R. T. Bell (eds.). Translation and Translating:Theory and Practice[M]. London and New York:Longman,2001.
[9]Bialystok, E. & Frohlich, M.1978. Variables of Classroom Achievement in Second Language Learning[J]. The Modern Language Journal,62(7):327-336.
[10]Brown, J. D.2001. Using Surveys in Language Programs[M]. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
[11]Cabeza, R. & Nyberg, L.1997. Imaging Cognition:An Empirical Review of PET Studies with Normal Subjects[J]. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience,9(1):1-26.
[12]Carroll, J. B. & Sapon, S.1959. Modern Language Aptitude Test(MLAT)[R]. New York:The Psychological Corporation.
[13]Carroll, J. B. The Prediction of Success in Intensive Foreign Language Training[A]. In R. Glaser (ed.). Training Research and Education[C]. Pittsburgh, PA:University of Pittsburgh Press,1962.
[14]Carroll, J. B. Twenty-five Years of Research on Foreign Language Aptitude[A]. In K. C. Diller (ed.). Individual Differences and Universals in Language Learning Aptitude[C]. Rowley, MA:Newbury House,1981.
[15]Child, J. R.1998. Language Aptitude Testing:Learners and Application[J]. Applied Language Learning,9(1-2):1-10.
[16]Cohen, A.1998. Strategies in Learning and Using a Second Language[M]. London: Longman.
[17]Colina, S.2003. Translation Teaching From Research to the Classroom:A Handbook for Teachers[M]. New York:McGraw-Hill Higher Education.
[18]Creswell, J.2003. Research Design:Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches[M]. Sage Publications.
[19]Croft, W. & Cruse, D. A.2006. Cognitive Linguistics[M]. Peking University Press.
[20]Ehrman, M. & Oxford, R.1995. Cognition Plus:Correlations of Language Learning Success[J]. The Modern Language Journal,79(1):67-89.
[21]Ehrman, M.1998. The Modern Language Aptitude Test for Predicting Learning Success and Advising Students[J]. Applied Language Learning,9(1-2):31-70.
[22]Ellis, R.1985. Understanding Second Language Acquisition[M]. Oxford:Oxford University Press.
[23]Ellis, R.1994. The Study of Second Language Acquisition[M]. Oxford:Oxford University Press.
[24]Flavell, J. H., Miller, P. H. & Miller, S. A.2002. Cognitive Development[M].4th ed. trans, by Deng Ciping, Liu Ming. Shanghai:East China Normal University.
[25]Gardner, R.1985. Social Psychology and Second Language Learning:The Role of Attitudes and Motivation[M]. London:Edward Arnold.
[26]Gardner, H.2006. Multiple Intelligences:New Horizons[M]. New York:Basic Books.
[27]Gay, L. R. & Airasian, P.2003. Educational Research:Competencies for Analysis and Applications[M]. Merill Prentice Hall.
[28]Gerver, D., Longely, P., Long, J. & Lambert, S.1984. Selecting Trainee Conference Interpreters:A Preliminary Study [J]. Journal of Occupational Psychology,57(1): 17-31.
[29]Gile, D. Opening up in Interpretation Studies[A]. In S. Mary, F. Pochhacker & K. Kaindle (eds.). Translation Studies:An Interdiscipline[M]. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company,1994:149-158.
[30]Gile, D.1995. Basic Concepts and Models for Interpreter and Translation Training[M]. John Benjamins Publishing Company:Amsterdam/Philadelphia.
[31]Gile, D.2000. The History of Research Into Conference Interpreting:A Scientometric Approach [J]. Target,12(2):297-321.
[32]Gile, D.2011. Basic Concepts and Models for Interpreter and Translator Training[M]. Revised ed. Shanghai:Shanghai Foreing Language Education Press.
[33]Grant, D. A. & Berg, E. A.1948. A Behavioural Analysis of Degree of Reinforcement and Ease of Shifting to New Responses in a Weigl-type Card Sorting Problem[J]. Journal of Experimental Psychology,38(4):404-411.
[34]Grigorenko, E. L., Sternberg, R. J. & Ehrman, M. E.2000. A Theory-based Approach to the Measurement of Foreign Language Learning Ability:The CANAL-F Theory and Test[J]. The Modern Language Journal,84(3):390-405.
[35]Harley, B. & Hart, D.1997. Language Aptitude and Second Language Proficiency in Classroom Learners of Different Starting Ages[J]. Studies in Second Language Acquisition,19(3):379-400.
[36]Harley, B. & Hart, D. Age, Aptitude and Second Language Learning on a Bilingual Exchange[A]. In P. Robinson (ed.). Individual Differences and Instructed Language Learning[C]. Amsterdam/Philadelphia:John Benjamins,2002.
[37]Harris, B.1977. The Importance of Natural Translation [J]. Working Papers on Bilingualism,12(1):96-114.
[38]Harris, B. & Sherwood, B. Translating as an Innate Skill[A]. In D. Gerver & H. W. Sinaiko (eds.). Language Interpretation and Communication[C]. New York:Plenum, 1978.
[39]Hatim, B. & Mason, I.1997. The Translator as Communinicator[M]. London & New York:Routlege.
[40]Haxby, J. V., Ungerleider, L. G., Horwitz, B., Rapoport, S. I. & Grady, C. L.1995. Hemispheric Differences in Neurosystems for Face Working Memory:A PET-rCBR Study[J]. Human Brain Mapping, (3):68-32.
[41]Heaton, R. K. Wisconsin Card Sorting Test:Computer Version-2 Research Edition[M]. Odessa, FL:Psychological Assessment Resources,1993.
[42]Herbert, J.1952. The Interpreter's Handbook:How to Become a Conference Interpreter[M]. Geneva:Georg.
[43]Hermann, A. Interpreting in Antiquity[A]. In F. Pochhacker & M. Shlesinger (eds.). The Interpreting Studies Reader[C]. London & New York:Routledge,2002:15-22.
[44]Kalina. S.2001. Interpreting Competence as a Basis and a Goal for Teaching[J]. The Interpreter's Newsletter, (10):3-32.
[45]Karmiloff, S, A.2001. Beyond Modularity:A Developmental Perspective on Cognitive Science[M]. trans. by Miao Xiaochun. Shanghai:East China Normal University Press.
[46]Keiser, W. Selection and Training of Conference Interpreters[A]. In D. Gerver & H. W. Sinaiko (eds.). Language Interpretation and Communication[C]. New York:Plenum Press,1978:11-24.
[47]Kiraly, D. C.1995. Pathways to Translation:Pedagogy and Process[M]. Kent, Ohio: The Kent State University Press.
[48]Kiss, C. & Nikolov, M.2005. Developing, Piloting, and Validating an Instrument to Measure Young Learner's Aptitude[J]. Language Learning,55(1):99-150.
[49]Krashen, S. Aptitude and Attitude in Relation to Second Language Acquisition and Learning[A]. In K. C. Diller (ed.). Individual Differences and Universals in Language Learning Aptitude[C]. Rowley, MA:Newbury House,1981.
[50]Lambert, S.1991. Aptitude Testing for Simultaneous Interpretation at the University of Ottawa[J]. Meta,36(4):586-594.
[51]Lie, C. H., Specht, K., Marshall, J. C. & Fink, G. R.2006. Using fMRI to Decompose the Neural Processes Underlying Wisconsin Card Sorting Test[J]. Neurolmage,30(3): 1038-1049.
[52]Longley, P. The Use of Aptitude Testing in the Selection of Students for Conference Interpretation Training[A]. In L. Gran & J. Dodds (eds.). The Theoretical and Practical Aspects of Teaching Conference Interpretation[C]. Udine:Campanotto Editore,1984:105-108.
[53]Mayes, A. R.1988. Human Organic Memory Disorders[M]. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
[54]Neufeld, G.1979. Towards a Theory of Language Learning Ability[J]. Language Learning,29(2):227-241.
[55]Neubert, A. Competence in Language, and in Translation[A]. In C. Schaffner & B. Adab (eds.). Developing Translation Competence[C]. Amsterdm/Philadelphia:John Benjamins Publishing Company,2000:3-18.
[56]Nord, C.1991. Text Analysis in Translation[M]. Amsterdam:Rodopi.
[57]Nord, C.2001. Translating as a Purposeful Activity:Functionalist Approaches Explained[M]. Shanghai:Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
[58]Niska, H. Community Interpreter Training:Past, Present, Future[A]. In G. Garzone & M. Viezzi (eds.). Interpreting in the 21st Century[C]. Amsterdam/Philadelphia:Johan Benjamins,2002:133-144.
[59]Orozco, M. & Hurtado, A. A.2002. Measuring Translation Competence Acquisition[J]. Meta,47(3):375-402.
[60]Oxford, R. L. Anxiety and the Language Learner:New Insight[A]. In J. Arnold (ed.). Affect in Language Learning[C]. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1999.
[61]PACTE. Acquiring Translation Competence Hypotheses and Methodological Problems of a Research Project[A]. In A. Beeby, D. Ensinger & M. Presas (eds.). Investigating Translation:Selected Papers from the 4th International Congress on Translation, Barcelona,1998[C]. Amsterdam:John Benjamins,2000:99-106.
[62]PACTE.2002. Exploratory Tests in a Study of Translation Competence[J]. Conference Interpretation and Translation, (2):41-69.
[63]PACTE. Building a Translation Competence Model[A]. In F. Alves (ed.). Triangulating Translation.Perspectives in Process Oriented Research[C]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins,2003:43-66.
[64]PACTE.2005. Investigating Translation Competence:Conceptual and Methodological Issuess[J]. Meta,50(2):609-619.
[65]PACTE. First Results of a Translation Competence Experiment "Knowledge of Translation" and "Efficacy of Translation Process"[A]. In J. Kearns (ed.). Translator and Interpreter Training:Issues, Methods and Debates[C]. New York & London: Continuum International Publishing Group,2008:104-126.
[66]Parry, T. & Stanfield, C.1990. Language Aptitude Reconsidered[C]. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.:Prentice Hall.
[67]Petersen, S., Fox, P., Posner, M., Mintun, M. & Raichle, M.1988. Positron Emission Tomographic Studies of the Cortical Anatomy of Single-word Processing[J]. Nature, 331(6157):585-589.
[68]Peterson, C. & Al-Haik, A. R.1976. The Development of Defense Language Aptitude Battery[J]. Educational and Psychological Measurement,36(2):369-380.
[69]Pimsleur, P. et al.1966. Pimsleur Language Aptitude Battery:Manual[M]. Bethesda, MD:Second Language Testing, Inc..
[70]Pochhacker, F.2004. Introducing Interpreting Studies[M]. London and New York: Routledge.
[71]Pochhacker, F.2010. Introducing Interpreting Studies[M]. trans. by Zhong Weihe, et al. Beijing:Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
[72]Pym, A.2003. Redefining Translation Competence in an Electronic Age:In Defence of a Minimalist Approach[J]. Meta,48(4):481-497.
[73]Ranta, L. The Role of Learners' Language Analytic Ability in the Communicative Classroom[A]. In P. Robinson (ed.), Individual Differences and Instructed Language Learning[C]. Amsterdam/Philadelphia:John Benjamins,2002.
[74]Risberg, J. Development of High-resolution Two-dimentional Measurement of Regional Cerebral Blood Flow[A]. In J. Wade, S. Knezevik, V. Maximilian, Z. Mubrin, & I. Prohovnik (eds.). Impact of Functional Imaging in Neurology and Psychiatry[C]. London:Libbey,1987.
[75]Robinson, P.1996. Learning Simple and Complex Second Language under Implicit, Incidental, Rule-search and Instructed Conditions[J]. Studies in Second Language Acquisition,18(1):27-67.
[76]Robinson, P.2001. Individual Differences, Cognitive Abilities, Aptitude Complexes and Learning Conditions in Second Language Acquisition[J]. Second Language Research,17(4):368-392.
Robinson, P.2005. Aptitude and Second Language Acquisition[J]. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, (25):46-73.
[78]Rozan, J. F.1956. La Prise de Notes en Interpretation Consecutive (Note-taking in Consecutive Interpreting[M]. Geneve:George & Cie S. A., Librairie de l'Universite.
[79]Rubin, J. Learner Strategies:Theoretical Assumptions, Research History and Typology. In A. Wenden & J. Rubin (eds.). Learner Strategies and Language Learning[C]. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:Prentice Hall,1987.
[80]Sasaki, M.1996. Second Language Proficiency, Foreign Language Aptitude, and Intelligence:Quantitaive and Qualitative Analyses[M]. New York:Peter Lang.
[81]Schaiffner, C. & Adab, B.2000. Developing Translation Competence[M]. Amsterdam/Philadelphia:John Benjamins.
[82]Setton, R.1999. Simultaneous Interpretation:A Cognitive Pragmatic Analysis[M]. Amsterdam and Philadelphia:John Benjamins.
[83]Skehan, P. Cluster Analysis and the Identification of Learner Types [A]. In V. Cook (ed.). Experimental Approaches to Second Language Learner[C]. Oxford:Pergamon, 1986.
[84]Skehan, P.1989. Individual Differences in Second Language Acquisition[M]. London: Edward Arnold.
[85]Skehan, P.1998. Cognitive Approach to Language Learning[M]. Oxford:Oxford University Press.
[86]Sparks, R. L.1995. Examining the Linguistic Coding Differences Hypothesis to Explain Individual Differences in Foreign Language Learning[J]. Annals of Dyslexia, (45):187-214.
[87]Sparks, R.L. & Ganschow, L.2001. Aptitude for Learning a Foreign Language[J]. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics,21(1):90-111.
[88]Spolsky, B.1995. Prognostication and Language Aptitude Testing,1925-1962[J]. Language Testing,12(3):321-340.
[89]Sternberg, R. J.2006. Cognitive Psychology[M].3rd ed. Beijing:China Light Industry Press.
[90]Toury, G.1995. Descriptive Translation and Beyond[M]. Amsterdam:Benjamins.
[91]Ungerer, F. & Schmid, H. J.2001. An Introduction to Cognitive Linguistics[M]. Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
[92]Wesche, M. Language Aptitude Measures in Streaming, Matching Students with Methods, and Diagnosis of Learning Problems[A]. In K. C. Diller (ed.). Individual Differences and Universals in Language Learning Aptitude[C]. Rowley, MA: Newbury House,1981.
[93]Williams, M. & Burden, R. L.2000. Psychology for Language Teachers[M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
[94]Wilss, W. Perspectives and Limitations of a Didactic Framework for the Teaching of Translation [A]. In R. W. Brislin (ed.). Translation, Applications and Research[C]. New York:Gardner Press,1976:117-137.
[95]Wilss, W.2001. The Science of Translation:Problems and Methods[M]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
[96]艾森克,基恩.2009.认知心理学(第五版)[M].高定国,等,译.华东师范大学出版社.
[97]安德森.2012.认知心理学及其启示(第七版)[M].秦裕林,译.人民邮电出版社.
[98]百度百科 1.2013-12-26[2014-01-02]认知 能力 [EB/OL].http://baike.baidu.com/view/2193347.htm.
[99]百度百科 2.2013-12-26[2014-01-15]脑前额叶[EB/OL].http://baike.baidu.com/link?url=RIdVagZW-9rOJeKcjsZErQdX6MsYHVeIn_UEH XbId-CivETEwapc_iypFZLzmK4_ahQjMKUzgpzi60qRGRMmSq.
[100]百度百科 3.2013-12-26[2014-02-02] 科学研究[EB/OL].http://baike.baidu.com/link?url=JrrOKtJLQ71P3NnAb_tmx57pcmahZvQgHVBQft oqgGPWVMTNWGk3hjzGqSr5hLcY.
[101]鲍刚.1998.口译理论概述[M].旅游教育出版社.
[102]鲍刚.2011.口译理论概述[M].中国对外翻译出版有限公司.
[103]蔡小红.2003.论口译质量评估的信息单位[J].外国语(5)：75-80.
[104]蔡小红.2007.口译评估[M].中国对外翻译出版公司.
[105]蔡小红.2002.口译研究新探：新方法、新观念、新趋势[M].开益出版社.
[106]柴明熲.2007a.口译职业化带来的口译专业化[J].广东外语外贸大学学报(3)：12-15.
[107]柴明熲.2007b.口译与口译教学[J].中国翻译(1)：48-50.
[108]柴明熲.2008.《会议口译解析》导读[M].上海外语教育出版社.
[109]柴明熲.2010.对专业翻译教学构建的思考：现状、问题和对策[J].东方翻译(1)：15-18.
[110]柴明熲.2012.翻译硕士专业学位教育：一种较为宏观的思考—上外高翻综合改革专题理论文章(之一)[J].东方翻译(1)：8-11.
[111]陈菁.1997.口译教学应如何体现口译的特点[J].中国翻译(6)：26-29.
[112]陈琪.2013a.少数民族译员翻译能力构建[J].青海民族大学学报(社会科学版)(4)：148-151.
[113]陈琪.2013b.翻译能力要素探源[J].青海师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版)(2)：124-127.
[114]陈晓春.2001.口译的性质、特点和过程—兼论高校英语口译教学[J].集美大学学报(哲学社会科学版)(1)：101-105.
[115]陈小慰.2013.面向现实需求的翻译人才能力结构再思考[J].外语教学(1)：94-98.
[116]程跃珍.2010.从吉尔的口译模式看商务英语口译能力要素的构成[J].华北电力大学学报(社会科学版)(4)：110-114.
[117]戴惠萍,孙海琴.2010a.携手合作打造精品口译院校—访欧委会口译总司司长Marco Benedetti[J]东方翻译(2)：9-12.
[118]戴惠萍.2010b.甄选合格会议员的科学性和艺术性—由欧盟口译总司译员招聘考试引发的思考[J].东方翻译(5)：21-23.
[119]戴运财.2006.语言学能对二语习得的影响[J].外语教学与研究(6)：451-459.
[120]戴运财,蔡金亭.2008.二语习得中的语言学能研究：回顾、现状、思考与展望[J].外国语(5)：80-90.
[121]戴忠信,刘军.2005.论翻译能力的构成因素[J].金陵科技学院学报(社会科学版)(6)：78-82.
[122]邓园,丁国盛,彭聃龄.2003.左侧前额叶语言加工功能研究综述[J].心理科学(4)：687-689.
[123]丁锦红,张钦,郭春颜.2010.认知心理学[M].中国人民大学出版社.
[124]杜云辉.2000.论口译人员的综合素质[J].中国科技翻译(1)：55-57.
[125]范琳,杜国宁.2001.语言潜能及其对语言学习的影响[J].山东外语教学(1)：65-68.
[126]冯全功.2010.从认知视角试论翻译能力的构成[J].外语教学(6)：110-113.
[127]封世文,程国勤,赵汉青,等.2006.左脑前额叶与语言神经机制的功能影像学研究[J].临床和实验医学杂志(9)：1275-1276.
[128]冯忠良,伍新春,姚梅林,王健敏.2010.教育心理学[M].人民教育出版社.
[129]葛林,罗选民,董丽.2011.诺德翻译能力理论观照下的MTI培养模式研究[J].中国翻译(4)：31-36.
[130]古琦慧.2009a.口译课程模式的开发及应用—以培养译员能力为中心的模式[J].外语界(2)：33-39.
[131]古琦慧.2009b.口译课程发展刍议—译员能力的视角[J].山东外语教学(4)：109-112.
[132]桂诗春.2000.新编心理语言学[M].上海外语教学出版社.
[133]郭宇路,谭淑玲.2012.行动研究与口译能力培养[J].学术论坛(8)：228-232.
[134]韩明鲲,吕静.2013.音乐训练对改善儿童前额叶执行功能的作用[J].中国健康心理学杂志(4)：540-542.
[135]韩世辉,朱滢.2007.认知神经科学[M].广东高等教育出版社.
[136]赫伯特.1984.高级口译手册[M].张晨君,译.北京出版社.
[137]何其莘.2012.翻译硕士专业学位建设的三大难点—从综合改革试点单位中期验收谈起[J].东方翻译(1)：4-7.
[138]何淑华,静进.2003.WCST应用于ADHD的现状与展望[J].国外医学妇幼保健分册(6)：321-324.
[139]胡庚申.1990.近年我国口译研究综述[J].外语教学与研究(4)：1-6.
[140]胡庚申.1993.怎样学习当好译员[M].中国科学技术大学出版社.
[141]胡庚申.2000.中国口译研究又十年[J].中国科技翻译(2)：40-44.
[142]黄子东.1997.翻译能力与翻译教学[J].上海科技翻译(3)：26-31.
[143]姜秋霞,权晓辉.2002.翻译能力与翻译行为关系的理论假设[J].中国翻译(6)：11-15.
[144]季春梅.2005.威斯康星卡片分类测试在执行功能障碍研究中的应用[J].神经疾病与精神卫生(4)：322-324.
[145]卡罗尔.2004.语言心理学[M].缪小春,译.华东师范大学出版社.
[146]康志峰.2012.现代信息技术下口译多模态听焦虑探析[J].外语电化教学(3)：19-22.
[147]勒代雷.2010.论翻译学研究方法[J].刘和平,译.中国翻译(2)：11-18.
[148]李芳琴.1999.从口译的特点看口译教学[J].四川外语学院学报(3)：77-80.
[149]李福印.2008.认知语言学概论[M].北京大学出版社.
[150]李家春.2012.基于多元系统论的商务英语翻译能力培养体系构建[J].黑龙江教育(高教研究与评估)(1)：15-16.
[151]李逵六.1994.口译：理论与实践语言与交际[M].外语教学与研究出版社.
[152]李兰荣.2013.外语学能之语言分析能力试题的开发、测试与效度研究[J].山东外语教学(1)：68-74.
[153]李利,莫雷,陈卓铭,等.2007.前额叶在双语词汇通达中的抑制作用—对一例前额叶损伤双语病人的研究[J].心理科学(6)：1282-1286.
[154]李瑞林.2011.从翻译能力到译者素养：翻译教学的目标转向[J].中国翻译(1)：46-51.
[155]李学平,杨天祝.2000.前额叶工作记忆功能研究的实验依据[J].临床荟萃(15)：709-710.
[156]廉洁.2001Skehan著《语言学习认知法》评介[J].外语与外语教学(11)：63-64.
[157]连榕.2010.认知心理学[M].高等教育出版社.
[158]梁宁建.2003.当代认知心理学[M].上海教学出版社.
[159]林郁如,等.1999.新编英语口译教程(教师用书)[M].上海：外语教育出版社.
[160]刘刚.曾亚伟,李科,等.2004.语言优势半球及语言相关皮层区的功能性磁共振定位[J].实用放射学杂志(3)：196-198.
[161]刘和平.2001.口译理论与教学研究现状及展望[J].中国翻译(2)：17-18.
[162]刘和平.2003.职业口译新形式与口译教学[J].中国翻译(3)：32-36.
[163]刘和平.2005.口译理论与教学[M].中国对外翻译出版公司.
[164]刘和平.2007a.谈口译研究与专业口译培训[J].中国翻译(1)：54-56.
[165]刘和平.2007b.口译培训的定位与专业建设[J].广东外语外贸大学学报(3)： 8-11.
[166]刘和平.2008.再谈翻译教学体系的构建[J].中国翻译(3)：35-39.
[167]刘和平.2011.翻译能力发展的阶段性及其教学法研究[J].中国翻译(1)：37-45.
[168]刘和平,许明.2012.探究全球化时代的口译人才培养模式—第九届全国口译大会暨国际研讨会述评[J].中国翻译(5)：53-59.
[169]刘和平.2013.翻译教学模式：理论与应用[J].中国翻译(2)：50-55.
[170]刘健,段海鸿,汪永光,等.2010.学习障碍儿童工作记忆和执行功能特征分析[J].中国学校卫生(5)：554-555.
[171]刘骏,蒋楠.2006.中国学生外语学习能力倾向研究[J].中国外语(2)：63-68.
[172]刘宓庆.2003.口笔译理论研究[M].中国对外翻译出版公司.
[173]刘萍,王小川.2007.《翻译课程模式研究—以发展翻译能力为中心的方法》评介[J].外语与外语教学(2)：63-64.
[174]刘润清.1990.决定语言学习的几个因素[J].外语教学与研究(2)：36-45.
[175]刘润清.1999.外语教学中的科研方法[M].外语教学与研究出版社.
[176]刘涛,刘利民,邓隽.2005.语言学能倾向中语法敏感性测验指标的相关系数法研究[J].西南民族大学学报(人文社科版)(10)：286-289.
[177]刘哲宁.1999.Wisconsin卡片分类测试的临床运用[J].国外医学精神病学分册(1)：6-9.
[178]陆留弟.2000.口译者的基本素质及其培训[J].国外外语教学(4)：33-35.
[179]马冬梅.2005.外语学习能力的实质：认识与再认识—以二语习得研究为视角[J].西安外国语学院学报(6)：37-40.
[180]梅德明.2003.中级口译教程(第二版)[M].上海外语教育出版社.
[181]苗菊.2007.翻译能力研究—构建翻译教学的基础[J].外语与外语教学(4)：47-50.
[182]穆雷,郑敏慧.2006.翻译专业本科教学大纲设计探索[J].中国翻译(5)：3-7.
[183]穆雷,王斌华.2009.国内口译研究的发展及研究走向—基于30年期刊论文、著作和历届口译大会论文的分析[J].中国翻译(4)：19-25.
[184]慕媛媛,潘珺.2005.专业化道路：中国口译发展的新趋势—兼评国际口译大会暨第五届全国口译实践、教学与研究会议[J].中国翻译(3)：38-41.
[185]黎难秋.2002.中国口译史[M].青岛出版社.
[186]潘能.1994.英语口译—理论、技巧与实践[M].西安交通大学出版社.
[187]皮亚杰.1995.认识发生论原理[M].王宪钿,等,译.北京商务印书馆.
[188]钱春花.2010.交互性教学对学习者翻译能力的驱动[J].外语界(2)：19-24.
[189]钱春花.2011a.基于扎根理论的译者翻译能力体系研究[J].外语与外语教学(6)：65-69.
[190]钱春花,李冠杰.2011b.翻译能力体系构建及培养途径分析[J].煤炭高等教育(6)：123-125.
[191]钱春花.2012.翻译能力构成要素及其驱动关系分析[J].外语界(3)：59-65.
[192]秦晓晴.2003.外语教学研究中的定量数据分析[M].华中科技大学出版社.
[193]秦晓晴.2009.外语教学问卷调查法[M].外语教学与研究出版社.
[194]任大玲.2013.翻译教学与翻译技术并重的项目型翻译能力培养课程模式[J].外语电化教学(5)：42-48.
[195]任文.2012.全球化时代口译—第八届全国口译大会暨国际研讨会论文集[C].外语教学与研究出版社.
[196]塞莱丝科维奇.1979.口译技巧[M].孙慧双,译.北京出版社.
[197]塞莱斯科维奇,勒代雷.1990.口译理论实践与教学[M].汪家荣,等,译.旅游教育出版社.
[198]塞莱斯科维奇.1992.口译技艺：即席口译与同声传译经验谈[M].黄为忻,钱慧杰,译.上海翻译出版公司.
[199]塞莱斯科维奇,勒德雷尔.1992.口笔译概论[M].孙慧双,译.北京语言学院出版社.
[200]塞莱斯科维奇,勒代雷.2007.口译训练指南[M].闫素伟,邵炜,译.中国对外翻译出版公司.
[201]盛腊萍.2012.译员能力内涵与口译教学研究[J].安徽工业大学学报(社会科学版)(5)：105-107.
[202]石毓智.2008.认知能力与语言学理论[M].学林出版社.
[203]舒畅,王高华,王惠玲,等.2004.WCST操作时脑活动模式的初步研究[J].中国神经精神疾病杂志(3)：223-225.
[204]司马贺.1986.人类的认知—思维的信息加工理论[M].棘其诚,张厚粲,译.北京：科学出版社.
[205]苏伟.2011a.本科阶段口译能力发展途径研究—一项基于部分翻译本科专业试点院校的实证研究[D].上海外国语大学.
[206]苏伟.2011b.以过程为导向的口译职业能力评估研究[J].上海翻译(3)：47-51.
[207]索尔所,麦克林.2008.认知心理学(第七版)[M].邵志芳,李林,徐媛,等,译.上海人民出版社.
[208]同文译馆.2013[2014-05-18].2013MTI院校招生简章[EB/OL].http://www.oktranslation.com/mti/mti-zsjz.aspx?page=1.
[209]塔沙克里,特德莱.2010.混合方法论：定性方法和定量方法的结合[M].唐海华,译.重庆大学出版社.
[210]仝亚辉.2010.PACTE翻译能力模式研究[J].解放军外国语学院学报(9)：88-93.
[211]瓦兹沃斯.1989.皮亚杰的认知和情感发展理论[M].徐梦秋,沈明明,译.厦门大学出版社.
[212]王斌华.2007a.“口译能力”评估和“译员评估”—口译的客观评估模式初探[J].外语界(3)：44-50.
[213]王斌华.2007b.口译能力的评估模式及测试设计再探—以全国英语口译大赛为例[J].外语界(1)：66-71.
[214]王斌华.2008.口译研究的路径与方法—回顾与前瞻[J].中国外语(2)：85-90.
[215]王斌华,叶亮.2009.面向教学的口译语料库建设：理论与实践[J].外语界(2)：23-32.
[216]王斌华.2012a.语料库口译研究—口译产品研究方法突破[J].中国外语(3)：94-100.
[217]王斌华.2012b.从口译标准到口译规范：口译评估模式构建的探索[J].上海翻译(3)：49-54.
[218]王斌华.2012c.从口译能力到译员能力：专业口译教学理念的拓展[J].外语与外语教学(6)：75-78.
[219]王传英.2012.从“自然译者”到PACTE模型：西方翻译能力研究管窥[J].中国科技翻译(4)：32-35.
[220]王恩冕.2007.进入21世纪的高质量口译—第六届全国口译大会暨国际研讨会论文集[C].外语教学与研究出版社.
[221]王金波,王燕.2006.口译的特点与口译教材：问题与前景[J].外语界(5)：41-47.
[222]王魁,汪安胜.2011.认知心理学(重排版)[M].北京大学出版社.
[223]王凌,王文宇,周丹丹.2011.2011年度全国英语专业八级口语与口译考试情况总结与分析[J].外语测试与教学(2)：47-55.
[224]王树槐,王若维.2008.翻译能力的构成因素和发展层次研究[J].外语研究(5)：80-88.
[225]王伟忠,陈康宁,高晋华,等.2003.前额叶右颞叶损害对策略转换能力监控能力影响的研究[J].第三军医大学学报(12)：1095-1097.
[226]王文宇,周丹丹,王凌.2010对英语专业高年级学生口译能力的调查—兼谈口译教学[J].外语教学(9)：71-75.
[227]王湘玲、汤伟、王志敏.西方翻译能力研究：回眸与前瞻[J].湖南大学学报(社会科学版),2008(2)：103-106.
[228]王寅.2006.认知语言学[M].上海外语教育出版社.
[229]王晓农.2009.论翻译专业能力与外语专业翻译教学[J].唐山师范学院学报(1)：157-160.
[230]魏景汉,阎克乐,等.2008.认知神经科学基础[M].人民教育出版社.
[231]文军.2004.论翻译能力及其培养[J].上海科技翻译(3)：1-5.
[232]文军.2004.论以发展翻译能力为中心的课程模式[J].外语与外语教学(8)：49-52.
[233]文军.2005.翻译课程模式研究—以发展翻译能力为中心的方法[M].北京：北京文史出版社.
[234]文军,李红霞.2010.以翻译能力为中心的翻译专业本科课程设置研究[J].外语界(2)：2-7.
[235]文秋芳.2001.应用语言学研究方法与论文写作[M].外语教学与研究出版社.
[236]文秋芳,王立非.2003.英语学习策略实证研究[M].西安：陕西师范大学出版社.
[237]文秋芳,王凌.2009.英语专业四级口试的效度研究[J].解放军外国语学院学报(5)：37-41.
[238]文秋芳,王文宇,周丹丹,王艳.2005.全国英语专业八级口试体系的研究与实施[J].外语界(5)：53-58.
[239]文秋芳,吴克明,王文宇,任裕海.2002.全国英语专业八级口试的可行性研究 [J].外语界(4)：67-73.
[240]文秋芳,赵学熙.1995.英语专业四级口试的可行性研究[J].外语界(1)：30-36.
[241]文秋芳,赵学熙.1998.全国英语四级录音口试评分的时间与研究[J].解放军外语学院学报(3)：52-54.
[242]温植胜.2005.对外语学能研究的重新思考[J].现代外语(4)：383-392.
[243]温植胜.2007.外语学能研究的新趋势[J].华南师范大学学报(社会科学版)(1)：148-150.
[244]邬姝丽.2010.高校英语专业口译能力评估及其对口译教学的启示[J].中国翻译(4)：37-39.
[245]吴一安,刘润清,P.Jeffrey.1993.中国英语本科学生素质调查报告[J].外语教学与研究(1)：36-46.
[246]席春华,汪凯,牛朝诗,等.2006.前额叶损伤患者的社会认知障碍[J].中华神经科杂志(10)：651-654.
[247]夏慧言.2011.汉语语境下的外语学能测试研究及效度验证[J].山东外语教学(5)：52-55.
[248]肖维青.2012.多元素翻译能力模式与翻译测试的构念[J].外语教学(1)：109-112.
[249]肖晓燕.2002a.西方口译研究：历史与现状[J].外国语(4)：71-76.
[250]肖晓燕.2002b.口译教学中交际能力训练[A].蔡小红主编.口译研究新探—新方法、新观念、新趋势[C].开益出版社.
[251]邢家伟.2010.认知能力与口译能力关系探究[J].沈阳师范大学学报(社会科学版)(4)：86-88.
[252]刑家伟.2011.认知理论在口译人才培养中的应用价值[J].沈阳农业大学学报(社会科学版)(3)：219-221.
[253]许明.2007.口译认知研究的心理学基础[J].天津外国语学院学报(6)：69-73.
[254]许明.2012.跨学科视野下的口译能力研究[A].任文.全球化时代的口译—第八届全国口译大会暨国际研讨会论文集[C].外语教学与研究出版社：80-91.
[255]杨承淑.2005.口译教学研究：理论与实践[M].中国对外翻译出版公司.
[256]杨恩堂,姚秀清.1993.英语口译技巧[M].青岛出版社.
[257]杨炯炯,翁旭初.1999.前额叶在记忆中的作用—脑功能成像研究进展[J].心 理科学进展(2)：13-18.
[258]杨松岩.2003.翻译能力的培养与翻译教学[J].辽宁师范大学学报(社会科学版)(3)：62-64.
[259]杨玮斌.2012.论口译实践的三个要素[J].上海翻译(2)：51-55.
[260]杨晓荣.2002.汉译英能力解析[J].中国翻译(6)：16-19.
[261]杨志红,王克非.2010.翻译能力及其研究[J].外语教学(6)：91-95.
[262]张爱玲.2012.专业口译人才培养体系探索—上外高翻综合改革专题理论文章(之二)[J].东方翻译(1)：12-16.
[263]张梅.2011.翻译能力的研究及其培养[J].四川教育学院学报(2)：69-72.
[264]张睿,刘艾云.2010.科技人才口译能力培养模式研究[J].科技人才口译能力培养模式研究(8)：73-75.
[265]张威.2011.口译认知研究：同声传译与工作记忆的关系[M].外语教学与研究出版社.
[266]张维为.1999.英汉同声传译[M].中国对外翻译出版公司.
[267]张文,韩常慧.2006.口译理论研究[M].科学出版社.
[268]钟毅平,叶茂林.2010.认知心理学高级教程[J].安徽人民出版社.
[269]钟守满,雷雪莲.2009.以市场为导向,侧重翻译能力的培养[J].外语与外语教学(2)：35-41.
[270]仲伟合.2003.译员的知识结构与口译课程设置[J].中国翻译(4)：63-65.
[271]仲伟合.2007a.口译课程设置与口译教学原则[M].中国翻译(1)：52-53.
[272]仲伟合.2007b.专业口译教学的原则与方法[J].广东外语外贸大学学报(3)：5-7.
[273]仲伟合.2008.翻译专业人才培养模式探索与实践[J].中国外语(6)：4-8.
[274]仲伟合、王斌华.2010.口译研究的“名”与“实”—口译研究的学科理论构建之—[J].中国翻译(5)：7-12.
[275]仲伟合、王斌华.2010.口译研究方法论—口译研究的学科理论构建之二[J].中国翻译(6)：18-24.
[276]仲伟合.2010.口译在中国：新趋势与新挑战—第七届全国口译大会暨国际研讨会论文集[C].外语教学与研究出版社.
[277]仲伟合等.2012.口译研究方法论[M].外语教学与研究出版社.
[278]周兆祥,陈育沾.1988.口译的理论与实践[M].商务印书馆.
[279]朱玉彬.2008.以教学为取向的翻译能力探讨[J].外语研究(3)：71-76.
⑧ 本视频资料选自戴惠萍主编的《交替传译技能训练教程》(下册)一书,该书即将由上海外语教育出版社出版于2014年6月出版。
⑨ 该视频材料文字部分选自王宣民新浪微博“维护海洋利益应以军力作后盾走先民后军之路”一文,有改动。原文参见http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_570d193fD1012tq2.html。
[1]Anderson, J. R.1983. The Architecture of Cognition[M]. Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press.
[2]Anderson, J. R.1996. ACT:A Simple Theory of Complex Cognition[J]. American Psychologist,51(4):355-365.
[3]AIIC.2012-07-02[2013-3-10] What Kind of Personal Traits Do I Need to Be a Conference Interpreter? [EB/OL] http://aiic.net/node/2672/advice-to-would-be-interpreters/lang/12013/7/2.
[4]Alves, F. & Goncalves, J. R. A Relevance Theory Approach to the Investigation of Inferential Processes in Translation[A]. In F. Alves (ed.). Triangulating Translation: Perspectives in Process Oriented Research[C]. Amsterdam:John Benjamins,2003: 3-24.
[5]Baddeley, A. D.1986. Working Memory[M]. Oxford:Clarendon Press.
[6]Baddeley, A. D.1990. Human Memory:Theory and Practice[M]. Hove, UK:Erlbaum.
[7]Baddeley, A. D.1998. Human Memory:Theory and Rractice[M]. Revised ed. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
[8]Beeby, A. Evaluating the Development of Translation Competence[A]. In C. Schaffner, & R. T. Bell (eds.). Translation and Translating:Theory and Practice[M]. London and New York:Longman,2001.
[9]Bialystok, E. & Frohlich, M.1978. Variables of Classroom Achievement in Second Language Learning[J]. The Modern Language Journal,62(7):327-336.
[10]Brown, J. D.2001. Using Surveys in Language Programs[M]. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
[11]Cabeza, R. & Nyberg, L.1997. Imaging Cognition:An Empirical Review of PET Studies with Normal Subjects[J]. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience,9(1):1-26.
[12]Carroll, J. B. & Sapon, S.1959. Modern Language Aptitude Test(MLAT)[R]. New York:The Psychological Corporation.
[13]Carroll, J. B. The Prediction of Success in Intensive Foreign Language Training[A]. In R. Glaser (ed.). Training Research and Education[C]. Pittsburgh, PA:University of Pittsburgh Press,1962.
[14]Carroll, J. B. Twenty-five Years of Research on Foreign Language Aptitude[A]. In K. C. Diller (ed.). Individual Differences and Universals in Language Learning Aptitude[C]. Rowley, MA:Newbury House,1981.
[15]Child, J. R.1998. Language Aptitude Testing:Learners and Application[J]. Applied Language Learning,9(1-2):1-10.
[16]Cohen, A.1998. Strategies in Learning and Using a Second Language[M]. London: Longman.
[17]Colina, S.2003. Translation Teaching From Research to the Classroom:A Handbook for Teachers[M]. New York:McGraw-Hill Higher Education.
[18]Creswell, J.2003. Research Design:Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches[M]. Sage Publications.
[19]Croft, W. & Cruse, D. A.2006. Cognitive Linguistics[M]. Peking University Press.
[20]Ehrman, M. & Oxford, R.1995. Cognition Plus:Correlations of Language Learning Success[J]. The Modern Language Journal,79(1):67-89.
[21]Ehrman, M.1998. The Modern Language Aptitude Test for Predicting Learning Success and Advising Students[J]. Applied Language Learning,9(1-2):31-70.
[22]Ellis, R.1985. Understanding Second Language Acquisition[M]. Oxford:Oxford University Press.
[23]Ellis, R.1994. The Study of Second Language Acquisition[M]. Oxford:Oxford University Press.
[24]Flavell, J. H., Miller, P. H. & Miller, S. A.2002. Cognitive Development[M].4th ed. trans, by Deng Ciping, Liu Ming. Shanghai:East China Normal University.
[25]Gardner, R.1985. Social Psychology and Second Language Learning:The Role of Attitudes and Motivation[M]. London:Edward Arnold.
[26]Gardner, H.2006. Multiple Intelligences:New Horizons[M]. New York:Basic Books.
[27]Gay, L. R. & Airasian, P.2003. Educational Research:Competencies for Analysis and Applications[M]. Merill Prentice Hall.
[28]Gerver, D., Longely, P., Long, J. & Lambert, S.1984. Selecting Trainee Conference Interpreters:A Preliminary Study [J]. Journal of Occupational Psychology,57(1): 17-31.
[29]Gile, D. Opening up in Interpretation Studies[A]. In S. Mary, F. Pochhacker & K. Kaindle (eds.). Translation Studies:An Interdiscipline[M]. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company,1994:149-158.
[30]Gile, D.1995. Basic Concepts and Models for Interpreter and Translation Training[M]. John Benjamins Publishing Company:Amsterdam/Philadelphia.
[31]Gile, D.2000. The History of Research Into Conference Interpreting:A Scientometric Approach [J]. Target,12(2):297-321.
[32]Gile, D.2011. Basic Concepts and Models for Interpreter and Translator Training[M]. Revised ed. Shanghai:Shanghai Foreing Language Education Press.
[33]Grant, D. A. & Berg, E. A.1948. A Behavioural Analysis of Degree of Reinforcement and Ease of Shifting to New Responses in a Weigl-type Card Sorting Problem[J]. Journal of Experimental Psychology,38(4):404-411.
[34]Grigorenko, E. L., Sternberg, R. J. & Ehrman, M. E.2000. A Theory-based Approach to the Measurement of Foreign Language Learning Ability:The CANAL-F Theory and Test[J]. The Modern Language Journal,84(3):390-405.
[35]Harley, B. & Hart, D.1997. Language Aptitude and Second Language Proficiency in Classroom Learners of Different Starting Ages[J]. Studies in Second Language Acquisition,19(3):379-400.
[36]Harley, B. & Hart, D. Age, Aptitude and Second Language Learning on a Bilingual Exchange[A]. In P. Robinson (ed.). Individual Differences and Instructed Language Learning[C]. Amsterdam/Philadelphia:John Benjamins,2002.
[37]Harris, B.1977. The Importance of Natural Translation [J]. Working Papers on Bilingualism,12(1):96-114.
[38]Harris, B. & Sherwood, B. Translating as an Innate Skill[A]. In D. Gerver & H. W. Sinaiko (eds.). Language Interpretation and Communication[C]. New York:Plenum, 1978.
[39]Hatim, B. & Mason, I.1997. The Translator as Communinicator[M]. London & New York:Routlege.
[40]Haxby, J. V., Ungerleider, L. G., Horwitz, B., Rapoport, S. I. & Grady, C. L.1995. Hemispheric Differences in Neurosystems for Face Working Memory:A PET-rCBR Study[J]. Human Brain Mapping, (3):68-32.
[41]Heaton, R. K. Wisconsin Card Sorting Test:Computer Version-2 Research Edition[M]. Odessa, FL:Psychological Assessment Resources,1993.
[42]Herbert, J.1952. The Interpreter's Handbook:How to Become a Conference Interpreter[M]. Geneva:Georg.
[43]Hermann, A. Interpreting in Antiquity[A]. In F. Pochhacker & M. Shlesinger (eds.). The Interpreting Studies Reader[C]. London & New York:Routledge,2002:15-22.
[44]Kalina. S.2001. Interpreting Competence as a Basis and a Goal for Teaching[J]. The Interpreter's Newsletter, (10):3-32.
[45]Karmiloff, S, A.2001. Beyond Modularity:A Developmental Perspective on Cognitive Science[M]. trans. by Miao Xiaochun. Shanghai:East China Normal University Press.
[46]Keiser, W. Selection and Training of Conference Interpreters[A]. In D. Gerver & H. W. Sinaiko (eds.). Language Interpretation and Communication[C]. New York:Plenum Press,1978:11-24.
[47]Kiraly, D. C.1995. Pathways to Translation:Pedagogy and Process[M]. Kent, Ohio: The Kent State University Press.
[48]Kiss, C. & Nikolov, M.2005. Developing, Piloting, and Validating an Instrument to Measure Young Learner's Aptitude[J]. Language Learning,55(1):99-150.
[49]Krashen, S. Aptitude and Attitude in Relation to Second Language Acquisition and Learning[A]. In K. C. Diller (ed.). Individual Differences and Universals in Language Learning Aptitude[C]. Rowley, MA:Newbury House,1981.
[50]Lambert, S.1991. Aptitude Testing for Simultaneous Interpretation at the University of Ottawa[J]. Meta,36(4):586-594.
[51]Lie, C. H., Specht, K., Marshall, J. C. & Fink, G. R.2006. Using fMRI to Decompose the Neural Processes Underlying Wisconsin Card Sorting Test[J]. Neurolmage,30(3): 1038-1049.
[52]Longley, P. The Use of Aptitude Testing in the Selection of Students for Conference Interpretation Training[A]. In L. Gran & J. Dodds (eds.). The Theoretical and Practical Aspects of Teaching Conference Interpretation[C]. Udine:Campanotto Editore,1984:105-108.
[53]Mayes, A. R.1988. Human Organic Memory Disorders[M]. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
[54]Neufeld, G.1979. Towards a Theory of Language Learning Ability[J]. Language Learning,29(2):227-241.
[55]Neubert, A. Competence in Language, and in Translation[A]. In C. Schaffner & B. Adab (eds.). Developing Translation Competence[C]. Amsterdm/Philadelphia:John Benjamins Publishing Company,2000:3-18.
[56]Nord, C.1991. Text Analysis in Translation[M]. Amsterdam:Rodopi.
[57]Nord, C.2001. Translating as a Purposeful Activity:Functionalist Approaches Explained[M]. Shanghai:Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
[58]Niska, H. Community Interpreter Training:Past, Present, Future[A]. In G. Garzone & M. Viezzi (eds.). Interpreting in the 21st Century[C]. Amsterdam/Philadelphia:Johan Benjamins,2002:133-144.
[59]Orozco, M. & Hurtado, A. A.2002. Measuring Translation Competence Acquisition[J]. Meta,47(3):375-402.
[60]Oxford, R. L. Anxiety and the Language Learner:New Insight[A]. In J. Arnold (ed.). Affect in Language Learning[C]. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1999.
[61]PACTE. Acquiring Translation Competence Hypotheses and Methodological Problems of a Research Project[A]. In A. Beeby, D. Ensinger & M. Presas (eds.). Investigating Translation:Selected Papers from the 4th International Congress on Translation, Barcelona,1998[C]. Amsterdam:John Benjamins,2000:99-106.
[62]PACTE.2002. Exploratory Tests in a Study of Translation Competence[J]. Conference Interpretation and Translation, (2):41-69.
[63]PACTE. Building a Translation Competence Model[A]. In F. Alves (ed.). Triangulating Translation.Perspectives in Process Oriented Research[C]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins,2003:43-66.
[64]PACTE.2005. Investigating Translation Competence:Conceptual and Methodological Issuess[J]. Meta,50(2):609-619.
[65]PACTE. First Results of a Translation Competence Experiment "Knowledge of Translation" and "Efficacy of Translation Process"[A]. In J. Kearns (ed.). Translator and Interpreter Training:Issues, Methods and Debates[C]. New York & London: Continuum International Publishing Group,2008:104-126.
[66]Parry, T. & Stanfield, C.1990. Language Aptitude Reconsidered[C]. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.:Prentice Hall.
[67]Petersen, S., Fox, P., Posner, M., Mintun, M. & Raichle, M.1988. Positron Emission Tomographic Studies of the Cortical Anatomy of Single-word Processing[J]. Nature, 331(6157):585-589.
[68]Peterson, C. & Al-Haik, A. R.1976. The Development of Defense Language Aptitude Battery[J]. Educational and Psychological Measurement,36(2):369-380.
[69]Pimsleur, P. et al.1966. Pimsleur Language Aptitude Battery:Manual[M]. Bethesda, MD:Second Language Testing, Inc..
[70]Pochhacker, F.2004. Introducing Interpreting Studies[M]. London and New York: Routledge.
[71]Pochhacker, F.2010. Introducing Interpreting Studies[M]. trans. by Zhong Weihe, et al. Beijing:Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
[72]Pym, A.2003. Redefining Translation Competence in an Electronic Age:In Defence of a Minimalist Approach[J]. Meta,48(4):481-497.
[73]Ranta, L. The Role of Learners' Language Analytic Ability in the Communicative Classroom[A]. In P. Robinson (ed.), Individual Differences and Instructed Language Learning[C]. Amsterdam/Philadelphia:John Benjamins,2002.
[74]Risberg, J. Development of High-resolution Two-dimentional Measurement of Regional Cerebral Blood Flow[A]. In J. Wade, S. Knezevik, V. Maximilian, Z. Mubrin, & I. Prohovnik (eds.). Impact of Functional Imaging in Neurology and Psychiatry[C]. London:Libbey,1987.
[75]Robinson, P.1996. Learning Simple and Complex Second Language under Implicit, Incidental, Rule-search and Instructed Conditions[J]. Studies in Second Language Acquisition,18(1):27-67.
[76]Robinson, P.2001. Individual Differences, Cognitive Abilities, Aptitude Complexes and Learning Conditions in Second Language Acquisition[J]. Second Language Research,17(4):368-392.
Robinson, P.2005. Aptitude and Second Language Acquisition[J]. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, (25):46-73.
[78]Rozan, J. F.1956. La Prise de Notes en Interpretation Consecutive (Note-taking in Consecutive Interpreting[M]. Geneve:George & Cie S. A., Librairie de l'Universite.
[79]Rubin, J. Learner Strategies:Theoretical Assumptions, Research History and Typology. In A. Wenden & J. Rubin (eds.). Learner Strategies and Language Learning[C]. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:Prentice Hall,1987.
[80]Sasaki, M.1996. Second Language Proficiency, Foreign Language Aptitude, and Intelligence:Quantitaive and Qualitative Analyses[M]. New York:Peter Lang.
[81]Schaiffner, C. & Adab, B.2000. Developing Translation Competence[M]. Amsterdam/Philadelphia:John Benjamins.
[82]Setton, R.1999. Simultaneous Interpretation:A Cognitive Pragmatic Analysis[M]. Amsterdam and Philadelphia:John Benjamins.
[83]Skehan, P. Cluster Analysis and the Identification of Learner Types [A]. In V. Cook (ed.). Experimental Approaches to Second Language Learner[C]. Oxford:Pergamon, 1986.
[84]Skehan, P.1989. Individual Differences in Second Language Acquisition[M]. London: Edward Arnold.
[85]Skehan, P.1998. Cognitive Approach to Language Learning[M]. Oxford:Oxford University Press.
[86]Sparks, R. L.1995. Examining the Linguistic Coding Differences Hypothesis to Explain Individual Differences in Foreign Language Learning[J]. Annals of Dyslexia, (45):187-214.
[87]Sparks, R.L. & Ganschow, L.2001. Aptitude for Learning a Foreign Language[J]. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics,21(1):90-111.
[88]Spolsky, B.1995. Prognostication and Language Aptitude Testing,1925-1962[J]. Language Testing,12(3):321-340.
[89]Sternberg, R. J.2006. Cognitive Psychology[M].3rd ed. Beijing:China Light Industry Press.
[90]Toury, G.1995. Descriptive Translation and Beyond[M]. Amsterdam:Benjamins.
[91]Ungerer, F. & Schmid, H. J.2001. An Introduction to Cognitive Linguistics[M]. Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
[92]Wesche, M. Language Aptitude Measures in Streaming, Matching Students with Methods, and Diagnosis of Learning Problems[A]. In K. C. Diller (ed.). Individual Differences and Universals in Language Learning Aptitude[C]. Rowley, MA: Newbury House,1981.
[93]Williams, M. & Burden, R. L.2000. Psychology for Language Teachers[M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
[94]Wilss, W. Perspectives and Limitations of a Didactic Framework for the Teaching of Translation [A]. In R. W. Brislin (ed.). Translation, Applications and Research[C]. New York:Gardner Press,1976:117-137.
[95]Wilss, W.2001. The Science of Translation:Problems and Methods[M]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
[96]艾森克,基恩.2009.认知心理学(第五版)[M].高定国,等,译.华东师范大学出版社.
[97]安德森.2012.认知心理学及其启示(第七版)[M].秦裕林,译.人民邮电出版社.
[98]百度百科 1.2013-12-26[2014-01-02]认知 能力 [EB/OL].http://baike.baidu.com/view/2193347.htm.
[99]百度百科 2.2013-12-26[2014-01-15]脑前额叶[EB/OL].http://baike.baidu.com/link?url=RIdVagZW-9rOJeKcjsZErQdX6MsYHVeIn_UEH XbId-CivETEwapc_iypFZLzmK4_ahQjMKUzgpzi60qRGRMmSq.
[100]百度百科 3.2013-12-26[2014-02-02] 科学研究[EB/OL].http://baike.baidu.com/link?url=JrrOKtJLQ71P3NnAb_tmx57pcmahZvQgHVBQft oqgGPWVMTNWGk3hjzGqSr5hLcY.
[101]鲍刚.1998.口译理论概述[M].旅游教育出版社.
[102]鲍刚.2011.口译理论概述[M].中国对外翻译出版有限公司.
[103]蔡小红.2003.论口译质量评估的信息单位[J].外国语(5)：75-80.
[104]蔡小红.2007.口译评估[M].中国对外翻译出版公司.
[105]蔡小红.2002.口译研究新探：新方法、新观念、新趋势[M].开益出版社.
[106]柴明熲.2007a.口译职业化带来的口译专业化[J].广东外语外贸大学学报(3)：12-15.
[107]柴明熲.2007b.口译与口译教学[J].中国翻译(1)：48-50.
[108]柴明熲.2008.《会议口译解析》导读[M].上海外语教育出版社.
[109]柴明熲.2010.对专业翻译教学构建的思考：现状、问题和对策[J].东方翻译(1)：15-18.
[110]柴明熲.2012.翻译硕士专业学位教育：一种较为宏观的思考—上外高翻综合改革专题理论文章(之一)[J].东方翻译(1)：8-11.
[111]陈菁.1997.口译教学应如何体现口译的特点[J].中国翻译(6)：26-29.
[112]陈琪.2013a.少数民族译员翻译能力构建[J].青海民族大学学报(社会科学版)(4)：148-151.
[113]陈琪.2013b.翻译能力要素探源[J].青海师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版)(2)：124-127.
[114]陈晓春.2001.口译的性质、特点和过程—兼论高校英语口译教学[J].集美大学学报(哲学社会科学版)(1)：101-105.
[115]陈小慰.2013.面向现实需求的翻译人才能力结构再思考[J].外语教学(1)：94-98.
[116]程跃珍.2010.从吉尔的口译模式看商务英语口译能力要素的构成[J].华北电力大学学报(社会科学版)(4)：110-114.
[117]戴惠萍,孙海琴.2010a.携手合作打造精品口译院校—访欧委会口译总司司长Marco Benedetti[J]东方翻译(2)：9-12.
[118]戴惠萍.2010b.甄选合格会议员的科学性和艺术性—由欧盟口译总司译员招聘考试引发的思考[J].东方翻译(5)：21-23.
[119]戴运财.2006.语言学能对二语习得的影响[J].外语教学与研究(6)：451-459.
[120]戴运财,蔡金亭.2008.二语习得中的语言学能研究：回顾、现状、思考与展望[J].外国语(5)：80-90.
[121]戴忠信,刘军.2005.论翻译能力的构成因素[J].金陵科技学院学报(社会科学版)(6)：78-82.
[122]邓园,丁国盛,彭聃龄.2003.左侧前额叶语言加工功能研究综述[J].心理科学(4)：687-689.
[123]丁锦红,张钦,郭春颜.2010.认知心理学[M].中国人民大学出版社.
[124]杜云辉.2000.论口译人员的综合素质[J].中国科技翻译(1)：55-57.
[125]范琳,杜国宁.2001.语言潜能及其对语言学习的影响[J].山东外语教学(1)：65-68.
[126]冯全功.2010.从认知视角试论翻译能力的构成[J].外语教学(6)：110-113.
[127]封世文,程国勤,赵汉青,等.2006.左脑前额叶与语言神经机制的功能影像学研究[J].临床和实验医学杂志(9)：1275-1276.
[128]冯忠良,伍新春,姚梅林,王健敏.2010.教育心理学[M].人民教育出版社.
[129]葛林,罗选民,董丽.2011.诺德翻译能力理论观照下的MTI培养模式研究[J].中国翻译(4)：31-36.
[130]古琦慧.2009a.口译课程模式的开发及应用—以培养译员能力为中心的模式[J].外语界(2)：33-39.
[131]古琦慧.2009b.口译课程发展刍议—译员能力的视角[J].山东外语教学(4)：109-112.
[132]桂诗春.2000.新编心理语言学[M].上海外语教学出版社.
[133]郭宇路,谭淑玲.2012.行动研究与口译能力培养[J].学术论坛(8)：228-232.
[134]韩明鲲,吕静.2013.音乐训练对改善儿童前额叶执行功能的作用[J].中国健康心理学杂志(4)：540-542.
[135]韩世辉,朱滢.2007.认知神经科学[M].广东高等教育出版社.
[136]赫伯特.1984.高级口译手册[M].张晨君,译.北京出版社.
[137]何其莘.2012.翻译硕士专业学位建设的三大难点—从综合改革试点单位中期验收谈起[J].东方翻译(1)：4-7.
[138]何淑华,静进.2003.WCST应用于ADHD的现状与展望[J].国外医学妇幼保健分册(6)：321-324.
[139]胡庚申.1990.近年我国口译研究综述[J].外语教学与研究(4)：1-6.
[140]胡庚申.1993.怎样学习当好译员[M].中国科学技术大学出版社.
[141]胡庚申.2000.中国口译研究又十年[J].中国科技翻译(2)：40-44.
[142]黄子东.1997.翻译能力与翻译教学[J].上海科技翻译(3)：26-31.
[143]姜秋霞,权晓辉.2002.翻译能力与翻译行为关系的理论假设[J].中国翻译(6)：11-15.
[144]季春梅.2005.威斯康星卡片分类测试在执行功能障碍研究中的应用[J].神经疾病与精神卫生(4)：322-324.
[145]卡罗尔.2004.语言心理学[M].缪小春,译.华东师范大学出版社.
[146]康志峰.2012.现代信息技术下口译多模态听焦虑探析[J].外语电化教学(3)：19-22.
[147]勒代雷.2010.论翻译学研究方法[J].刘和平,译.中国翻译(2)：11-18.
[148]李芳琴.1999.从口译的特点看口译教学[J].四川外语学院学报(3)：77-80.
[149]李福印.2008.认知语言学概论[M].北京大学出版社.
[150]李家春.2012.基于多元系统论的商务英语翻译能力培养体系构建[J].黑龙江教育(高教研究与评估)(1)：15-16.
[151]李逵六.1994.口译：理论与实践语言与交际[M].外语教学与研究出版社.
[152]李兰荣.2013.外语学能之语言分析能力试题的开发、测试与效度研究[J].山东外语教学(1)：68-74.
[153]李利,莫雷,陈卓铭,等.2007.前额叶在双语词汇通达中的抑制作用—对一例前额叶损伤双语病人的研究[J].心理科学(6)：1282-1286.
[154]李瑞林.2011.从翻译能力到译者素养：翻译教学的目标转向[J].中国翻译(1)：46-51.
[155]李学平,杨天祝.2000.前额叶工作记忆功能研究的实验依据[J].临床荟萃(15)：709-710.
[156]廉洁.2001Skehan著《语言学习认知法》评介[J].外语与外语教学(11)：63-64.
[157]连榕.2010.认知心理学[M].高等教育出版社.
[158]梁宁建.2003.当代认知心理学[M].上海教学出版社.
[159]林郁如,等.1999.新编英语口译教程(教师用书)[M].上海：外语教育出版社.
[160]刘刚.曾亚伟,李科,等.2004.语言优势半球及语言相关皮层区的功能性磁共振定位[J].实用放射学杂志(3)：196-198.
[161]刘和平.2001.口译理论与教学研究现状及展望[J].中国翻译(2)：17-18.
[162]刘和平.2003.职业口译新形式与口译教学[J].中国翻译(3)：32-36.
[163]刘和平.2005.口译理论与教学[M].中国对外翻译出版公司.
[164]刘和平.2007a.谈口译研究与专业口译培训[J].中国翻译(1)：54-56.
[165]刘和平.2007b.口译培训的定位与专业建设[J].广东外语外贸大学学报(3)： 8-11.
[166]刘和平.2008.再谈翻译教学体系的构建[J].中国翻译(3)：35-39.
[167]刘和平.2011.翻译能力发展的阶段性及其教学法研究[J].中国翻译(1)：37-45.
[168]刘和平,许明.2012.探究全球化时代的口译人才培养模式—第九届全国口译大会暨国际研讨会述评[J].中国翻译(5)：53-59.
[169]刘和平.2013.翻译教学模式：理论与应用[J].中国翻译(2)：50-55.
[170]刘健,段海鸿,汪永光,等.2010.学习障碍儿童工作记忆和执行功能特征分析[J].中国学校卫生(5)：554-555.
[171]刘骏,蒋楠.2006.中国学生外语学习能力倾向研究[J].中国外语(2)：63-68.
[172]刘宓庆.2003.口笔译理论研究[M].中国对外翻译出版公司.
[173]刘萍,王小川.2007.《翻译课程模式研究—以发展翻译能力为中心的方法》评介[J].外语与外语教学(2)：63-64.
[174]刘润清.1990.决定语言学习的几个因素[J].外语教学与研究(2)：36-45.
[175]刘润清.1999.外语教学中的科研方法[M].外语教学与研究出版社.
[176]刘涛,刘利民,邓隽.2005.语言学能倾向中语法敏感性测验指标的相关系数法研究[J].西南民族大学学报(人文社科版)(10)：286-289.
[177]刘哲宁.1999.Wisconsin卡片分类测试的临床运用[J].国外医学精神病学分册(1)：6-9.
[178]陆留弟.2000.口译者的基本素质及其培训[J].国外外语教学(4)：33-35.
[179]马冬梅.2005.外语学习能力的实质：认识与再认识—以二语习得研究为视角[J].西安外国语学院学报(6)：37-40.
[180]梅德明.2003.中级口译教程(第二版)[M].上海外语教育出版社.
[181]苗菊.2007.翻译能力研究—构建翻译教学的基础[J].外语与外语教学(4)：47-50.
[182]穆雷,郑敏慧.2006.翻译专业本科教学大纲设计探索[J].中国翻译(5)：3-7.
[183]穆雷,王斌华.2009.国内口译研究的发展及研究走向—基于30年期刊论文、著作和历届口译大会论文的分析[J].中国翻译(4)：19-25.
[184]慕媛媛,潘珺.2005.专业化道路：中国口译发展的新趋势—兼评国际口译大会暨第五届全国口译实践、教学与研究会议[J].中国翻译(3)：38-41.
[185]黎难秋.2002.中国口译史[M].青岛出版社.
[186]潘能.1994.英语口译—理论、技巧与实践[M].西安交通大学出版社.
[187]皮亚杰.1995.认识发生论原理[M].王宪钿,等,译.北京商务印书馆.
[188]钱春花.2010.交互性教学对学习者翻译能力的驱动[J].外语界(2)：19-24.
[189]钱春花.2011a.基于扎根理论的译者翻译能力体系研究[J].外语与外语教学(6)：65-69.
[190]钱春花,李冠杰.2011b.翻译能力体系构建及培养途径分析[J].煤炭高等教育(6)：123-125.
[191]钱春花.2012.翻译能力构成要素及其驱动关系分析[J].外语界(3)：59-65.
[192]秦晓晴.2003.外语教学研究中的定量数据分析[M].华中科技大学出版社.
[193]秦晓晴.2009.外语教学问卷调查法[M].外语教学与研究出版社.
[194]任大玲.2013.翻译教学与翻译技术并重的项目型翻译能力培养课程模式[J].外语电化教学(5)：42-48.
[195]任文.2012.全球化时代口译—第八届全国口译大会暨国际研讨会论文集[C].外语教学与研究出版社.
[196]塞莱丝科维奇.1979.口译技巧[M].孙慧双,译.北京出版社.
[197]塞莱斯科维奇,勒代雷.1990.口译理论实践与教学[M].汪家荣,等,译.旅游教育出版社.
[198]塞莱斯科维奇.1992.口译技艺：即席口译与同声传译经验谈[M].黄为忻,钱慧杰,译.上海翻译出版公司.
[199]塞莱斯科维奇,勒德雷尔.1992.口笔译概论[M].孙慧双,译.北京语言学院出版社.
[200]塞莱斯科维奇,勒代雷.2007.口译训练指南[M].闫素伟,邵炜,译.中国对外翻译出版公司.
[201]盛腊萍.2012.译员能力内涵与口译教学研究[J].安徽工业大学学报(社会科学版)(5)：105-107.
[202]石毓智.2008.认知能力与语言学理论[M].学林出版社.
[203]舒畅,王高华,王惠玲,等.2004.WCST操作时脑活动模式的初步研究[J].中国神经精神疾病杂志(3)：223-225.
[204]司马贺.1986.人类的认知—思维的信息加工理论[M].棘其诚,张厚粲,译.北京：科学出版社.
[205]苏伟.2011a.本科阶段口译能力发展途径研究—一项基于部分翻译本科专业试点院校的实证研究[D].上海外国语大学.
[206]苏伟.2011b.以过程为导向的口译职业能力评估研究[J].上海翻译(3)：47-51.
[207]索尔所,麦克林.2008.认知心理学(第七版)[M].邵志芳,李林,徐媛,等,译.上海人民出版社.
[208]同文译馆.2013[2014-05-18].2013MTI院校招生简章[EB/OL].http://www.oktranslation.com/mti/mti-zsjz.aspx?page=1.
[209]塔沙克里,特德莱.2010.混合方法论：定性方法和定量方法的结合[M].唐海华,译.重庆大学出版社.
[210]仝亚辉.2010.PACTE翻译能力模式研究[J].解放军外国语学院学报(9)：88-93.
[211]瓦兹沃斯.1989.皮亚杰的认知和情感发展理论[M].徐梦秋,沈明明,译.厦门大学出版社.
[212]王斌华.2007a.“口译能力”评估和“译员评估”—口译的客观评估模式初探[J].外语界(3)：44-50.
[213]王斌华.2007b.口译能力的评估模式及测试设计再探—以全国英语口译大赛为例[J].外语界(1)：66-71.
[214]王斌华.2008.口译研究的路径与方法—回顾与前瞻[J].中国外语(2)：85-90.
[215]王斌华,叶亮.2009.面向教学的口译语料库建设：理论与实践[J].外语界(2)：23-32.
[216]王斌华.2012a.语料库口译研究—口译产品研究方法突破[J].中国外语(3)：94-100.
[217]王斌华.2012b.从口译标准到口译规范：口译评估模式构建的探索[J].上海翻译(3)：49-54.
[218]王斌华.2012c.从口译能力到译员能力：专业口译教学理念的拓展[J].外语与外语教学(6)：75-78.
[219]王传英.2012.从“自然译者”到PACTE模型：西方翻译能力研究管窥[J].中国科技翻译(4)：32-35.
[220]王恩冕.2007.进入21世纪的高质量口译—第六届全国口译大会暨国际研讨会论文集[C].外语教学与研究出版社.
[221]王金波,王燕.2006.口译的特点与口译教材：问题与前景[J].外语界(5)：41-47.
[222]王魁,汪安胜.2011.认知心理学(重排版)[M].北京大学出版社.
[223]王凌,王文宇,周丹丹.2011.2011年度全国英语专业八级口语与口译考试情况总结与分析[J].外语测试与教学(2)：47-55.
[224]王树槐,王若维.2008.翻译能力的构成因素和发展层次研究[J].外语研究(5)：80-88.
[225]王伟忠,陈康宁,高晋华,等.2003.前额叶右颞叶损害对策略转换能力监控能力影响的研究[J].第三军医大学学报(12)：1095-1097.
[226]王文宇,周丹丹,王凌.2010对英语专业高年级学生口译能力的调查—兼谈口译教学[J].外语教学(9)：71-75.
[227]王湘玲、汤伟、王志敏.西方翻译能力研究：回眸与前瞻[J].湖南大学学报(社会科学版),2008(2)：103-106.
[228]王寅.2006.认知语言学[M].上海外语教育出版社.
[229]王晓农.2009.论翻译专业能力与外语专业翻译教学[J].唐山师范学院学报(1)：157-160.
[230]魏景汉,阎克乐,等.2008.认知神经科学基础[M].人民教育出版社.
[231]文军.2004.论翻译能力及其培养[J].上海科技翻译(3)：1-5.
[232]文军.2004.论以发展翻译能力为中心的课程模式[J].外语与外语教学(8)：49-52.
[233]文军.2005.翻译课程模式研究—以发展翻译能力为中心的方法[M].北京：北京文史出版社.
[234]文军,李红霞.2010.以翻译能力为中心的翻译专业本科课程设置研究[J].外语界(2)：2-7.
[235]文秋芳.2001.应用语言学研究方法与论文写作[M].外语教学与研究出版社.
[236]文秋芳,王立非.2003.英语学习策略实证研究[M].西安：陕西师范大学出版社.
[237]文秋芳,王凌.2009.英语专业四级口试的效度研究[J].解放军外国语学院学报(5)：37-41.
[238]文秋芳,王文宇,周丹丹,王艳.2005.全国英语专业八级口试体系的研究与实施[J].外语界(5)：53-58.
[239]文秋芳,吴克明,王文宇,任裕海.2002.全国英语专业八级口试的可行性研究 [J].外语界(4)：67-73.
[240]文秋芳,赵学熙.1995.英语专业四级口试的可行性研究[J].外语界(1)：30-36.
[241]文秋芳,赵学熙.1998.全国英语四级录音口试评分的时间与研究[J].解放军外语学院学报(3)：52-54.
[242]温植胜.2005.对外语学能研究的重新思考[J].现代外语(4)：383-392.
[243]温植胜.2007.外语学能研究的新趋势[J].华南师范大学学报(社会科学版)(1)：148-150.
[244]邬姝丽.2010.高校英语专业口译能力评估及其对口译教学的启示[J].中国翻译(4)：37-39.
[245]吴一安,刘润清,P.Jeffrey.1993.中国英语本科学生素质调查报告[J].外语教学与研究(1)：36-46.
[246]席春华,汪凯,牛朝诗,等.2006.前额叶损伤患者的社会认知障碍[J].中华神经科杂志(10)：651-654.
[247]夏慧言.2011.汉语语境下的外语学能测试研究及效度验证[J].山东外语教学(5)：52-55.
[248]肖维青.2012.多元素翻译能力模式与翻译测试的构念[J].外语教学(1)：109-112.
[249]肖晓燕.2002a.西方口译研究：历史与现状[J].外国语(4)：71-76.
[250]肖晓燕.2002b.口译教学中交际能力训练[A].蔡小红主编.口译研究新探—新方法、新观念、新趋势[C].开益出版社.
[251]邢家伟.2010.认知能力与口译能力关系探究[J].沈阳师范大学学报(社会科学版)(4)：86-88.
[252]刑家伟.2011.认知理论在口译人才培养中的应用价值[J].沈阳农业大学学报(社会科学版)(3)：219-221.
[253]许明.2007.口译认知研究的心理学基础[J].天津外国语学院学报(6)：69-73.
[254]许明.2012.跨学科视野下的口译能力研究[A].任文.全球化时代的口译—第八届全国口译大会暨国际研讨会论文集[C].外语教学与研究出版社：80-91.
[255]杨承淑.2005.口译教学研究：理论与实践[M].中国对外翻译出版公司.
[256]杨恩堂,姚秀清.1993.英语口译技巧[M].青岛出版社.
[257]杨炯炯,翁旭初.1999.前额叶在记忆中的作用—脑功能成像研究进展[J].心 理科学进展(2)：13-18.
[258]杨松岩.2003.翻译能力的培养与翻译教学[J].辽宁师范大学学报(社会科学版)(3)：62-64.
[259]杨玮斌.2012.论口译实践的三个要素[J].上海翻译(2)：51-55.
[260]杨晓荣.2002.汉译英能力解析[J].中国翻译(6)：16-19.
[261]杨志红,王克非.2010.翻译能力及其研究[J].外语教学(6)：91-95.
[262]张爱玲.2012.专业口译人才培养体系探索—上外高翻综合改革专题理论文章(之二)[J].东方翻译(1)：12-16.
[263]张梅.2011.翻译能力的研究及其培养[J].四川教育学院学报(2)：69-72.
[264]张睿,刘艾云.2010.科技人才口译能力培养模式研究[J].科技人才口译能力培养模式研究(8)：73-75.
[265]张威.2011.口译认知研究：同声传译与工作记忆的关系[M].外语教学与研究出版社.
[266]张维为.1999.英汉同声传译[M].中国对外翻译出版公司.
[267]张文,韩常慧.2006.口译理论研究[M].科学出版社.
[268]钟毅平,叶茂林.2010.认知心理学高级教程[J].安徽人民出版社.
[269]钟守满,雷雪莲.2009.以市场为导向,侧重翻译能力的培养[J].外语与外语教学(2)：35-41.
[270]仲伟合.2003.译员的知识结构与口译课程设置[J].中国翻译(4)：63-65.
[271]仲伟合.2007a.口译课程设置与口译教学原则[M].中国翻译(1)：52-53.
[272]仲伟合.2007b.专业口译教学的原则与方法[J].广东外语外贸大学学报(3)：5-7.
[273]仲伟合.2008.翻译专业人才培养模式探索与实践[J].中国外语(6)：4-8.
[274]仲伟合、王斌华.2010.口译研究的“名”与“实”—口译研究的学科理论构建之—[J].中国翻译(5)：7-12.
[275]仲伟合、王斌华.2010.口译研究方法论—口译研究的学科理论构建之二[J].中国翻译(6)：18-24.
[276]仲伟合.2010.口译在中国：新趋势与新挑战—第七届全国口译大会暨国际研讨会论文集[C].外语教学与研究出版社.
[277]仲伟合等.2012.口译研究方法论[M].外语教学与研究出版社.
[278]周兆祥,陈育沾.1988.口译的理论与实践[M].商务印书馆.
[279]朱玉彬.2008.以教学为取向的翻译能力探讨[J].外语研究(3)：71-76.