Pedagogical Report㻌 㻌 㻌 㻌 㻌 㻌 㻌 㻌 㻌 㻌 㻌 㻌 㻌 㻌 㻌 㻌 㻌 㻌 㻌 㻌 㻌 㻌 㻌 㻌 㻌 㻌 㻌 㻌 㻌 㻌 㻌 㻌㻌 㻌 㻌 㻌 㻌 JAITS䢢

The Consecutive Interpreting Approach and Its Effects
on L2 Written Reproduction
IIZUKA Hideki1(Jichi Medical University)
In 2009, the new Course of Study for senior high schools was announced by the MEXT for
implementation in April 2013. It declares that English classes should be conducted in English byintegrating four key linguistic areas. The aim of the present study was to examine how verbal
practices based on the Consecutive Interpreting Approach, the basis of which is comprised of
shadowing and reproduction, had an effect on L2 written reproduction. The approach was usedwith 105 students for 14 weeks. Written reproduction activities and their results were then examined.
A quantitative analysis revealed that 96 students succeeded in accurately writing out 82.33% of thetext consisting of 167 words. Also, the mean value for class satisfaction reached 3.80 out of 4.00.
The suggestions made within this study should therefore assist in developing a new instruction
method that conforms to the new Course of Study.
1. Introduction
In March 2009, the new Course of Study for Senior High Schools (the MEXT: Ministry of
Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology, 2009) was announced. High school English
classes were revised as shown in Table 1 below.
Table 1. English classes for senior high schools

After revision

Before revision
English I

Basic English Communication

English II

English Communication I

Oral Communication I

English Communication II

Oral Communication II

English Communication III

Reading

English Expression I

Writing

English Expression II
English ConversationIIZUKA, Hideki, “The Consecutive Interpreting Approach and Its Effects on L2 Written Reproduction,”Interpreting and Translation Studies, No.14, 2014. Pages 259-276. © by the Japan Association forInterpreting and Translation Studies

259
259

ࠗ㏻ヂ⩻ヂ◊✲࠘14 ྕ 2014 

The common objective of the new curriculum is to “nurture the ability to understand abstract
contents for a wide range of topics and the ability to fluently communicate with English speaking
persons”, while requiring the integrated teaching of the four key linguistic areas, namely listening,speaking, reading and writing. Furthermore, one concrete measure in the Course of Study is to“conduct English classes in English with high-level linguistic activities,” thus further emphasizing
the development of practical communication skills. This new Course of Study came into effectfrom the 2013 academic year. For these reasons, the development of an instruction method thatincorporates the aforementioned changes is a pressing issue for English education in Japan.
Iizuka (2009) sought ideas for developing an instruction method in “professional interpreter
training,” which specializes in communication between different cultures. By integrating methods
whose results were recognized in previous studies, Iizuka developed an instruction method called
the Consecutive Interpreting Approach and then examined its practical application (Iizuka, 2010,2011). Originally, this approach aimed to develop the verbal communication skills that stressedprosody. However, when written reproduction activities were included to analyze Interlanguage(IL) data, many students were able to accurately write out much of the text, which suggests that thisapproach could likely be expanded into writing instruction as well.
Accordingly, the main topic treated in this study was how oral practice that stresses prosody
influenced written reproduction activities. The paper first provides an overall picture of theConsecutive Interpreting Approach along with its theoretical background. The written reproduction
activities and their results based on this approach are then examined. Finally, language areas thatare difficult to resolve in speaking-centered learning approaches are identified through IL analysis,
and measures to improve them are investigated. Normally, speaking is the focus of oral
communication or conversation classes, while writing is the basis of writing-activity classes.
However, this research breaks away from this type of instruction method by integrating listening
and reading (as input) with speaking and writing (as output). It then considers an instruction
method that conforms to the new Course of Study.
2. Theoretical Background of the Consecutive Interpreting Approach
The Consecutive Interpreting Approach is a prosody-oriented instruction method developed forstudents in an English as a Foreign Language (EFL) environment to nurture the basis for verbal
communication skills. First, the author discusses the theoretical background of the approach toclarify what this method attempts to produce.
2.1 Prosody
Prosody is a general term used to explain sound in language, and it includes accents, intonation,
pauses between sense-groups, sentence stress, concatenation, reduction of sounds, and absorption(Someya, 1996). Prosody accounts for approximately 30 to 40% of meaning transmission in natural
260
260

The Consecutive Interpreting Approach and Its Effects on L2 Written Reproduction

communication (ibid.).
Each language has its own prosody. English tends to have a constant interval from onestrong vowel to the next, regardless of the number of intervening weak vowels (Saito, 2008). Thisis called isochronism, and it is an important element that characterizes English prosody. An
example of isochronism is provided in Table 2.
Table 2. An example of isochronism

Students

watch

movies.

ƔƔƔThe students

are watchinga movie.

ƔƔƔThe students

have been watchinga movie.

ƔƔƔƔ sections are read at equal intervals.

On the other hand, Japanese is a language where rhythm is kept using moras (Saito, 2008),
which combine a consonant and vowel into a single unit. Accordingly, if English is pronouncedwith Japanese prosody, isochronism is destroyed, introducing sounds not recognized by native
English speakers. These prosody differences between languages also have an effect on listening. If
a listener cannot acquire the prosody inherent to English, he or she cannot recognize the weak
vowels buried between strong vowels, and thus cannot accurately grasp the meaning.
Murao (2006) used gating method to reveal that native English speakers are immensely
dependent on prosodic information to understand spoken English. Furthermore, in the case ofJapanese students of English, she also clarified that the lower the students’ proficiency, the less theyuse prosodic information when decoding the meaning of spoken English.
Currently, the high school English textbooks authorized by the MEXT do not include audio
CDs. It is thus not surprising that students who are forced to learn English in such a learning
environment are not able to sufficiently acquire prosody. However, as the research above shows,
prosody plays an important role in recognizing and transmitting spoken language. If Japanese
students do not undergo a process of directly experiencing prosody, their English proficiency will
not improve. This beckons the question as to what kinds of methods exist as means to obtainprosody.
2.2 Shadowing
To make non-native speakers more aware of prosodic information, Someya (op. cit.) stated that thefaithful imitation of the original sounds through shadowing leads to an awareness of language
rhythm and phonetic differences. Consequently, this nurtures a prosodic sense, which in turn
261
261

ࠗ㏻ヂ⩻ヂ◊✲࠘14 ྕ 2014 

provides a foundation for listening skills.
There are two types of shadowing: prosody and content. The former focuses on the soundand the latter on content. Suzuki (2007) compared the results of a listening test between two
shadowing groups: one with prior textual knowledge of the text to be shadowed, and the other one
without such knowledge. Only the latter group showed a clear improvement in their listening skills
after shadowing.
On this issue, Tamai (2002) stated from his study that the equation of “shadowing technique= listening skills” does not appear to be a workable formula, since the correlation between the two
is low: shadowing is a product of phonological analysis while a listening test involves bothphonological analysis and meaning comprehension. To understand spoken conversation, we do not
simply engage in surface-level sound construction analysis using technical sound processing(bottom-up processing); our background knowledge is also used to carry out knowledge-based
processing (top-down processing). Only a combination of both processes will lead to an
improvement in listening skills. As to why a significant improvement was recognized for the lattergroup (a group working with an unfamiliar text) in Suzuki’s research, she considers that thestudents practiced shadowing while guessing what the spoken content should be, thus stimulating a
top-down process. In other words, prosody and content shadowing should be used in tandem toinduce an improvement in listening skills.
Regarding the influence of shadowing on speaking skills, it is clear from Someya’s findingsthat prosody obtained through shadowing aids in 30 to 40% of speech output. However, shadowing
still lacks a crucial element as a method for further improving verbal communication skills. Simply
repeating a sound after hearing it does not go beyond imitation, as students lack a sense oftransmitting their own opinion. In other words, seen from a wider context, shadowing must beclassified as an activity that tends toward input.
Krashen (1985) noted that in L1 acquisition, there are many cases of infants who are unable
to speak going on to use perfect sentences once they begin speaking, suggesting that thecomprehending input is an important mechanism for language acquisition and affirming the input
hypothesis. Similar cases were observed not only in L1 acquisition but in L2 acquisition as well,and there are many reports of children who went to live overseas when a parent relocated for
professional reasons and who passed through a silent period only to suddenly begin speaking(Shirai, 2008). These cases suggest that output is not essential in language acquisition. On the other
hand, after observing children placed in immersion programs in Canada, Swain (1985, 1988) noted
many grammatical errors when the children spoke regardless of the amount of input that they had.
She therefore advocated the output hypothesis. By producing their own utterances, students canbecome aware of the various aspects of language, such as syntactic structures; furthermore, theylearn to correct themselves. Without this type of metalinguistic awareness, automatic language
output is not achieved. With this in mind, the author examines the type of activities that focus on
262
262

The Consecutive Interpreting Approach and Its Effects on L2 Written Reproduction

output, which may be sought in literature related to reproduction.
2.3 Reproduction
Foreign language output requires the simultaneous processing of several types of information,
which represents a considerable cognitive burden. Therefore, if the work demands exceeded
students’ abilities, there would be a high risk of the task ending in failure if the students did notreceive some kind of assistance. One approach that may prove effective is reproducing thesentences of a text that students have already read or listened to. For instance, Maeda (2008) and
Ikenabe (2004) promoted students’ output by having them reproduce texts using keywords as asupport. Both experiments resulted in an increase in English-language production as well as an
improvement in grammatical knowledge. However, as both experiments focused on writing, eventhough an increase in output ability was achieved, no improvement was observed in students’ oral
communication skills.
Taking into account the results of these prior studies, the author integrated shadowing andreproduction, to create the Consecutive Interpreting Approach, which focuses on both verbal input
and output.
2.4 A new approach – the Consecutive Interpreting Approach
In consecutive interpreting, the interpreter listens to the speaker while taking notes, and when the
speaker pauses, the interpreter renders a portion of the message in the target language (TL) basedon the notes taken. In the Consecutive Interpreting Approach, a part of this pattern is altered, as
students reproduce the TL in their own English. Figure 1 shows the order of activities used in thisapproach. Each step is summarized as follows.
Step I (Target Language). The TL is an audio recording from the textbook.
Step II (Listening and Shadowing). Students shadow an unknown text with no printed referencematerial to look at. This corresponds to the content shadowing. If the text is too difficult to shadow,
students carry out listening and shadowing alternately.
Step III (TL Analysis). The words and grammar used in the TL text are explained to help students
understand the content.
Step IV (Parallel Reading and Shadowing). Once the content has been understood, students
alternately carry out a parallel reading with the text, and then prosody and content shadowing bylistening to the audio soundtrack alone.
Step V (Listening and Note-taking). Students take notes while listening, writing down keywords
necessary for reproduction. If the work demands exceed students’ abilities, an instructor helps
students create these notes.
Step VI (Oral Reproduction both in L1 and L2). Students reproduce the text orally in both L1263
263

ࠗ㏻ヂ⩻ヂ◊✲࠘14 ྕ 2014 (Japanese) and L2 (English) while looking at their notes from Step V.
Step VII (Written Reproduction in L2). Once the contents can be replicated orally in L2 (in Step
VI), students are asked to write out what they are able to reproduce orally in English while referringto the keywords.
Step VIII (Comparison between TL and IL via Parallel Reading). Students carry out a parallel
reading while referring to their written reproduction (from Step VII), therefore enabling them toidentify any differences between the correct TL prosody and the mistakes made in their written
reproduction.

3. Method
3.1 Purpose of the present study
This study was motivated by the research described in Iizuka and Nagahashi (2013). The original
experiment was replicated because its conclusions were difficult to generalize, as (a) the
participants were all students at the same upper secondary school, (b) the number of students wasvery small: 39 and 36 students in the 1st and 3rd year, respectively, and (c) the research was carriedout in a language laboratory. Therefore, the present study investigated the following three researchquestions (RQs):(1) Will the instructional approach bring about the same effects regarding students’ written
reproduction as in the previous research?
(2) Will the approach work in a large university English class with approximately 100 students?
(3) Will the approach function in a normal classroom without the L.L. equipment used in the
264
264

The Consecutive Interpreting Approach and Its Effects on L2 Written Reproduction

previous research?
3.2 Participants
Our institute accepts 105 students annually. As a requirement for graduation, students must choose
at least one foreign language class from among English, Spanish, and Chinese. These language
classes are open to first- and second-year students, and this year all the first-year students took theEnglish class known as “Basic English”. This is held once a week, 14 times during the firstsemester. We also provide medical English classes called “Medical English Communication” and“Medical English” as electives. This experiment was implemented in the Basic English class with
105 enrolled students.
3.3 Assessment of students’ language ability
Prior to this study, the overall language ability of the 105 subjects was assessed using a Test ofEnglish for International Communication (TOEIC) practice test. A sample of items (28 listening
and 25 reading questions) was used to make a shorter version of the test, without changing the test
format.
The listening test results are shown in Table 3. The mean score for the 28 questions (1 point
per question) was 14.50, giving a correct response rate of 51.79%. Similarly, the reading test resultsin Table 4 reveal an average of 9.39 points for 25 questions (1 point per question), giving an
average correct response rate of 37.56%. The overall correct response rate for listening and reading
test combined was 44.68%, which approximates to a TOEIC score of 442 points out of 990. Taking
into account the 2011 national average TOEIC IP score of 447 (IIBC, 2012), the subjects’ English
proficiency would be considered just about the same as that of the average university students inJapan.
Table 3. Listening test results

N

Min

Max

Mean

SD

101

7

23

14.50

3.74

Results from 28 questions

Table 4. Reading test results

N

Min

Max

Mean

SD

103

2

16

9.39

2.85

Results from 25 questions

3.4 Procedures followed in each class
The Consecutive Interpreting Approach was used over a period of 14 weeks (once per week) with
265265ࠗ㏻ヂ⩻ヂ◊✲࠘14 ྕ 2014 

the first two lessons assigned to clarify how the instruction method works by explaining its
theoretical background.
With every new chapter in the textbook, the lesson began with Step III (TL Analysis), in
which the texts were explained so that students fully understood the contents, including new words,
their pronunciation, and the grammar used in the passages. This step was crucial because it formed
the basis for the following activities.
Next, students engaged in Step IV (Parallel Reading and Shadowing). The audio recording
was played, and the students were instructed to do both parallel reading and shadowing. This was
repeated several times until the students were able to precisely mimic the voice patterns withoutlooking at the textbook.
Many of the students found Step V (Listening and Note-taking) too challenging and wereunable to produce effective notes for reproduction. After several failed attempts, the author decided
to create notes for them. Table 5 provides an example of the text along with the corresponding
notes.
Table 5. An example of the text and its corresponding notes
1. Hi, Toshi. Long time no see. How is everything going?
2. Hi, Amy. I’ve been here just over a month now but I still feel confused about some things.
3. Like what? Maybe I can help answer your questions.
4. Well, my sociology professor wants me to write a paper in APA style and I’m not sure whatthat means.
1.

2.

3.

4.

H, T.

H, A.

౛㸽

M ♫ prof

ஂ


࡝࠺㸽

ĺ ࡇࡇ

ḧ



࠿ࡶ

  jt Ĺ1 ᭶ ຓ   me ᭩ ppbt ᮍ

   ⟅in APA ឤᅔ    yQs

  s. ths

& ×ศ
 ఱព

These notes were shown as a PowerPoint (PPT) slide on the screen, and the explanation of which
letter corresponds to which part of the text was provided.
Step VI (Oral Reproduction both in L1 and L2) was the main activity of the class. Oralreproduction training was carried out for the entire class as they looked at the PPT slide. First, theauthor demonstrated reproducing the text in L2, sentence by sentence, and then had students repeat
it. After all of the students were correctly able to repeat the text in L2, they worked in pairs,
verbally reproducing the English alternately. From time to time, the author asked some of thestudents to perform their oral reproduction in front of the class.
266
266

The Consecutive Interpreting Approach and Its Effects on L2 Written Reproduction

As it would be unreasonable to expect an improvement in students’ verbal skills after only
14 lessons, an assignment was given each week throughout the entire semester. The students were
instructed to come to each class, fully prepared for Step VI (Oral Reproduction both in L1 and L2).
In addition, the students were expected to practice Step VII (Written reproduction in L2), Step VIII
(Comparison between TL and IL via Parallel Reading), and Step II (Listening and Shadowing) as
preparation for the next lesson. Thus, the subsequent classes began with Step VI, after which theentire procedure detailed above was repeated while the class progressed with the textbook. The
students were assessed based on their performances in Steps VI and VII with the author examining
the extent and accuracy of students’ reproductions. With students’ permission, Step VI was video
recorded in Medical English Communication class using this approach, and uploaded on YouTube
at: http://youtu.be/ZdPhl5RUqbI.
3.5 Data collection
After implementing the approach in 12 lessons, a new TL passage and its mp3 sound file were
distributed to class to investigate the effects on writing using this approach. The passage and its
corresponding notes used in the data collection are included as Appendix 1. Students were expected
to come to the class with preparation for Step VI (Oral reproduction both in L1 and L2)
presentation. Then, in class, Step VII (Written reproduction in L2) was carried out instead, to assess
how the oral practice influences their writing skills. A worksheet (Appendix 2) for Step VII was
given to students and they were instructed to write down what they were able to reproduce orally
by looking at the keywords. In order to grasp their overall reproduction rates and to extract their IL
trends, the author devised an evaluation sheet that is included as Appendix 3.
As shown in the evaluation sheet, the students’ written reproductions were verified against
the TL and they were scored on four evaluation criteria: (۵) the number of perfectly matchingwords (perfect match), (ᇞ) the number of typos or spelling mistakes, (×) the number of irrelevant
words, ( ? ) the number of words that students cannot evaluate by themselves.
In addition, an optional survey, a part of our Faculty Development initiative, was distributed
to review this instructional approach from the students’ perspectives.
4. Results
4.1 Reproduction
Table 6 is the descriptive statistics for the perfect match reproduction rates that are extracted from
Step VII (Written reproduction in L2). Overall, the students proactively wrote out the English text
with the mean value reaching 82.33%, meaning that 96 students in the class understood much of thecontent learned and succeeded in reproducing 82.33% of the text perfectly.

267
267

ࠗ㏻ヂ⩻ヂ◊✲࠘14 ྕ 2014 

Table 6. Perfect match reproduction rates

N

Min

Max

Mean

SD

96

11.40

100.0082.33%

21.17

Figure 2 shows the perfect match reproduction rate and the number of words contained per
sentence. As observed in Figure 2, the reproduction rate displayed a decreasing trend, especiallyafter sentence 5 where a total number of words exceeded 80. Still, they managed to reproduce over
75% of the words precisely even after sentence 6.
95
90

89.3

91.0

30

89.6
86.5

85

25

84.3

20

77.2

80

79.0
75.9

77.6

15

75

10

70

5

65

11

16

10

18

27

27

17

17

24

Number of words
Reproduction Rates

0

Figure 2. The perfect match reproduction rate and the number of words contained per sentence

4.2 Survey results
The survey used a 4-point scale, where: 4 = very true, 3 = true, 2 = somewhat true, and 1 = not true.
Table 7 presents the evaluation items along with the statistical analysis of the responses. As
observed in the Table, the overall mean value reached 3.80 out of 4.00. Figure 4 is a radar chart
based on the mean scores for this survey. The students’ comments regarding how they perceived
this approach are also listed in Appendix 4; these comments are translated into English in section
5.2 below.
Table 7. Evaluation items and their statistical analysis

N

Min

Max

Mean

SD

94

2.00

4.00

3.77

.45

94

2.00

4.00

3.79

.44

Item 3. The voice of the instructor was clear.

94

2.00

4.00

3.83

.41

Item 4. The lesson raised my motivation and interest.

94

2.00

4.00

3.81

.45

Item 1. The gist of the lesson was easy to understand.
Item 2. The textbook and teaching materials were easy tofollow.

268
268

The Consecutive Interpreting Approach and Its Effects on L2 Written Reproduction

Item 4Item 1
4.00
3.80
3.60
3.40
3.20
3.00

Item 2Item 3Figure 4. Mean score radar chart for the survey

5. Discussion
5.1 Reproduction
Initially, the author had expected that the students would produce different varieties of English in
Step VII (Written reproduction in L2), but in reality, after practicing shadowing and reproduction
numerous times, the English they wrote out became almost identical to the TL, which resulted in
the high ratio of perfect match reproduction rates. However, this should not be regarded as anegative effect because, regardless of the fact that their reproduced English being almost the sameas the TL, students are accumulating phonetic or syntactic items orally through this approach andthis should serve as the foundation for verbal communication skills.
One note of caution lies in the sharp drop observed in sentence 6 reproduction rate as
indicated in Figure 3. In order to investigate its causes, the students’ IL has to be analyzed. The
sentence is comprised of 27 words and is among the longest in the TL. Table 8 presents samples oftypos or spelling mistakes (ᇞ), irrelevant words (×), and words that students cannot evaluate bythemselves ( ? ). They are extracted from the evaluation sheet (Appendix 3).
Table 8. Samples of students’ ILs in sentence 6

Typos or spelling mistakes (ᇞ)

Irrelevant words (×)

Words impossible to evaluate(?)

remote ĺ remort

my parents separated

a handful of times ĺ timeĺ my parents was separated

intimidating ĺ imtimding /ĺ my parents is seprating

imtiminga handful of times
ĺ a piece of time

269
269

After the age of fiveĺ after at the age of five
I saw him ĺ I met him
when I did ĺ when at the timea handful of times

ࠗ㏻ヂ⩻ヂ◊✲࠘14 ྕ 2014 

intimidating
intimirated
handful ĺ hundfullĺ a handful piece of timeĺ a handful times

ĺ a only handful of times

ĺ a handful of the times

after the age of fivemy parents ĺ parent,ĺ after the age of time

pearent

When my parents separated
ĺ when my parents
separating

separated ĺ sepalated
From this qualitative point of view, it is noted that reproduction was difficult for words with
spelling characteristics that differed from the phonological habits of the mother tongue such as‘separated’ and ‘remote,’ or for a word like ‘intimidating’ that consists of more than four syllables.
With the exception of students confusing some content words and writing them out incorrectly,
most of these errors involved with function words and local expressions, so the results did not
impair an overall understanding of meaning. It should be noted that the same IL trends wereobserved in the prior research; thus, the language items should be identified as ones that are
difficult for EFL students to learn.
Furthermore, attention should be given to the number of words treated in each session. As
displayed in Figure 2, a decrease was observed in the reproduction rate when the number of words
exceeded 80. Adjusting the amount of TL in view of the proficiency of students and promoting
satisfactory performance through splitting up the content into several parts may contribute tosustaining students’ drive to learn. Given the results of both the prior and current studies, the ideal
number of words treated with this instructional approach should be about 80 to 100, which can be
adjusted according to students’ proficiency levels.
5.2 Survey
As observed in Table 7, the overall mean value reached 3.80 out of 4.00, which indicates that the
majority of students felt quite positively about the instruction method based on this approach.
Below are some of the encouraging comments that the author received (Appendix 4).
“It was the first time for me to speak English by looking at notes or diagrams. I achieved a senseof creating English in my mind. Thank you, the class was a lot of fun.”“Mr. Iizuka’s approach helped improve my pronunciation and fluency, which raised my interest
toward English even more.”“So far, all my English classes were centered on reading and writing and I rarely had
opportunities to speak English. For the first time, I had a sense of achivement that I reallylearned English because I spoke a lot and had enough exposure to real English. I loved yourEnglish class. Thank you.”“I didn’t expect too much from “English class” since our university is a medical one. However,270
270The Consecutive Interpreting Approach and Its Effects on L2 Written Reproduction

Mr. Iizuka’s English class was quite interesting and rewarding. As I kept on speaking
English, I realized that I was actually acquiring speaking skills.”“I had lots of opportunities to speak English in the class. It was good because I was able topractice making a presentation in front of other students.”“The class was a lot of fun. It was my first time to actually feel that English class wasinteresting.”
6. Conclusion
This paper focused on the Consecutive Interpreting Approach and examined how its verbal input
and output practices had an effect on L2 written reproduction. From a quantitative point of view, 96
students succeeded in accurately writing out 82.33% of the TL consisting of 167 words, which was
an extremely high level of achievement. In the previous study, the perfect match reproduction rates
were only 69.7% and 51.4% for the 1st and 3rd year high school students, respectively. Hence, theanswers to the RQs 1and 3 are yes.
As shown in the survey results, the mean class satisfaction score was 3.80 out of 4.00, which
also supports as a positive answer to RQ 2.
The major issue with this instructional approach is the students’ strict adherence to the SL, as
stated in section 5.1. Therefore, as a subsequent stage, it would be preferable for instructors to seekout activities that elicit more voluntary output from students. For example, by switching fromlanguage reproduction, which was at the core of the approach, to summarization activities, it should
be possible to expand the breadth of language utilization, such as the control and reorganization oflearned expressions. At the same time, by having students add comments and opinions related tothe text, their creative capacity can be increased naturally.
Furthermore, using the consecutive interpreting notes as prompts may provide helpful aids
for high-level linguistic activities such as improvised speeches or debates. Whichever development
activities are pursued, it is crucial to gradually increase students’ creative capacity whileconsidering their language abilities, and not to force them to suddenly develop perfectself-expression.
The suggestions made in this study should assist in developing a new instruction method thatincorporates the four key linguistic areas - listening, speaking, reading and writing - and provide
useful insights for language teachers who wish to incorporate interpreting and interpreter training
into their classes.

Acknowledgement
The present study was supported by a Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (C) for 2012-2015 (No.
24520642) from Japan Society for the Promotion of Science.

271
271

ࠗ㏻ヂ⩻ヂ◊✲࠘14 ྕ 2014 ……………………………
About the author
IIZUKA Hideki is a lecturer at School of Nursing, Jichi Medical University. His research interests
include application of interpreter training to English for medical purposes. Email: hiizuka@jichi.ac.jp……………………………
References
Krashen, S.D. (1985). The Input Hypothesis: Issues and Implications. London & New York: Longman.
Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input andcomprehensible output in its development. In Gass, S. & Madden, C. (Eds.) Input in Second
Language Acquisition. 235-253, Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Swain, M. (1998). Focus on Form in Classroom Second Language Acquisition, 64-81, Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
㣤ሯ⚽ᶞ㸦2009㸧䛂㏻ヂカ⦎ἲ䛻䜘䜛ⱥㄒຊྥୖ䛾᭷ពᛶ䛸ㄒᏛᣦᑟ䜈䛾ᛂ⏝ ʊ ᭱᪂䛾 SLA ◊✲䛾どᗙ䜢஺䛘䛶 ʊ䛃䛄㏻ヂ⩻ヂ◊✲䛅➨ 9 ྕ㸸107-122.
㣤ሯ⚽ᶞ㸦2010㸧䛂Consecutive Interpreting Approach 䛻䜘䜛䝥䝻䝋䝕䜱䞊㔜ど䛾ᣦᑟἲ䛜➨஧ゝㄒ⩦ᚓ䛻୚䛘䜛ᙳ㡪䛃䛄㏻ヂ⩻ヂ◊✲䛅➨ 10 ྕ㸸38-58.
㣤ሯ⚽ᶞ㸦2011㸧䛂ᬑ㏻ᩍᐊ䛻䛚䛡䜛 Consecutive Interpreting Approach 䛾ᐇ㊶䛸䛭䛾⪃ᐹ㻌 ⮬἞་⛉኱Ꮫ┳ㆤᏛ㒊䛻䛚䛡䜛་⒪㏻ヂᩍ⫱䛾ྲྀ䜚⤌䜏䛛䜙䛃䛄㏻ヂ⩻ヂ◊✲䛅➨ 11 ྕ㸸75-93.
㣤ሯ⚽ᶞ࣭㛗ᶫ㞞ಇ㸦2013㸧
ࠕConsecutive Interpreting Approach ࡟ᇶ࡙ࡃཱྀ㢌⦎⩦ࡀ L2 ➹グ෌⏕࡟୚࠼ࡿຠᯝࠖࠗⱥㄒᒎᮃ ELEC Bulletin࠘No. 120 : 62-72.
ụ㑓⿱ྖ㸦2004㸧䛂Reproduction 䜢⏝䛔䛯ⱥㄒ⾲⌧⬟ຊ䛾⫱ᡂ䛃ࠗSTEP Bulletin࠘vol. 16: 146-152.
୍⯡㈈ᅋἲே ᅜ㝿䝡䝆䝛䝇䝁䝭䝳䝙䜿䞊䝅䝵䞁༠఍㸦IIBC㸧㸦2012㸧ࠗTOEIC 䝔䝇䝖 DATA &ANALYSIS 2011࠘ᩪ⸨ᘯᏊ㸦2008㸧䛂ⱥㄒ䜢ᨭ㓄䛩䜛䝸䝈䝮䚸䝸䝈䝮䛜ᨭ㓄䛩䜛ⱥㄒ䛃䛄䝇䝨䝅䝱䝸䝇䝖䛻䜘䜛ⱥㄒᩍ⫱䛾⌮ㄽ䛸ᛂ⏝䛅ᯇ᯽♫, 33-46.
ⓑ஭ᜤᘯ㸦2008㸧ࠗእᅜㄒᏛ⩦ࡢ⛉Ꮫʊ➨஧ゝㄒ⩦ᚓㄽ࡜ࡣఱ࠿࠘ᒾἼ᪂᭩, 94-95.
㕥ᮌஂ⨾㸦2007㸧䛂䝅䝱䝗䞊䜲䞁䜾䜢⏝䛔䛯ⱥㄒ⫈ゎຊྥୖ䛾ᣦᑟ䛻䛴䛔䛶䛾᳨ド䛃ࠗSTEP Bulletin࠘
vol.19: 112-124.
ᰁ㇂Ὀṇ㸦1996㸧䛂㏻ヂカ⦎ᡭἲ䛸䛭䛾୍⯡ㄒᏛᏛ⩦䜈䛾ᛂ⏝䛻䛴䛔䛶 ʊ ➨ 47 ᅇ㏻ヂ⌮ㄽ◊✲ሗ࿌せ᪨䛃䛄㏻ヂ⌮ㄽ◊✲䛅䠄㏻ヂ⌮ㄽ◊✲఍䠅➨ 6 ᕳ 2 ྕ㸸27-44.
⋢஭೺㸦2002㸧䛂䝸䝇䝙䞁䜾ຊྥୖ䛻䛚䛡䜛䝅䝱䝗䞊䜲䞁䜾䛾ຠᯝ䛻䛴䛔䛶 ʊ ᪥ᮏ㏻ヂᏛ఍➨䠏ᅇᖺḟ኱఍ㅮ₇䠄2002 ᖺ䠕᭶ 23 ᪥䠅䛃䛄㏻ヂ◊✲䛅➨ 2 ྕ㸸178-192.
๓⏣ᫀᐶ㸦2008㸧ࠕࢹ࢕ࢡࢺࢢࣟࢫࢆ⏝࠸ࡓࣜࢫࢽࣥࢢ⬟ຊࢆఙࡤࡍᣦᑟ ʊ ᢏ⬟㛫ࡢ⤫ྜࢆど㔝࡟ධࢀ࡚ ʊ ࠖࠗSTEP Bulletin࠘vol.20: 149-161.
ᮧᑿ⋹⨾㸦2006㸧䛂䝀䞊䝔䜱䞁䜾ἲ䜢ᛂ⏝䛧䛯ⱥㄒ䝸䝇䝙䞁䜾⬟ຊ䛾せᅉศᯒ䛃ࠗSTEP Bulletin࠘vol.18:
61-76.
ᩥ㒊⛉Ꮫ┬㸦2009㸧䛂㧗➼ᏛᰯᏛ⩦ᣦᑟせ㡿 ➨ 8 ⠇ እᅜㄒ䛃䛄㧗➼ᏛᰯᏛ⩦ᣦᑟせ㡿䛅㸸87-92.

272
272

The Consecutive Interpreting Approach and Its Effects on L2 Written Reproduction

Appendix 1. The passage and its corresponding notes used for data collection

1. Growing up as John Lennon’s son has been a rocky path. 2. All my life I’ve had people coming up tome saying ‘I loved your Dad’. 3. I always have very mixed feelings when I hear this. 4. I know that Dad
was an idol to millions who grew up loving his music and his ideals. 5. But to me he wasn’t a musician
or a peace icon, he was the father I loved and who let me down in so many ways. 6. After the age of five,when my parents separated, I saw him only a handful of times, and when I did he was often remote andintimidating. 7. I grew up longing for more contact with him but felt rejected and unimportant in his life.
8. Dad was a great talent, a remarkable man who stood for peace and love in the world. 9. But at thesame time he found it very hard to show any peace and love to his first family 㸫my mother and me.

2. ĺ⏕

1. ⫱

▱

ĺme

D

D

m.feel

id

×mus

⪺

to mil.

JL Ꮚ

ᣢ

alw

㝤

ேࠎĸゝ

ᣢ


  㐨

5. Bt

4. I

3. I

 
   Dad



×ᖹ ic
D

㸦⫱

∗
㸦I
㡢 ⌮㸧
meĻ
    ከ㸧
6. Aft 5,
ぶ

9. Bt

8. D

7. I
⫱

೧ᡯ

ᮃ

 ≉



ู





I

  cont
w/D

఍



ྠ


D
ศ

⏨

㸦❧

 

ᅔ

D

bt

  ᖹ

   ♧୍ᥱឤ   ឡᏳ᫬ ᣄ    ୡ㸧

 ឡ

D



oft

  To

×imp
D’⏕

ึᐙ
    ẕ㞳   

  ᛧ

273
273

me

ࠗ㏻ヂ⩻ヂ◊✲࠘14 ྕ 2014 

Appendix 2. Worksheet for Step VII (Written reproduction in L2)

Appendix 3. Evaluation sheetᬅ ࣜࣉࣟࢲࢡࢩ࡛ࣙࣥ᭩ࡁฟࡍࡇ࡜ࡢ࡛ࡁࡓⱥᩥࢆ࢜ࣜࢪࢼࣝⱥᩥࡢୗḍ࡟ධຊࡋ࡞ࡉ
࠸ࠋᬆ ୖࡢࢸ࢟ࢫࢺᮏᩥ࡜ẚ㍑ࡋ࡚㸪ḟࡢ࡜࠾ࡾ㉥࡛࣌ࣥྛ༢ㄒ࡟༳ࢆࡘࡅ㸪᥇Ⅼࡋ࡞ࡉ࠸ࠋ

274
274

The Consecutive Interpreting Approach and Its Effects on L2 Written Reproduction

ż…ୖࡢࢸ࢟ࢫࢺ࡜᏶඲࡟୍⮴ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿ༢ㄒ
ᇞ…ඖࡢ༢ㄒࡀ᥎

࡛ࡁࡑ࠺࡞㸪ᝰࡋ࠸㸭ᑠࡉ࡞ࡘ࡙ࡾ㛫㐪࠸ࡢ࠶ࡿ༢ㄒ

×…᏶඲࡟ព࿡ࡢ࡜࠾ࡽ࡞࠸༢ㄒ㸦᭩ࡁฟࡏ࡞࠿ࡗࡓ༢ㄒࡣ࢝࢘ࣥࢺࡋ࡞࠸㸧
㸽…ᇞ࠿×࡛㸪ุ᩿ࡢ㞴ࡋ࠸༢ㄒ㸦ヱᙜࡢ༢ㄒ࡟ࡣ࣐࣮࣮࢝ࢆᘬ࠸࡚࠾ࡃࡇ࡜㸧Sentences
ᬅ

ᬆ

ᬇ

ᬈ

ż

Growing up as John Lennon’s son has been a rocky path.

11

All my life I’ve had people coming up to me saying ‘I loved your

16

Dad’.
I always have very mixed feelings when I hear this.

10

I know that Dad was an idol to millions who grew up loving his

18music and his ideals.
But to me he wasn’t a musician or a peace icon, he was the father Iᬉloved and who let me down in so many ways.

After the age of five, when my parents separated, I saw him only aᬊintimidating.

17

love in the world.
But at the same time he found it very hard to show any peace andᬍ

17unimportant in his life.
Dad was a great talent, a remarkable man who stood for peace andᬌ

27

handful of times, and when I did he was often remote andI grew up longing for more contact with him but felt rejected andᬋ

27love to his first family 㸫my mother and me.

275
275

24

ᇞ

×

㸽

ࠗ㏻ヂ⩻ヂ◊✲࠘14 ྕ 2014 

Appendix 4. Comments from the students

276
276