《会议口译加工模式：评估与重构》由以下六部分构成：

　　第一章概述部分，指出了本文的研究背景、研究意义以及结构安排。

　　第二章文献综述部分，介绍了口译的历史、分类、特点，会议口译的定义、工作模式、研究现状以及加工模式。

　　第三章是理论框架。本章介绍了释意理论的起源、发展、成就，以及释意理论的三大核心组成部分，即：“脱离源语语言外壳”假说、口译过程三角模式（口译过程三程序说）以及释意学派口译教学模式。

　　第四章是本文的主体部分之一。作者尝试着在释意理论的框架下，对会议口译加工模式的主要组成部分进行评估。这些组成部分分别为“理解”、“分析”、“记忆”和“表达”。

　　作者在第四章评估的基础上，对加工模式进行重构。其中，原有模式中的“理解”被细化为“积极听力（ActiveListening）”，“分析”被细化为“逻辑分析（LogicalAnalysis）”；而为了有助于口译员的“记忆”与“表达”，“语域准备（RegisterPreparation）”和“知识补充（KnowledgeSupplement）”被加入到口译过程当中，起到对整个过程的推动和促进作用；原有的“记忆”与“表达”在重构的模式中得以保留。重构的加工模式借用了传统的“折扇”图形，从哲学上对会议口译的过程进行阐释。

　　第五章是本文的主体部分之二。

　　第六章结论部分，对本文结论进行了归纳，指出了本文研究的局限性和以后研究的方向。

　　本文由以下六部分构成：

　　第一章概述部分，指出了本文的研究背景、研究意义以及结构安排。

　　第二章文献综述部分，介绍了口译的历史、分类、特点，会议口译的定义、工作模式、研究现状以及加工模式。

　　第三章是理论框架。本章介绍了释意理论的起源、发展、成就，以及释意理论的三大核心组成部分，即：“脱离源语语言外壳”假说、口译过程三角模式（口译过程三程序说）以及释意学派口译教学模式。第四章是本文的主体部分之一。

　　作者尝试着在释意理论的框架下，对会议口译加工模式的主要组成部分进行评估。这些组成部分分别为“理解”、“分析”、“记忆”和“表达”。

　　《会议口译加工模式：评估与重构》：

　　The second period, from the 1960s to the early 1970s, was CIR's Experimental Psychology Period, in which researchers focused on cognitive issues, based on a the oretical framework drawn from psychology and psycholinguistics. Researchers, mainly cognitive psychologists and psycholinguists ( Oleron and Nanpon, Goldman-Eisler,Barik, Gerver), hypothesized about the interpreting process, and analyzed the impact of such variables as the source language, noise, speakers' speaking speed,and EVS ( Ear-Voice Span) , among others, on interpreting, and how interpreters coped with those variables. Gerver, the most active of these researchers, conducted experiments on interpretation over a period of 10 years, and co-organized, with Sinaiko (1978) , a symposium on interpretation that brought together interpreters and scientists from various disciplines to initiate research cooperation; unfortunately,there was no follow up to this initiative ( Gile, 1994). Gerver is often called a pioneer in the information-processing paradigm in the field; however, since the researchers in this period were not interpreters themselves, there is doubt as to whether their research helped people better understand the interpreting process.

　　The third period, from the early 1970s to the mid-1980s, was the Practitioners Period. The 1977 conference organized by Gerver and Sinaiko may be taken, symbolically, as the point at which research in the field began to be taken over by interpreting practitioners, who chose to ignore their predecessors' methods and findings both ( as reflected by an almost total absence of citations of their studies in the literature) , instead pursuing their own mode of investigation ( Gile, 2006). CIR in this period was dominated by Danica Seleskovitch, at the Ecole Sup6rieure d'Interpretes et de Traducteurs ( ESIT) of the Universit6 Paris III. Her research centered on her theorie du sens ( theory of sense) , also known as the Interpretive Theory (IT), which essentially postulates total deverbalization between comprehension of the source speech and production of the target speech by the interpreter, denies language-pair-specific processes, and ignores linguistic and cognitive difficulties( Gile, 2006). Seleskovitch has supervised many papers and more than 10 doctoral dissertations on interpreting, and written or contributed to several books and many papers. ESIT became a source of inspiration to aspiring interpreting researchers in the West (Cile, 2006). During this period, several models of interpreting were developed, including information-processing-oriented ones ( Moser 1978, Gerver 1976) and Gile's processing-capacity-oriented "Effort-Model" ( Gile, 1995) , and several ideas were formed on training, processes, the differences between interpretation of adlibbed speeches and speeches read from texts, and other aspects of interpreting.

　　……