Corpora in Interpreting Studies: East Asian Perspectives

In his seminal work on Translation Studies, Holmes (1972;2000) proposed a tripartite framework encompassing theoretical, descriptive, and applied branches.Within this framework, Descriptive Translation Studies (DTS) occupies a foundational role, marked by its systematic and empirical orientation.Toury (1995Toury ( /2012) ) further redefined this framework, advocating for DTS as a methodology-driven approach capable of producing replicable and generalizable research outcomes.This emphasis on empiricism has propelled the evolution of Translation Studies into an "empirical science" (ibid, p. 3).A pivotal catalyst in this transformation was Baker's (1993) integration of corpus linguistics into translation research, which laid the groundwork for Corpus-Based Translation Studies (CBTS).Recognized by Laviosa (1998) for its ability to uncover patterns in translation universals, translator styles, and pedagogical applications, CBTS has since become a cornerstone of the discipline.However, its counterpart -Corpus-Based Interpreting Studies (CBIS) -has not achieved the same level of maturity.While Shlesinger's (1998) pioneering paper, Corpus-based Interpreting Studies as an Offshoot of Corpus-based Translation Studies, ignited scholarly interest, subsequent research has struggled to achieve the methodological rigor and disciplinary breadth seen in CBTS.Scholars such as Setton (2011) have critiqued CBIS as a "cottage industry," emphasizing the need for more empirical, corpus-based evidence to enhance understanding of interpreting practices.Hu (2016) acknowledged the progress made in CBIS over decades but noted that there is still a long way to go before it becomes an established discipline.Importantly, existing literature has largely focused on Eurocentric, overlooking