论文部分内容阅读
There are some 100，000 commercial flights each day in the world， which means that literally millions of interactions take place between pilots and air traffic controllers， very often in a foreign language since English is the international language of civil aviation. This entails a special form of bilingualism as it is very domain-specific and has to be optimal at all times. How does it take place？ How efficient is it？ Are there breakdowns and if so， what are they due to？ What still needs to be improved？
Dr. Judith Bürki-Cohen， formerly a senior scientist at the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Office of the Secretary， Research and Technology， has worked extensively on these questions.
Grosjean： What percentage of communication between pilots and air traffic controllers involves English as a foreign language for one or both parties， would you say？
Cohen： In non-English speaking countries， near 100 percent， because few air traffic controllers and only some pilots are native speakers of English. In countries where English is the official language， it will depend on the percentage of international flights or international student pilots. This will vary according to region.
Grosjean： Who is responsible for making sure that both air traffic controllers and pilots are sufficiently proficient to talk to one another in English？
Cohen： The civil aviation authorities in each country， which are affiliated with the International Civil Aviation Organization （ICAO）. For all pilots and air traffic controllers， it requires proficiency in aviation phraseology1. Since March 2011， ICAO also requires general English language proficiency2 for pilots and controllers flying internationally or interacting with international flights.
Grosjean： Is English always respected or do pilots and controllers who share the same language， e.g. a German pilot speaking to a German controller， slip into their native language？
Cohen： Well， they really shouldn’t. One important reason is the so-called party line3， i.e. a source of information for pilots and for air traffic controllers. The airspace is divided into sectors that communicate on the same radar frequency. As a pilot， I can increase my situation awareness4 by listening to who else is on the same frequency. This tells me who is near me and whether they encounter any weather that I should know about. I may even catch an air traffic controller’s mistake， such as clearing5 me for the same runway as another airplane. Pilots and controllers speaking in languages other than English deprive non-English speaking pilots flying in the same airspace of the information in the party line， and they thus diminish their situation awareness.
Grosjean： Flying is one of the safest ways of traveling so communication in English， even though it is in a foreign language for many， seems to work very well. What are the procedures6 that are in place to make it so efficient？
Cohen： The most important aspect is the strictly regulated phraseology and communication procedures that aim at avoiding misunderstandings. That is why it is so critical that all pilots and air traffic controllers adhere to these procedures， which afford multiple occasions to catch errors. One procedural requirement， for instance， is careful “readback7” by the pilot of what the controller has said， and “hearback8” by the controller. The latter is supposed to listen to the pilot’s readback and catch any readback errors. Of course， errors can go unnoticed， especially in a congested airspace. Efforts are underway to shift routine conversations to “datalink” via satellite， where air traffic controllers can communicate with pilots via text messages.
Grosjean： There are some instances where communication between pilots and air controllers break down though. Can you tell us how much is due to faulty English as compared to other reasons？
Cohen： In addition to readback and hearback errors， there are many reasons why communication breakdowns happen. Faulty English is just one of them and restricted to areas with international flights or pilots. Use of non-standard phraseology may or may not be due to lack of English proficiency. There are also stuck microphones which block an entire frequency and there is frequency congestion where a pilot cannot get a word in.
Another problem is airplane callsign9 confusions， where a pilot may take a clearance for another airplane with a similar sounding callsign. Certainly， all these issues are not helped with lack of English proficiency as a compounding10 factor.
Grosjean： How important is accent in communication breakdown since a controller and a pilot might each have a different English accent？ Would you have an example of an incident due to this？
Cohen： There are certainly complaints from both pilots and controllers， and incidences where accents may have played a role. A quick search of an official reporting system in the United States for “foreign accent” yields just 10 reports filed in the past 10 years. However， there are many unreported incidents involving pilots flying into non-English speaking territory， pilots using airports with foreign students， pilots communicating with non-native English speaking crew， and of course air traffic controllers communicating with international flights or pilots. Grosjean： You give specific recommendations for how air traffic controllers should talk to foreign pilots speaking English. What are they？
Cohen： Controllers should be aware that international pilots may be less familiar with the phraseology or that regional phraseologies may differ. Controllers should be especially careful with numbers and stick to giving them in single digits instead of grouping them， that is， “eight” “three” instead of “eighty-three.” Grouping occurs differently for different languages （three and eighty in German， or four times twenty and three in French）. Units for weights， distances， barometric pressure etc. may also be different in different countries.
Controllers should break the instruction up into its component words by inserting short pauses. Recognizing where one word ends and the next begins is notoriously difficult for listeners of a foreign language. And， of course， controllers should pay extra attention to complete and correct readback. Finally， keeping instructions short will facilitate correct readback and save time over trying to cram too much information into one clearance.
全球每天商业航班约有10万架次，这意味着飞行员和空管员之间的交流可达数百万次。由于英语是民航国际语言，交流常以这一外语形式进行。这致使一种特殊的双语形式出现，其专业程度高，并且必须始终保持精准。双语如何发生？效果如何？是否会失败？如有，是何原因引起的？还有哪些地方需要改进？
曾供职于美国运输部部长办公室研究和技术处的资深科学家尤迪特·比尔基-科恩博士对这些问题进行了广泛研究。
格罗让：在飞行员和空管员交流中，您认为一方或双方为英语非母语者比例为多少？
科恩：在非英語国家，接近百分之百，因为只有少数空管员和一部分飞行员是英语为母语者。在英语为官方语言的国家，这取决于国际航班或国际飞行学员比例，因地区而有所不同。
格罗让：谁来负责确保空管员和飞行员能十分熟练地用英语进行交流？
科恩：这由国际民用航空组织（ICAO）下属各成员国民航部门负责。该组织要求所有飞行员和空管员熟练掌握航空专业用语。自2011年3月起，ICAO还要求国际航线上的或与国际航班交流的飞行员与空管员的英语水平达到工作级要求。
格罗让：总是使用英语吗？说同一语言的飞行员和空管员，比如，一名德国飞行员与一名德国空管员在通话时是否会慢慢转用母语？
科恩：哦，他们不应该这样做。一个重要原因就是所谓的“专用线”，即飞行员和空管员的信息源。空域划分为不同部分，但在通信中使用同一雷达频率。作为一名飞行员，通过聆听同一频率上其他人的通话，我可以提高情境意识，还能知道谁在附近、其他航班是否遇到我应该知晓的天气状况。我甚至能发现空管员的错误，比如把我驾驶的飞机放行至另一架飞机正在使用的跑道上。
如果飞行员和空管员在通话中使用其他语言，在同一空域飞行的非英语母语飞行员就无法从专用线上获取信息，情境意识随之降低。
格罗让：飞行是最安全的旅行方式之一。尽管英语对很多人来说是外语，但用它交流的效果看起来非常好。目前有哪些程序使它如此有效？
科恩：最重要的一个方面就是，为避免误解，专业用语和通信程序都有严格规定。这些程序提供多次发现错误的机会，因而所有飞行员和空管员都必须遵守，这一点极为关键。比如，陆空通话有一个程序，要求飞行员认真“复诵”空管员指令，空管员要对此进行“监听”，抓住复诵中的任何错误。当然，错误有可能会被忽视，尤其是在繁忙的空域。目前，业内设法通过卫星把常规通话转换为“数据链”，空管员可通过短信与飞行员交流。
格罗让：在一些情况下，飞行员和空管员之间的通信会失败。和其他原因相比，请问有多少是由误用英语所致？
科恩：除复诵和监听错误外，导致通信失败的原因有很多。英语误用只是其中之一，仅在国际航班或飞行员身上出现。使用非标准专业用语可能是因为英语能力欠缺，也可能不是。卡住的麦克风会堵塞整个频率，飞行员也会因频率繁忙而无法加入通话。
另一原因就是混淆飞机呼号。当两架飞机呼号发音相似时，飞行员可能会把空管员对另一架飞机的放行误听为对自己的放行。英语能力不足这一不利因素显然会加重这些问题。
格罗让：空管员和飞行员说英语时可能有不同口音，口音对通话（失败）影响有多大？您能给出一个相关事故案例吗？
科恩：毫无疑问，飞行员和空管员都抱怨过口音问题。在一些事件中，口音可能是一个原因。在美国一家官方报告系统中快速检索“外国口音”，发现过去10年只有10份报告记录。但是，很多事故都没有上报。比如，飞行员飞入非英语地区，飞行员和外国飞行学员共用机场，飞行员与英语非母语机组人员交流，当然还有空管员与国际航班或飞行员交流等情况。
格罗让：针对空管员如何用英语与国外飞行员交流，您给出了具体建议。请问是哪些？
科恩：空管员应当意识到国外飞行员可能不太熟悉专业用语，或各地区用语可能有所不同。空管员应格外注意数字，坚持逐个报出，不要把它们合到一起。比如，应当说8和3，而不是83。组合数字在不同语言里说法不同（83在德语中是3加80，在法语中是4个20加3）。在不同国家，重量、距离或气压单位也有所不同。
在发送指令时，空管员应当在单词之间短暂停顿，把每个单词隔开。对英语非母语者，通过听来判断一个单词结束、下一个单词开始的位置，极其困难。当然，空管员还应格外重视复诵的完整性和准确性。最后，让指令保持简短，不把过多信息塞进一个放行指令，将有助于提高复诵准确性，节省时间。
（译者单位：南京航空航天大学）
Dr. Judith Bürki-Cohen， formerly a senior scientist at the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Office of the Secretary， Research and Technology， has worked extensively on these questions.
Grosjean： What percentage of communication between pilots and air traffic controllers involves English as a foreign language for one or both parties， would you say？
Cohen： In non-English speaking countries， near 100 percent， because few air traffic controllers and only some pilots are native speakers of English. In countries where English is the official language， it will depend on the percentage of international flights or international student pilots. This will vary according to region.
Grosjean： Who is responsible for making sure that both air traffic controllers and pilots are sufficiently proficient to talk to one another in English？
Cohen： The civil aviation authorities in each country， which are affiliated with the International Civil Aviation Organization （ICAO）. For all pilots and air traffic controllers， it requires proficiency in aviation phraseology1. Since March 2011， ICAO also requires general English language proficiency2 for pilots and controllers flying internationally or interacting with international flights.
Grosjean： Is English always respected or do pilots and controllers who share the same language， e.g. a German pilot speaking to a German controller， slip into their native language？
Cohen： Well， they really shouldn’t. One important reason is the so-called party line3， i.e. a source of information for pilots and for air traffic controllers. The airspace is divided into sectors that communicate on the same radar frequency. As a pilot， I can increase my situation awareness4 by listening to who else is on the same frequency. This tells me who is near me and whether they encounter any weather that I should know about. I may even catch an air traffic controller’s mistake， such as clearing5 me for the same runway as another airplane. Pilots and controllers speaking in languages other than English deprive non-English speaking pilots flying in the same airspace of the information in the party line， and they thus diminish their situation awareness.
Grosjean： Flying is one of the safest ways of traveling so communication in English， even though it is in a foreign language for many， seems to work very well. What are the procedures6 that are in place to make it so efficient？
Cohen： The most important aspect is the strictly regulated phraseology and communication procedures that aim at avoiding misunderstandings. That is why it is so critical that all pilots and air traffic controllers adhere to these procedures， which afford multiple occasions to catch errors. One procedural requirement， for instance， is careful “readback7” by the pilot of what the controller has said， and “hearback8” by the controller. The latter is supposed to listen to the pilot’s readback and catch any readback errors. Of course， errors can go unnoticed， especially in a congested airspace. Efforts are underway to shift routine conversations to “datalink” via satellite， where air traffic controllers can communicate with pilots via text messages.
Grosjean： There are some instances where communication between pilots and air controllers break down though. Can you tell us how much is due to faulty English as compared to other reasons？
Cohen： In addition to readback and hearback errors， there are many reasons why communication breakdowns happen. Faulty English is just one of them and restricted to areas with international flights or pilots. Use of non-standard phraseology may or may not be due to lack of English proficiency. There are also stuck microphones which block an entire frequency and there is frequency congestion where a pilot cannot get a word in.
Another problem is airplane callsign9 confusions， where a pilot may take a clearance for another airplane with a similar sounding callsign. Certainly， all these issues are not helped with lack of English proficiency as a compounding10 factor.
Grosjean： How important is accent in communication breakdown since a controller and a pilot might each have a different English accent？ Would you have an example of an incident due to this？
Cohen： There are certainly complaints from both pilots and controllers， and incidences where accents may have played a role. A quick search of an official reporting system in the United States for “foreign accent” yields just 10 reports filed in the past 10 years. However， there are many unreported incidents involving pilots flying into non-English speaking territory， pilots using airports with foreign students， pilots communicating with non-native English speaking crew， and of course air traffic controllers communicating with international flights or pilots. Grosjean： You give specific recommendations for how air traffic controllers should talk to foreign pilots speaking English. What are they？
Cohen： Controllers should be aware that international pilots may be less familiar with the phraseology or that regional phraseologies may differ. Controllers should be especially careful with numbers and stick to giving them in single digits instead of grouping them， that is， “eight” “three” instead of “eighty-three.” Grouping occurs differently for different languages （three and eighty in German， or four times twenty and three in French）. Units for weights， distances， barometric pressure etc. may also be different in different countries.
Controllers should break the instruction up into its component words by inserting short pauses. Recognizing where one word ends and the next begins is notoriously difficult for listeners of a foreign language. And， of course， controllers should pay extra attention to complete and correct readback. Finally， keeping instructions short will facilitate correct readback and save time over trying to cram too much information into one clearance.
全球每天商业航班约有10万架次，这意味着飞行员和空管员之间的交流可达数百万次。由于英语是民航国际语言，交流常以这一外语形式进行。这致使一种特殊的双语形式出现，其专业程度高，并且必须始终保持精准。双语如何发生？效果如何？是否会失败？如有，是何原因引起的？还有哪些地方需要改进？
曾供职于美国运输部部长办公室研究和技术处的资深科学家尤迪特·比尔基-科恩博士对这些问题进行了广泛研究。
格罗让：在飞行员和空管员交流中，您认为一方或双方为英语非母语者比例为多少？
科恩：在非英語国家，接近百分之百，因为只有少数空管员和一部分飞行员是英语为母语者。在英语为官方语言的国家，这取决于国际航班或国际飞行学员比例，因地区而有所不同。
格罗让：谁来负责确保空管员和飞行员能十分熟练地用英语进行交流？
科恩：这由国际民用航空组织（ICAO）下属各成员国民航部门负责。该组织要求所有飞行员和空管员熟练掌握航空专业用语。自2011年3月起，ICAO还要求国际航线上的或与国际航班交流的飞行员与空管员的英语水平达到工作级要求。
格罗让：总是使用英语吗？说同一语言的飞行员和空管员，比如，一名德国飞行员与一名德国空管员在通话时是否会慢慢转用母语？
科恩：哦，他们不应该这样做。一个重要原因就是所谓的“专用线”，即飞行员和空管员的信息源。空域划分为不同部分，但在通信中使用同一雷达频率。作为一名飞行员，通过聆听同一频率上其他人的通话，我可以提高情境意识，还能知道谁在附近、其他航班是否遇到我应该知晓的天气状况。我甚至能发现空管员的错误，比如把我驾驶的飞机放行至另一架飞机正在使用的跑道上。
如果飞行员和空管员在通话中使用其他语言，在同一空域飞行的非英语母语飞行员就无法从专用线上获取信息，情境意识随之降低。
格罗让：飞行是最安全的旅行方式之一。尽管英语对很多人来说是外语，但用它交流的效果看起来非常好。目前有哪些程序使它如此有效？
科恩：最重要的一个方面就是，为避免误解，专业用语和通信程序都有严格规定。这些程序提供多次发现错误的机会，因而所有飞行员和空管员都必须遵守，这一点极为关键。比如，陆空通话有一个程序，要求飞行员认真“复诵”空管员指令，空管员要对此进行“监听”，抓住复诵中的任何错误。当然，错误有可能会被忽视，尤其是在繁忙的空域。目前，业内设法通过卫星把常规通话转换为“数据链”，空管员可通过短信与飞行员交流。
格罗让：在一些情况下，飞行员和空管员之间的通信会失败。和其他原因相比，请问有多少是由误用英语所致？
科恩：除复诵和监听错误外，导致通信失败的原因有很多。英语误用只是其中之一，仅在国际航班或飞行员身上出现。使用非标准专业用语可能是因为英语能力欠缺，也可能不是。卡住的麦克风会堵塞整个频率，飞行员也会因频率繁忙而无法加入通话。
另一原因就是混淆飞机呼号。当两架飞机呼号发音相似时，飞行员可能会把空管员对另一架飞机的放行误听为对自己的放行。英语能力不足这一不利因素显然会加重这些问题。
格罗让：空管员和飞行员说英语时可能有不同口音，口音对通话（失败）影响有多大？您能给出一个相关事故案例吗？
科恩：毫无疑问，飞行员和空管员都抱怨过口音问题。在一些事件中，口音可能是一个原因。在美国一家官方报告系统中快速检索“外国口音”，发现过去10年只有10份报告记录。但是，很多事故都没有上报。比如，飞行员飞入非英语地区，飞行员和外国飞行学员共用机场，飞行员与英语非母语机组人员交流，当然还有空管员与国际航班或飞行员交流等情况。
格罗让：针对空管员如何用英语与国外飞行员交流，您给出了具体建议。请问是哪些？
科恩：空管员应当意识到国外飞行员可能不太熟悉专业用语，或各地区用语可能有所不同。空管员应格外注意数字，坚持逐个报出，不要把它们合到一起。比如，应当说8和3，而不是83。组合数字在不同语言里说法不同（83在德语中是3加80，在法语中是4个20加3）。在不同国家，重量、距离或气压单位也有所不同。
在发送指令时，空管员应当在单词之间短暂停顿，把每个单词隔开。对英语非母语者，通过听来判断一个单词结束、下一个单词开始的位置，极其困难。当然，空管员还应格外重视复诵的完整性和准确性。最后，让指令保持简短，不把过多信息塞进一个放行指令，将有助于提高复诵准确性，节省时间。
（译者单位：南京航空航天大学）