Interpreting as Process Sandra Hale 2007 Community Interpreting

Interpreting as Process Sandra Hale 2007: Community Interpreting

Content 1. Interpreting as process 2. The differences between Interpreting and Translation 3. The interpreting process 2

Interpreting as process • Written vs. spoken word • Message transfer from one language to another • • • Reproduction of meaning > faithful representation of the author’s original (Rabin) Pragmatic equivalence at the expense of semantic equivalence (House) Mediator creating an own version of another person’s utterance, but on behalf of that person (Wadensjö) 3

Interpreting as process According to Pöchhacker, interpreting is the production of a first and final rendition in another language on the basis of a one-time presentation of an utterance in a source language. 4

Interpreting as process • Fidelity, equivalence, norms…? • Translational norms determine decisions made by the translator and the type of equivalence to ensue (Toury) • “An utterance is a link up in a chain of utterances. ” (Wadensjö) • Pragmatic perspective of equivalence to make it achievable • “It is to this subjective interpretation of the source utterance that an interpreter has an obligation to be faithful. ” 5

The differences between Interpreting and Translation • Written vs. spoken word • • • Research and preparation Text availability Correction and adaption of the result Monologic – dialogic Target audience-oriented – author/speaker-oriented Translation – Conference Interpreting – Community Interpreting 6

The differences between Interpreting and Translation • Written vs. spoken word • Translation – Conference Interpreting – Community Interpreting • Monologic interpreting types –> text condensing; no interaction between author and audience (? ) • Dialogic interpreting: immediate clarification; interaction between speakers, shift of responsibility? 7

The differences between Interpreting and Translation • Written vs. spoken word • Translation – Conference Interpreting – Community Interpreting • “The dialogue interpreter attempts to reproduce the original intention (illocutionary point) and illocutionary force to achieve the reaction in the listener that the original would have achieved if the message had been understood in its original language (perlocutionary act). ” 8

The differences between Interpreting an Translation • Triadic construction of text • “In dialogue interpreting, the interpreter’s rendition of each speaker’s turn will determine the next turn, and hence the dialogue is dynamically created by three participants rather than by two. ” • • Interpreter’s rendition determining the unfolding relationship between speakers Matching the illocutionary point and force to produce similar perlocutionary act 9

The interpreting process • Comprehension – Conversion – Delivery • • „…depends crucially on what is already known. “ (Pöchhacker) • Interpreters have to understand before they can start to interpret (? ) Four maxims applying to the cooperative principle: quantity, quality, relevant and manner (Grice) 10

The interpreting process • Comprehension – Conversion – Delivery • • Sources of misunderstanding on discourse-internal and discourse external level • Court interpreting: major source of difficulty for interpreters is lack of knowledge of the setting, of the specific use of language in the courtroom „How much an interpreter understands the ‘language’ of the speaker will be determined by how many of the extra linguistic requirements that interpreter meets. ” 11

The interpreting process • Comprehension – Conversion – Delivery • • Mental translation process = making strategic choices Essential factors: • • • Knowledge of the target language Interpreting skills A theoretical underpinning approach 12

The interpreting process • Comprehension – Conversion – Delivery • A theoretical underpinning approach • • Top-down vs. bottom-up • “How would I express this utterance in the target language in this situation, with these participants to achieve a similar reaction in the listener? ” “Only the most competent interpreters will convert the message pragmatically, taking the top-down approach, understanding the text as discourse rather than words or sentences stung together. ” 13

The interpreting process • Comprehension – Conversion – Delivery • • • Style depends on interpreting type, mode and purpose Dialogic interpreting types focus on both content and form (? ) Extra-linguistic features as an integral part of the interactive discourse 14