conference interpreting in the vietnamese context from a pragmatic perspective = nghiên cứu phiên dịch hội nghị trong bối cảnh việt nam từ quan điểm dụng học

1
TABLE OF CONTENT
ABSTRACT 3
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS 5
INTRODUCTION 6
1. Background 6
2. Research aims 7
3. Methodology and scope 7
4. Outline 8
1 CHAPTER I 10
A REVIEW OF CONFERENCE INTERPRETING RESEARCH 10
1.1 INTERPRETING 10
1.1.1 Definition 10
1.1.2 Classification of interpreting 12
1.1.3 Interpreting Quality 20
1.2 INTERPRETING RESEARCH 24
1.2.1 Paradigms in interpreting studies 25
1.2.2 Areas of Interpreting studies 31
1.3 PRAGMATICS, COGNITIVE SCIENCE AND RESEARCH IN CONFERENCE SI 42
1.3.1 Conference (simultaneous) interpreting as the object of research 42
1.3.2 Pragmatics 48
1.3.3 Pragmatics in conference interpreting 61
1.3.4 Cognitive science and SI research 64
2 CHAPTER 2 67
THE COGNITIVE PRAGMATIC MODEL FOR SI ANALYSIS 67
2.1 THE COGNITIVE PRAGMATIC MODEL OF SI 68
2.1.1 Inputs to discourse comprehension 72
2.1.2 Assembly: syntax, lexicon and context 74
2.1.3 The Executive 76
2.1.4 Speech production in SI 77
2.2 APPLICATION OF THE MODEL 79

3 CHAPTER 3 82
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 82
2
3.1 THE HYPOTHESES AND ASSUMPTIONS 84
3.2 THE RESEARCH QUESTIONS 85
3.3 THE DATA SET 87
3.3.1 The subjects in the study 88
3.3.2 Selection of sample speeches 89
3.3.3 Data collection 90
3.3.4 Data processing 91
3.4 THE DATA ANALYSIS METHOD 94
4 CHAPTER 4 97
RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION 97
4.1 SIMULTANEITY 97
4.1.1 Ear-Voice-Span (EVS) 97
4.1.2 Syllable counts 107
4.2 ANTICIPATION AND INFERENCE IN MEANING ASSEMBLY 113
4.2.1 Semantic structure and message comprehension 113
4.2.2 Redundancy and anticipation 118
4.2.3 Inference in SI 127
4.3 COORDINATION STRATEGY IN SI 139
4.3.1 Judgment 140
4.3.2 Late elaborations and afterthoughts 144
4.3.3 Compensation 145
4.3.4 Compression 151
4.4 CAUSES OF FAILURE IN SI 155
4.4.1 Problems in primary assembly 155
4.4.2 Information density in the rheme 159
4.4.3 Loss of information due to a missed rheme 160
CONCLUSIONS 163

Summary of findings 163
Implications for training 170
Further research 171
REFERENCES 173
3
ABSTRACT

The study analyzes the transcripts of recorded conference speeches and
interpreter’s versions (in both live and simulated situations) to explore the
anticipation and coordination efforts by the simultaneous interpreter in action.
This is based on the theoretical framework of the cognitive pragmatic model
developed by Setton and the pragmatic anticipation theory modeled by Chernov.
According to the model, the interpreter makes use of the pragmatic principles to
assemble meanings through anticipation and inferences and then to deliver the
interpretation with judgement, compensation and elaboration. It is found out that:
The average EVS is 3 second and if the EVS accumulates to longer than this, the
interpreter tries to compress the SL output to reduce it to normal, failure to do this
may result in failure (omissions or distortions).
The speed of the SL Speaker dictates the rate of delivery by the Interpreter. There
is no difference in the normal speed of speech between the Vietnamese and
English speakers and that of the interpreters among the subjects of the study
(calculated to be around 180 syllables per minute).
The SI interpreter continuously makes anticipation and formulates inferences on
the basis of partial meanings, either because the utterance is still incomplete or
because, not being the addressed, she receives less than the full meaning available
to the Addressees. One of the indicators for successful anticipation is the shorter
EVS (1-2 seconds, or even negative). This is possible thanks to sufficient
discourse redundancy (both objective and subjective) as well as cues from the
environment.
The interpreter consciously makes judgement of implausible inputs, compression

of the theme of discourse, and compensation for the late change and afterthoughts
of the Speaker. This includes elaborations, reiteration or additions by the
interpreter in order to achieve pragmatic fidelity of the interpretation.
4
Apart from comprehension failure, some interpretation errors are the results of the
coordination problems faced by the interpreter. Failure to deal with longer EVS or
acceleration of SL speech by the Speaker may lead to boggle effects and
distortions or omissions of the subsequent utterances, unless proper compensation
and coordination strategies are applied. Insufficient discourse redundancy (both
objective and subjective) may also lead to errors, either distortions or omissions.
5
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

EVS ear – voice - span
IT interpreted text
RT relevance theory
SI simultaneous interpreting
SL source language
ST source text
T&I translation and interpreting
TL target language

6
INTRODUCTION
1. Background
Translation and interpreting (T/I) have become increasing important activities in
the international integration process that is occurring in Vietnam. Vietnam needs
to open up to the world, learn from the experiences of other developed countries,
and further develop economic, political and cultural relations with other nations.
The past few years have seen a dramatic increase in the number of events and

settings requiring the service of translators and interpreters, including but not
limited to international conferences, business meetings, cultural events, etc. The
need for quality interpreting and translation services in these contexts is therefore
immense. Studies on T/I, especially interpreting, will contribute to the
improvement of interpreting quality on the one hand, and of the training of
professional interpreters, on the other.
Conference Simultaneous interpreting (SI) provides an interesting field for
research. SI research started in the mid 70s of the last century has developed
greatly ever since and has now become a multidisciplinary subject of academia, a
convergence of cognitive psychology and linguistics, built upon the foundations of
the Paris School with a new conception of with a new conception of linguistics
informed by Relevance Theory, that is, cognitive pragmatics, as developed by
Setton. There have been different approaches to look at interpreting: as a form of
translation; a cognitive process; a dialogic interaction; or a neuro-linguistic
activity. Nevertheless, not much research on SI has been done in Vietnam, or on
the language pair English – Vietnamese. This offers a challenging but interesting
area for this research to explore.
7
2. Research aims
The study aims to explore the mechanisms that allow the simultaneous interpreter
to make different efforts: inputs processing, meaning assembly, formulation and
articulation in a highly coordinated manner. In particular, based on the theoretical
framework of the cognitive pragmatic model, the study will attempt to provide
explanations for the on-going anticipation and inference process during the
comprehension stage, as well as the continuous coordination, judgment and
compensation in the delivery stage of the SI interpreter.
In order to achieve the aims, the research project seeks to answer the following
questions:
- What is the normal time lag (ear-voice-span or EVS) for interpreting English
propositions into Vietnamese and vice versa?

- What strategies are normally used by the SI interpreter to deal with the difficult
situations and characteristics of simultaneous interpreting?
- What are the causes of common failures in SI from the pragmatic perspective?
and
- Are there any noticeable differences between various interpreting situations: live
vs. simulated; SL discourse modes: semi-rehearse vs. spontaneous oral input; and
language directions: Vietnamese into English and vice versa?
3. Methodology and scope
As this study aims to describe the cognitive operations in SI and correlate them
with texts, a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods have been used.
It is necessary to combine both top-down (application of theoretical models) and
bottom-up (recording and commentary of speech products) approaches because
the database only is insufficient to make progress towards a real explanatory
theory. The primary design of the study is the application and testing of the
8
pragmatic cognitive model of Setton in the English – Vietnamese language pair.
The quantitative data on the simultaneity of the interpreting process (which
includes recordings and synchronized transcripts of the live interpretations
versions as well as two other versions in a mock situation) will provide useful
signals for in-depth analysis of the strategies successfully used by the interpreter,
as well as evidence for the causes of errors and failures in interpreting.
The scope of study is confined to “conference simultaneous interpreting in the
Vietnamese context”, which means interpreting in the simultaneous mode, in
formal conference settings, and importantly, involving only the two languages:
English and Vietnamese. Therefore other forms of conference interpreting
(consecutive, chuchotage) and multilingual simultaneous interpreting do not fall
within the scope of this study.
The study does not, however, try to answer the big questions of immediate interest
to SI research, such as how to assess quality or what are the mental, neurological
processes behind interpreting. Rather, the scope of the study is confined only to

the cognitive pragmatic aspects of the SI process, for example the visible use of
the Speaker’s intentionality and other pragmatic indicators, such as anticipation
and inference, or the economy of SI processing through the evidences of judgment,
compensation and coordination.
4. Outline
The thesis is organized into 4 chapters, besides the introduction and conclusions.
After this chapter of introduction, Chapter 1 presents a review of the current state
of SI research by introducing different paradigms and research areas in SI study.
Chapter 2 goes on to discuss the components of the proposed theoretical
framework for this study, i.e. the cognitive pragmatic model. Chapter 3 provides a
detailed description of the data set, research methodology and procedures. Chapter
4 discusses the quantitative results on the simultaneity (ear-voice-span and
syllable counts) which provide useful information for the analysis of the SI
9
process, which focuses more on the strategies and cues employed by the
interpreter, especially anticipation and inference in the comprehension stage and
the relative autonomy in the production stage, evidenced by judgments and
compensations made in the original version.


10

1 CHAPTER I
A REVIEW OF CONFERENCE
INTERPRETING RESEARCH
1.1 INTERPRETING
1.1.1 Definition
1.1.1.1 Interpreting vs. translation
Interpreting is generally regarded as a translational activity, as a special form
of ‘Translation' (the capital initial is used to indicate that the word appears in

its generic sense, as opposed to ‘written translation’, also a form of
Translation). Therefore, in order to understand the concept of interpreting, it is
necessary to explore the concept and definitions of Translation provided by
well-known authors in the field. There are various definitions of Translation,
looking at different conceptual dimensions, as summarized by Pochhacker
(2004:12):
“an activity consisting (mainly) in the production of utterances (texts)
which are presumed to have a similar meaning and/or effect as
previously existing utterances in another language and culture”.
According to most common dictionaries, ‘interpreting' is usually equated with
‘oral translation’ or, more precisely, with the ‘oral rendering of spoken
messages’. However, following this definition would exclude interpreting in
signed (rather than spoken) languages from our purview, and would make it
difficult to account for the less typical manifestations of interpreting, such as
sight translation or on-line (written) translation of Internet chats occasionally
used in the European Commission, among others. Instead, by elaborating on
the feature of immediacy, one can distinguish interpreting from other forms of


11

Translation without resorting to the dichotomy of oral vs. written. Kade (1968)
defined interpreting as a form of Translation in which: (a) the source-language
text is presented only once and thus cannot be reviewed or replayed, and (b)
the target-language text is produced under time pressure, with little chance for
correction and revision.
This way of definition emphasizes the general characterization of interpreting
as an immediate type of translational activity, performed ‘in real time’ for
immediate use. A definition relying on Kade's criteria, foregrounding the
immediacy of the interpreter's text processing rather than real-time

communicative use, could thus be formulated as follows:
Interpreting is a form of Translation in which a first and final rendition
in another language is produced on the basis of a one-time presentation
of an utterance in a source language. (Pochhacker, 2004)
1.1.1.2 The interpreter vs. the translator
The so-called “twin” professions of translators and interpreters have same goal,
act on the same principle and are - or can be - based on the same theory. Yet,
although the terms "translator" and "interpreter" are often used interchangeably,
they do represent two rather different professions.
We should probably define the difference between them: translation converts a
written text into another written text, while interpretation converts an oral
message into another oral message. This difference is crucial. In translation, the
thought that is studied, analyzed and subsequently rendered in the other language
is contained in a permanent setting: the written text. Good or bad, this text is
static, immutable in its form and fixed in time. And the translation, equally
circumscribed within a written text, is intended, as was the original, for a public
the translator does not know. Conference interpreting represents something
entirely different. The conference interpreter is there with both speaker and
listener, dealing with messages whose fleeting words are important, not because
of their form, but almost entirely because of their meaning. She participates in a


12

dialogue, her words are aimed at a listener whom she addresses directly and in
whom she seeks to elicit a reaction, and she does this at a speed that is about 30
times greater than that of the translator (Seleskovitch 1989).
1.1.2 Classification of interpreting
There are various ways to classify interpreting, by its setting, working mode
or by language direction. The traditional method of classifying interpreting

tends to look only at the interpreting settings while paying less attention to the
other perspectives from which to categorize interpreting.
1.1.2.1 Social context
The most obvious criterion for categorization and labeling is the social context
of interaction, or setting, in which the activity is carried out. In its distant
origins, interpreting took place when members of different linguistic and
cultural communities entered into contact for some particular purpose. Apart
from such contacts between social entities in various inter-social settings,
interpreted communication is also possible within multi-lingual societies, in
which case we can speak of interpreting in intra-social settings.
Some of the first mediated contacts between communities speaking different
languages will have served the purpose trading and exchanging goods, of
‘doing business', which would give us business interpreting as a ‘primeval’
type of interpreting. Where the representatives of different linguistic and
cultural communities came together with the aim of establishing and
cultivating political relations, they will have relied on mediators practicing
what is usually called diplomatic interpreting. When relations turned sour, or
maybe before they were even pursued, armed conflicts would have
necessitated mediated communication in a military setting. Such military
interpreting, as in talks with allies, truce negotiations or the interrogation of
prisoners, thus bears a historical relation to the diplomatic type of interpreting.


13

As societies became increasingly comprehensive and complex, we can
conceive of multi-ethnic socio-political entities in which communication
between individuals or groups belonging to different language communities
necessitated the services of interpreters. This is particularly the case in multi-
cultural societies like Australia, the US, and the UK, among others. The issue

of access, first to the labor market and then to a variety of public institutions
and social welfare services, was also at the heart of new communication needs
arising in the context of (im)migration. Countries like Sweden and Australia
responded as early as the 1960s to the demand for interpreting services to help
immigrants function in the host society. It was only in the 1980s and 1990s, in
the face of mounting communication problems in public-sector institutions
(healthcare, social services), that community interpreting, also referred to as
public service interpreting (mainly in the UK) and cultural interpreting (in
Canada), emerged as a wide new field of interpreting practice, with
healthcare interpreting (sometimes referred to as medical interpreting,
hospital interpreting) and legal interpreting as the most commonly used
forms of community interpreting.
In community interpreting, factors exist which determine and affect language
and communication production, such as speech's emotional content, hostile or
polarized social surroundings, its created stress, the power relationships
among participants, and the interpreter's degree of responsibility—in many
cases more than extreme; in some cases, even the life of the other person
depends upon the interpreter's work.
1.1.2.2 Situational interaction
In addition to the categorization of interpreting types by social context and
institutional setting, further significant distinctions can be derived from the
situational constellation of interaction. Even though interpreting always
involves ‘three-party interaction’, the mediating role of the interpreter differs,
depending on the clients (s)he is working for. Gentile (1996) distinguishes
dialogue interpreting with a (bilingual) interpreter assuming the pivotal


14

mediating role between two (monolingual) clients (also referred to as bilateral

interpreting, dialogue interpreting, liaison interpreting or three-cornered
interpreting) with conference interpreting which is usually assumed as
interpreting in multilateral communication in conferences attended by
delegates and representatives of various nations and institutions.
Both dialogue and conference interpreting can be found in either intra-social
or inter-social setting. For example, dialogue interpreting can be used not only
for clients from different cultures (business interpreting) but also from the
same society (medical interpreting). Likewise, conference interpreting is
usually used by clients from different cultures, but it can also be found in an
intra-social setting, for example a parliament meeting of Canada or Belgium.
Combining these two analytical criteria of setting and interaction, we can
conceive of interpreting as a conceptual spectrum extending from
international (conference) to intra-social (community) interpreting. It is
important to note that the dual distinction between ‘international vs.
community-based’ and ‘conference vs. liaison/dialogue interpreting’ is only
one way of categorizing major (sub)types of interpreting.
Besides, there is also focus group (marketing) interpreting in which an
interpreter sits in a sound proof booth or in an observer’s room with the
clients. There is usually a one-way mirror between the interpreter and the
focus group participants, wherein the interpreter can observe the participants,
but they only see their own reflection. The interpreter hears the conversation
in the original language through headphones and simultaneously interprets
into the target language for the clients. Since there are usually anywhere
between 2 to 12 (or more) participants in any given focus group, experienced
interpreters will not only interpret the phrases and meanings but will also
mimic intonation, speech patterns, tone, laughs, and emotions.
Another type of setting is media interpreting. By its very nature, media
interpreting has to be conducted in the simultaneous mode. It is provided
particularly for live television coverage such as press conferences, live or

15

taped interviews with political figures, musicians, artists, sportsmen or people
from the business circle. In this type of interpreting, the interpreter has to sit
in a sound-proof booth where ideally she/she can see the speakers on a
monitor ant the set. All equipment should be checked before recording begins.
In particular, satellite connections have to be double-checked to ensure that
the interpreter's voice is not sent back and the interpreter gets to hear only one
channel at a time. In the case of interviews recorded outside the studio and
some current affairs programme, the interpreter interprets what she or she
hears on a TV monitor. Background noise can be a serious problem. The
interpreter working for the media has to sound as slick and confident as a
television presenter.
Media interpreting has gained more visibility and presence especially after
Vietnam’s recent successful hosting of several major sporting and cultural
contests and events, which is live broadcast. Television channels have begun
to hire staff simultaneous interpreters. The interpreter renders the press
conferences, telephone beepers, interviews and similar live coverage for the
viewers. It is more stressful than other types of interpreting as the interpreter
has to deal with a wide range of technical problems coupled with the control
room's hassle and wrangling during live coverage.
We can also categorize interpreting based on additional parameters as
illustrated below.
1.1.2.3 Working mode
The way in which interpreting was originally practiced did not require
terminological classification until the emergence of a new working mode. It
was only in the 1920s, when transmission equipment was developed to enable
interpreters to work simultaneously, that it became meaningful to distinguish
between consecutive interpreting (after the source-language utterance) and

simultaneous interpreting (as the source-language text is being presented).


16

In consecutive interpreting, the interpreter starts speaking after the source-
text speaker has finished. (The speech may be divided into sections).
Normally, in consecutive interpreting, the interpreter is alongside the speaker,
listening and taking notes as the speech progresses. When the speaker has
finished, or comes to a pause, the interpreter reproduces (consecutively) the
message in the target language, in its entirety and as though she or she was
making the original speech.
Frequently, an experienced consecutive interpreter will prefer to interpret
phrase by phrase, or even shorter portions of a sentence, in such a way as to
approximate simultaneous interpreting. This method requires the speaker to
pause between phrases and clauses long enough to allow the interpreter to
render each portion of the speech instantly into the target language, without
having to take time to take notes and without running the risk of forgetting
any detail of the speech. This phrase-by-phrase method is frequently used in a
number of settings, such as speeches before an audience, legal depositions,
recorded statements, interpreting for a witness at a court hearing or trial, and
others. This is termed “short consecutive”, as opposed to “traditional
consecutive” whereby the interpreter holds and then renders the entire 5-10
minute speech.
With simultaneous interpreting, on the other hand, the interpretation is given
while the source speaker is speaking, as quickly as the interpreter can
reformulate the message in the target language. Normally, in simultaneous
interpreting between spoken languages the interpreter sits in a sound-proof
booth, usually with a clear view of the speaker, at a microphone, listening
through headphones to the incoming message in the source language; the

interpreter relays the message in the target language into the microphone to
whosoever is listening. Simultaneous interpreting is also the most common
mode used by sign language interpreters.
Simultaneous interpreting is sometimes referred to as "simultaneous
translation" and the interpreter referred to as the "translator". These terms are


17

incorrect, as discussed in the distinction between interpreting and translation
above.
Recently, another hybrid form, which could be labeled ‘consecutive
simultaneous’, has become feasible with the use of highly portable digital
recording and playback equipment. This involves the use of a digital recorder
to replace note-taking while listening to the source language speech, then the
interpreter replays the speech into a headset, renders it in the simultaneous
mode.
Since consecutive interpreting does not presuppose a particular duration of the
original act of discourse, it can be conceived of as a continuum which ranges
from the rendition of utterances as short as one word to the handling of entire
speeches. Subject to the individual interpreter's working style - and memory
skills - and a number of situational variables (such as the presentation of
slides), the consecutive interpretation of longer speeches usually involves
note-taking as developed by the pioneers of conference interpreting in the
early twentieth century. Hence, consecutive interpreting with the use of
systematic note-taking is sometimes referred to as ‘classic’ consecutive, in
contrast to short consecutive without notes, which usually implies a
bidirectional mode in a liaison constellation.
On the other hand, the term ‘simultaneous interpreting’ (frequently
abbreviated to SI) is often used as shorthand for ‘spoken language interpreting

with the use of simultaneous interpreting equipment in a sound-proof booth’.
A modified form of simultaneous interpreting (without audio transmission
equipment and sound-proof booths) is sometimes employed where the
interpreter works right next to one or no more than a couple of listeners can
she or she provide a rendition by whispered interpreting, or ‘whispering’
(also known by the French term chuchotage), which is in fact done not by
whispering but by speaking in a low voice. This is also possible with portable
transmission equipment (microphone and headset receivers) as used for
guided tours.


18

Another special type of simultaneous interpreting is the rendition of a written
text ‘at sight’. Commonly known as ‘sight translation’, this variant of the
simultaneous mode, when practiced in real time for immediate use by an
audience, should thus be labeled more correctly as ‘sight interpreting’. In
sight translation, the interpreter’s target-text production is simultaneous not
with the delivery of the source text but with the interpreter's real-time (visual)
reception of the written source text. If the interpreter is working ‘at sight’
without the constraints of real-time performance for a (larger) audience, sight
interpreting will shade into the consecutive mode or even come to resemble
‘oral translation’, with lesser degree of immediacy and considerable
opportunity for ‘reviewing’ and correction. A special variation of
simultaneous interpreting is SI with text in the booth. Since the actual speech
still arrives through the acoustic channel, with many speakers departing from
their texts for asides or time-saving omissions, this variant of the simultaneous
mode is not subsumed under sight interpreting but rather regarded as a
complex form of SI with more or less important sight.
1.1.2.4 Directionality

While the interpreting process always proceeds in one direction - from source
to target language - the issue of direction is more complex at the level of the
communicative event. In the prototype case of mediated face-to-face dialogue,
or still, three-cornered interpreting, the interpreter will work in both directions,
that is, ‘back and forth’ between the two languages involved, depending on
the turn-taking of the primary parties. Bilateral interpreting (or two-way
interpreting) is thus typically linked with the notions of ‘liaison interpreting’
and ‘dialogue interpreting’, whereas the one-directional type is common
practice in conference interpreting, except where interpreters may work in a
‘bilingual booth’, or are said to provide ‘small retour’ (i.e. interpret questions
and comments back into the language chiefly used on the floor).
An individual interpreter, especially those who work for international
conferences, may have a combination of several working languages, which are


19

classified by AIIC, the International Association of Conference Interpreters,
as A-, B- or C-languages, where A = native or best ‘active’ language; B =
‘active’ language commanded with near-native proficiency; C = ‘passive’
language allowing ‘complete understanding’). The western tradition of
conference interpreting has favored simultaneous interpreting from B- or C-
languages into an interpreter's A-language. For example a native English
interpreter who are fluent in French and Italian usually works from French and
Italian into English. A-to-B interpreting, or retour interpreting, though widely
practiced on the ‘local’, or private market, has not been equally accepted for
simultaneous interpreting in international organizations. Where the language
combination of the interpreters available does not allow for ‘direct
interpreting’, recourse is made to relay interpreting, that is, indirect
interpreting via a third language, which links up the performance of two (or

more) interpreters, with one interpreter's output serving as the source for
another. Relay interpreting in the simultaneous mode was standard practice in
Vietnam in multilingual conferences like APEC, or ASEM meetings, where
the pivot language is English. A speech by a Vietnamese leader will first be
interpreted into English before it is relayed to another language, be it French,
Cambodian or Portuguese.
To sum up, there are different perspectives from which to categorize
interpreting, for instance, working mode and situational interactions, or
settings. It is also important to note that while conference interpreting (as a
setting) may imply both working modes (i.e. consecutive and simultaneous)
and SI (as a mode) occurs not only in conference contexts, most authors of
interpreting studies literature often equate ‘simultaneous interpreting’ to
‘conference interpreting’, because they want to refer to the kind of
multilingual international conferences in which the only efficient working
mode is SI. Therefore in order to avoid confusion, and for the purpose of this
study, both terms ‘conference interpreting’ and ‘simultaneous interpreting’
are used interchangeably to refer to “simultaneous interpreting in the
conference context”, or ‘conference simultaneous interpreting’ for short,


20

with the only difference being the emphasis on the setting (‘conference’) or
the working mode (‘simultaneous’).
1.1.3 Interpreting Quality
To assess the success of an interpreting session, be it simultaneous or
consecutive, Riccardi (2002) suggests a useful descriptive sheet for the
interpreted text (IT) which is divided into four main areas: delivery, language,
content and interpretation. Each area includes various categories, providing a
description of IT from different points of view. The areas of delivery and

language contain categories to describe the IT as an autonomous text within
the communicative event, while the area of content considers the semantic
relations between ST and IT. The last area, interpretation, aims at highlighting
interpreting specific features such as interpreting strategies. Depending on the
objectives of the analysis, further categories may be added. A global
description or evaluation may be obtained only by taking into account these
four mail areas without analyzing single categories. The sheet may be used for
all interpreting modalities (consecutive, simultaneous, relay), from B-C
languages into A and also from A into B.
1.1.3.1 Delivery
This area encompasses categories which point to phonation, articulation and
prosodic features.
1. Pronunciation and phonation - the category also includes
mispronunciations such as phoneme exchange. Description: standard,
altered, heavily altered.
2. Output - this category points towards production speed and rhythm.
Description: standard, fast, slow.
3. Prosody - this category encompasses word, clause and sentence accent as
well as intonation. Description: standard, monotonous, erroneous.


21

4. Non-fluencies - it includes several elements distributed in two classes:
a. filled pauses (ehms, ah, etc.) coughs, glottal clicks, audible breathing;
b. false starts, repetitions.
Description: few, frequent, many.
5. Pauses - long, silent pauses that are not correlated to source-text pauses.
Description: few, frequent, many.
1.1.3.2 Language

This section examines the adequacy of lexical, terminological and
morphosyntactic choices within the communicative event.
1. Standard lexicon - both the word and collocation level are considered.
Description: correct, overemphatic, and understated.
2. Technical lexicon - both the word and collocation level are considered.
Description: correct, overemphatic, and understated.
3. Morphosyntax and syntax - to describe the presence or absence of concor-
dance at clause and propositional level, as well as propositional links
(connectives). Description: few, frequent, many.
4. Calques - to point to the presence of lexical and morphosyntactic
interferences between the language pair. Description: few, frequent, many.
5. Internationalisms - a category relying upon transliteration from other
languages. Description: few, frequent, many.
1.1.3.3 Content
The categories in this section refer to the equivalence relations between ST
and IT, taking into account information units and their impact within the
communicative event. The assessor will decide upon the relevance of the
information units for the overall economy of the text within the
communicative event and will examine the impact or the changes in terms


22

form or content. In other words, are the changes only quantitative or also
qualitative? The categories chosen reveal whether the changes introduced by
the interpreter strengthen text coherence, dilute the content or, at worst,
produce an incoherent text. The descriptive criteria are both quantitative and
qualitative, to show whether the changes are: strategic and useful for the
global economy of the performance, preserving or enhancing text coherence;
imperceptible, and therefore negligible or disturbing and liable to alter the

sense.
1. Changes - substitution of elements, synthesis or paraphrase of text
segments. Quantitative description: none, few, many; qualitative
description: strategic, negligible, and disturbing.
2. Omissions - different kinds of omissions may be detected (omission of
redundant elements, reformulation with loss of information, omission of
information units). Quantitative description: none, few, many; qualitative
description: strategic, negligible, and disturbing.
3. Additions - as already stated for the preceding categories, there are several
occurrences in this category. At one end of the continuum are the
interpreter's intentional additions, useful for global text coherence; at the
other end are additions which have no connection with the text or the
communicative situation and therefore entail a breakdown in text
coherence. Quantitative description: none, few, many; qualitative
description: strategic, negligible, and disturbing.
4. Logical links - to indicate whether the logical sequence of the ST has been
reproduced. Description: same, less, more.
5. Register - this category shows whether the rhetorical and stylistic effect of
the original has been maintained, and whether the register used was
suitable to the communicative intention and event. Description: same,
modified, distorted.


23

1.1.3.4 Interpretation
Categories in this section help describe specific aspects of an interpreting
performance in which interpreting competence prevails over language and
communication competence, reflecting use of interpreting strategies. The
purpose of the last category is to give an impressionistic evaluation, not a

description, of the IT immediately after it has been performed.
1. Reformulation - this category points to the ability to move away from the
text, avoiding calques or excessive adherence to ST constructions, but also
the ability to postpone text segments or change the sequence of
information units. Depending on the text type, it can be applied to a greater
or lesser extent. While technical texts require little reformulation, it is
more important in narrative texts. Description: none, little, frequent.
2. Anticipation - this category refers to the possibility of anticipating given
text portions, based on linguistic or knowledge-bound assumptions.
Descriptive criteria: none, little, frequent.
3. Decalage, the time lag between the original and the interpretation, or Ear-
Voice-Span (EVS), - Description: close, distant, variable.
4. Technique - a category that indicates the command of the simultaneous or
consecutive modality (i.e. divided attention in SI, use of the technical
equipment - especially during relay, self-monitoring, note-taking, eye
contact and posture) and reveals the ability to manage difficulties by use of
strategies. Description: none, little, much.
5. Overall performance - to indicate the global impression of the interpreting
performance immediately after completion. It is made up of all other
categories, but represents a separate category because it indicates whether
the IT has achieved the communicative goal within the specific event in
which it is performed. It is a qualitative category. Evaluation: good,
satisfactory, poor.
Summary


24

So far we have covered the definition and categorization of interpreting as
opposed to translation; we have also explored in greater detail the process of

simultaneous interpreting; and the issues of interpreting quality. This will
provide a background for the analysis of the interpreting samples in the later
parts of this study.
It is important to note that interpreting is different from translation not just
because it deals with oral text, but in the fact that: (a) the source-language text
is presented only once and thus cannot be reviewed or replayed, and (b) the
target-language text is produced under time pressure, with little chance for
correction and revision. It is this difference that lead to the different skills
required for the interpreter, besides language and contextual knowledge.
1.2 INTERPRETING RESEARCH
Interpreting has only become a serious object of research for more than a half
century now, starting in eastern Europe with Kade and the ‘Leipzig School’
which is somewhat more linguistically oriented and Chernov and the ‘Soviet
School’ which focuses on the role of predictive understanding in simultaneous
interpreting; then Seleskovitch and the ‘Paris School’ which has provided a
fertile ground for a number of doctoral dissertations on interpreting in ESIT
interpreting school; through to the interdisciplinary approach championed by the
Trieste School; and a recent focus on community interpreting, particularly
through the Critical Link conference series in Canada.
The study of interpreting has now become a multidisciplinary subject of
academia, a convergence of cognitive psychology and linguistics, built upon the
foundations of the Paris School with a new conception of linguistics informed by
Relevance Theory, that is, cognitive pragmatics, as developed by Robin Setton.
In the next part of this chapter, we will explore the prevailing paradigms - or
schools of thought - in interpreting studies.


25

1.2.1 Paradigms in interpreting studies

Each interpreting paradigm is made up of the basic assumptions, models, memes
and standard methods shared by all members of a given scientific community.
There are 3 super-memes (or ways of looking at interpreting): as a form of
Translation, as a process operation and as a communicative activity. The three
major research methods in interpreting studies are fieldwork, survey and
experiment. Working within the prevailing paradigm, researchers will design
further studies and refine theories so as to account for as many aspects of the
phenomenon as possible in a cumulative process. Eventually, though, a paradigm
may prove incapable of dealing with new issues, answering new questions, and
new conceptual and methodological approaches emerge, pushing the old
paradigm into crisis and taking its place. The short history of interpreting
research in the last six decades has witnessed several paradigm shifts, starting
from the interpretive theory of Translation (IT paradigm), through to the
cognitive processing approach (CP paradigm), neurolinguistic (NL paradigm),
translation-theoretical (TT paradigm), and dialogic discourse-based interaction
(DI paradigm). The details of these paradigms are described below.
1.2.1.1 IT paradigm.
Built around the interpretive theory of Translation (IT), the paradigm of the so-
called Paris School may be referred to as the IT paradigm. Informing this school
of thought was the meme of making sense, which Seleskovitch formulated in a
triangular model, highlighting the conceptual (‘deverbalized’) result of the
interpreter's comprehension process, or sense, as the crucial stage in the
translational process. The IT approach was first applied to the study of note-
taking in consecutive interpreting by Seleskovitch and then to simultaneous
interpreting by her colleague and successor Marianne Lederer. These paradigm
cases of the ESIT research model reaffirmed the view of interpreting as a
knowledge-based process of making sense rather than operating on and between
languages.