61

Ciência e Natura, v. 37 Part 2 jun. 2015, p.61−68

ISSN impressa: 0100-8307 ISSN on-line: 2179-460X

Issues on Interpreting

Roghiyeh Asgari

MA Graduated in Translation Studies, Faculty of Foreign Languages, Department of

English, IAUCTB, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

Interpreting is an ancient human practice which clearly predates the invention of writing and translation. Interpreting has existed for a
long time. Whenever people met other people who had no common language they had to make do with sing language or find someo ne who
speak both languages (Pochhacker, 2004). 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 (ibid). This paper is intended to provide some crucial
features presented in interpreting; the quality of which directly affect the quality of interpreting.

Keywords: Interpreting, translation, language

 62

Of course, it should be mentioned that in

1 Introduction English the term ‘interpretation’ is often used
According to Pochhacker (2004), within the instead of ‘interpreting’; however, some
theorists emphasizes that the use of former as
conceptual structure of translation, interpreting
the synonym of the later should be prevented
can be distinguished from other types of
(Shuttleworth and Cowie, 1997).
translational activity most succinctly by its
immediacy. In principle, interpreting is
performed ‘here and now’ for the benefit of 2 A Brief History of Interpreting
people who want to engage in communication
across barriers of language and culture. Interpreting is an ancient human practice
Riccardi (2002), states that interpreting, which clearly predates the invention of writing
understood as the mental process and and translation. The English word ‘interpreter’ is
communicative act of reproducing orally in a derived from Latin ‘interpres’ means a person
target language what a speaker is expressing in explaining what is obscure (Pochhacker, 2004).
a source language, has often been regarded by Baker (1998) quotes that interpreting as an
translation scholars as phenomena which can be official or professional function seems to have
studied within the framework of and by means been in existence since very early time; some
of translation science, translation studies, or studies have indicated its use in ancient Egypt.
translatology. As cited in Pochhacker (2004), To find the origin of interpreting, Gross (as
Kade’s opinion is that in contrast to common cited in Soleymani 2011) goes back as far as birth
usage as reflected in most dictionaries, of language itself. He notes that just as many
interpreting need not necessarily be equated meanings of the Greek and Latin words for
with ‘oral translation’, or more precisely, with interpreter provided us with a window onto
the ‘oral rendering of the spoken messages’. prehistory, so what we now know about
Doing so would exclude interpreting in signed prehistory also provides us with a window
(rather than spoken) languages. Instead, by opening directly onto the origins of language.
elaborating on the feature of immediacy, one He claims that it is clear that Hermes is the
can distinguish interpreting from other forms of god of translation and interpreting; although
translation without resorting to the dichotomy some European translators have claimed that St
of oral vs. written. Janzen (2005), continues that Jerome is the patron saint of translation. Gross
interpreting for people who don’t share the continues that Hermes was par excellence the
same language involves understanding the god of interpreting, of quick-wittedness, of wily
ideas of one person inferred from one linguistic improvisation, while translation, like writing
structure and re-constructing them into another itself, was a later development. Hermes was
linguistic structure, that of the language used considered as a divine messenger. He was also in
by those intended to receive the interpreted charge of commerce and travel which is related
message. Seleskovitch (1978) goes so far as to to interpreting (ibid).
say that the actual wording of a source message For the word Hermes, Socrates (as cited in
is largely immaterial, that interpreters must Soleymani, 2011) says that: “I should imagine
immediately discard the original wording and that the name Hermes has to do with speech,
retain only the ideas, or sense, underlying the and signifies that he is the interpreter
speaker’s text. One reason for this claim is that (Hermeneus), or messenger, or thief, or lair, or
word meaning can be variable –a word can bargainer; all that sort of thing has a great deal to
often mean one thing in one context and do with language.”
something else in another, so that an interpreter According to Soleymani (2011), the ancient
cannot depend on what any word might mean Greek word for interpreter is Hermeneus which
when it is isolated out of a specific context. means mediator, go-between, deal-broker and
marriage-broker. The verb Hermeneuo means
 63

interpreting foreign language, translating, nonverbal factors showing happiness, anger

explaining, expounding, putting into word, hatred, seriousness, easy-going mood, flexibility
expressing, describing, and writing about. In and inflexibility in positions help the interpreter
those old days, it was the travelers and to asses more information while he/she is
tradesmen who were transferring thoughts and interpreting.
ideas from cultures to cultures and places to Pochhacker (1995) points to the similarities
places. It all shows that interpreters must have between interpreting and translation. He
existed during prehistory – the period before conceptualizes the two activates through the
writing was invented. notion of skopos. He sees interpreting and
translation as ‘twines’ and brings out the
similarities between the two activities: both
3 Interpreting vs. Translating
‘seeks to achieve a communicative purpose (i.e.
“It should not surprise us to learn that many skopos rule).’
people including the learned of the field of However, Kopezynski (cited in Miremadi,
translation always misuse the two terms 2001) summarizes the differences between
‘interpreting’ versus ‘translation’ and try to use interpreting and translating as follow:
them interchangeably.” (Miremadi, 2005:179) A. In translation,
1. The author, the translator, and the
Despite being used interchangeably, receptors enjoy three different contexts of
interpretation and translation are not situation.
synonymous, but refer, respectively, to the 2. As usually carried out, the translator has no
spoken and written transference of meaning close contacts with the author or receptors.
between two languages. Interpreting occurs in 3. The translator has always the chance to
real time, in the presence –physical, televised, or receive his/her translation and to modify it based
telephonic- of the parties for whom the on the readers’ reactions.
interpreters renders an interpretation. 4. The encoding and decoding of the message
Translation is the transference of meaning from are carried out in written forms.
text to text (written, recorded, sign), with the 5. The message carried over is a permanent
translator having time and access to resources message not usually changed and modified by
(dictionaries, glossaries, etc.) to produce a the author.
faithful, true, and accurate document or verbal B. In interpretation,
artifact (Wikipedia, para. 5). Moreover, 1. There exist the same contact of situation for
Seleskovitch (1978) suggests that in interpreting the speaker who sends the message, the
community, those who first reflected upon their interpreter who transfuses it, and the receptors
activity agreed that interpreting was quite who receive the message.
different from translation. They were convinced 2. The interpreter, relying on the speaker
that in interpreting one had to be guided by the or/and the receptors has only the chance for
sense and not by the words; whereas translators quick instantaneous readjustments of the
had to focus on the wording of a text. interpretation.
As cited in Neshati (2007), Ronald argues 3. The message enjoys a transient character.
that, due to its nature, translation is slow, 4. The encoding and decoding of the message
changeable, re modifiable, and not necessarily is carried out in the spoken form.
quick. In other words, the translator has a great According to Riccardi (2002), although both
deal of time to readjust his rendering repeatedly translators and interpreters are cultural
without feeling any necessity in rush. On the mediators who may to a greater or lesser extent
other hand, the interpreter cannot be slow, has influence the way in which a ST is perceived in
no option to make changes in words, structures, the target language, the most important
and styles, and in the circumstances where differences between translation and
he/she is rendering texts, being quick is a must. interpretation regard the conditions under which
The only advantage that interpreter enjoys, they are carried out, such as time and
whereas the translator lacks it, is the way he/she environment, the cultural situation, the texts –
benefits from the gestures of the speaker. Thus, both ST and TT – and the subjects.
 64

As cited in Amini (2011), Mahmoodzadeh analysis, and production of the target. Gile (1995)
lists the characteristics of the two disciplines as adds that in interpreting, the knowledge of
follow: acquisition process must be completed to a large
1. The translated text is smooth and fluent. extent before interpreting begins; while in
2. The translated text is structurally TL translation it takes place on-line. In other words,
oriented. before starting their works, interpreters should
3. The translated text is lexically TL oriented. acquire as much specific knowledge as possible,
4. The interpreted version is structurally SL whereas translators can gain knowledge while
oriented. translating their text.
5. The interpreted version is lexically SL
oriented.
4.2. Powerful Listening
6. The translated text is more accurate than
the interpreted version. Listening is the first step to be able to
7. The translated text is more coherent and communicate with each other. An interpreter
comprehensible than the interpreted version. needs a good listening ability to be able to
8. The translated text is sometimes longer interpret. Listening ability is one of the basic and
than the original and the interpreted version is important skills that an interpreter should have.
shorter. Because an interpreter will have a lot of
Furthermore, Rostami (2009) states that the difficulties in comprehending the message of
translators activity is more like that of a writer’s, source language that he/she listened, a good
while the interpreter’s performance is more like listening ability will help him/her to avoid
that of an actor’s. A good translator will spend misunderstanding of source difficult pronounced
much time searching for the correct technical words or even misunderstanding of spontaneous
term or the right choice of words, but a good gestures, anecdotes during a speaker delivers
interpreter must immediately come up with a his/her speech (Resmiyanti, 2008 ).
satisfactory paraphrase or a rough equivalent if Based on Afsari’s (2012) opinion, listening can
le mot juste does not come to mind, in order not help interpreters to adapt themselves to the
to keep the audience waiting. speaker’s delivery to overcome both external and
internal distractions, to get the gist of the
message, and to formulate their translations.
4 Some Important Issues on
Interpreting 4.3. Discourse and Meaning

Mollanazar (1997, p. 3) emphasizes that:

4.1. Knowledge “discourse encompasses all the elements relevant
in communication: text (here means speech) and
For a practice or occupation to be
context. A text is explicit realization of the
acknowledged as a profession, it must be
discourse. [Language and texts are considered to
perceived to rest on a complex body of
be realizations of sociocultural messages and
knowledge, mastery of which can only be
power relations; the discourse. (Munday, 2001)] .
acquired by specialized training (Pochhacker,
But the author/speaker intends the
2004). According to Janzen (as cited in Mobaraki,
reader/hearer to use certain contextual
2011), there are two aspects to an interpreter’s
assumptions, such as relevant elements of
knowledge of language: intuitive knowledge and
situation or some shared background knowledge
knowledge gained by careful study. These two
to interpret the whole message.”
aspects are not mutually exclusive. Conscious
Janzen (2005) adds that the interactions of
effort in studying the structure and meaning of
speakers and of signers are not self-contained
language can reinforce intuitive knowledge, and
units, completely meaningful without reference
sometimes challenge it. He believes that intuitive
to the communicators of their surroundings.
knowledge of language is critical because the
Thus language cannot be seen as an entirely
interpreter’s attention must be shared among
objective thing. Rather, an intention conveyed by
several taxing efforts: taking in the source text,
 65

linguistic means (i.e. a message) can only be storage of information for later use. He refers to
correctly apprehended in relation to its context. these operations as the short-term Memory Effect
Seleskovitch (1978) argues that interpreting which is pushed and pulled among others (the
should not be considered to just be the oral Listening and Analysis Effort and Production
translation of words. What the interpreter is Effort). Janzen (as cited in Mobaraki, 2011)
expected to do is to uncover meaning and to continues that short-term memory is critical for
make it explicit for others. She adds that recalling immediate aspects of the source
interpretation is more like painting than message, and long-term memory gives the
photography. Photography reproduces words interpreter access to the source and target
without attempting to explain their meaning. language lexicon, grammar and discourse
Painting seeks to discover a meaning, to convey structure information.
a message and reflects the object as seen through
the eyes of the painter. Therefore, the interpreter
4.5. Note-taking
must ‘apprehend’ the source language of the
massage to understand the meaning. The One of the essential parts of an interpreter’s
meaning of a message can only be apprehended work by different researches is described as:
when effort is expended in considering possible understanding, analysis, and re-expression.
meanings and intentions; many times even by Notes are an aid to enhance the work done on
comparing what is being said to what is not the basis of these three components, not being an
being said. aid in themselves, but a means to an end. The
main use of notes is to relieve memory. Although
4.4. Memory an interpreter may have understood the main
ideas of a speech, it is almost impossible for
The modern conception of memory for the him/her to recall all the elements of a five
mental representation of sensory input emerged minutes speech; particularly if it contains
in the mid-twentieth century, when numbers, names, lists, since such elements
psychologists developed the hypothesis of a cannot be recalled on the basis of analysis and
temporary storage system distinct from a more logic (Miremadi, 2001).
durable form of ‘storage’ based on networks of He also argues that it is a fact that, in writing
neurochemical traces or activation patterns. down what a speaker says, one has to be
Various models of memory allowing for ‘short- selective. Not all words can be written down
term’ and ‘long-term’ storage have since been equal in space with those of the speaker.
proposed, and short-term memory resources, According to Amini (2011), some linguists argue
generally referred to as ‘working memory’, have that selectivity should be confined to prominent
emerged as a central concern in researches on words, that is, those words which play key roles
language and cognitive processing (Pochhacker, in sentence semantics. Thus, they believe that a
2004). Of course, an excellent memory is an consecutive interpreter should jot down only
important trait for any good interpreter. As cited those words which can be later used in recalling
in Mobaraki (2011), Janzen argues that both long sentences. In note-taking, the interpreter should
term memory and short term memory (or as much abbreviate forms as possible, providing
working memory) is critical in the field of that he/she can read them later; in fact, the
interpreting. Short-term memory capacity is interpreters are to highlight the distinctive
central to both simultaneous and consecutive graphic features.
interpreting, although in somewhat different Moreover, Asli (2006) declares that notes are
ways. Information from the source language useful in terms of “noetic content” which is non-
speech must be retained even if the exact form it linguistic but pragmatics. The loss of pragmatic
takes is rapidly forgotten. meaning means not understanding relevantly
According to Gile (1995), during and therefore uttering nonsense. Briefly, what is
interpretation, short-term memory operations essential is bringing deep meaning and sense of
(up to a few seconds) occur continuously. Its the message to the note, is not writing every
operations fall under the category of non- word and using it as a decisive mean for
automatic operations because they include the
 66

recalling, but linking and expressing the anticipation is simply defined as the listener’s
speaker’s utterance coherently. normal reaction to the linguistic and extra
linguistic ambiguities throughout listening.
As cited in Vandepitte (2005), Lederer
4.6. Time, the Biggest Restriction in
introduces different types of anticipation. Firstly,
Interpreting
she recognizes “anticipations based on language
As cited in Riccardi (2002), Kade points out prediction” (which have later been referred to as
that translation is characterized by the fixed and linguistic anticipation) on the one hand, and
stable nature of both the source and the target “anticipations based on sense expectation”
text (ST, TT). A translation may be carried out (which have later been called extra linguistic
repeatedly, it may be corrected and checked over anticipation). These two types of anticipation
and over again; whereas in interpretation the ST actually involve the activity of different modules
is expressed only once and mostly orally and the in the mind. With the former, a particular
TT can be controlled only partially and can linguistic item (e.g. the second element of a
hardly be corrected because of the time pressure collocation) is retrieved by means of linguistic
conditioning interpretation, especially in the knowledge only. Any native speaker of English,
simultaneous form. Similarly, Mahmoodzadeh for instance, is able to continue the utterance
(2003, p. 47) mentions that: She was green with …
“As far as conduct is concerned, there are with the word envy. Sometimes, however, one
privileges the translator enjoys, but the word may occur in different collocations, for
interpreter is deprived of. These privileges may instance, to hold off. An utterance like
be listed as follows: They held off …
1. The possibility of reading the source cannot be finished with the linguistic
language text as many times as the translator information present only; one needs additional
deems necessary. (situational or contextual) pragmatic information.
2. The possibility of analyzing the source If that information is present, the second type of
language text. anticipation can be produced. For example, as
3. Access to all kinds of sources and soon as one knows they refers to the general and a
references. few high officers, one may think in terms of
4. The possibility of restructuring.” holding off something like ‘the enemy’s attack’. If,
on the other hand, they refers to committee
He concludes that: “time is the only enemy members, one may continue the utterance with
the interpreter cannot thoroughly defeat.” (ibid, ‘their decision’.
p. 53) Secondly, Lederer also makes a distinction
In interpretation, in addition, Gile (1995) between anticipation proper and freewheeling:
states that much of the specific knowledge in the former instance, the interpreter’s
required for task performance is acquired before production comes before speaker’s production;
beginning the task, because there is simply not in the latter, it comes more or less at the same
enough time while interpreting. In translation time as the speaker’s production.
the situation is totally different, in that specific As a conclusion, interpreters would be better
knowledge is acquired during the task as the to rely on their anticipatory and predicting
requirement arises. This allows the translator to ability to save the time.
optimize efforts, none of which are wasted on
information not directly used for the task. 4.8. Speaking and Speed of Delivery

The speed rate in speaking is the number of

4.7. Anticipation
words or syllables that one utters in a fixed
Gile (1995) defines anticipation as ‘the target period of time (Barik, 1973). Bowen (as
language production by the interpreter of a (sign mentioned in Rostami, 2009) believes that the
of) word (s) before (or simultaneous with) the number of words uttered in a minute varies from
speaker’s production of the corresponding 120 to 150 words per minute. Exceptional cases
(string of) words.’ According to Sha’bani (2005),
 67

have been reported when speakers have situation, on the other hand, both author and
produced more than 220 words per minute. addressees are usually present, and interaction
According to Amini (2011), speed of and feedback may occur. Since the new text
interpreting is related to some different factors emerges chunk by chunk and do not ‘stay
including speed of input, source-text complexity, permanently with the interpreter (or the
strategies used by the interpreter, interpreter’s addressees)’, it is only controllable and
knowledge regarding source or target language, correctible by the interpreter to a limited extent
and also the topic under discussion, intonation (House, 2009). The interpreter’s voice may then
patterns, and some other factors. become to a greater or lesser extent ‘a carrier
Viaggio (2006) puts force that the ability to without substance of its own, a virtually
speak and produce adequate speech act, is the transparent vehicle’ (Hermans, 1996). This act of
interpreter’s presence or representation that transparency includes some elements the
equals with the textual competence in writing rendering of which are diachronic.
translation. The interpreter’s competence is
his/her ability in correct expressing, good
References
reproduction and in good use of different
registers, relevantly. Afsari, J. (2012). Using communication strategies
in oral translation and listening practice
4.9. Pronunciation influence on the use of communication
strategies in oral translation. (Unpublished
Based on the opinion of Morley (1991), the MA dissertation). Islamic Azad University of
goal of pronunciation is developing functional Central Tehran Branch, Iran.
intelligibility, communicability, increased self-
Amini, M. (2011). On the relationship between
confidence, and the development of speech
the interpreters’ speed of speaking in their
abilities. He believes that intelligible
mother tongue (i.e. Persian) and their speed
pronunciation is an essential component of
of consecutive interpreting (i.e. from English
communication competence.
to Persian). (Unpublished MA dissertation).
In interpreting, says Elson (1992),
Islamic Azad University of Central Tehran
pronunciation is clearly a central factor in
Branch, Iran.
interpreters’ success in making themselves
understood. Similarly, Mahmoodzadeh (2006, Asli, S. (2006). Note-taking strategy and the
p.41) highlights that: “One of the significant consecutive interpreting quality.
features attributed to professional interpreters is (Unpublished MA dissertation). Islamic Azad
that they are able to understand all the variations University of Central Tehran Branch, Iran.
of their working languages, but at the same time
Baker, M. (1998). Routledge encyclopedia of
they have a ‘standard’ pronunciation with any of
translation studies. London: Routledge.
the internationally recognized accents so that
they can easily be understood by all the speakers Barik, H.C. (1973). Simultaneous interpretation:
of these languages, whether native or non-native. Temporal and quantitative data. Language
In addition to having a standard pronunciation, and Speech, 16 (3): 237- 270.
each and every one of the interpreters should be Elson, N. (1992). Teaching American English
able to pronounce the words clearly, and this is pronunciation. London: Oxford University
of great significance.” Press.
Gile, D. (1995). Basic concepts and models for
7 Conclusion interpreter and translator training. USA:
Benjamins.
The distinction between translation and
interpreting is a necessary one – they are very Hermans, T. (1996). The translator’s voice in
different activities. In translation, neither authors translated narative. Target, 1 (8), 23-48.
of source texts nor addressees of target texts are
House, J. (2009). Translation. New York: Oxford
usually present so no over interaction or direct
University Press.
feedback can take place. In the interpreting
 68

Janzen, T. (2005). Interpretation and language Rostami, M. (2009). On the relationship between
use: ASL and English. Amsterdam: interpreters’ speed of speaking in their
Benjamins. second language and the quality of their
consecutive interpreting. (Unpublished MA
Mahmoodzadeh, K. (2003). Time: The major
dissertation). Islamic Azad University of
difference between translating and
Central Tehran Branch, Iran.
interpreting. Translation Studies Quarterly,
1(1), 45-54. Seleskovitch, D. (1978). Interpreting for
international conferences. Washington D.C.:
Mahmoodzadeh, K. (2006). Why Do you have to
Pen and Booth Publishers.
mumble? A glance at the performance of
interpreter. Translation Studies Quarterly, Sha’bani, K. (2005). Anticipation strategy and
4(15), 33-43. simultaneous interpreting. Translation
Studies Quarterly, 2 (7 & 8), 9- 32.
Miremadi, S. A. (2001). Theories of Translation
and Interpretation. Tehran, SAMT. Shuttleworth, M. and Cowie, M. (1997).
Dictionary of translation studies. Ney York:
Miremadi, S. A. (2005). Theoretical foundations
Oxford University Press.
and principles of translation. Tehran: SAMT.
Soleymani, M. (2011). The relationship between
Mobaraki, M. (2011). Interpretation. Tehran:
extroversion/introversion and the quality of
Rahnama Press.
consecutive translation. (Unpublished M.A.
Mollanazar, H. (1997). Principles and dissertation). Islamic Azad University of
methodology of translation. Tehran: SAMT. Central Tehran Branch, Iran.
Morley, J. (1991). The pronunciation component Vandepitte, S. (2005). Anticipation in conference
in teaching English to speakers of other interpreting: A cognitive process. Revista
languages. TESOL Quarterly, 25(1), 51-74. Alicantina de Estudios Inglese 14 (2001), 323-
Munday, J. (2001). Introducing translation 335.
studies. London: Routledge. Viaggio, S. (2006). Speech, communication,
Neshati, M. (2007). On the relationship between translation and mediation: a general theory of
the speed of speaking in Farsi and the quality interlingual mediation. Berlin: Frank and
of consecutive interpreting from English to Timme Verlag.
Farsi among undergraduate students of Wikipedia. Translation. Retrieved from http://
English translation. (Unpublished M.A. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/translation.
dissertation). Islamic Azad University of
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Central Tehran Branch, Iran.
Pochhacker, F. (1995). “simultaneous
interpreting: A functionalist perspective”.
Hermes, Journal of Linguistics, 14(3), 31-53.
Pochhacker, F. (2004). Introducing interpreting
studies. London: Routledge.
Resmiyanti, R. (2008). The correlation between
listening skill and interpreting ability of the
second grade students at MTS Sadarmanah
Cimahi. ABC of Translation, 3(6). Retrieved
from:
http://www.eng.helsinki.translation.ckl.56/
Riccardi, A. (2002). Translation studies:
Perspectives on an emerging discipline. New
York: Cambridge University Press.