What is Interpretation? Interpretation can be defined in a nutshell as conveying understanding. Its usefulness stems from the fact that a speaker’s meaning is best expressed in his or her native tongue but is best understood in the languages of the listeners. In addition, the respect shown by addressing an interlocutor in that person’s own language is conducive to successful diplomacy or negotia tion. For example, US President John F. Kennedy undertook the task of mastering French specifically with a view to negotiating with French President Charles de Gaulle. But not all statesmen and diplomats have the time, energy, or linguistic talent to master the language of each party with whom they must speak. By bridging the gap between languages, the interpreter helps speakers to discharge their duty to make themselves understood and helps listeners to satisfy their need to understand what is being said. How Does Interpretation Differ from Translation? A translator studies written material in one language (the “source language”) and reproduces it in written form in another language (the “target language”). An interpreter listens to a spoken message in the source language and renders it orally, consecutively or simultaneously, in the target language. Both the translator and the interpreter must have a thorough mastery of the target language, as well as a very good passive understanding of the source language or languages with which they work. For most interpreters, the target language will be his or her native tongue. The translator relies mainly on thorough research with background materials and dictionaries in order to produce the most accurate and readable written translation possible. The interpreter relies mainly on the ability to get the gist of the message across to the target audience on the spot. No translation is ever “perfect” because cultures and languages differ. However, in practice, the translator is usually held to a higher standard of accuracy and completeness (including the ability to reproduce the style of the original), while the interpreter is expected to convey the essence of the message immediately. The translator’s activity is more like that of a writer, while the inter preter’s performance is more like that of an actor. A good translator will spend much time searching for the correct technical term or the right choice of words, but a good interpreter must immediately come up with a satisfactory paraphrase or a rough equivalent if le mot justedoes not come to mind, in order not to keep the audience waiting. Some people are able to do both translation and interpretation. Others find that, for reasons of temperament and personality, they cannot do one or the other. Generally, some experience as a translator provides a good foundation for becoming an interpreter. What is the Difference between Consecutive Interpretation and Simultaneous Interpretation? A consecutive interpreter listens to the speaker, takes notes, and then reproduces the speech in the target language. Depending on the length of the speech, this may be done all at one go or in several segments. The consecutive interpreter relies mainly on memory, but good note-taking technique is an essential aid. A simultaneous interpreter, usually sitting in a soundproof booth, listens to the speaker through earphones and, speaking into a microphone, reproduces the speech in the target language as it is being delivered in the source language. Because the simultaneous interpreter cannot fall too far behind, this method requires considerable practice and presence of mind. Consecutive interpretation was long the standard method, until simul taneous interpretation was first tried out on a large scale, and found to be workable, at the Nuremberg trials. Thanks to that breakthrough and to modern sound equipment, simultaneous interpretation has now become the most widely used method, in every type of meeting from business conventions to summit conferences, and can even be done via remote com munications links. It is much less time-consuming and enables a multi lingual conference, with participants speaking a number of languages, to proceed without interruption. However, consecutive interpretation is still preferred in certain situations, such as one-on-one interviews, confidential hearings, brief public appearances by prominent persons, or some legal proceedings. It has the advantage of not requiring much equipment. Occasionally, interpreters may be asked to do “whispering” or “chuchotage”, which consists of sitting behind a participant at a meeting and simultaneously interpreting the proceedings sotto voceonly for that person.
