TB+-+ESSAY


 * Setting strategies to cope with the problem of Fast Speech in Simultaneous Interpretation **

There are lots of different cultures and languages on Earth, and it is the function of a translator to establish the communication between them. The origin of different languages is explained through some theories, such as the biblical theory of the Tower of Babel, and the well-known evolutionist theory. However, despite those theories, the fact is that languages – and cultures – may communicate with one another with the help of translators and interpreters.

In this text, we are going to analyze some of the challenges that a simultaneous interpreter has when doing his or her job, and then we are going to focus on just one problem faced by them: the fast speech. The problem of fast speech is well known in the simultaneous interpretation area, but through the use of effective strategies, it should no longer pose any problems to effective translation.

Before defining strategies to cope with that problem, we are going to define some key concepts used through the text, then look into the concept of simultaneous interpretation and the origin of it, and then introduce some troubles that an interpreter probably will face. After that, we are going to focus on the matter of fast speech, and then set some strategies to overcome it, based on the theory of Effort Models.

Before getting into discussion about the particularities of simultaneous interpretation, it is important to discuss some key concepts. We will discuss three language-pairs, namely source and target language, translation and interpretation and simultaneous and consecutive interpretation. The pair source and target language is absolutely key to the understanding of translation and interpretation. The source language (SL) can be simply defined as the language in which the text to be translated is written/spoken. That is the original language, the actual language in which a paper or a talk was written. Opposed to the source language, the target language (TL) is the language into which a text is to be translated. Consider a talk where a speaker addresses the audience in Portuguese - the source language will be Portuguese. The content of the ‘original talk’ is to be translated into German - German in this case will be the target language.

With this distinction clear we can move on to another key distinction for this paper, that of translation and interpretation. According to Catford, a famous linguist in the area of Translation´s Studies, translation can be defined as “replacement of textual material in one language (SL) by equivalent material in another language” (1965:20). In Interpretation the essence of Catford’s definition prevails, however with an important particularity: interpretation is the replacement of spoken material in one language (SL) by equivalent material in another language. In brief when a determinate act of translation involves speech, the translator will be called interpreter.

Finally to conclude this section, it is important to be aware of the concept of simultaneous and consecutive interpretation. These are two different types of interpreting: the first occurs when the interpreter awaits the speaker finishes his speech or pauses for interpreting. This means that there are two consecutive actions, that of speaking and that of interpreting, very common in meetings or seminars. The latter is when the interpreter and the speaker execute their tasks simultaneously. In this paper we will only consider simultaneous interpretation. Hence SI is a simultaneous activity that consists in real-time translation of the SL to the TL, orally, during which the interpreter sits in a booth wearing a pair of headphones and speaking into a microphone to an audience that is also supposed to wear headphones. In this process the audience will not listen to the speaker’s voice, maintaining only visual contact with him or her.

After discussing the key concepts used in this text and defining what simultaneous interpretation is, we are going to introduce briefly the history of simultaneous interpretation, according to the report of Siegfried Ramler in a special lecture on February 18, 2006, at Tokyo University of Foreign Studies, under the sponsorship of the Japan Association for Interpretation Studies. Ramler is an interpreter who participated in the well-known Nuremberg Trials, after the end of World War II. A special tribunal was set in Nuremberg in order to judge “leaders of Germany who had been arrested and gathered at the Nuremberg Palace of Justice”. That tribunal was composed of judges and prosecutors “representing the four allied nations – USA, Great Britain, France and the Soviet Union”; hence, interpretation was required in four languages, namely German, English, French and Russian. In the beginning of the trials interpretations were being made consecutively; however, it “would have been a tedious and laborious procedure to deal with four languages consecutively, not to mention the unacceptable increase in the length of the trial”.

In fact, the Nuremberg Trials were not the first experience in simultaneous interpretation, for there were attempts at the League of Nations before with only English and French. Nonetheless, it was in Nuremberg “the first comprehensive and large scale practice of simultaneous interpreting using multilanguage teams”: three teams of 12 people each, responsible from translating from and to German, English, French and Russian, using equipments provided by IBM Corporation. Obviously, the equipment was a “system which would seem very primitive by today’s standards but was quite innovative at the time”. That was the first time simultaneous interpretation was conducted, an experience that was very important to the development of it and still is until today.

Nowadays simultaneous interpretation is much more developed: equipments and techniques created in order to aid the interpreter and access information is easier and faster than in 1945. Thus, the work as a simultaneous interpreter is easier, and even more recognized, than in the beginning. There are also associations such as the AIIC – // Association Internationale des Interprètes de Conférence //, in English it means International Association of Conference Interpreters. Those associations function as a global syndicate for interpreters, giving support to them. Therefore, a simultaneous interpreter has a better support, equipment and even better techniques than before, not being the “impossible” profession as in the Nuremberg Trials.

Even though simultaneous interpretation has seen enhancement and sophistication throughout the years, interpreters still do face challenges, such as technical problems, quality of speaker´s voice, language structure, ambiguity, emotional impact, fast speech, the use of dialects and technical terms to name just a few. They are challenges that any interpreter should account for.

The Fast Speech is one of the most problematic challenges, as it requires the doing of something which is already difficult in an increased speed. Fast speech is not something that can be eased with prior preparations like can be done to overcome the problem of technical terms and lack of knowledge, also it is not something that can be predicted; it’s completely out of the control of the interpreter. Fast Speech can turn interpreting unsustainable as it jeopardizes the ability of the interpreter to understand what is being said, causes a delay in production and results in a loss of information or mistranslation.

There has been discussion about what can be considered an appropriate speech rate and there have been some disagreement between linguists: Seleskovitch (1965, cited in Gerver 1976) argued that an input rate of 100-120wpm (words per minute) was comfortable for interpretation, being 150 an upper limited (cited in Gerver 1976). Lederer held a different opinion and defended that a rate of 100wpm was the maximum an interpreter could cope with for recited texts.

When the interpreter faces a situation in which the speech rate in faster than his humane limit of comprehension, the problem of fast speech becomes apparent: how can an interpreter carry out his job if instead of processing 100-120 wpm he is called to process 200 wpm.? Which strategies can an interpreter develop in order to overcome the problem of fast speech?

When the interpreter faces the problem of fast speech, he will need to transfer more attention to listening in order to overcome the difficulties caused by the fast speech. This means that he will devote less attention to other tasks of his job, as his attention will be all concentrated in solving this difficulty he encountered. This is better illustrated by the theory of Effort Models by Daniel Gile.

Daniel Gile postulates that in interpreting three efforts are involved: the Listening and analysis effort (L), the Production Effort (P) and the short-term Memory Effort (M). The first one is self-explanatory; it is concerned with the ability to listen to what is being said and analyze the content of what is being said. The second effort is concerned with speech production in simultaneous interpretation and with note production during the first stage of consecutive interpretation and the latter concerns dealing with memory operations from the time a speech segment is heard to the time it is reformulated in the target speech or disappears from memory.

These three efforts “compete” with each other: “The three Efforts are at least partly competitive, meaning that even if they share resources and may be somewhat cooperative, the net result of their coexistence will usually be an increase in processing capacity requirements (the ‘competition hypothesis’)” (Gile 1999). The “competition hypothesis” can be represented with the following mathematical formulae:

TotC = C(L) + C(M) + C(P) + C(C), where ‘TotC’ stands for total processing capacity consumption.

The equation consists of a sum of the capacity of the three efforts, the listening and analysis effort C(L), the short term memory effort C(M) and the production effort C(P), plus a new element being introduced, the coordination effort (C) – “the management of capacity allocation between the efforts” (Gile 1999).

In some occasions one of the efforts may require more attentional resources then the other, which will result in an increase of the total processing capacity consumption. This would not have been a problem if it were not for a simple fact: the total processing capacity consumption cannot increase ceaselessly. On the contrary, the interpreter has a limited mental capacity, and this capacity has to be distributed in different tasks, as seen with the three efforts. Therefore if there is an increase in one capacity, it follows that there will be a decrease in other capacities.

The interpreter may still be able to carry on executing his job, if he was not working at his “full capacity” (which means he still has “effort” to employ into the three efforts), but it will depend on how great this increase is. If there is an increase so great that it affects the resource allocation of other efforts, then the interpreter´s job may be compromised: “ total capacity consumption is close to the interpreter’s total available capacity, so that any increase in processing capacity requirements and any instance of mismanagement of cognitive resources by the interpreter can bring about overload or local attentional deficit (in one of the Efforts) and consequent deterioration of the interpreter’s output” (Gile 1999).

For instance, when an interpreter faces the problem of fast speech his brain is overloaded with too much information in a short period of time and his understanding and performance is affected. In other words, most of his attentional resources will be employed in the listening and analysis Effort, and little will be left for the production and the short- term memory. That is the reason why fast speech is a problem. Even though it may be possible to understand what is being said, the effort to accomplish this task is so great that it affects resource allocation of the other efforts, and consequently affects the quality of the interpreter´s output as a whole.

Having analyzed the matter of fast speech, what is going to be dealt now are strategies to cope with it. Based on the theory of effort models, we are going to explore six strategies: previous knowledge, preparation of a glossary, ** request the speaker to slow down, the interpreter speeding up, s **** ummarization and t **** ermination of service. **

At first, for interpreters it is fundamental to have previous knowledge of the subject of a conference. In fact, that is fundamental to every interpretation, but that may really help overcoming the problem of fast speech. It is very common for the requester of service to send an abstract or even the full text of the event, but, it is necessary to read apart from that, articles, newspapers and even journals in the area. If the interpreter prepares him or herself previously, it would demand less attentional resources: total capacity consumption of attentional resources is less consumed by the listening and analysis effort, because the interpreter has already read about and understands much more the subject; thus, few if any parts of the speech would be unintelligible for him or her. In case of fast speech, it would be more easily listened and analyzed by the interpreter. If he or she has not read around the subject area, it would demand more effort in listening and analyzing the fast speech, i.e. total capacity consumption of attentional resources is more consumed by the listening and analysis effort. The theory of effort models explains the relation of a previous knowledge and the quality of interpretation. Considering this equation given before: TotC = C(L) + C(M) + C(P) + C(C), it is possible to conclude that if the interpreter spends less time and efforts in listening and analyzing (L), he or she would have more time and efforts to spend in producing (P), in short-term memory operations (M) and in coordinating his or her own thoughts and speech (C). Hence, it is high advisable to have previous knowledge of the subject dealt in the event, for it will consume less attentional resources.

Secondly, preparing a glossary is also an aid to any interpreter, mostly if there is the problem of fast speech. By using a glossary he or she may identify a particular word or expression, requiring less time and attentional effort than trying to translate it mentally, for reading something that was written before consumes less total capacity consumption of attentional resources. In a report by Igor Maslennikov about a conference that he interpreted simultaneously from Russian into German, besides reading, he prepares himself previously by making a glossary. In his report, he decides to “gather all the vocabulary which he would need for the job (nouns, verbs and semantic word combinations)” in a glossary “on the basis of keywords”, using general and specific dictionaries, but not copying all them – just the necessary words or expressions. He also included in the glossary abbreviations, for it would be much faster and easier to read them than listen, analyze and translate them. In Maslennikov’s words, “during simultaneous interpretation, sometimes it is necessary to remember a word in the given context, a word combination, or the translation into the other language within a few seconds, and such glossaries are very useful in those cases”.

The theory of effort models also explains the relation of a glossary and the quality of interpretation. Considering the equation mentioned two paragraphs before, it is possible to have the same conclusions, since the interpreter is using less listening and analysis capacity (L) to translate a sentence which has words, abbreviations and other expressions that are difficult to translate, and are even more difficult in a fast speech. Therefore, glossaries are very useful tools, and may help someone trying to interpret a fast speech.

** Another strategy to cope with the matter of fast speech is to request the speaker to slow down. That is probably the most obvious strategy, but there are some problems in implementing this solution. The question is that “ ** reminders seldom work, for speakers are either set in their speaking habits, or are always trying to cover too much within a limited time” (Changshuan 2010). The word reminders here means from lights near the speaker that blink when the interpreter presses a button to just the interpreter raising hands – it is a reminder that the speaker must speak slower. According to Changshuan, “after being reminded, a speaker will usually slow down for a sentence or two, before quickly forgetting the rules”. However, an interpreter should try to remind the speaker, even if taking into consideration that it would be ineffective.

The fourth strategy is ** the interpreter speeding up. If all the strategies above fail, that could be a solution. The problem is that, according to the effort models, one’s ** total capacity consumption of attentional resources is constant, i.e. it could not be increased, which means that “most of the interpreter’s processing capacity will be devoted to comprehension, leaving little energy and time for translating and speaking the target language” (Changshuan). Even though the interpretation “would be either incoherent or too fast for the audience’s comprehension” (Changshuan), the strategy of the interpreter speeding up may be used.

Following there is the strategy of summarization. As the name tells this strategy consists of making a summary of the speaker´s speech. In this way, the interpreter can avoid losing the audience by trying to speak in the same pace as the speaker or fitting in the same amount of information. This strategy can be used when the interpreter is unable to keep pace, even though he has tried using the previous strategy of speeding-up. It may be an effective solution since it “produces a more succinct speech than the original and complex information can be made simple” (Changshuan), but in order to truly work it is essential that more than one strategy mentioned in this paper is used. A speaker which has previous knowledge of the area in question can respond better to summarization as he can “respond faster by capturing essential information and discarding the trivial” (Changshuan). Also an effort is required from the interpreter to speed up and keep pace with the speaker, as this will make summarization more sustainable.

However the use of this strategy has problems, for it consumes a lot of energy. According to Changshuan, when an interpreter faces a speech “densely packed with information or with complex reasoning”, a speech with few redundant information or a speech with jargons and technical vocabulary, “any attempt at summarizing will result in omissions or truncated logic, and the audience will find difficulty following the speaker”. Besides that, taking into consideration the equation used before: TotC = C(L) + C(M) + C(P) + C(C); there is another effort in the process of summarization, the summarization Effort, which can be called S. Hence there is one more effort that consumes the total capacity consumption of attentional resources, that is constant. Thus, “summarization consumes a lot of energy and is not sustainable” for long conferences. Obviously, this is not true for every single act of interpretation and will depend on certain factors such as familiarity of the interpreter with the subject, and its terminology and also his or her ability and the agility.

At last there is the strategy which can be used if all the above fails : it is the termination of service. That seems an extreme solution, but it may be acceptable, necessary and possible for interpreters to terminate their services, “as working conditions do not meet the interpreters’ minimum requirements” (Changshuan). Changshuan also advises that this is certainly the last strategy to be used and that “interpreters who serve as the bridge between speakers and audience should refrain from turning off the microphone (despite it being one possible strategy) unless absolutely necessary”. The interpreter should bear in mind that one speaker, among many others who are participating in a given congress, who speaks fast is not a trigger for them turning off their microphones, as their “turn will be soon over” (Changshuan). He also points out that “many conferences provide SI services simply to raise the prestige of the meeting or as part of the complete language service offered at the conference. If the interpreter determines that this is indeed the case […] there is even less necessity to turn off the microphone and attract the organizer’s attention to interpreters”.

In conclusion, throughout this text we defined some key concepts, looked into the concept of simultaneous interpretation and the origin of it. After we introduced some troubles that an interpreter probably will face, and later we focused on the issue of fast speech, a problem is well known in the simultaneous interpretation area. Through Gile´s theory of Effort models we explained why fast speech can be considered a problem to interpreters and also how this theory is pertinent when seting strategies to overcome this problem

Based on that theory of Effort Models, some strategies were presented in order to aid an interpreter to overcome the challenge of interpreting a fast speech. Through the use of those strategies, even though fast speech may be challenging, it was verified that it should no longer pose any problems to effective translation. .