Comparison of STs and TTs as a method of SI research

2.1 Comparison of STs and TTs as a method of SI research

Time delay between original and translation. The psychological research on simultaneous interpreting by Pierre Oléron and Hubert Nanpon is based on comparing interpreters’ output with that of speakers or a written translation. In qualitative terms, they have considered ”the degree of correspondence, and hence the accuracy, of the translation to be assessed” (1963/2002: 43) (my italics). In the article referred to here, the authors focus on the time aspect of the SI activity,

”examining the speaker’s activity relative to that of the interpreter” (ibid.: 43). In order to determine the time delay between the original and the translation, the authors have devised an experimental study. One set of texts for the experiment consisted of recordings made ’in the field’, subsequently selected and edited for the purposes of the study.

The issue of the research material is highly relevant for interpreting studies, and therefore some aspects will be discussed in the context of the early studies. What has to be taken into account when dealing with a study from the early 1960’s is our increased understanding of the differences between written and spoken language. Oléron and Nanpon characterize the presentations produced

’in the field’ as containing ’flaws’; according to them ”the text is not organized ’normally’, and this impacts on interpretation” (ibid.: 44). By ’flaws’ the authors understand ”hesitations, repetitions and incorrect language.” The authors report that because of these features, producing transcriptions from the recordings was a cumbersome effort; therefore they decided to make use of a more

standardized situation (ibid.: 44). Thus, a second set of texts was selected from printed sources and read out on tape.

The design of the experiment has since been criticized as not being relevant for SI studies.

The critics (e.g. Gile 2000, 1994) have asked for ecological validity in empirical studies instead of laboratory experiments based on modified or edited texts. Criticism has also been directed at comparing originals and the interpreted versions on word level. Oléron and Nanpon, too, noticed that interpreters process texts in larger chunks than single words. Thus, the quality concept of

’accuracy’ cannot be used in quantitative terms to refer to the number of words in the SI version that correspond to the original text (cf. ibid.: 46, Table 2). Consequently, the quality criterion of

’accuracy’ has to be assessed on a different basis.

The effect of variation in input rate on the interpreter’s performance. David Gerver has played an important role in shaping the development of SI theory.¹ His study referred to here deals with ”the effects of source language presentation rate on the performance of simultaneous conference interpreters” (1969/2002: 53). Gerver views SI as ”a naturally occurring tracking task,” where the simultaneous interpreter ”is confronted with differential information load” (ibid.: 53). Some of the questions he discusses in his paper of 1969 are also present in the study at hand, such as the syntactic and/or semantic variability of the source language input, and the variability in source language presentation rate.

Relating to the discussion of SI quality criteria, Gerver enumerates deviations between the interpreters’ output message and the input message². He classifies the deviations into the following categories: omissions of words, of phrases and of longer stretches of input of eight words or more;

substitutions of words and of phrases; and corrections of words and of phrases. According to his analysis, these deviations contributed to some discontinuity in the message being transmitted. In looking for an explanation to these deviations he comes to the following conclusion: ”[...] any decrement in interpreter’s performance was due to the effects of presentation rate on the process involved in interpretation rather than to an inability to perceive and repeat the input message correctly (ibid.: 63)”. This statement confirms my personal observations which led to the formulation of the hypotheses of the present study where the issue to be analyzed is what happens to the sense of the message as a result of these deviations.

In comparing interpreters’ versions with the originals, Gerver (ibid.) concludes that it is more appropriate to use the term ’discontinuity’ rather than ’error’ to describe the deviations between the interpreters’ output and the original message. In the present study, Gerver’s terms will

1 For an extensive discussion of Gerver’s research, see Pöchhacker and Shlesinger (2002).

2 The input text was an extract from a speech at a UNESCO conference on Human Rights, recorded on tape

be used in comparing the STs with the TTs to describe the non-correspondences observed between the two sets of texts.

Regarding the key quality criteria for the SI user, i.e. ’sense consistency with the original message’, it is important to bear in mind what early research has indicated: an increase in the speaker’s presentation rate will lead to a decrement in the interpreter’s performance. This finding has not been contradicted by any subsequent studies. Thus, one of the starting points of the present study is based on Gerver’s (1969/2002: 66) summary of his findings, stated as follows:

The picture emerges of an information-handling system which is subject to overload if required to carry out more complex processes at too fast a rate and copes with overload by reaching a steady state of throughput at the expense of an increase in errors and omissions. There is evidence that attention is shared within this system between the input message, processes involved in translating a previous message, and the monitoring of feedback from current output. Under normal conditions, attention can be shared between these processes, but when the total capacity of the system is exceeded, less attention can be paid to either input or output if interpretation is to proceed at all. Hence, less material is available for recall for translation, and more omissions and uncorrected errors in output will occur. (my italics)

Corresponding results were obtained by Tommola and Helevä in an experimental study in which linguistic complexity had a significant effect on lowering SI accuracy (1998). In another experimental study conducted by Tommola and Laakso (1997), increased input rate lowered propositional accuracy significantly. An excessively high presentation rate may thus be one answer to the research question ’What are the factors that make SI more difficult?’ This finding will be considered a plausible factor that will be taken into account in the analysis of the research material of the study at hand.³

What Gerver has concluded about the information-handling system is relevant for the analysis of the research material of the present study. It will analyze instances of overload to the interpreter’s information handling system as well as the types of errors and omissions and their impact on the propositional content of the original message. The resulting analysis will thus be a qualitative one, focusing on the content of the original messages and the changes in output form and content due to information overload caused by specifiable features in the input.

The studies cited above have provided a number of concepts and phrases that can be found in subsequent studies. For example, Oléron and Nanpon (1965/2002: 49) make the following comment:

3 Hella Kirchhoff (1976/2002) formulates the issue of speed of delivery in a way that supports the approach of the present study: ”Sender performance: The communicativity of the sender’s delivery facilitates appropriate segmentation of the message, particularly with regard to the speaker’s pauses. The presentation rate, which the interpreter cannot influence, has an impact on all operations of the process: all phases are under

pressure. When language structures diverge, a high presentation rate is particularly stressful.” (In:

Pöchhackker and Shlesinger 2002: 113)

[...] the interpreter is part of a complex situation, and the variables considered account for only some of its aspects. In this connection, we can talk of strategies designed to try to control the situation and involving various compromises either in terms of accuracy, or in terms of correctness, when time constraints – particularly those arising out of over-rapid speaker speed – become excessive. (my italics)

Recent studies employ the same concepts with the same sense as in the conclusions above. Franz Pöchhacker (1994) investigated simultaneous interpreting, calling it a complex activity. In his study Pöchhacker aimed at taking into account the many variables that make the SI situation a complex one. Sylvia Kalina (1998), together with her students, investigated some of the strategies that interpreters employ in order to control the situation.