227
THE IMPACT OF NON-NATIVE ENGLISH ON OMMISIONS
IN SIMULTANEOUS INTERPRETING
Qurbonov Yusufjon Ziyodulla
o‘g‘li
1
st
year Master student, Simultaneous Interpretation,
Uzbekistan State World Languages University
Omission is a method or procedure in translating, whether it is made for pragmatic
or capacity reasons. Taking after a survey of the approaches to omission, this study sets
out to investigate the effect of a strong, non-native English emphasize on omission, on
the off chance if any. An explore has been carried out on interpreting students, described
below in detail to look for the connection between accent and omission.
Additionally, the self-perceptions of interpreting students with respect to the
discourse and their own experience received through post-experiment
questionnaires and interviews is talked about. In order to reply the investigate
questions, interpreting
students’ simultaneous translating work of indistinguishable
writings perused with and without a non-native English was compared too.
After the student performances are analysed with regard to omission, the
information was supported by post-experiment surveys and interviews.
Omission, depicted as the deficient version of the source content message,
has long been discussed in Interpreting Studies. This study, outlined as an
explorative, graphic, observational study, points to discover the answers to the taking
after questions.
1. What is the affect of non-native English complement on the translating
students’ execution in terms of omissions?
2. Are omissions conditioned by relevant variables as well as cognitive
components?
According to Altman (1994) omission may be a sort of mistake, instead of a
technique that translators resort to, and omission is made due to reasons such as
difficulty in preparing a preceding content item. In her work gathered from interpreting
students, Altman did not discover any omissions that would cause a communication
breakdown be that as it may, omissions are still seen as a disappointment to get a
handle on or prepare a source content thing, constituting a mistake.
Barik (1994) characterizes omission as a way to withdraw from initial form by
the interpreter and as
“missing material” indicating out that an unimportant reiteration
or false start would not be considered an omission. He also includes that as it were
omissions of connectives and fillers such as
“well, now, you see” as well as omissions
of articles are worthy since they do not cause a change meaning within the unique
content. All other sorts of omissions are regarded as errors as they represent to
departure from the initial.
Omissions as uncorrected speech mistakes that reveal a lapse in self-
monitoring due to a diversion from centred consideration. Hence, omission as an
error instead of a procedure that translators might intentionally resort to on the off
chance that and when vital.
Gile (1995) states omission as a procedure that translators utilize it within the
case of an outside difficulty. These troubles are recorded as high rate of delivery high
228
density of the data content, strong acce3nts and false grammar and lexical usage.
Due to the fact that, the translator cannot comprehend to the speech and already
works under a mental overload. Hence, it is a necessity rather than a deliberate
methodology utilized by the translator.
Omission can be made as a relevant choice and it can be seen from this
viewpoint as well. In addition, these discoveries moreover have a few academic
suggestions. Translator preparing programs ought to unquestionably center on
tuning in comprehension as an ability.
Other than, interpreting students ought to be familiarized with different non
native accents as non native speakers commonly use English in conferences and
this appears to be substantial for the interpreters.
Hence, interpreting students should be well prepared to handle challenges
such as non native complement since they are expected to require on a very
demanding task usually under circumstance far from the perfect.
REFERENCES:
1. Altman J. (1994). Error analysis in the teaching of simultaneous
interpretation. Amsterdam and Philadelphia.
2. Barik H.C. (1994). A description of various types of omissions, additions and
errors of translation encountered in simultaneous interpretation.
3. Gile D (1995). Basic concepts and models for interpreter and translator training.
4. http://www.apostil-perevod.ru.
