510
OMISSION AS A STRATEGY IN SIMULTANEOUS INTERPRETING
Djalolova Zarnigor Sharofovna
Master of Uzbekistan State World Languages University
Oral translations can be simultaneous and consecutive. Consecutive translation
is carried out in pauses between segments of the speaker's speech, equal to
approximately 5 sentences. It looks something like this: the speaker makes a remark
and pauses, allowing the interpreter to process the information and translate it.
Consecutive interpreting is usually used at small events where it is relatively painless
to double the speaking time, for example, at business meetings and one-on-one
negotiations or at protocol events. The main advantage of this type of translation is
that the translator very accurately conveys the content of the conversation.
Omission has also been treated by some researchers as a technique that an
interpreter may resort to only when forced by some external difficulty. Gile (1995:
173) discusses “high rate of delivery”, “high density of the information content” as
well as “strong accents” and “incorrect grammar and lexical usage” as examples of
situations that may jeopardize the interpreter’s ability to give a complete rendition.
The second type of interpreting is simultaneous interpreting, the most
psychologically and physically difficult, during which the interpreter translates the
speaker's speech with a delay of a few words or 2-4 seconds. It is usually used at
large events with a tight schedule that can not be broken. Simultaneous interpreters,
as a rule, wor
k in special soundproof booths with headphones and microphones. “As
a rule”, because sometimes they work with the “whispering” technique, that is, they
follow the participant of the event (meeting) and literally whisper the translation into
his ear. At major events, simultaneous interpreters always work in pairs, because
one person cannot physically cope with such a load. Interpreters should be replaced
at most every half an hour (better - more often). Omission has also been treated by
some researchers as a technique that an interpreter may resort to only when forced
by some external difficulty.
Simultaneous translation requires a lot of concentration, so it is important that
the interpreter is not distracted by anything. Such conditions help to create small
soundproof cabins. These are not just "any" self-made booths, but special booths for
simultaneous translation.
Simultaneous translation is a kind of interpretation when the translation is given
by the interpreter simultaneously with the speaker's speech or with a minimum delay
(a couple of seconds). This means that the translator does two things at once: he
perceives the speech in the source language and translates it into the target
language. A simultaneous interpreter does not wait for the end of the phrase, but
translates “on the fly”, which, of course, is more difficult, because he does not know
how the phrase will end. In this way, simultaneous translation differs from
consecutive translation, when the interpreter first listens to a complete thought and
only then translates it.
The question arises: Is it possible for an interpreter to omit certain information
deliberately, due to the fact that some segments have been assessed as redundant
511
or dispensable because they are implicitly present in the discourse? Do omissions
necessarily indicate lesser quality?
Naturally, this requires a huge mobilization of attention, stress resistance, and
the ability to think quickly. In addition, only those who have been specially trained in
this type of translation can perform such work. A person who knows the language
well, but is not familiar with the theory and practice of simultaneous translation,
cannot do such a thing.
Oral simultaneous translation is the most difficult type of translation activity, in
which the interpreter translates immediately after the speaker.
There is an opinion in the translation community that a simultaneous interpreter
is not just a profession, but a vocation and a gift. The average person is not able to
listen and speak at the same time, but for simultaneous interpreters, this is the usual
order of things.
Simultaneous interpreters work at large and crowded events: conferences,
summits, forums, congresses. For the work of a simultaneous interpreter, special
equipment for translation is required: a soundproof booth with transparent glass,
headphones that receive sound from the hall, a microphone.
Omission in interpreting, understood as an incomplete rendition of the
information present in the source language, has long been a contentious issue.
Altman (1994), Barik (1994), Gile (1995; 1999) as well as Setton (1999) have
perceived omission in simultaneous interpreting either as a mistake or as a technique
that interpreters may use only in extremely difficult conditions, when experiencing
cognitive overload. Nevertheless, Viaggio (2002), Visson (2005) and Pym (2008)
draw attention to the pragmatic approach to omission, treating it as a conscious
decision made by the interpreter rather than a mistake resulting from
miscomprehension. The main purpose of the study is to check whether both
interpreting trainees and professional interpreters are sensitive to the pragmatic
aspect of omissions. We ask whether they tend to use deliberate omission in a real
interpreting task in order to eliminate message redundancy or whether they stick to
the original, despite repetitions, digressions and unnecessary information contained
in the text. The results of the study may shed new light on the issue of omission in
simultaneous interpreting.
Maybe not far off is the day when electronic translators will learn how to digest
texts from one language to another. But it is unlikely that a machine will ever replace
a live synchronized interpreter. After all, his task is not only to perceive the spoken
words, but also to correlate them with the non-verbal range. A computer cannot
predict what the speaker will say in the next moment, but a person can do it. The
machine is unlikely to be able to choose a really successful translation of this or that
reality, because, for example,
the word “dacha” is, whatever one may say, not just a
“country house” and not just a “garden”, but a concept that causes a Russian person
many associations and only a thinking person, not a computer, can choose the most
suitable translation option.
Simultaneous translation is somewhat similar to boxing: here you also need to
keep the punch. Simultaneous loads are similar to those experienced by a test pilot
and these are not empty words, but a proven medical fact. By the way, scientists are
still wondering what processes in the human brain allow us to perceive speech in one
language and immediately transmit it in another.
512
Sometimes simultaneous interpreters are "carried" to the most unexpected and
interesting places where "ordinary mortals" are barred from going. Simultaneous
translation services may be required, for example, in psychoanalysis sessions.
Roughnesses and mistakes made in simultaneous translation are always
noticeable: it turns out as if inanimate language. Bad translation can give away syntax
or too banal politically correct tracing papers. Sometimes it happens that the
simultaneous interpreter cannot find the right word, and then he resorts to a fairly
common technique - generalization, replacing a narrow concept with a broader one.
A good simultaneous interpreter must have impeccable literacy and be
especially sensitive to the languages he speaks. But even the most high-class
synchronized swimmers always have their sad and funny stories about how they
once got into a puddle. However, they are always highly valued and cherished,
because the success of the entire event largely depends on them.
Of the obvious advantages of the synchronized profession: the opportunity to
visit different countries of the world, contact interesting personalities, and participate
in interesting events. Simultaneous interpreters are respected and even honored,
which are successfully converted into a fairly high salary.
The main disadvantage of this profession can be called a kind of forced
depersonalization - the simultaneous interpreter does not belong to himself, he must
dissolve - and the more, the better. Therefore, a person who plans to become a
simultaneous interpreter must be ready to give up his own thoughts and conclusions
in order to become someone else's shadow again and again.
Nevertheless, despite these limitations, our surprising results may shed new
light on the issue. As for our further research, the study could be extended to include
consecutive interpreting. In this case, the tendency to omit even more redundant
information is expected. The comparison of the two interpreting modes with respect
to omission would make it possible to formulate some general conclusions about the
nature of the two modes. Furthermore, we could see if there exists any correlation
between our particular areas of interest and the likelihood that elements are omitted.
The issue of omission in interpreting has so far been dealt with only sufficiently; there
is still much to investigate.
REFERENCES:
1. Vasilevich A. P. Problems of measuring language competence // Linguistic
foundations of language teaching. M.: Nauka, 1983. p. 113
– 136
2. Krasikov Y.V. Psycholinguistic analysis of speech errors: dis. ... cand.
psychol. Sciences. M., 1980. 192 p.
