KINDS OF TRANSLATING/INTERPRETING

As has been noted, the sense of a language unit (the content of a whole matter) can be conveyed in the target language either in writing or in viva voce (orally). Depending on the form of conveying the sense/ content, the following kinds or types of translating/interpreting are to be distinguished:

1. The written from a written matter translating, which rep­resents a literary/literary artistic or any other faithful sense-to-sense translating from or into a foreign language. It may also be a free interpreting performed in writing. The matter under translation may be a belles-lettres passage (prose or poetry work), a scientific or technical/ newspaper passage / article, etc.

2. The oral from an oral matter interpreting, which is a regular oral sense-to-sense rendering of a speech/radio or TV interview, or recording which can proceed either in succession (after the whole matter or part of it is heard) or simultaneously with its sounding. This consecutive interpreting is a piecemeal performance and the inter­preter can make use of the time, while the speech/recording is pro­ceeding, for grasping its content and selecting the necessary means of expression for some language units of the original matter. There is also a possibility to interrupt (stop) the speaker/recording in order to clarify some obscure place. As a result, consecutive interpreting can take more or a little less time than the source language speech/ recording lasts. When it takes quite the same amount of time as the

source language matter flows and the interpreter faithfully conveys its content, it is referred to as simultaneous interpreting/translating. Otherwise it remains only a consecutive interpreting. That can be well observed when interpreting a film, each still of which in the process of the simultaneous interpretation takes the time, allotted to it in the source language. In Ukrainian this kind of interpreting is called синхронний переклад. Therefore, simultaneous interpreting is per­formed within the same time limit, i.e., takes the same amount of time or a little more/less, than the source matter lasts.

3. The oral from a written matter interpreting is nothing else than interpreting at sight. It can also proceed either simultane­ously with the process of getting acquainted with the content of the written matter, or in succession (after each part of it is first read through and comprehended). The former way of interpreting, if carried out faithfully and exactly on time with the consecutive conveying of the matter, may be considered simultaneous too. Usually, however, it is a regular prepared beforehand kind of interpreting.

4. The written translating from an orally presented matter is, as L.S.Barkhudarov points out¹, a rare occurrence. This is because a natural speech flow is too fast for putting it down in the target lan­guage (except for a shorthand presentation, which would be then a regular translation, i.e. interpretation from a written matter). Translat­ing from an oral speech/recording is now and then resorted to for training practices. When the matter to be rendered is produced at a slower speed than the written translation, this matter/speech can naturally be performed (and put down) in the target language.

Поиск по сайту: