Grammatical difficulties of consecutive and simultaneous interpreting

Maksimov S.E.

Kyiv National Linguistic University

Nowadays consecutive and simultaneous interpreting is in the focus of translation studies with the rapid development of international relations of Ukraine. The article highlights the problems of grammatical difficulties of interpreting. The author focuses upon difficulties in rendering English articles, difficulties in rendering tense and aspect forms of the English verb, difficulties in rendering forms expressing unreality, difficulties in rendering evaluative components of utterances, difficulties in rendering affirmative and negative constructions; considers word-order and functional sentence perspective of messages.

The most challenging problems appear to be the use and rendering articles, tense and aspect forms and evaluative components of messages. Practical observations and works of modern writers on the use of articles testify to the fact that the definite article in Modern English is sometimes omitted and is often used where there is a tendency for its communicational purpose of indicating definiteness. The same tendency is observed with the indefinite article which may be omitted for the sake of minimisation of communicative efforts through reducing redundancy of messages. Interpreters should pay special attention to rendering the perfect forms of the English verb, while the “future time” is mostly expressed by the forms of the Present Indefinite and the Present Continuous Tenses. Evaluative components of messages in interpreting may be omitted or not depending upon where the evaluation is located - in the attribute or in the antecedent of the message. Word-order in English is fixed, while in Ukrainian it is mostly free and the rheme may be placed in any place of the utterance. Thus, in interpreting from Ukrainian into English the word-order often has to be changed. All of these issues, if resolved successfully, greatly contribute to creating high quality, adequate and equivalent interpretation product.

Key words: grammatical aspects of interpreting, consecutive and simultaneous interpreting, evaluative component, discourse.

Максімов С. Є. Граматичні труднощі послідовного та синхронного перекладу. Реальність сьогодення та швидкий розвиток міжнародних зв 'язків України ставить послідовний та синхронний переклад в центр уваги сучасного перекладознавства. У статті досліджуються граматичні труднощі послідовного та синхронного перекладу, з якими досить часто стикаються усні перекладачі. Автор розглядає труднощі відтворення в перекладі англійських артиклів, перекладу видо-часових форм англійського дієслова, способи перекладу форм вираження нереальності дії, а також труднощі трансформації порядку слів та функціональної перспективи висловлювання.

З'ясовано, що найбільш суттєвими граматичними викликами для усних перекладачів є вживання артиклів, видо-часових форм дієслова та оцінних компонентів висловлювання. Практичні спостереження та наукові праці сучасних дослідників стосовно вживання артиклів свідчать про те, що означений артикль в сучасній англійській мові інколи опускається і вживається здебільшого на позначення комунікативної функції означеності. Те саме стосується неозначеного артикля, який часто опускається задля мінімізації комунікативних зусиль та зменшення надмірності висловлювання.

Зазначено, що усні перекладачі також мають особливо уважно ставитися до перекладу перфектних видо-часових форм дієслова та форм вираження «майбутнього часу», оскільки ця категорія в сучасній англійській мові здебільшого виражається формами простого або тривалого теперішнього часу. Оцінний компонент може зберігатися або опускатися в перекладі залежно від його розташування - в означенні або в означуваному слові.

Акцентовано на тому, що порядок слів в англійській мові є фіксованим, а в українській - вільним, тому рема в українській мові може бути розташована в будь-якому місці висловлювання. Така різниця в синтаксичній будові мов змушує усних перекладачів часто змінювати порядок слів у висловлюванні. Використання оптимальних перекладацьких стратегій для розв'язання цих проблем значно сприяють створенню високоякісного, адекватного та еквівалентного перекладу.

Ключові слова: граматичні аспекти усного перекладу, послідовний та синхронний переклад, оцінний компонент, дискурс.

Defining the problem and argumentation of the topicality of its consideration. The article deals with grammatical challenges that occur in consecutive and simultaneous interpreting. This problem is important nowadays as the inability of interpreters to overcome grammatical difficulties in comprehending and rendering oral discourse messages may lead to serious mistakes in translation. Interpreting plays a significant role both at the national and international levels as nowadays Ukraine has become an equal partner in its relationships with the world community of nations.

Recent research and publications on the problem. In Ukrainian translation studies there seems to be no profound publications on this problem. However, there are authors in other countries, who, at least partially, touch upon it. Thus, Zh. S. Sarmanova [6] suggests a general overview of some grammatical difficulties of simultaneous interpreting, M. A. Apollova [2] deals mostly with teaching specific features of English grammar to students and Marianne Celce-Marcia [8] focuses on understanding the Past Perfect Tense constructions in a particular discourse. Some grammatical difficulties of interpreting from English into Russian were analyzed by G. V Chernov [7], though he focuses mostly on lexical and semantic aspects of interpreting. The importance of discourse in understanding grammar patterns is the subject of two profound publications by B. Hatim,

I. Mason [10], B. Hatim, J. Munday [11], who view discourse as the “clue” to perception and understanding oral messages. R. Hughes and M. McCarthy [12] proceed from analysis of sentences to discourse grammar as an essential component of teaching Modern English.

The purpose and the objectives of this article are to outline basic grammatical difficulties of consecutive and simultaneous interpreting oral discourse messages from English into Ukrainian and vice versa. In doing so the author would like to share with the international community of interpreters some of his experience in the sphere of consecutive and simultaneous interpreting gained throughout more than 20 years of professional work in this field.

1. Failure to use the Present Perfect Tense in utterances like: Я живу в Києві вже шість років -1 have lived (not * lived, *live, *am living) in Kyiv for six years;

2. The use of the Future Indefinite Tense in English in the adverbial clauses of condition and time after if, when, till, until, before, after, etc., e. g.: Якщо ви цього не зробите, то наслідки буде важко передбачити -

If you don't do (not *will not do) that, it will be difficult to predict the consequences.

3. Inability to apply the rules of the sequence of tenses, e. g.: Вони сказали, що прийматимуть участь у роботі семінару - They said that they would participate (not * will _participate) in the workshop.

4. Difficulties in rendering forms expressing unreality

Forms expressing unreality, which are traditionally called the “Subjunctive Mood” or “Oblique Moods”, indicate that the action is considered to be unreal, unlikely, problematic, hypothetical, desirable, recommended, etc. While finding options for these verb-forms interpreters have to observe the following recommendations:

a) Make yourself sure that the speaker has really used the Subjunctive (Conditional) Mood form and not the clause of a real condition, i. e. distinguish between If it does not rain, we will go to the beach (Якщо не буде дощу, то ми підемо на пляж) and If it did not rain, we would go to the beach (Якщо б не було дощу, ми би пішли на пляж).

There is a debate nowadays whether was can be used in clauses of unreal condition and after wish instead of were as even the native speakers of English often use was where it should be were according to the rules of traditional English grammar. Leaving this debate behind, the author of this article supports the view of the writers on traditional English grammar, which requires the use of were in the mentioned instances, treating was as ungrammatical or spoken variant. Thus, Cathrine Traffs writes: “Use were if the state of being you are describing is in no way the current reality. This is true whenever a hypothetical situation is expressed, for example: Would you invite me over if I were more polite at the dinner table?; If it were _ possible to solve the puzzle, I would have done it. Another sure sign that you should use the subjunctive is when the word wish is used. A wish is the desire or hope for something that cannot or probably will not happen, e. g.: I wish I were the winner of the Nobel Prize in Literature; He wishes his grammar were better <...>. These phrases are never correct: I wish I was; I wish it was; he wishes he was; she wishes she was” [17]. Therefore, even though languages are changing, interpreters should be guided by the correct grammar as they may always learn and use “broken English” in private conversations (outside the conference room) throughout their professional career;

b) Remember that forms of the be, speak, go, etc. type after predicates expressing order, proposal, request, arrangement, recommendation are quite common nowadays both in American and in British English, e. g.: It is necessary that he speak at the conference - Йому необхідно виступити на конференції (an alternative variant is should speak); It is important that these reforms Ъв_ strengthened - Необхідно закріпити ці реформи;

c) Always be on alert if the speaker uses contracted (shortened) forms of the mood auxiliaries, especially with the perfect forms of the verb which refer an action to the past - failure to perceive these forms may cause serious errors in interpreting messages, e. g.:

If Idbeen (for had been) present in Strasbourg last month, I'd have spoken (for would have spoken) to Lord Judd - Якщо б я був у Страсбурзі минулого місяця, то я би мав розмову з лордом Джаддом;

d) Always be ready to render pat phrases with the Subjunctive Mood of the type: От, якби завжди було так! - Oh, if only it were so forever!; Нехай буде так! - Let it he_!; Хай живе мир! - Long live peace!; God forbid! - Борони Боже!, хай Бог милує!; God damn it! - От бісова душа!

5. Difficulties of rendering evaluative components in simultaneous interpreting

Semantic structure of oral messages normally contains the following components, which ensure that the messages acquire certain sense in the act communication:

¦ the deictic component: orientation of the message with regard to the “person”, space” and “time”, e. g.: I warn you that it is_probably cold outside;

¦ the modal component: treating the proposition by the speaker as possible, impossible, desired, mandatory, unnecessary, likely, unlikely, doubtful, real, unreal etc., e. g.: I warn you that it may be cold outside;

¦ the evaluative component (оцінний компонент): positive or negative evaluation of the elements of the proposition by the speaker (or absence of such evaluation - “zero evaluation”), e. g.: I warn you that it is cold (negative evaluation) outside, so, since you are unwell (negative evaluation), you'd rather wear your warm (positive evaluation) sweater;

¦ the pragmatic component: indicator of the aim of pronouncing the utterance (communicative intention) as it is planned by the speaker [16], e. g.: I warn (the act of warning) you that it is cold outside.

However, if the deictic and the modal components present no major difficulties for interpreting, it is the evaluative component that may be a challenge for simultaneous interpreters due to the deficit of time.

Evaluative components may play different roles in the semantic structure of utterances. If they are parts of the theme they may often be redundant and omitted (compressed) in interpreting [3; 7], e. g. The significant advances in science and technology open up great opportunities for the rapid development of human and material resources of Ukraine - <...> Досягнення у галузі науки та техніки забезпечують нам сьогодні можливість швидко розвивати людські та матеріальні ресурси України. Omission of the evaluative adjective істотні in interpreting does not damage the sense of the utterance and its communicative effect. However, if the evaluative component is placed in the rheme of the utter-ance, it becomes a part of the “informational focus” and its omission may result in distortions in interpreting, e. g.: We have always attached considerable importance to the development of self-governance - Ми завжди приділяли значну увагу розвитку самоврядування. Omission of the evaluative adjectives значну, велику would result in a certain loss of the sense - evaluation, in this particular case.

In terms of semantic structure evaluative phrases may be classified into:

1. Phrases in which the evaluative component is included in the attribute and the antecedent

Table 1

Types of evaluative components (type 1)

Types of evaluative components (type 2)

1. (антецедент, означуване слово) either contains weak evaluation or no evaluation at all:

Phrases in which the evaluative component is included in the antecedent and the attribute is rather an intensifier of quality the meaning of which is equal to the generic adverb “very”:

1. Difficulties in rendering affirmative and nega-tive constructions

Interpreters sometimes have problems with distin-guishing between affirmative and negative messages, which occur due to certain phonological interference (interrelation of similar sounds, failure to “hear” the no/not particles), poor SL signal, or excessive con-centration of attention on other parts of the message. The best safeguard in such situations is the commu-nicative context of the message; however, in consec-utive interpreting there is always an option to apol-ogise and ask the speaker to repeat what has been said which is seldom possible in simultaneous inter-preting. A real-life example (recorded by the author of this article at the international conference) is giv-en below: Нам абсолютно [?] імпонує допомога з боку міжнародних організацій where it is not easy to perceive the message phonologically due to the interference of the -но in абсолютно which could have been wrongly understood as не_ (імпонує). In this case the real sense of the message becomes clear from the overall discourse and the on-going messages: Нам абсолютно імпонує допомога <...>.

2. Word-order and functional sentence perspec-tive of messages

Below the focus is made only on those syntac-tic aspects, which are relevant for oral simultaneous interpreting. The main challenge here is that mes-sages in simultaneous interpreting have to be often perceived before the source language speaker struc-turally completes them. Most authors argue that simul-taneous interpreters use the so-called “split programme” of perceiving and interpreting syntactic structure of the SL messages. In other words, simultaneous interpreters construct “the inner syntactic structure” of messages long before (in terms of seconds) they are completed by the SL speaker using the mechanism of anticipation [7, 185-193]. Interpreters seem “to look into the inner syn-tactic depth” of utterances and plan their possible struc-ture. However, successful anticipation of syntax without considerable delays and pauses is possible if interpreting is performed between languages with a similar syntac-tic structure. Syntactic structure of utterances reflects the way in which the speakers of different languages present the theme and the rheme, or, in other words, it reflects the functional sentence perspective of utterances.

Table 3