Community Interpreting Essay

10061 WordsSep 7, 201441 Pages
LANGUAGE MEDIATION, INTERPRETING AND TRANSLATING, THE COMMUNITY INTERPRETER [libro:”community interpreting” CAP. I] Interpreting traditionally has been regarded as a branch of Translation. But more specifically, interpreting refers to the translation of the spoken word, while translation to the translation of the written word. Throughout the history of translation studies, there have been strong arguments proposing different degrees of “faithfulness” to the original text, and by inference different definitions of the meaning of “fidelity”. These range from the need to be as literal as possible to the original at one extreme and to the virtual disregard of the source text at the other. Although Interpreting and Translation have much in common, the differences between them are great. The first difference is that one is expressed in written form and the other in oral form. Translators have the complete text in front of them, the translator has access to numerous resources when preparing the translation and these are becoming increasingly sophisticated with very important aids. Interpreters, on the other hand, need to deal with the oral text as it is presented to them, without the opportunity to consult references, previous interpreting assignments or correct and edit their final product. The role of both short-and long-term memory is crucial in their work. Conference interpreters are provided with material to research and papers to prepare before their work commences. In Community Interpreting, interpreters are given very little information about their future assignment, either for reasons of confidentiality or insufficient knowledge about the purpose of the interaction. One less obvious difference between interpreting and translation is that, as a general rule, translation is target audience-oriented, because the translator is able to assess (valutare) the
Open Document