Justifying the deverbalization approach in the interpreting and translation classroomWord格式.docx

Justifying the deverbalization approach in the interpreting and translation classroomWord格式.docx

《Justifying the deverbalization approach in the interpreting and translation classroomWord格式.docx》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《Justifying the deverbalization approach in the interpreting and translation classroomWord格式.docx（16页珍藏版）》请在冰点文库上搜索。

Ré

sumé

Pourconvaincrelesé

tudiantsdel’inté

rê

tdeladé

verbalisation,ilimportedelessensibiliseraupré

alableaufaitqu’entraduisant,ilsaccomplissentunetâ

checommunicationnelleauserviced’unclientetd’unauteur.Surcettebasedeloyauté

professionnelle,ilscomprennentl’inté

tdelacorrectiondecertaineserreursetmaladressestechniques.Eninterpré

tation,l’existencedecelles-ciapparaî

trapidementauxyeuxdesé

lè

ves-interprè

tesdufaitdeleurspropresdifficulté

s.Entraduction,l’expé

rimentationpé

dagogiqueaideà

montrerquelavariabilité

estunepartieintrinsè

quedelaproductiondudiscours,quel’auteurd’untexten’enestpasné

cessairementlemaî

treabsolu,etqu’ilpeutsouhaiterlemodifiers’ilenalapossibilité

.Cetteexpé

rimentation,ainsiquelesexplicationsthé

oriques,quin’excluentpaslesaspectsspé

cifiquesparlanguesetparpairesdelangues,ontuneffetsensibilisateur,maisunsuiviconcretdanslapratiqueestindispensable.

Keywords:

Deverbalization,classroomexperimenting,speech-productionvariability,fidelity,language-specificity

I.Introduction

Inarecentbookontranslationresearchanddidactics,Hatim（2001）rightlyputsthe“literalvs.free”issueatthecenterofdebatesontranslationthroughouthistory.Inthetranslatortrainingschoolsenvironment,theliteratureofthepast30yearsseemstoreflectaconsensus,atleastontranslationofinformationaltexts（asopposedtoliterarytexts）,infavorofameaningandintention-orientedtranslationstrategy,asopposedtoastrategybasedonformalequivalence:

itisfeltthattranslationsufferswhenitisconstructedonlinguisticcorrespondences,andservesitspurposebetterwhentheformofthesourcetextisusedtounderstanditandisthenhonorablydischargedwhilethereformulationprocessproceedsonthebasisofanautonomousmentalrepresentationofitsmeaning（informational,emotional,social,intentional,etc.）.AspointedoutbyPö

chhacker（1994:

22）,morethan40yearsago,Wirl（1958:

23）talkedaboutthetranslatoroperatingmostlyonthebasisofthecontent（“sense”）ofthesourcetext

strippedofitslinguisticform（“vomWortlautschongelö

st,alsoentsprachlicht”）.Twodecadeslater,SeleskovitchandLedererofESIT,Paris,madethis“deverbalization”principlethefoundationoftheir“theoryofsense”（“thé

oriedusens”）.Intheliterature,thereissomeuncertaintyastothestatusofthisconcept:

isitsupposedtobetotalorpartial（Laplace2002:

197,Setton2003）,descriptiveorprescriptive?

Myfeeling,somewhatdifferentfromKarlaDé

jeanLeFé

al’s（2002:

146）,isthatthe“theoryofsense”isonlychallengedbyitscriticsasadescriptivetheoryintheusualscientificsenseoftheword,butthatitiswidelysupportedasaprescriptiveparadigm,thatis,adesirableapproachtotranslation.Thispaperdiscussesstrategiesforjustifyingsuchanapproachtostudentsintheclassroom.

II.Translator-rolepostulates

LikemanyotherauthorsandTranslationinstructors（“Translation”withacapitalTwillbeusedtorefertobothtranslationandinterpreting;

similarly,“Translators”willrefertotranslatorsandinterpreters,and“Texts”willrefertotextsandspeeches）,IbelievethatprescriptivestatementsaboutTranslationstrategiesaremostconvincingiftheyarebasedonaclearideaaboutthecommunicativeroleofTranslation,thatis,ifitismadecleartostudentsthatintheworldofprofessionalTranslation,mostoften,andnearlyalwayswhentranslatingnon-literarytexts,Translatorsareexpectedtoservenottexts,butpeople,withparticularintentionsandinterests.

Explanationscanbe“theoretical”,forinstanceusingthe“skopostheory”（seeforexampleReissandVermeer1984,Schä

ffner1998）.Inanacademicenvironment,muchcanbesaidinfavorofsomeabstractthinkingandtheorizing.However,inthecontextofshort,moreprofessionallyorientedprograms,astraightforward,down-to-earthapproachisprobablymoreefficient:

whenstudentsaretoldaboutthereal-lifecircumstancesthatleadtoaTranslationassignment,itbecomesclearertothemthattheyareaskedtoTranslateprimarilyinordertohelpusersoperateamachine,tohelparesearcherpresentandexplainhis/hertheoryorfindingstofellow-researchers,tohelpaCEOpresentanddefendhisbusinessstrategytodirectorsandshareholders,tohelpacompanysellitsproducts,etc.ItalsobecomesclearertothemthattheTranslation

commissionerisgenerallynotthespeakerortheauthorofthetextbutanintermediary,whoseprimaryinterestsmaybetoservetheinterestsofthespeakerorauthorortheirorganization’s,butmayjustasoftenbepurelycommercial.

ThedefaultparametersIdefineintheclassroomafterdiscussionofothercasespositaTranslationdoneattherequestofaTranslationcommissioner（the“Client”）withthepurposeofconveyingtotarget-languagereadersorlistenerstheauthor’sorspeaker’smessage,bothintermsoftheinformationthats/heintendsthemtoreceiveandintermsoftheeffect（s）thats/heistryingtoachieve.Thus,theTranslator’sprofessionalloyaltyisduebothtotheClient,byvirtueoftheprofessionalrelationshiptheyenterinto,andtotheauthororspeaker,whomtheTranslatorrepresents,mostofteninatransparentway,atleastinwritten,non-literarytranslation:

readersmayhavetheknowledgethattheyarereadingatranslation,butnottheconstantawarenessofthefact,andfeelthattheyarereadingtheauthor’stext,notthetranslator’s.Inthemostfrequentcase,theClient'

saimsarenotincompatiblewiththeauthor/speaker’s,whichmeansthattheTranslatorisfreetodevotehis/hereffortstoservetheauthor’s/speaker’sinterests（differentsituations,wheretheTranslatorservesnottheauthor,butathirdparty,alsooccur-seeGile1995）.

Onceprofessionalloyaltyisseenasservingtheauthorofamessage,whosetextorspeechistheverbalobjectdesignedtoservehis/herintentiontoproducecertaineffectsonreaders/listeners,andunderthedefaultassumptionthattheauthor'

sinterestsdonotclashwiththeClient’s,itbecomeseasytoidentifycertaincaseswheretheTranslatorcanjustifiablydepartfromthesourceText.Inparticular,whenitcontainsamistakewhichcanreasonablybeassumedtoresultfromatechnicalproblem（suchasatypo）orfromtheauthor’sinsufficientmasteryofthesource-textlanguage,itiseasytodefendtheideathattheTranslatordoeshis/herworkbestifs/hecorrectsitinthetargetText.Similarly,ifaTextisambiguousandthereisnoreasontobelievethisisduetotheauthor’sintentiontobevague,studentscanbepersuadedthattheywillservesuchanauthor’sintentionsandinterestsbestbyremovingtheambiguity.

Overthepasttenyearsorso,IhavebeencollectingauthenticTextswitherrorsandambiguouspassagesforclassroomdemonstrations.SuchTextscanbefoundinthecourseofone’sTranslationwork（forinterpreting,speechesmayberecorded,bothintheconferenceroom-withtherelevantpersons’permission,orfromradioandTVbroadcasts）.Instructorsnotcurrentlyengagedinprofessionaltranslationcanlookforsuitableexamplesinscientificpapers,whichareoftenwrittenbynonnativespeakers,andinparticularinabstracts.

Inthetranslationclassroom,inordertosavetime,thewholetextispresentedtostudents,buttheyareaskedtotranslateonlyshortpassageswhichareparticularlyproblematic,soastoraisetheirawarenessofsuchproblemsin“official”printedmaterial,whichmanyofthemtendtoconsidererror-free（“Ithasbeenpublished,soitmustbegood”）.

Oneparticularstrikingexamplewasfoundontheinternetrecently,inthebiographyofapersonality:

（accessedonOctober14,2000）,wherethefollowingtwosentenceswerefound:

“HeisqualityofknowledgeisaMujjahidMurakkihJuristicScholarsabletooutweighbetweenthefourIslamicSchoolsofthought:

Hanafi,Maliki,Shaffi’ieandHanbali.”

........

“HeisthefounderofHizbut-TahrirUkbranchandthefounderofAl-Muhajirounworld-wild.”

ItwasobviousforthestudentsthatiftheywereaskedtotranslatethisWeb-pageintoFrenchforthepurposeofservingtheinterestsofitsauthors,theyhadtomakesenseoutofitandcorrectit.

III.Justifyingadeverbalizationapproachininterpretingclasses

OnceTranslationisunderstoodasacommunicationserviceassetoutinSectionIIabove,justifyingdeverbalizationintheinterpretingclassroomisrelativelyeasy,becausestudentsrealizewithinaveryshorttimehowcomplexanddifficultspeechproductioncanbeandhowofteninfelicitiesandevenerrorsoccurinspontaneousspeech.Notonlydotheyobservetheminotherspeakers,buttheypainfullyexperiencethemintheirownspeechproduction.ThedeteriorationoflinguisticoutputqualityinstudentsspeakingtheirnativelanguageduringexercisesinconsecutiveinterpretingwasoneofthephenomenaIfoundmoststrikingwhenIwasafirstyearinterpretingstudent

myself;

itlaterbecamethefocusofanempiricalstudyinwhichIuseditasanindicatoroftherelativedifficultyofconsecutiveandsimultaneousinterpreting（Gile1987）.

Onceinterpretingstudentsareawareofthesedifficulties,theycanextrapolateonthebasisoftheirownexperienceandunderstandinaveryconcrete,personalway,reinforcedwithmanyfieldobservations,howstress,ortheinfluenceofaforeignlanguageintheimmedia