Translation is a means of interlingual communication

    These factors work in the ideal case when the reporter speaks in a usual speed in a clear literal language, when his pronunciation is standard and he understands that he is being translated and he is interested in that the audience to understand him. But this happens rarely.

    The simultaneous interpreter must always be ready morally and professionally that

the reporter will speak very fast or will read the text of his speech;

the reporter’s pronunciation will be indistinct or nonstandard;

the reporter will use nonstandard abbreviations in his speech, which weren’t entered beforehand, or professional jargon words or expressions.

    All these difficulties may undoubtedly present at consecutive translation but there always exist a feed-back with the reporter. The interpreter may ask again, ask to repeat and there is always a contact of the interpreter with the audience where is surely someone who knows the language and subject of the speech and he will always prompt and correct benevolently, as a rule, if the translation is well in general [9,246].

 

 

2.2 Note-taking in consecutive translation

 

 

    While listening to the speaker the interpreter takes notes of the message he or she receives, while the utterance is being received. It means that perception and comprehension are concurrant with note-taking.

    The interpreter’s notes are an ideographic system of encoding the message. They are word- and symbol-based, their syntax is simple, their word order is direct and grammatical functions are expressed by fixed positions of the elements of the utterance, while positions themselves are vertically organized.

    This brief description of the system of interpreter’s notes makes one realize that to take notes one has to translate the original utterance into another code. This code is in fact very close to what has been previously described as the internal semantic code of the Recipient. And the fact that the interpreter’s notes are something only the interpreter who has made them can read, or decode, proves the point [10,228].

    So in order to be able to listen, comprehend and take down a processed and transformed version of the original utterance the interpreter has to run ahead of the utterance being received and anticipate its morpho-phonemic, syntactical and semantic structure.

    If we now take our model of the interpretation process we shall see that it represents a two-phase process of consecutive interpreting in which the phases are separated from each other, the first phase being completed when the semantic representation is achieved in the form of notes, and the second phase being started when this semantic representation is utilized for programming and producing the message in the TL (target language) [11,256].

    No such border-line can be drawn for simultaneous interpreting. If we attempt a graphic representation of the process of simultaneous interpreting for one utterance, we shall see that the processes of speech perception and speech generation concur and run parallel to each other.

    The language in which an interpreter has to take notes is the source language. Note-taking is a help for short-term memory. It reflects basic thoughts of the source text. The system of note-taking is based at widely spread abbreviations and individual own symbols.

    Symbols and abbreviations used in note-taking must meet the following requirements:

• they should be understandable, easy to write and to decode;
• to be universal and easy to remember;
• they should mean definite notion, symbol, sense, which appears clearly and monosemantically both in linguistic and extra linguistic context;
• to be recognizable at the given moment of speaking and translating.

    In order to read and interpret the notes easily you should place them downward in diagonal way. The first level is subject group, the second level is predicative, the third level is Direct Object and the fourth level is Indirect Object [12,309].

 

 

 

 

Model:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Some examples of the symbols used in the note-taking:

MP – Member of Parliament

VIP – Very Important Person

G-7 – Group of seven

Common used abbreviations:

CIS – СНГ (Commonwealth of Independent States)

EU – European Union

RF – Russian Federation

US – United States

UK – United Kingdom

UN – ООН (United Nations Organization)

MOW – Moscow

NY – New York

LON – London

CEO – chief executive officer

JV – joint venture

FTZ – Free trade zone

P – President

VP – Vice President

I/V – investment

↑I – growth of inflation

E – employment

E – unemployment

D/B – budget deficit

Usage of contracted words:

pro – professional

demo – demonstration

info – information

    Letter precision information such as proper names and geographical names is written only by means of consonants. Numeral precision information like days of a week and months is written by numbers.

e.g. – Friday, 11 – November

dates: current decade – 2008 = ‘8

          current century – 1995 = .95

          current millennium – 1812 = .812

numbers from 1100 to 10000 is to be written by hundreds

e.g. 17H = 1700

       17t = 17 thousand

       17m = 17 million

       17b = 17 billion

        17tr = 17 trillion

    Marking of semantic ties between the symbols is the most important and rather difficult point. Especially when the interpreter is voicing his notation. Speaking is marked with : after the subject group; emphasis is marked with :! (claimed, referred, accused, offered). The symbol (:) means press-conference, press-release, statement.

approval – OK

disapproval – OK

plural – sign of square; e.g. MP² = Members of Parliament

m² = millions

repeat = R with an arrow with the place which is repeated

> - more, < - less

↑ - growth, rise; increase; improvement; future

↓ - decrease, fall, degradation; past

∆ - state, country

lines: → departure;         E   - export; address to

← arrival;               I   - import

 

Expression of modality:

possibility: m – may; m? – might

c – can; c? – could

doubt: ? or ?!

necessity: d (must, to be to, should) – from debere (lat.)

Comparative and Superlative degrees of Adjectives: signs of square and cube

e.g. big² – bigger, big³ – the biggest

“Speaking” symbols:

○ – congress, meeting

X – war, conflict

    This approach shouldn’t be accepted as a third language. It should be created by imagination of an interpreter [13,211].

 

  

 2.3 Linguistic  peculiarities of simultaneous translation

 

 

    During the translation the simultaneous interpreter chooses equivalents on basis of:

• common linguistic knowledge;
• microcontext;
• common background information;
• special information.

    Here is the example of choosing the equivalents in translating the fragment of the report “Patents and other industrial property titles and their licensing.”

    “When technology is to be used in cooperation with a third party, whether in the form of a license, as it is the main aspect of this paper, or by merger or by taking capital investment of a third party into the company owning the technology, it is of tremendous importance to determine the value of patents and other intangible assets, in the following designated as intellectual property rights (IPR), belonging to the respective entity” [14,196].

    Simultaneous translation of the fragment:

    “Когда технология применяется совместно с третьей стороной, либо в форме лицензии, как в этом докладе, либо путем слияния или же вложения капитала третьей стороны в фирму, владеющую технологией, чрезвычайно важно определить стоимость патентов и прочих нематериальных активов, что в дальнейшем мы будем называть Правами на интеллектуальную собственность, принадлежащими данному субъекту”.

    At first we should note that the interpreter didn’t choose the equivalents during the translation as he had chosen and remembered them earlier. These terms are “merger” – “слияние”, “intangible assets” – “нематериальные активы”, “entity” – “субъект (права)”.

    At the same time there was a different interpretation and exchanging of some usual equivalents with those which do structurally and stylistically. They are “capital investment” – “инвестиция” was exchanged for “вложение капитала”, “in cooperation” – “в сотрудничестве” was exchanged for “совместно”./18/

    There are main devices which were formed during the long development of oral translation and they are used in the work of simultaneous interpreter. They are speech compression, omission and addition of the material. During the oral translation from Russian into English the compression is required when there are repetitions, words of little importance or when the speaker is too fast. In order not to be behind the speaker and not to miss important segments of his speech the interpreter has to choose between lexical and syntactical equivalents which must be compressed. e.g. “На международном, национальном и местном уровнях” can be translated as “on all levels” or “on several levels” [14,194].

    The ability to abridge and to condense oral speech is one of the most important abilities in the art of simultaneous translation. But, in order not to misrepresent the speaker’s idea using short words or omitting unnecessary words he is forced to decide each time what is superfluous and should be omitted.

e.g. “Госсекретарь предложил созвать конференцию”

 “The secretary of state proposed a conference”

 “Просмотр состоится 22 сентября”

 “The showing is on September 22”

“Это было опубликовано в газете Нью-Йорк Таймс”

 “This appeared in the New York Times”

Though during the translation from Russian into English the text is usually becomes shorter sometimes there are the opposite cases. It happens when the rules of English grammar and the structure of the language require addition of the article or when the complex type of tense is used. e.g. “We shall have been doing this”

    The time is spending on the translation increases if the interpreter has to define more precisely or explain Russian realias.

    e.g. “Днем они пошли с друзьями в ЗАГС, а вечером свадьбу справили в ресторане «Арбат»” [15,271].

    “In the afternoon they went to sign the marriage registry, and in the evening they had a reception in the Arbat”

    Metonymy and synecdoche, as the devices of simultaneous translation, are used for the specification of common idea and the generalization of typical or concrete occurrence. When there is no exact equivalent for a definite Russian notion or when the interpreter just didn’t here some word he is often saved from failure by the substitution of the general occurrence by the concrete one and vice versa.

    e.g. “зелень” (Нужно добавить зелень в суп) – “parsley and other herbs”

    If the interpreter suddenly forgets the word or the idiom he can use some other synonym even less exact [16,293].

    e.g. “семь пядей во лбу” – (as wise as Solomon) – “He paid him a compliment”

    Antonymous inversion is another very useful device which helps to avoid a word-for-word translation when it is necessary. The possibilities of antonymous usage are very wide but they are not boundless. Context always plays a decisive role especially by the inversion of idiomatic expression [17,172].

e.g. “не иметь себе  равных” – “to be second to none”

“не придавать значения”  – “to overlook”

Grammatical inversion:

    “И в промышленной, и в военном отношении, эти планы нашей страны…”

“Militarily and industrially, our country’s plans…”

“Их было больше”

“They prevailed”

Syntactical inversion:

“Они завоевали эту территорию”

“This territory fell to them”

    The search of semantic equivalents and avoidance of a word-for-word translation are two the most important way of translation into idiomatic English [18,270].

e.g. “глубоко убеждены”  – “firmly convinced”

 “идти к кому-то на встречу” – “to accommodate someone”

“случайные люди в политике”  – “outsiders in politics”

“белые пятна (в наших знаниях)”  – “gaps”

    What ever effective the devices of translation would be they don’t release the interpreter from the necessity to solve chief problem which consists in escaping over-literal rendering during the translation. They are highly dangerous to apply to specific notions and unique realias of Russian culture as they are lack of equivalents in English. The interpreter shouldn’t be limited by linguistics only in order to find better equivalents for such notions. He must study different spheres of human life in the country of the source language: its history, literature, psychology, etc. Only in this way there appears a possibility for the truth expert to fulfill the most difficult task – to interpret not just from one language into another language but from one culture into another [19,218].

 

    Conclusion

 

 

    Oral translation plays very important part in the world. Russian and foreign businessmen, scientists and politicians work side by side at different countries and therefore they need translation during commercial talks, signing of contracts and everyday communication.

    During studying this work we tried to find out the problems of oral translation and the way these problems may be solved. We have done it by finding salvation to the following tasks:

6. We identify the definition to the notion “translation”;
7. We found out the difference between written and oral translation;
8. We characterized the types of oral translation;
9. We defined the problems of oral translation;
10. We found various ways and translating devices for solving those problems.

     As a kind of practical activities translation is a set of actions performed by the translator while rendering ST into another language. These actions are largely intuitive and the best results are naturally achieved by translators who are best suited for the job, who are well-trained or have a special aptitude, a talent for it. Masterpieces in translation are created by the past masters of the art, true artists in their profession. At its best translation is an art, a creation of a talented, high-skilled professional.

    As we have known, there two types of translation: written and oral. As the names suggest, in written translation the source text is in written form, as is the target text. In oral translation or interpretation the interpreter listens to the oral presentation of the original and translates it as an oral message in TL. As a result, in the first case the Receptor of the translation can read it while in the second case he hears it.

    Oral translation falls into consecutive and simultaneous. In consecutive translation the translating starts after the original speech or some part of it has been completed. In simultaneous interpretation the interpreter is supposed to be able to give his translation while the speaker is uttering the original message.

    In simultaneous interpretation the translator is expected to keep pace with the fastest speakers, to understand all kinds of foreign accents and defective pronunciation, to guess what the speaker meant to say but failed to express due to his inadequate proficiency in the language he speaks.

    In consecutive interpretation he is expected to listen to long speeches, taking the necessary notes, and then to produce his translation in full or compressed form, giving all the details or only the main ideas.

    Sometimes the interpreter is set a time limit to give his rendering, which means that he will have to reduce his translation considerably, selecting and reproducing the most important parts of the original and dispensing with the rest.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

List of used literature

 

1. Eugene Nida. Toward a Science of Translating. Leiden: Brill, 1964,-300 
   
2. Eugene Nida, Charles R. Taber. The Theory and Practice of Translation. Leiden: Brill, 1969,-297p

3 Good News for Modern Man. New York: American Bible Society, 1966,-89p

4  Stephen Prickett, Words and the Word: Language, Poetics and Biblical Interpretation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986,-10p

5  Anthony Howard Nichols. Translating the Bible: A Critical Analysis of E.A. Nida's Theory of Dynamic Equivalence and its Impact upon Recent Bible Translations. Sheffield University, 1996,-192p

6  Lawrence Venuti. The Translator's Invisibility: A History of Translation. London: Routledge, 1995,-281p

7  Eugene Nida. Contexts in Translating. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2001,-93p

8  Stephen Pattemore. Framing Nida: The Relevance of Translation Theory in The United Bible Societies // A History of Bible Translation, ed. Philipp A. Noss. Roma, 2007,-217p

9 H.F. Peacock. Current Trends in Scripture Translation // Current Trends in Scripture Translation. UBS Bulletin 124/125, ed. H.F. Peacock. New York: UBS, 1981,-12p

10 Ян де Ваард, Юджин А. Найда. На новых языках заговорят: функциональная эквивалентность в библейских переводах. Санкт-Петербург: РБО, 1998,-79

11 Pattemore, Framing Nida... P. 224.

12 Развернутые возражения см. в  N. Statham. Dynamic Equivalence and Functional Equivalence: How Do They Differ? // The Bible Translator 54 (2003). Pp. 102-111; N. Statham. Nida and ‘Functional Equivalence’: The Evolution of Concept, Some Problems, and Some Possible Ways Forward // The Bible Translator 56 (2005),-29p