retour interpreting

8/12/2019 Retour Interpreting

1/6

1

LECTURE 5

RETOUR INTERPRETING

CONCEPT OF RETOUR INTERPRETING

PROS AND CONS OF USING RETOUR INTERPRETING

RETOUR REQUIREMENTS

RETOUR STRATEGIES

I. CONCEPT OF RETOUR INTERPRETINGThe French term retour refers to interpretation in both directions using two

languages. For example, "I know your A language is French and your B is English, but do you do a

retour? ( = Do you interpret from French into English as well?)

Retour interpreting - interpreters should interpret only into their mother

tongues or also into a 'B' language;

Relay interpreting is another term for indirect interpretation, i.e. rather thantranslate directly from the source language to the target language, an interpreter

may work from a colleague's translation. Relay interpretation can be justified atconferences using many languages where some interpreters do not understand all

the working languages, or in cases where an exotic or rare language is spoken orrequired.(AIICsdefinition)

Pivot interpreting- involves two steps: Interpreting from several languages

into a single pivot language (in 1 booth); and from the pivot language into otherlanguages (in a separate booth).


2/6

2

In relay interpreting, the pivot interpreteris the interpreter working directly

from the source language, and whose translation will therefore serve as the basisfrom which other interpreters may work into other languages.

Relay Interpretation occurs when several languages are the targetlanguage.

A source

language interpreter renders the message to a language common to everyinterpreter, who then renders the message to his or her specific targetlanguage. For

example, a Japanese source message is rendered to English, then it is rendered to

the other targetlanguages.

If an interpreter has a near-native commandof his or her "B" language and

offers other less common languages, European institutions occasionally certify aninterpreter's "B" language as " B-r etour"upon which his or her interpretation into

his or herB-retourlanguage may be used as a relay for further interpretation intoother languages.

Retour interpreting, is an issue that has been hotly debated by bothprofessionals and trainers since interpreting has been recognized as a profession.

However, AIIC advises against this solution and only accepts it in exceptionalcases. This is because relay interpreting inevitably causes an additional time lag

and increases the risk of inaccuracy and errors.

There have been two polarised views in the past: the Western European

camp, which favoured interpreting exclusively into the mother tongue from several

different foreign languages (in simultaneous, at least) and the Eastern European

camp led by the Soviet Union, where interpreters would interpret in both directions

and where interpreting from the A language into the B language in both

consecutive and simultaneous was commonplace.

Daniel Giles argument is that "interpreting directionality preferences are

contradictory and based on traditions rather than research". The Soviet model wasbased on the premise that no one is exempt from comprehension problems and as

one cannot interpret what one has not understood, the comprehension phase mustbe given priority over production".

Emilia Iglesias Fernandez explains that Soviet thinking was based on the

view that as the most important phase in interpreting is understanding, its successdepends on a range of cognitive processes which are more easily completed in the

mother tongue. Moreover, it is argued that it is "cognitively more economical" forthe interpreter to have fewer options to choose from in the expression phase, thusinterpreting into a foreign language, paradoxically, facilitates the interpreting

process. Fernandez also claims that "at the very beginning, simultaneousinterpreting was invariably carried out into the interpreter's foreign language" and


3/6

3

that it is only since interpreters have been employed by international organizations

that this process has been reversed. Gile points out that many authors who areopposed to interpreting into the B language in simultaneous nonetheless do so

routinely in consecutive while maintaining that consecutive has a higher status than

simultaneous. For Gile, they are thus guilty of flawed logic.

Despite these arguments, AIIC, the professional association of conferenceinterpreters, maintains that interpreters should interpret into their mother tongue.

The theory behind this, known as the thorie du sens, was developed bySeleskovitch and Lederer of the Paris school ESIT. Seleskovitch maintained that

interpretation into the interpreter's A language is always of higher quality.

As Clare Donovan points out "a B language is by definition less versatile and

flexible than an A language" and interpreters working out of their mother tongue

find the process more tiring and stressful than into their mother tongue as they donot have the same intuition and confidence of expression. Her researchdemonstrates that recordings of interpretations into B show a "greater tendency to

break down or become unusable".

Djean Le Fal refers to the "intrinsic (original) weaknesses" of retour and cites

her own research which shows that it is "more subject to destabilization thaninterpretation into the mother tongue". Interpreters have to adapt to changes in

global markets and take a pragmatic approach to such factors as supply and

demand. Although retour interpretation remains the norm in the international

organizations interpreting out of the mother tongue is common on the privatemarket, although it should be pointed out that it seems much more common and

accepted in some countries than in others (the Spanish find interpreting into Bwholly acceptable but the French do not and it would be a brave interpreter indeed

who dared encroach on the territory of the French booth). But offering an

interpreting service is a costly exercise and private sector organizers can reduce

their costs by insisting interpreters work in two directions. Furthermore, theaccession of new member states to the EU with minority languages has meant that

interpreters with minority languages as mother tongue are now required to perform

retour even within an international organization.


4/6

4

Issue Pro-Retour Against retour

culturalcompetence

an interpreter is more culturallycompetent in his mother culture

and therefore more competent

to interpret out of his mother tongue

Loss of cultural elements since the interpreterhas difficulties in

finding right cultural equivalents

comprehension no one is exempt fromcomprehension

problems and as one cannot interpret

what one has not understood, the

comprehension phase must be given

priority over production

As a result of lack of comprehension there

can be: omissions, additions, message

distortion, substitutions, paraphrasing, synthesis

mispronunciation, problems with

imtonation, rhythms

Quality Higher Lower, increases the risk of inaccuracy,takes more time

Language use If you have a very goodcomprehension, that will influence

production; a clearer and more

accurate message

Use of internationalisms, calques, change of

register, style

Efforts Interpreters do not make tiringefforts in understanding the

message, they feel confident and not

stressful as regards message

formulation

B language is by definition less versatile and

flexible

than an A language" and interpreters working out

of their mother tongue find the process more tiring

and stressful than into their mother tongue as they

do not have the same intuition and confidence of

expression

Retour requirements

DELIVERY

PRONUNCIATION - Clear articulation/pronunciation (an accent is not necessarily

a problem provided it is not off-putting for the listeners); using the natural stress

and intonation of the target language.

COMPREHENSION- Clear, unambiguous meaning- language usage and grammar

are not in themselves major issues if the message is clear.

LOGICAL LINKS- Separation of ideas: bring out the individual points of a speechsimply but forcefully by marking the end and beginning of sentences , preserve the

logical sequence


5/6

5

CONTENT- avoid reformulation with loss of elements, substitution of elements

and redundant elements, avoid additions if not necessary for the type of message

and event.

FLUENCY- reasonably fluent delivery i.e. not halting because searching forwords, filled pauses (ehms, ohs, coughs, glottal clicks)false starts, repetitions,

REGISTER- fairly extensive vocabulary and ability to distinguish between

registers.

LANGUAGE- ability to pick up and use correct terminology ; avoid language A

lexical and morphologic interference

Recommended strategies:

Listen to the A source language message almost as much as you would to aC source language but think more consciously about how to express yourself

in the B target language (e.g. avoiding literalisms) than you might need tointo an A language.

Avoid ambitious linguistic pyrotechnics: they might not work and you couldfall flat on your face or make the speaker sound ridiculous; steer a modest,

cautious and neutral line language-wise. Keep it straightforward and simplewith short sentences.

Work actively on language enhancement building up a stock of setequivalents between your A and B languages and stock phrases in the Blanguage.

Prepare your meetings, especially terminology, even more thoroughly thanwhen working into A; you will find it more difficult to get round theproblem of not knowing the correct technical term in your B language than

in your A language. Knowing the terms in B is a welcome comfort factorwhen you are having to grapple with the handicap of expressing your self in

a language other than your mother tongue.

Think of your customers- delegates and interpreters taking you on relay.


6/6

6

retour interpreting

Documents