Résumés
Abstract
The paper reports a small-scale experimental study to test the viability or even superiority of technology-assisted consecutive interpreting as a new working method for conference interpreters. In this technique, pioneered in 1999 by an EU staff interpreter, a digital voice recorder is used to record the original speech which the interpreter then plays back into earphones and renders in the simultaneous mode. The performances of three experienced professional interpreters (French-German) in the conventional consecutive and the ‘simultaneous consecutive’ mode were assessed and compared on the basis of transcript analysis, self-assessment and audience response. Our findings suggest that simultaneous consecutive permits enhanced interpreting performances, as reflected in more fluent delivery, closer source–target correspondence, and fewer prosodic deviations. Though the interpreters’ personal working experience and preferences appeared to have a significant influence on their performance, all three subjects easily adopted the technology-assisted interpreting mode and considered it a viable technique.
Keywords/Mots-clés:
- consecutive interpreting,
- simultaneous interpreting,
- technology-assisted consecutive interpreting,
- interpreting quality assessment,
- comparative analysis
Résumé
L’article présente une étude expérimentale à petite échelle ayant pour objectif de tester la viabilité, voire la supériorité de l’interprétation consécutive assistée par technologie numérique, comme nouvelle méthode de travail pour l’interprétation de conférence. Cette technique, utilisée pour la première fois en 1999 par un interprète de la Direction générale de l’interprétation de l’Union européenne, consiste à enregistrer le discours original à l’aide d’un dictaphone numérique pour permettre à l’interprète, muni d’écouteurs, de le réécouter et le reproduire en simultanée. Les productions consécutives et « techno--consécutives » de trois interprètes professionnels et expérimentés (français-allemand) ont été examinées et comparées à partir de l’analyse des transcriptions, de l’autoévaluation des interprètes et de la réaction des auditeurs participant à l’expérience. Les résultats montrent que la « simultanée consécutive » génère de meilleures performances, notamment en ce qui concerne la fluidité du discours, la correspondance source cible et les déviations prosodiques. Bien que l’expérience personnelle des interprètes ainsi que leurs préférences quant au mode de travail semblent avoir influencé considérablement leur performance, les trois sujets ont facilement adopté l’interprétation consécutive assistée par technologie numérique et la considèrent comme une technique viable.
Parties annexes
References
- Ahrens, B. (2005): “Prosodic phenomena in simultaneous interpreting: A corpus-based analysis,” Interpreting 7-1, p. 51-76.
- Baigorri-Jalón, J. (1999): “Conference Interpreting: From Modern Times to Space Technology,” Interpreting 4-1, p. 29-40.
- Barik, H. C. (1975/2002): “Simultaneous Interpretation: Qualitative and Linguistic Data,” in Pöchhacker, F. and M. Shlesinger (eds.), The Interpreting Studies Reader, London/New York, Routledge, p. 79-91.
- Camayd-Freixas, E. (2005): “A Revolution in Consecutive Interpretation: Digital Voice-Recorder-Assisted CI,” The ATA Chronicle 34, p. 40-46.
- Ferrari, M. (2001): “Consecutive simultaneous?,” SCIC News 26, p. 2-4, http://scic.cec.eu.int/scicnews/2001/011121/default_26.htm (accessed 28 September 2006).
- Ferrari, M. (2002): “Traditional vs. ‘simultaneous’ consecutive,” SCIC News 29, p. 6-7, http://scic.cec.eu.int/scicnews/2002/020130/default_29.htm (accessed 28 September 2006).
- Gomes, M. (2002): “Digitally mastered consecutive. An interview with Michele Ferrari,” Lingua franca 5-6, p. 6-10, http://www.europarl.europa.eu/interp/online/lf99_one/v05_no6/page2.html (accessed 28 September 2006).
- Hamidi, M. (2006): Simultanes Konsekutivdolmetschen. Ein experimenteller Vergleich im Sprachenpaar Französisch-Deutsch, MA thesis, University of Vienna.
- Lombardi, J. (2003): “DRAC Interpreting: Coming Soon To A Courthouse Near You?,” Proteus 12-2, p. 7-9, http://www.najit.org/proteus/PDFVersions/Proteus_Spr03%20web.pdf (accessed 28 September 2006).
- Mouzourakis, P. (2006): “Remote Interpreting: A technical perspective on recent experiments,” Interpreting 8-1, p. 45-66.
- Poyatos, F. (1987/2002): “Nonverbal Communication in Simultaneous and Consecutive Interpretation: A theoretical model and new perspectives,” in Pöchhacker, F. and M. Shlesinger (eds.), The Interpreting Studies Reader, London/New York, Routledge, p. 235-246.
- Pöchhacker, F. (2001): “Quality Assessment in Conference and Community Interpreting,” Meta 46-2, p. 410-425.
- Pöchhacker, F. (in press): “‘Going simul?’ Technology-assisted consecutive interpreting,” in Bao, C. et al. (eds.) Proceedings of the MIIS Anniversary Conference, 9-11 September 2005.
- Pradas Macías, M. (2006): “Probing Quality Criteria in Simultaneous Interpreting: The role of silent pauses in fluency,” Interpreting 8-1, p. 25-43.
- Shlesinger, M. (1994): “Intonation in the Production and Perception of Simultaneous Interpretation,” in Lambert, S. and B. Moser-Mercer (eds.), Bridging the Gap. Empirical Research in Simultaneous Interpretation, Amsterdam/Philadelphia, John Benjamins, p. 225-236.
- Vivas, J. (2003): “Simultaneous consecutive: Report on the comparison session of June 11. 2003,” SCIC B4/JV D2003, Brussels, European Commission, Joint Interpreting and Conference Service.