The role of rhetorical competence in training and work of interpreters
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.12775/RP.2008.021Keywords
rhetorical competence, consecutive interpretation, simultaneous interpretation, translation methodologyAbstract
The purpose of this article is to present the idea of rhetoric and rhetorical competence in the process of translation. The main emphasis is laid on competence concerning efficiency, esthetics and the quality of transfer of meaning in translation. The article presents both the idea of rhetoric with rhetorical competence and its elements. My initial assumption is that the process of translating itself is a complex act as regards relations. Rhetoric is perceived here as an attempt to exert an influence in order to achieve communicative agreement. Competence is a practical ability to apply means of improving communication efficiency. The importance of basic rhetorical abilities of the interpreter which contribute to deepening communicativeness and efficiency of message transfer will be presented. Rhetorical aspects of the transfer of message in the process of translation such as argumentation, working on the voice, competence in conversations and speeches as well as intercultural competence will be discussed. All the aforementioned aspects are relevant for simultaneous consecutive interpreting (unilateral and bilateral). These considerations are to create inspiration to extend the perspective of interpreters’ training. In the final part of the article a model of interpreters’ training considering aspects of rhetorical education is presented. The model emphasizes the importance of rhetorical competence in the mother tongue and the foreign language. The model assumes close relationship among its particular elements as shortages in one domain of competence are reflected in others.
References
Coblenzer, H., Muhar, F., 1976, Atem und Stimme, Wien.
Connor, U., 1996, Contrastive Rhetoric: Crosscultural Aspects of Second Language Writing, Cambridge.
Fiukowski, H., 1988, „Zur Rhetorik fur Konsekutivdolmetscher”, Fremdsprachen 4/1988, s. 227-232.
Geissner, H., 1974, Rhetorik, Munchen.
Geissner, H., 1975, Rhetorik und politische Bildung, Kronenberg.
Geissner, H., 1981, Sprechwissenschaft – Theorie der mundlichen Kommunikation, Kronenberg.
Geissner, H., 1986, „Formen des Gesprachs”, [w:] Rhetorik und politische Bildung, Geissner, H. (red.), Frankfurt, s. 37–72.
Kienpointer, M., 1992, Struktur und Funktion von Argumentationsmustern, Stuttgart.
Kram, J., 1981, Zarys kultury żywego słowa, Warszawa.
Mikuta, M., 2001, Kultura żywego słowa, Częstochowa.
Nord, Ch., 1991, Textanalyse und Ubersetzen: theoretische Grundlagen, Methode und didaktische Anwendung einer ubersetzungsrelevanten Textanalyse, Heidelberg.
Schulz von Thun, F., 1990, Miteinander Reden. Storungen und Klarungen, Reinbeck.
Śliwińska, M., 1999, Głos narzędziem pracy nauczyciela. Poradnik nauczyciela, Łódź.
Spillner, B., 1977, „Das Interesse der Linguistik an Rhetorik”, [w:] Rhetorik – Kritische Positionen zum Stand der Forschung, Plett, H. (red.), Munchen, s. 93-108.
Sucharowski, W., 2002, „Sinnkonstitution und alltagliches Argumentieren – Voruberlegungen zu einer Argumentationssemantik”, [w:] Semantische Aspekte off entlicher Kommunikation, Pohl, I. (red.), Frankfurt, s. 469–489.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
Stats
Number of views and downloads: 1080
Number of citations: 0