Conference interpreters in the European Parliament
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.12775/RP.2020.001Keywords
simultaneous interpreting, interpreter, , European Parliament, ethnographic researchAbstract
The paper presents the working environment of EU interpreters in the European Parliament (EP), a setting with 24 working languages and 552 interpreting directions. It focuses on the specificity of plenary sessions and the challenges posed by the source texts (usually very short utterances, presented in a rapid succession and at a high speed, often in non-native English). Some attention is devoted to the multi-stage recruitment procedure, which should be of interest to potential candidates. Finally, the paper offers an outline of ethnographic research on EP interpreters that has been flourishing in recent years. The methods used by researchers include surveys, interviews, observation, participant observation, and content analysis of the material from plenary sessions. Some studies suggest that interpreters’ satisfaction is lower than could be expected on the basis of the high prestige and income associated with the job. This is mostly attributable to uncooperative speakers and uninterested audiences. The author’s own study (Bartłomiejczyk 2017) explores what participants of plenary sessions say about interpreters and interpreting. The results paint a more positive picture: appreciation is much more frequent than criticism and doubt. However, the frequency of reminders about the constraints of simultaneous interpreting addressed to speakers reinforces the observations of other authors that many speakers do not adjust their output to facilitate high-quality interpreting. Evidently, some of them are not ignorant of the requirements their speeches should meet, but they simply refuse to make any concessions.References
Bartłomiejczyk M., 2016, Face threats in interpreting. A pragmatic study of plenary debates in the European Parliament, Katowice.
Bartłomiejczyk M., 2017, The interpreter’s visibility in the European Parliament, „Interpreting”, 19(2), s. 159–185.
Beaton M., 2007, Intertextuality and ideology in interpreter-mediated communication. The case of the European Parliament, niepubl. praca doktorska, Heriot-Watt University.
Beaton-Thome M., 2013, What’s in a word? Your ‘enemy combatant’ is my ‘refugee’. The role of simultaneous interpreters in negotiating the lexis of Guantanamo in the European Parliament, „Journal of Language and Politics”, 12(3), s. 378–399.
Buchowska M., 2017, Tłumacz w instytucjach Unii Europejskiej. Wyzwania współczesnej wieży Babel, „Rocznik Przekładoznawczy. Studia nad teorią, praktyką i dydaktyką przekładu”, 12, s. 67–82.
Calzada Perez M., 2001, A three-level methodology for descriptive-explanatory translation studies, „Target”, 13(2), s. 203–239.
Čeňkova I., 2015, Relay interpreting, [w:] Routledge encyclopedia of interpreting studies, F. Pochhacker (red.), London–New York, s. 339–341.
Cosmidou O., 2013, The European Parliament. A temple of multilingualism, a pioneer in interpreting ‘exploits’, „Gramma”, 19, s. 129–132.
Defrancq B., Plevoets K., 2018, The cognitive load of interpreters in the European Parliament. A corpus-based study of predictors for the disfluency uh(m), „Interpreting”, 20(1), s. 1–32.
de Vicente F., 2011, European Union and translation, http://ec.europa.eu/ dgs/translation/workwithus/candidatecountries/documents/european__ union__translation_en.pdf (dostęp: 28.12.2013).
Duflou V., 2016, Be(com)ing a conference interpreter. An ethnography of EU interpreters as a professional community, Amsterdam–Philadelphia.
Henriksen L., 2007, The song in the booth. Formulaic interpreting and oral textualisation, „Interpreting”, 9(1), s. 1–20.
Kajzer-Wietrzny M., 2013, Idiosyncratic features of interpreting style, „New Voices in Translation Studies”, 9, s. 38–52.
Kent S. J., 2009, A discourse of danger and loss. Interpreters on interpreting for the European Parliament, [w:] The Critical Link 5. Quality in interpreting. A shared responsibility, L. Stern, U. Ozolins, S. B. Hale (red.), Amsterdam–Philadelphia, s. 55–70.
Kent S. J., 2014, Interpreting, niepubl. praca doktorska, University of Massachusetts Amherst.
Komisja Europejska, b.d., Interpretation in figures – 2015, http://ec.europa.eu/ dgs/scic/docs/about_dg_int/statistics-brochure.pdf (dostęp: 1.07.2016).
Koturbasz B., 2012, Ideology in the European Parliament. ‘We’ markers in one-minute speeches and their modifications in translated and interpreted discourse, niepubl. praca magisterska, Uniwersytet Gdański.
Kučiš V., Majhenič S., 2018, Cultural and stress-related manifestations of political controversial language in the European Parliament from the view of interpreters, „Babel”, 64(1), s. 33–62.
Lejkowska-Abdelhazer K., 2018, Interpreting impoliteness. A case study on the basis of Nigel Farage’s speech at the European Parliament in Strasbourg on 25th November 2009, niepubl. praca magisterska, Uniwersytet Śląski.
Loupaki E., 2008, Shifts of involvement in translation. The case of European Parliament proceedings, [w:] New trends in translation and cultural identity, M. Munoz-Calvo, C. Buesa-Gomez, M. Angeles Ruiz-Moneva (red.), Newcastle upon Tyne, s. 105–116.
Magnifico C., Defrancq B., 2017, Hedges in conference interpreting. The role of gender, „Interpreting”, 19(1), s. 21–46.
Marzocchi C., 1998, The case for an institution-specific component in interpreting research, „The Interpreters’ Newsletter”, 8, s. 51–74.
Monti C., Bendazzoli C., Sandrelli A., Russo M., 2005, Studying directionality in simultaneous interpreting through an electronic corpus: EPIC (European Parliament Interpreting Corpus), „Meta”, 50(4), s. 1079–1147.
Parlament Europejski, 2013, Towards more efficient and cost effective interpretation in the European Parliament, http://www.europarl. europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+REPORT+A7- -2013-0233+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN (dostęp: 4.01.2015).
Phillipson R., 2003, English-only Europe? Challenging language policy, London– New York.
Pochhacker F., 2004, Introducing interpreting studies, London–New York.
Pym A., 2008, Translation vs. language learning in international institutions. Explaining the diversity paradox, http://usuaris.tinet.cat/apym/on-line/ translation/2008_diversity_paradox.pdf (dostęp: 28.12.2013).
Russo M., 2010, Reflecting on interpreting practice. Graduation theses based on the EPIC, [w:] Translationswissenschaft – Stand und Perspektiven, L. Zybatow (red.), Frankfurt, s. 35–50.
Spinolo N., Garwood J., 2010, To kill or not to kill. Metaphors in simultaneous interpreting, „Forum”, 8(1), s. 181–211.
Van Dam H., Zethsen K. K., 2013, Conference interpreters – the stars of the translation profession? A study of the occupational status of Danish EU interpreters as compared to Danish EU translators, „Interpreting”, 15(2), s. 229–259.
Vuorikoski A. R., 2004, A voice of its citizens or a modern tower of Babel? The quality of interpreting as a function of political rhetoric in the European Parliament, Tampere.
Wright S., 2007, English in the European Parliament. MEPs and their linguistic repertoires, „Sociolinguistica”, 27, s. 151–165.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
Stats
Number of views and downloads: 613
Number of citations: 0