EU Terminology in Interpreter Training: Selected Problem Areas Connected With EU-Related Texts

• Authors: Ewa Kościałkowska-Okońska
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

The presentation refers to the entire area of translating legal terminology, in particular to the translation of EU law-related texts that are especially vital for translating the acquis communautaire. This area of translation (and interpreting) services has been developing rapidly. The language used in documents is specialist and, at the same time, specific, due to the terminology used. Both the translator and the interpreter face the responsibility and the obligation to observe and apply translation strategies, consistently selected and considering the already existing and valid names, terms, concepts, definitions etc., by means of such available sources of information as dictionaries, encyclopedias, lexicons or special glossaries. Problems that translators and interpreters may encounter focus, to a large extent, on (un)translatability of certain terms, ambiguity of EU-speak or textual coherence, or the absence of it, which results from unclear, vague or ambiguous style of the original. On the other hand, the challenge for the translator/interpreter is constant care of the quality of the text created in Polish, which substantially affects the standard level and quality of Polish that we use everyday. Quality is the concept in translation and interpreting closely related with successful performance and communication (with all its aspects). The attempt at quality description in this context, apart from subjective impressions resulting from our understanding of the importance of features that good - competent - translation and effective communication should have, cannot be devoid of focusing on three principal factors, i.e., the translator/interpreter (as the text author/producer), translation/interpreting process and product, which is the result of this process and, finally, involvement (and competence) on the part of the translator/interpreter. All the above aspects pose a real challenge for the translator/interpreter focusing on legal terminology.Selected aspects of the aforementioned issues shall be verified in a case study conducted on trainee interpreters.

Keywords

EN

translation; interpreting; quality; legal terms

• Publisher: Uniwersytet Łódzki. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego
• Journal: Research in Language
• Year: 2011
• Volume: 9
• Issue: 1
• Pages: 111-124

Dates

published

2011-06-01

online

2011-06-17

Contributors

author

Ewa Kościałkowska-Okońska

• Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń, Poland

References

• Amabile, Teresa M., 1996, Creativity in context. Boulder, Co: Westview.
• Aust, Anthony, 2000, Modern treaty law and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Boden, Margaret, 1992, The Creative Mind: Myths and Mechanisms. New York: Basic Books
• Boden, Margaret, 1994, Dimensions of Creativity. Cambridge: MIT Press.
• Bühler, Hildegund, 1986, "Linguistic (semantic) and extra-linguistic (pragmatic) criteria for the evaluation of conference interpretation and interpreters", Multilingua 5, 4: 231 - 235.
• Bylard-Ozeroff, A., Králová, J. and B.Moser-Mercer, (eds.), 1998, Translators' strategies and creativity, Amsterdam: Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
• Danks, Joseph H., Shreve, Gregory M., Fountain, Stephen B., & McBeath, Michael K. (eds) 1997. Cognitive Processes in Translation and Interpreting. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
• Diriker, Ebru, 1999, "Problematizing the discourse on interpreting - A quest for norms in simultaneous interpreting", [in:] TexTconTexT 132, 73-90.
• Chesterman, A. and E. Wagner (eds.), 2002, Can Theory Help Translators, Manchester: St Jerome Publishing.
• Englund Dimitrova, Birgitta, 2005, Expertise and Explicitation in the Translation Process. Amsterdam /Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
• Gile, Daniel, 1995, Basic Concepts and Models for Interpreter and Translator Training. Amsterdam: Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
• Gran, Laura, 1998, "In-Training Development of Interpreting Strategies and Creativity", [in:], Translators' strategies and creativity, A. Bylard-Ozeroff, J. Králová, J. and B. Moser-Mercer (eds.), Amsterdam: Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 145-162.
• Jopek-Bosiacka, Anna, 2006, Przekład prawny i sądowy. Warszawa: PWN.
• Kadric, M., K. Kaindl and F. Pöchhacker (eds.), 2000, Translationswissenschaft, Tübingen: Stauffenburg Verlag.
• Kaiser-Cooke, Michele "Theory in practice: translation as trans-disciplinary action". In Translationswissenschaft, M. Kadric, K. Kaindl and F. Pöchhacker, (eds.) 67-79. Tubingen: Stauffenburg Verlag. 2000.
• Kopczyński, Andrzej 1994. "Quality in conference interpreting: Some pragmatic problems", [in:] S. Lambert and B. Moser-Mercer (eds.), Bridging the gap. Empirical Research in simultaneous interpretation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 87-100.
• Kurz, I., 1989, "Conference Interpreting: User Expectations", [in:], Coming of Age: Proceedings of the 30th Annual Conference of the American Translators Association, D.L. Hammond (ed.), Medford/New Jersey: Learned Information, 143-148.
• Kurz, Ingrid, 1993, "Conference Interpretation: Expectations of different user groups", The Interpreter's Newsletter, 5, Universita degli Studi di Trieste, SSLM, 13-21.
• Marrone, Stefano 1993. "Quality: A Shared Objective", The Interpreter's Newsletter, 5, 35-41.
• Mesa, A.-M., 2000, "The Cultural Interpreter: An Appreciated Professional. Results of a Study on Interpreting Services: Client, Health Care Worker and Interpreter Points of View", [in:] The Critical Link 2: Interpreters in the Community, R.P. Roberts and S.E. Carr (eds.), Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 67-79.
• Mikkelson, Holly, 2000, Introduction to Court Interpreting, Manchester: St Jerome Publishing.
• Mikkelson, Holly, 2008, "Evolving views of the court interpreter's role: Between Scylla and Charybdis", [in:] Crossing Borders in Community Interpreting, Carmen Valero-Garces and Anne Martin (eds.), Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 81-97.
• Moser, Peter 1995. "Simultanes Konferenzdolmetschen. Anforderungen und Erwartungen der Benutzer. Endbericht, im Auftrag von AIIC", Wien: SRZ Stadt- und Regionalforschung.
• Neubert, Albrecht, 2000, "Competence in Language, in Languages, and in Translation", [in:], Developing Translation Competence, C. Schäffner and B. Adab (eds.), Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 3-18.
• Pöchhacker, Franz and Miriam Schlesinger (eds.). 2002. The Interpreting Studies Reader. London/New York: Routledge
• Roberts, R.P. and S.E. Carr (eds.), 2000, The Critical Link 2: Interpreters in the Community. Amsterdam/Philadephia: John Benjamins.
• Rogers, Carl R. 1976. "Toward a Theory of Creativity", [in:] Rothenberg and Hausman 1976. Reprinted from ETC. A Review of General Semantics, Vol. 11, No. 4, 1954.296-305.
• Šarčević, Susan, 2000, New approach to legal translations. The Hague: Kluwer Law International.
• Schjoldager, Anne, 2002, "An exploratory study of translational norms in simultaneous interpreting: methodological reflections", [in:] The Interpreting Studies Reader, F. Pöchhacker and M. Shlesinger (eds.), London: Routledge, 300-311.
• Shlesinger, M., 1989 "Extending the theory of translation to interpretation: Norms as a case in Point", [in:] Target 1: 1, 111-15.
• Shlesinger, Miriam, 2000, "Interpreting as a Cognitive Process: How can we know what really happens?", [in:] Tapping and mapping the processes of translation and interpreting: outlooks on empirical research, S. Tirkkonen-Condit and R. Jääskeläinen (eds.), Amsterdam: John Benjamins, s. 3-15.
• Shreve, G. M. and B. J. Diamond, 1997 "Cognitive Processes in Translation and Interpreting: Critical Issues", [in:] Cognitive Processes in Translation and Interpreting, .J.H. Danks (ed.), Thousand Oaks, London, New Delhi: Sage, 233-251.
• Sternberg, Robert J., 1999, Cognitive Psychology, Fort Worth: Harcourt Brace College Publishers.
• Toury, Gideon, 1995, Descriptive Translation Studies and Beyond, Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Identifiers

DOI

10.2478/v10015-011-0009-x