COVID-19 Çalışma Koşullarının Sözlü Çevirmenlerin Performansları Üzerindeki Etkisini Analiz Etmek: 2020 Amerikan Başkanlık Münazaralarında Sayıların Çevirisi

Bu çalışmada 2020 Amerikan Başkanlık Münazaralarının ilkinin iki televizyon kanalı için Türkçeye yapılan çevirilerinde sayıların çevrilmesi incelenmiştir. Kaynak ve erek metinler karşılaştırılarak COVID- 19 pandemisinde geçerli çalışma koşullarında sayıların nasıl çevrildiği değerlendirilmiştir. Sayıların çevrilmesi ve çalışma koşulları arasındaki ilişkinin aydınlatılması amacıyla, Amerikan Başkanlık Münazaralarını çeviren çevirmenler ile yarı yapılandırılmış görüşmeler yapılmıştır. Çalışmada, yüz yüze çalışma koşullarından farklı bir ortamda sayıların büyük oranda değiştirilerek ya da eksik çevrildiği saptanmıştır. Sonuç olarak, görüşme ve bütünce analizi bulguları çevirmenlerin birbirlerine yardımcı olamamalarının sayıların yanlış çevrilme oranını artırdığını ve çevirmenlerin sayıları sözlü çevirideki diğer unsurlara kıyasla öncelik verilmediği iddia edilebilir.

Anahtar Kelimeler:

sözlü çeviri, sayılar, Amerikan başkanlık münazaraları, medya çevirisi, sayıların çevrilmesi.

Taking Stock of the COVID-19 Working Conditions on the Performance of the Interpreters: Rendering the Numbers in the 2020 American Presidential Debates

The paper investigates the rendition of numbers in the first American Presidential Debates from English into Turkish for two broadcasting institutions. Comparing the source and target texts, we examine the rendition of numbers under the COVID-19 working conditions. In an attempt to address this question, semi-structured interviews with the interpreters of the Presidential Debates are corroborated with corpus analysis. The findings seem to suggest that numbers were either omitted or misinterpreted to a large extent in an atmosphere different from face-to-face working conditions. In conclusion, the paper shows that the interpreters’ inability to assist each other exacerbated the error rate as the interpreters did not prioritize numbers over other components of interpreting.

Keywords:

interpreting, numbers, American presidential debates, broadcast interpreting, interpreting numbers,

PDF

___

Blake, A. (2020). “5 takeaways from the first presidential debate.” The Washington Post, September 30, 2020. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/09/29/takeaways-first-presidential-debate/.
Braun, S. & Clarici A. (1996). Inaccuracy for numerals in simultaneous interpretation: Neurolinguistic and neuropsychological perspectives. The Interpreters’ Newsletter, 7, 85–102.
Breuninger, K, and Christina Wilkie. (2020). “Vicious first debate between Trump and Biden offered little on policy, lots of conflict.” CNBC, September 29, 2020. https://www.cnbc.com/2020/09/29/first-presidential-debate-highlights-trump-vs-biden-.html.
Cheung, A. K. (2009) Numbers in simultaneous interpreting: An experimental study. Forum, 7(2), 61–88.
Collard, C., & Defrancq, B. (2019). Disfluencies in simultaneous interpreting: A corpus-based study with special reference to sex. L. Vandevoorde, J. Daems, & B. Defrancq (Eds.), New empirical perspectives on translation and interpreting (pp. 264–299). Routledge.
Colucci, C. (2011). Modalisation and pragmatics in simultaneous TV interpreting. A case study: American presidential debates. The Interpreters ́ Newsletter, 16, 61-80.
Dal Fovo, E. (2014). Simultaneous interpretation on television: the case of the question/answer group in the 2004 US Presidential Debathon [Unpublished PhD dissertation]. Università degli studi di Trieste
Dam, H. V. (2001). On the option between form-based and meaning-based interpreting: The effect of source text difficulty on lexical target text form in simultaneous interpreting. The Interpreters’ Newsletter, 11, 27-55.
Desmet, B.; Vandierendonck, M. & Defrancq, B. (2018). Simultaneous interpretation of numbers and the impact of technological support. C. Fantinuoli (Ed.), Interpreting and technology (pp. 13–27). Language Science Press.
Gile, D. (2009). Basic concepts and models for interpreter and translator training. John Benjamins.
Goldmacher, S. (2020). Six takeaways from the first presidential debate.” The New York Times, September 30, 2020. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/30/us/politics/debate-takeaways.html
Frittella, F. M. (2019). 70.6 Billion world citizens: Investigating the difficulty of interpreting numbers. The International Journal of Translation and Interpreting Research, 11(1), 79–99. https://doi.org/10.12807/ti.111201.2019.a05
Isotalus, P. (2011). Analyzing presidential debates: Functional theory and Finnish political communication culture. Nordicom Review, 32(1), 31-43. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/43557433.pdf.
Kajzer-Wietrzny, M., Ivaska, I. & Ferraresi A. (2021): ‘Lost’ in interpreting and ‘found’ in translation: Using an intermodal, multidirectional parallel corpus to investigate the rendition of numbers, Perspectives, 29(4), 469-488. https://doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.2020.1860097
Korpal, P; Stachowiak-Szymczak, K. (2018). The whole picture: Processing of numbers and their context in simultaneous interpreting. Poznan Studies in Contemporary Linguistics, 54(3), 335–354. https://doi.org/10.1515/psicl-2018-0013
Korpal, P; Stachowiak-Szymczak, K. (2020). Combined problem triggers in simultaneous interpreting: exploring the effect of delivery rate on processing and rendering numbers, Perspectives, 28(1), 126-143. https://doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.2019.1628285
Liu, M. (2012). The Making of a skilled interpreter, Found in translation lecture series, Monterey Institute of International Studies. http://sites.miis.edu/gstile/2012/03/found-in-translation-the-making-of-a-skilled-interpreter-what-we-know-about-expertise-development-in-interpreting/
Mazza, C. (2001). Numbers in simultaneous interpretation. The Interpreters’ Newsletter, 11, 87– 104.
Mead, P. (2015). Numbers. F. Pöchhacker (Ed.), Routledge encyclopedia of interpreting studies, (pp. 286–288). Routledge.
Munday, J. (2017). A modal of appraisal: Spanish interpretations of President Trump’s inaugural address 2017. Perspectives, 26 (2), 180-195. https://doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.2017.1388415.
Puková, Z. (2008). Daniel Gile’s efforts model and its application to the simultaneous interpreting of texts saturated by numerals and enumerations. Folia Translatologica, 10, 46–72.
Pinochi, D. (2009). Simultaneous interpretation of numbers: Comparing German and English to Italian. An experimental study. The Interpreters’ Newsletter, 14, 33–57.
Plevoets, K., & Defrancq, B. (2016). The effect of informational load on disfluencies in interpreting. Translation and Interpreting Studies, 11(2), 202–224. https://doi.org/10.1075/tis.11.2.04ple
Plevoets, K., & Defrancq, B. (2018). The cognitive load of interpreters in the European Parliament. Interpreting. International Journal of Research and Practice in Interpreting, 20(1), 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.00001.ple
Pöchhacker F. (1994). Simultandolmetschen als komplexes handeln. Gunter Narr.
Pöchhacker, F. (2011). Researching TV interpreting: Selected studies of US presidential material. The Interpreters' Newsletter, 16, 21-36. http://hdl.handle.net/10077/8252.
Sacks, H., Schgloff E.A., Jefferson G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn- taking for conservation. Language (50), 696-736.
Schroeder, A. (1996). Watching between the lines: Presidential debates as television. The Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics 1(4), 57-75. https://doi.org/10.1177/1081180x96001004006.
Schroeder, A. (2000). Presidential debates: Forty years of high-risk TV. Columbia University Press.
Schroeder, A. (2016). Presidential debates: Risky business on the campaign trail. Columbia University Press. https://doi.org/10.7312/schr17056.
Seeber, K. (2015). Simultaneous interpreting. H. Mikkelson and R. Jourdenais (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of interpreting (pp. 79-96). Routledge.
Wadensjö, C. (1998). Interpreting as interaction. Longman.
Zurcher, A. (2020). “Presidential debate: Key takeaways from the Trump-Biden showdown.” BBC News, October 23, 2020. https://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2020-54650681.