“Community interpreting,” said one interpreter educator, “is a condensed form of all the communication problems that can happen between people. It can teach you a lot about what it means to be a human being.”
Amitav Ghosh on interpreting (excerpts from The Hungry Tide).
four problems of interpreting ~ Seleskovitch 1978
“Bourdieu views zones of uncertainty as contradictory and potentially liberatory spaces within a social structure in which contradictions emerge from a convergence of conflicting worldviews that momentarily upset the relevant habitus” (Inghilleri, p. 72, 2005).
Exclusively at stake in translation is meaning; in interpretation meaning, understanding, and relationship intertwine. This is evident in “the constant overlap between target and source environment” (Wadensjo, p. 105, 2004). While the process of crafting a written translation can focus narrowly on the means by which linguistic meaning in one language can best be rendered in another language; live interpretation must equally consider the ways in which relationship is crafted through language. An interpreter cannot limit their attention to literal dictionary definitions (and neither will skilled translators) but must also consider the 1) functions and effects of particular language use (choices of diction, phrasing, restructuring) in a 2) specific situation shaped by a 3) particular context as well as the 4) possible aims and goals of each participant in the conversation.
particularly in regard to the role of the interpreter as a participant (group member) in this process. (cites &emdash; SL and Diriker) [quotes] Building upon Bourdeau’s notions of habitus, field, and capital, Inghilleri theorizes “interpreting as a norm-governed translational activity” in which meaning is generated through the interplay of microsocial and macrosocial factors (2003, p. 243) and further argues that “interpreting activity can be seen…as a concrete site for the recontextualization of inter-locking fields and their accompanying habitus” (emphasis in original, p. 72, 2005). This is another version of the same point: when languages (and language users) come into contact with each other, change, growth, and learning can occur. If there is a “problem of culture,” it will show up as a “problem of meaning.” Culture will appear in the language (discourse) of the group.