Oralità, traduzione e interpretazione simultanea

Abstract: This article compares simultaneous interpreting with written translation, asking if and to what extent the inherent orality and immediacy of interpreting involves differences in the processes implemented by the interpreter and by the translator. The discussion examines comparatively translation as a process and interpreting as a process, relying on the relevant literature as well as on studies on quality and error analysis, and also discusses a case study, the interpretation into Italian of the Hearing of EU Commissioner-designate Helena Dalli in October 2019. Results show that simultaneous interpreting is not simply an oral version of written translation, but requires specific procedures and skills, on account of the prohibitive working conditions characterised by immediacy and by orality of both input and output. This fact also explains why it is generally accepted that even in the best of cases the product of simultaneous interpreting has limitations in terms of general text organization, cohesion, and style, and, although usable, is often characterised by small errors, omissions, imprecision, uncertainties, etc. and occasionally by real blunders – problems that in most cases are not due to the inadequacy of the interpreter, but rather to the inherent constraints of this interpreting mode. Different quality expectations do not mean that the product of simultaneous interpreting is only a poor relation to written translation, as it would have appeared if evaluated with the traditional criteria of precise correspondence with the source text. In a target oriented perspective simultaneously interpreted texts can be seen as functionally effective with respect to the purpose they serve, and therefore as part of the fuzzy set of translations, an open and fluid whole that includes, with a different degree of belonging, texts with a variable relationship with the source text depending on the context and the purpose for which the text is translated.