Challenges in technical translation and court interpreting : the case of SADC Commission of Inquiry to the Kingdom of Lesotho

• DOI: 10.10520/EJC-110b3a21f8
• Author: M. Sebotsa
• Pages: 195-230
• Record Number: lesotho_v26_n1_a7
• Published date: 01 September 2018
• Date: 01 September 2018

CHALLENGES IN TECHNICAL TRANSLATION AND COURT

INTERPRETING: THE CASE OF SADC COMMISSION OF

INQUIRY TO THE KINGDOM OF LESOTHO

Sebotsa M. *

Abstract

Ideally, in court, interpretation in the target language should

serve as the nearest possible equivalent of the source language

in order to facilitate mutual and synchronised understanding

between the foreign language speaking witnesses, lawyers and

judges. However, such standards are not always easy to

attain for reasons innumerable. While empirical research

attests to the s ignificant impact of inadequate interpreting on

the outcomes of bilingual court cases, the present paper

attempts a technical analysis of translation ch allenges and

interpreting errors encountered during the SADC

Commission of Inquiry to the Kingdom of Lesotho. It

deliberately confines itself within a legal context in order to

use the SADC Commission as a springboard to delve into the

core of the general problems surrounding court interpreting

as well as professional translation and interpreting in

Lesotho. The paper concludes by proposing practical solutions

to problems highlighted.

INTRODUCTION

Whilst translation theorists agree on the translation techniques and

their practical application in written and oral situations, their

definitions of translation as a practice generally differ depending on

the objective of the author. This is clarified by Laplace1 who

* PhD in Lexicology, Multiple Languages Terminology, and Translation; M.A in

Professional Translation and Conference Interp reting in English and French;

196 LLJ Vol. 26 NO. 1

undertook a terminographic analysis of the concept of translation as

defined by Otto Kade, Eugenio Coseriu and Danica Saleskovitch

based on their theories on language and translation.2 Whilst Kade

understands translation as a transcoding process that proceeds from

the acousti c or graphic apprehension of text A t o the p honic or

graphic restitution of text B, Coseriu views translation as the speech

act that expresses information delivered in a given discourse by

means of a different linguistic tool from the one in which it was

originally expressed. In the same context, Saleskovitch theorises

about interpretative translation as an operation in which a

translator or an interpreter assimilates the meaning of any given

text and, through the process of self-appropriation, reconceptualises

and expresses it in a different language.

As regards court interpreting, Edwards3 and Shuttleworth and

Cowie4 understand court interpreting5 as a type of interpreting that

Lecturer in Translation in the French Department at the National University of

Lesotho.

1 Laplace, C., Théorie du Language et Théorie de la Traduction : Les Concepts-

clefs de Trois Auteurs : Kade (Leipzig), Coseriu (Tübingen), Seleskovittch (Paris).

Didier Erudition, Paris, (1994), pp. 255-279.

2 Laplace (1994:7) gives her credentials as a Conferenc e Interpreter, and a

lecturer in Consecutive Interpreting and Simultaneous Interpreting at the

Ecole Supérieure d’Interprètes et de Traducteurs “ESIT School of Interpreting

and Translation” (ESIT – Paris III). In her book, Theorie du Language et

Theorie de la Traduction: Les concepts-clefs de trois auteurs: Kade (Leipzig),

Coseriu (Tübingen), Saleskovitch (Paris), she narra tes how, in colloquies,

translation and interpreting specialists used translation terminology and

terms relatin g to language and meaning to denote different concepts. In

this work, she attempts to establish terminogra phic definitions based on

the three translation theorists she found to be influential in the field of

translation and interpreting.

3 Edwards, A.B., The Practice of Court Interpreting, John Benjamin

Publishing Co, Amsterdam/Philadelphia. (1995), p. 1.

4 Shuttleworth, M. & Cowie, M., Dictionary of Translation Studies.

Routledge. New York. 2014, pp. 32-33.

197

derives its definition from the context in which it takes place even

though it includes interpreting activities in other settings such as a

prison or a police station. In its narrowest sense, it is a bi-directional

oral interpretation6 of any verbal communication from the SL to the

TL within a legal framework, whereby it is imperative that the court

interpreter be both bilingual and bicultural since the main reason

for facilitating court interpreting is to enable the witness to

participate in the proceedings. In the present study, translation is

understood as a cognitive behind-the-scene activity that takes place

in the mind before it could be verbalised in audible terms. It is

therefore a necessary activity to arrive at an interpretation of the

utterance in the target langua ge.

The present study is motivated by the avalanche of quasi-

unanimous public criticism about the poor quality of interpreting

delivered duri ng the SADC Commission of Inquiry to the Kingdom

of Lesotho held in Maser u from 20th July 2015 to 6th November 2015.

I attempt a technical analysis of the full range of technical

challenges and interpreting er rors encountered therein7 premised

on the hypothesis that interpreting as a highly complex cognitive

discipline remains a mystery to the common man as well as to

specialists in various fields. This is well articulated by, Obst 8 who

5 The term “interpreting” is employed througho ut the present article with

the understanding that it refers solely to the act or the actual practice of

interpreting.

6 The term “interpretation” is used thr oughout the present paper with the

understanding that it refers to the end result or the product of the act of

interpreting.

7 For the purpose of the pre sent study, The SADC Co mmission of In quiry

to the Kingdom of L esotho held in Maseru from 20th July 2015 to 6th

November 2015 will henceforth be referred to as The Commission.

8 Obst, H., White House Interpreter: The Art of Interpretation, Author House:

Bloomington (2010), p. x.