Consecutive
interpretation requires a level of collaboration that, when overlooked and
neglected, may leave the interpreter dumbfounded. Yes, interpreter
dumbfoundedness is a thing! That means interpretation is not happening.
People
working with interpreters need to communicate in its entirety exactly what they
intend to say. This takes more than stating specific information; the way the
information is delivered matters even more.
The
interpreter serves as a bridge to enable communication between two parties with
limited proficiency in each other’s language. The interpreter is not the
barrier nor wants to slow down the pace at which one wants to convey
information; such a perception may betray a lack of understanding of the
services of consecutive interpretation. But it should be clear that if one
wants to convey information and be understood, the interpreter will facilitate
that. Any organization that wants its clients and employees to truly understand
each other should consider interpretation services, since that is the core of the
interpreter’s role.
The
interpreter is technically blind to how one regards his or her job, but language
services will be impacted by how one collaborates with the interpreter. Interpretation
services cannot turn an employee’s poor service into excellent service, but act
as an aid between the parties, especially if the information given to the
interpreter is precise and well-articulated. That information must also be conveyed so that
the interpreter can render it faithfully (this concern must first be that of
the employee working with the facilitation of an interpreter, before the
interpreter comes into play). Indeed, the interpreter needs to hear,
understand, and often note down the communicated information. This can all be
done at a sensible pace; those who use interpretation services must be mindful
of what the interpreter needs in order to achieve optimal results.
Listening
to too much information at once is destructive
Let’s consider an example:
Saying two long statements to
the interpreter.
While
the second statement is being said, the concentration and short-term memory utilized
to render the first statement right after it was said will be affected. Notes
taken can become partially unintelligible as the expectation of starting to
interpret after a workable segment of speech has been captured is violated. This
renders the interpretation of the first statement potentially unreliable and
the interpretation of the second statement potentially impossible.
As
a result, to ensure a faithful interpretation, more time will be spent when the
interpreter asks for a repetition, starting all over again with the first
statement, which could have been interpreted way, way back already (before the
interpreter became dumbfounded). Then time will be needed to interpret the
repeated statement. The interpretation time requirement is implied and out of
respect for the person working with the interpreter it may not be requested
explicitly. But frequent requests for repetitions can be expected when clarifications
are repeatedly needed or when one does not make timely pauses in one's speech so
that the interpretation can take place. An implied collaboration cannot be
buried under the idea that one is merely using a service, especially if that is
done haphazardly. But with enough regard from each one involved, the
interpretation can go forward, understandably, in the most sensible and
practical way.
A
word on best practices
Ideally,
the moment for the interpreter to begin his or her rendering is indicated in a
speaker’s intonation, whether he is speaking or reading a text. Ideally as
well, it never needs to get to a point where the interpreter has to ask for a
pause in one’s speech. This is optimizing one’s communication skills. Both a
company’s representatives and its customers can demonstrate awareness of what
is needed to convey information through an interpreter. But it would help if
the professionals working with interpreters would recognize how to segment what
they are communicating for interpretation purposes, with a full understanding
of how consecutive interpretation works. Hence, communication through an
interpreter can truly be a seamless and collaborative process. There are
exceptions to the ideal scenario, but those will introduce exceptions as well
to the interpreter’s performance of his duties. For instance, hopefully only
for brief moments out of anyone’s control, interpretation can take the form of
explaining (using the third person) what someone has said. That is an
adrenaline-triggered switch, but I digress.
Everything
about how to best work with an interpreter can be learned and perfected.
Working with an interpreter is much more than establishing a connection with one
in order to serve a customer, a patient, or anyone a person needs to have an
exchange with; it is a job function itself, and problems can arise if it is not
recognized as such. Understanding both what the services of an interpreter are and
how to use them should be emphasized when an interpreter is retained; this is a
responsibility that should be well understood and taken with care. And because demonstrating
proficiency in collaborating with an interpreter is quite commendable, workers should
be properly compensated for their knowledge and understanding, because
knowledge of a subject matter and proficiency in following best practices can
be measured and become the basis for recognition or a reward.