Abstract
This chapter illustrates a corpus-based analysis conducted on the third debate between the candidates to the presidency of the EU Commission (Brussels, May 15, 2014), and its live interpreted versions into Italian. The debate was broadcast live on the Eurovision channel, alongside with the Italian interpretation of the debate performed by the interpreters’ team of the Commission. A second interpreted version was broadcast live by the Italian national broadcaster Rainews24, who appointed its own interpreters’ team. The study focuses on the question-answer (Q/A) group rendition by the two teams: Rainews24 interpreters, who work in simultaneous mode within the specific constraints of the television setting, and without sharing the hic et nunc with the primary participants in the interaction; and EU Commission’s interpreters, who follow interpreting norms and conducts that are conventionally associated with quality criteria applied to conference interpreting, and that little have to do with the ethos of entertainment. The aim of the analysis is identifying discourse elements in the original which operationalize the principle of infotainment, namely the merging of politics and television agendas, and then verify their presence in the two interpretations. The different “habitus” (Katan and Straniero Sergio, Apropos of ideology, Manchester, St. Jerome, 2003) displayed by each interpreters’ team highlights the relevance of the context in defining the appropriateness of a given interpretation, thus raising questions regarding the concept of quality in interpreting and its multifaceted and elusive nature, especially in hybrid forms of discourse, such as the televised EU presidential debate—both institutional occasion and television event.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
All examples are taken from the corpus of analysis EUDEB14. Abbreviations of speakers’ names are illustrated in Sect. 9.2. Transcription conventions are provided at the end of the paper. English glosses are provided in italics when reference is made to the content of turns uttered in Italian.
- 2.
The 2014 EU debates were organised by three different broadcasters: Euronews, in cooperation with the University of Maastricht; RAI—Italian national broadcaster, in cooperation with the European University Institute; and Eurovision, in cooperation with the EU Parliament.
- 3.
Some of the latest developments in CIS are illustrated in the works of Bendazzoli (2010), Setton (2011), Straniero Sergio and Falbo (2012) and in this volume. These studies clearly illustrate the difficulties that lie in applying the corpus-based approach to IS. Yet, they also underline, just as clearly, the necessity of resorting to corpora in order to achieve descriptive adequacy, as opposed to the long-standing tradition of prescriptive and evaluation-oriented studies that have been a distinctive feature of research on interpreting in its early stage.
- 4.
- 5.
The corpus was compiled and transcribed by De Monte (2013) for her MA thesis, co-supervised by the author.
- 6.
Acronyms are composed by three letters indicating role and name and surname initials; roles are M = moderator; W = person in charge of selecting questions submitted via social media (web); C = candidate.
- 7.
As opposed to information-seeking questions (ISQ in Table 9.5).
- 8.
Unfortunately, it was not possible to verify the kind of equipment Rainews24 interpreters used during this specific assignment. However, thanks to a series of conversations with acquaintances who work for various Italian broadcasters on a regular basis, the author was able to establish that TV interpreters’ teams in Italy usually work in the same booth with individual control panels, which allow them to switch each microphone on and off manually and at will.
References
Amato, Amalia, and Gabriele D. Mack. 2011. Interpreting the oscar night on Italian TV: An interpreters’ nightmare? The Interpreters’ Newsletter, Special Issue on Television Interpreting 16: 37–60.
Antona, Marie-France. 1995. Typologie des trilogues dans les émissions de plateau. In Le discours en interaction, ed. C. Kerbrat-Orecchioni, 186–200. Paris: Armand Colin.
Bendazzoli, Claudio. 2010. Corpora e interpretazione simultanea. Bologna: Asterisco.
Bentivegna, Sara. 1994. Il processo di costruzione dell’agenda nell’ “arena” dei media. In Mediare la realtà. Mass media, sistema politico e opinione pubblica, ed. S. Bentivegna, 7–58. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
Bionda, Maria Luisa., Alberto Bourlot, Vittorio Cobianchi, and Marina Villa (eds.). 1998. Lo spettacolo della politica. Protagonismo e servizio nel talk show elettorale. Roma: RAI-ERI.
Button, Graham. 1992. Answers as interactional products: Two sequential practices used in job interviews. In Talk at work, ed. P. Drew, and J. Heritage, 212–232. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cameron Glen, T., Lynne M. Sallot, and Patricia A. Curtin. 1997. Public relations and the production of news: A critical review and a theoretical framework. In Communication Yearbook 20, ed. B.R. Burleson, 111–155. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Charaudeau, Patrick. 1997. Le discours d’information médiatique. La construction du miroir social. Paris: Nathan.
Clayman Steven, E., 1992. Footing in the achievement of neutrality: The case of news interview discourse. In Talk at work, ed. P. Drew, and J. Heritage, 163–198. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Clayman Steven, E., Marc E. Elliott, John Heritage, and Laurie McDonald. 2006. Historical trends in questioning Presidents, 1953–2000. Presidential Studies Quarterly 36 (4): 561–583.
Dal Fovo, Eugenia. 2012. Simultaneous interpretation on television: The case of question/answer group in the 2004 US presidential debathon. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Trieste. http://www.openstarts.units.it/dspace/handle/10077/10078. Accessed: 21 Sept. 2016.
Dayan, D., and E. Katz. 1992. Media events. The live broadcasting of history. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
De Monte, G. 2013. I dibattiti televisivi tra i candidati alla presidenza della Commissione europea. Analisi dell’interpretazione simultanea in TV. Unpublished MA thesis, University of Trieste.
Edelski, Carole. 1981. Who’s got the floor? Language in Society 10: 383–421.
Falbo, Caterina. 2007. L’interprete tra riformulazione e creazione al Festiva di Cannes. In Un paysage choisi: Mélanges de linguistique française offerts à Leo Schena, ed. G. Belletti, G. Benelli, P. Paissa, and C. Preite, 173–180. Parigi: L’Harmattan.
Falbo, Caterina. 2009. Un grand corpus d’interprétation: à la recherche d’une stratégie de classification. In Doctorants & Recherche 08. La recherche actuelle en linguistique française, eds. P. Paissa, and M. Biagini, 105–120. Milano: Lampi di stampa.
Falbo, Caterina. 2012. CorIT (Television Interpreting Corpus): Classification criteria. In Breaking ground in corpus-based Interpreting Studies, eds. F. Straniero Sergio, and C. Falbo, 155–186. Bern: Lang.
Goffman, Erving. 1981. Forms of Talk. Oxford: Blackwell.
Hartley, J. 1992. The politics of pictures: The creation of the public in the age of popular media. London: Routledge.
Katan, David, and Francesco Straniero Sergio. 2001. Look who’s talking. The ethics of entertainment and talkshow interpreting. The Translator 7 (2): 213–227.
Katan, David, and Francesco Straniero Sergio. 2003. Submerged ideologies in media interpreting. In Apropos of ideology, ed. M. Calzada Pérez, 131–144. Manchester: St. Jerome.
Kerbrat-Orecchioni, Catherine. 2005. Le discours en interaction. Paris: Armand Colin.
Lee, Martin A., and N. Solomon. 1990. Unreliable sources: A guide to detecting bias in news media. New York: Carol.
Levinson Stephen, C. 1992. Activity types and language. In Talk at work, ed. P. Drew, and J. Heritage, 66–100. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Linell, Per. 1998. Approaching dialogue: Talk, interaction and contexts in dialogical perspectives. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Linell, Per. 2009. Rethinking language, mind and world dialogically: Interactional and contextual theories of human sense-making. Charlotte, NC: IAP Information Age Publishing.
Mack, Gabriele. 2002. New perspectives and challenges for interpretation—the example of television. In Interpreting in the 21st century: Challenges and opportunities. Selected papers from the 1st Forlì Conference on interpreting studies: 9–11 November 2000, eds. G. Garzone, and M. Viezzi, 203–213. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Martin, Philippe. 2005. Linguistique de l’oralité: Description de la prosodie et analyse instrumentale. The Interpreters’ Newsletter 13: 15–24.
Martin, Philippe. 2009. Intonation du français. Paris: Armand Colin.
Mitrook, Michael A., Trent C. Seltzer, Spiro K. Kiousis, Cristina Popescu, and Arlana Shields. 2006. First- and second-level agenda building and agenda setting: Terrorism, the President, and the media. Paper presented at the Annual meeting of the International Communication Association. Dresden International Congress Centre, Dresden, Germany. http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p93168_index.html. Accessed: 25 June 2016.
Niemants, Natacha. 2012. The transcription of interpreting data. Interpreting 14 (2): 165–191.
Orletti, Franca. 2000. La conversazione diseguale. Potere e interazione. Roma: Carocci.
Pincus, David., Tony Rimmer, Robert E. Rayfiel, and Fritz Cropp. 1993. Newspaper editors’ perceptions of public relations: How business, news, and sports editors differ. Journal of Public Relations Research 5: 27–45.
Schäffner, Christina. 1997. Strategies of translating political texts. In Text typology and translation, ed. A. Trosborg, 119–143. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Schegloff Emmanuel, A. 1968. Sequencing in conversational openings. American Anthropologist 70 (6): 1075–1095.
Schegloff Emmanuel, A. 1992. On talk and its institutional occasions. In Talk at work, ed. P. Drew, and J. Heritage, 101–134. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schroeder, A. 2008. Presidential debates. Fifty years of high-risk TV. New York: Columbia University Press.
Searle, John R. 1983. Intentionality: An essay in the philosophy of mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Setton, Robin. 2011. Corpus-based Interpreting Studies (CIS): Overview and prospects. In Corpus-based Translation Studies. Research and applications, eds. A. Kruger, K. Walmach, and J. Munday, 33–75. London/New York: Continuum.
Shaw Eugene, F. 1979. Agenda setting and mass communication theory. Gazette International Journal for Mass Communication Studies 25 (2): 96–105.
Shin, Jae-Hwa., and Glen T. Cameron. 2003. The interplay of professional and cultural factors in the online source-reporter relationship. Journalism Studies 4 (2): 253–272.
Shlesinger, Miriam. 1998. Corpus-based Interpreting Studies as an offshoot of corpus-based Translation Studies. Meta 43 (4): 486–493.
Straniero Sergio, Francesco, and Caterina Falbo. 2012. Studying interpreting through corpora. An introduction. In Breaking ground in corpus-based interpreting studies, eds. F. Straniero Sergio, and C. Falbo, 9–52. Bern: Peter Lang.
Straniero Sergio, Francesco. (in press) Double renditions in simultaneous interpreters’ output. A corpus-based research. Trieste: EUT.
Straniero Sergio, Francesco. 2003. Norms and quality in media interpreting: The case of Formula One press conferences. The Interpreters’ Newsletter 12:135–74.
Straniero Sergio, Francesco. 2005. Equivalenza, formato dialogico e interpretazione. In Beyond equivalence, eds. N. Kocijančič Pokorn, E. Prunč, and A. Riccardi, 195–208. Graz: University of Graz.
Straniero Sergio, Francesco. 2007. Talkshow interpreting: La mediazione linguistica nella conversazione spettacolo. Trieste: EUT.
Viezzi, Maurizio. 2001. Interpretazione e comunicazione politica. In Comunicazione specialistica e interpretazione di conferenza, ed. G. Garzone, and M. Viezzi, 131–231. Trieste: EUT.
Wadensjö, Cecilia. 1998. Interpreting as interaction. London/New York: Longman.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Dal Fovo, E. (2018). European Union Politics Interpreted on Screen: A Corpus-based Investigation on the Interpretation of the Third 2014 EU Presidential Debate. In: Russo, M., Bendazzoli, C., Defrancq, B. (eds) Making Way in Corpus-based Interpreting Studies . New Frontiers in Translation Studies. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-6199-8_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-6199-8_9
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-10-6198-1
Online ISBN: 978-981-10-6199-8
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)