Tropes and Rhetorical Figures in Simultaneous Interpreting of Presidential Speeches

Guoda Pelenytė,Jonė Grigaliūnienė

doi:10.15388/vertstud.2021.5

Abstract

Since one of the distinctive features of presidential speeches is the use of tropes and rhetorical figures, which are employed to achieve a persuasive effect, this study aimed to find out if tropes and rhetorical figures are retained in simultaneous interpretation from English into Lithuanian and whether the omission of them in the interpretation diminishes the rhetorical effect of the speech. The research found that out of 500 tropes and rhetorical figures observed in original speeches more than a half are absent in interpretation. Based on a closer analysis of examples, it was concluded that tropes and rhetorical figures tend to cause problems for interpreters and that the omission of tropes and rhetorical figures results in a diminished rhetorical effect in the target language.

Highlights

This paper aims to find out how interpreters manage to cope with rhetorically dense material: whether they strip the original speech of its rhetorical effect in their interpretation or manage to transfer tropes and rhetorical figures into the target language and to gain at least some insights which could help interpreters and interpreting students to approach rhetorically dense speeches
The study revealed that approximately a half of tropes and rhetorical figures identified in presidential speeches by Obama, Trump, and Biden were not retained in simultaneous interpretation into Lithuanian
While it is extremely difficult to measure the persuasive impact of tropes and rhetorical figures, a closer analysis of examples might lead to the conclusion that in the cases where tropes and rhetorical figures are not present in interpretation, presidential speeches tend to lose their intended persuasive impact even if the essence of the speaker’s idea is rendered in the interpretation using other means

Summary

Tropai ir retorinės figūros sinchroniškai verčiant prezidentų kalbas

The structure of Kennedy’s speech is rather ambiguous and it might be difficult even to clearly identify its main ideas and arguments, the speech is very well-remembered for the iconic phrases, in which a rhetorical figure is employed, such as “ask not what a country can do for you, but what you can do for your country” or “let us never negotiate out of fear but let us never fear to negotiate” (Hahn 1982) These sentences definitely are stylistic elements of the speech and yet they simultaneously convey the main message proving that style and content are usually intertwined. Gile’s (ibid.) study grounds this statement as it found that even the most reputable and experienced interpreters made quite a few meaning errors and omissions during presidential inaugural speeches in English while working in the mode of live broadcast simultaneous interpreting Another factor which may negatively affect interpreters’ ability to retain tropes and rhetorical figures in interpretation is a general tendency to adopt meaning-based strategies. If the interpreter does not understand what is meant by a certain figure of speech but is certain that it is important, it is recommended to interpret the expression as literally as possible, in this case, neither meaning nor the rhetorical impact of the speaker’s idea would be retained in the interpretation

Data and Methods

General findings

Findings

Conclusions