This document discusses how to properly interpret quotations, allusions, and transpositions when interpreting speeches from one language to another. It advises interpreters to use official translations of quoted documents if available, and to prepare translations of known quotations in advance. When a quotation is originally from a work in the target language, it is best to use the original quotation or reflect the style and period of the author. The document also discusses using transposition to convey complex messages or allusions by finding an equivalent reference in the target language that preserves the main point.

1. INTERPRETATION
Created By :
• Iis Nur Aisiyah
• Adis Tri Permatasari
• Iin Inayatul Maula
• Rizka Aprilia
• Fajar Affriyan
2-H
English Department
University of Gunung Jati

2. QUOTATIONS/ALLUSIONS/TRANSPOSITION
When a speaker quotes from one of the
conference documents, the interpreter should always
try to use the official translation of the quotation
in the target language if the document is available in
that language. When a speaker has provided a text of his
speech in advance of delivery and the speech contains a
literary quotation, the interpreter should try to write out
a translation at least of the key parts of the quotation in
advance, so that it will come out more smoothly during
the interpretation of the speech.

3. When a speaker quotes from a literary work
and the written text has not been provided, the
interpreter can usually handle it by translating the
quotation. For example, an American delegate once
argued against the Berlin Wall by quoting a well-
known line from a poem by Robert Frost: "Something there is
that does not love a wall". The French interpreter could simply
translate this as "Il y a en nous quelque chose qui répugne à
un mur", and the Spanish interpreter could say "Hay
algo que no quiere a los muros", or similar words.
No one expects an interpretation (as,
opposed to a translation) of a quotation to be a
literary masterpiece, and the idea is usually sufficiently
clear . Many famous quotations, such as "to be or not to
be", have set translations in most languages, and an
interpreter should strive to learn them by heart.

4. When the quotation is originally from a
work in the target language, it is, of course,
desirable to avoid retranslation and use the original
quotation if you know it. If not, try at least to use
language that reflects the style, register , and
period of the author .
For example, if a Frenchman quotes
Shakespeare in French and you have to translate it
back into English but do not remember the
quotation, try at least to give your retranslation
something of the flavor of Shakespeare. If the quotation
is lengthy and this is impossible, an acceptable
alternative approach is to paraphrase the quote in
simple, modern English in a way that makes it plain to
the.

5. How could the English interpreter , in the
short time available, convey such a complex
message? The easy way out was to translate the
allusion and hope that everyone in the intended
audience (Western experts in chemical and
biological weapons) was familiar with La Fontaine's
fables ,and would therefore recognize the
allusion and get the point. But that seemed
unlikely .
And, given the importance of the message, it
was better not to take the chance. So, the interpreter
opted for transposition: looking for an approximately
equivalent reference drawn from English literature
which would preserve, if not the full import of
the French allusion, at least its main point and
essential flavor , humorously portraying the mutual
paranoia of the arms-race deadlock as absurd
and counterproductive.

6. In other words, the English
interpreter use dastereoty pefrom
modern American literature to
transpose a stereotype from classical
French literature. Given the constraint of
brevity , this strategy worked, and it
at least preserved the most
important element in the original

7. Argumentation relies primarily on logic and or
emotion in varying doses. An interpreter must be alert to
both and remember that they are not mutually exclusive and
that neither is better perse. Logically sound argument can be
stated in such powerful term that it overwhelms all
absurdity. And if the speaker’s logic is faulty, the interpreter’s
voice must not betray the absurdity. And if the speaker
waxes lyrical to a degree that the interpreter finds ridiculous,
the interpreter’s voice must not betray his skepticism. This
requires interpreters to develop some appreciation of both
logical and emotive rhetoric.
Demand great attention to detail on the part of
an interpreter, who must carefully follow every step in the
speaker’s train of thought. It is important for an interpreter
to bear in mind that, in a speech of this kind, a speaker may
have to present in detail positions with which he or she is
known to disagree.
ARGUMENTATION

8. In the Constitution, forbid our Federal
Government to control as to control as to slavery in our
federal territories? Upon this, Senator Douglas holds
the affirmative, and Republicans the negative.
Let us now inquire whether the “thirty-nine 44”,
or any of them, ever acted upon this question; and if they
did, how they acted upon it - how they
expressed that better understanding? In 1784, three
years before the Constitution - the United States
then owning the Northwestern Territory , and no
other, the Congress of the Confederation had before
them the question of prohibiting slavery in that
Territory; and four of the "thirty nine" who
afterward framed the Constitution, were in that
Congress, and voted on that question. Of these,
Roger Sherman, Thomas Mifflin, and Hugh Williamson
voted for the prohibition, thus showing that, in their
understanding, no line dividing local from federal
authority , nor anything else, properly forbade the
Federal Government to control as to slavery in
federal territory.

9. Thomas Fitzsimmons, then a member of the House of
Representatives from Pennsylvania. It went through all its
stages without a word of opposition, and finally passed
both branches without yeas and nays, which is equivalent
to an unanimous passage. In this Congress there were
sixteen of the thirty-nine fathers who framed the original
Constitution… This shows that, in their understanding, no line
dividing local from federal authority , nor anything in the
Constitution, properly forbade Congress to prohibit slavery in
the federal territory; else both their.

10. Insured that he who is born poor is no
longer condemned to die poor . (Statement by the
President of El Salvador) Paradoxically , just as mankind
has acquired the technology to reduce the distance
between the Earth and other celestial bodies in the
universe, the gap between the rich and the poor has
alarmingly widened. (Statement by the President of
Vietnam)
(a) Which of these two arguments relies more on
emotion and which appeals more to reason? Which
one is stronger?
(b) Could the second argument be strengthened by
going beyond stating a paradox and using the
technique of reduction ad absurdum? Is it the kind
of argument that could be strengthened by statistics?
(c)Could the two arguments be combined? Try combining
them into one sentence. 6 Unlike the incisive logic of
Lincoln's speech (pp.118-120), the following excerpt
from a speech by President Nelson Mandela of South I
Africa relies almost entirely on emotional and moral
rhetoric, yet is also very compelling.

11. After Rome successfully resisted the invasion
of Hannibal, the women 4 Rome demonstrated and
petitioned the Senate to repeal the austerity laws
adopted during the emergency , which forbade them to
wear jewelry and colorful dresses. It was the first time in
Roman history that women had played any role
outside the home.
Notice that, in this short speech, Cato uses
"every trick in the book". He "shames" the
Roman male by suggesting that he is not man enough
to keep women under control.
He appeals to authority by saying that, if the laws
were repealed, women would be placed on equal footing
even legally! He appeals to morality by characterizing women
aslicentious. He ingratiates himself with his audience,
speaking to them "man to man" when he slyly says,
"you know what women are like". He uses the "train of
horrors" or "slippery slope“ tactic by hinting darkly at
the disastrous consequences that would ensue if
women achieved equality.

12. He elicits sympathy and paints himself as
the victim by saying that women have already destroyed
men's freedom in the home. He appeals to self-interest by
suggesting to the men that they would come to be dominated
by women, but he portrays this selfish position as being
civic-minded. He uses scare tactics by recalling "you
remember what it was like before ', we passed these laws". He
uses reduction absurdum humor by concluding that the
Romans, who ruled the world, would be the only men
in the world ruled by their own wives. And, last but
not least, he frames the debate in his
own terms, ignoring other issues.
(a) Identify the parts of Cato's speech which contain
these different forms of argumentation. Are there any
others?
(b) Write an equally concise speech using the same
techniques of argumentation to refute Cato's position.
(c) Does Cato, at any point in his speech, address the central
issue of whether emergency Austerity laws adopted in
wartime should be kept on the books during peacetime? Was
his failure to address this key issue fatal to his other
arguments? (The laws he favored were repealed.)
(d) Translate Cato's speech into English, French, or your other
languages.

13. 1. How to interpret a quotation in
interpreting ?
2. What are the functions of allusion ?
3. The interpreter’s voice must not betray his
skepticism. How if the interpreter feels
skepticism is his perform?
QUESTION