| Abstract [eng] |
The object of the present thesis is optional implicitation and optional explicitation as the translation-inherent phenomena occurring for a number of different reasons. Implicitation refers to keeping implicit certain elements that are can be inferred from context, while explicitation involves verbalising the elements that were implied in the original. These actions by interpreters may be performed either consciously or unconsciously. The phenomenon has already been relatively well studied in the academic field, with greater focus typically placed on explicitation. Although implicitation has been studied to a much lesser extent, some scholars have put forward an idea that implicitation may be more characteristic of interpretation than explicitation. The novelty of this research lies in the fact that, with regard to the object of the study, the simultaneous interpretation of the speeches made by the Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) performed by interpreters from Lithuanian into English has not previously been analysed. The aim of this thesis is to determine whether this type of simultaneous interpretation is more characterised by optional implicitation or optional explicitation based on the analysis of a parallel corpus of MEPs speeches made at the EP committees and their simultaneous interpretation from Lithuanian into English. In addition, the identified cases are analysed with reference to the classification defined in the thesis. The study also addresses issues such as the complex character of the addressee (consisting of not only the actual participants of the committee meetings, but also other interpreters performing relay interpreting), communicative risk, and cognitive load. The research employs a detailed classification of optional explicitation based on an empirical study and a classification of optional implicitation designed for the purpose of this work on the basis of the explicitation classification based on the opposition principle. The findings indicate slightly more instances of optional implicitation than of optional explicitation; however, the difference is not significant. Therefore, it may be stated that simultaneous interpretation of MEPs’ speeches from Lithuanian into English is characterised by the balance between optional implicitation and optional explicitation. Nonetheless, the identified optional implicitation tends to largely take place on the discourse and pragmatic levels, while optional explicitation is more linked to the semantic and syntactic levels. The results of this study are applicable to a clearly established and largely non-variable context, as interpreters working in the European Parliament are aware of the target audience and the purpose of the interpretation. Moreover, they can be claimed to possess very good interpretation skills as well as general subject-matter knowledge. |
