Omission in simultaneous interpreting as a deliberate act

Abstract

Omission in interpreting, understood as an incomplete rendition of the information present in the source language, has long been a contentious issue. Altman (1994), Barik (1994), Gile (1995; 1999) as well as Setton (1999) have perceived omission in simultaneous interpreting either as a mistake or as a technique that interpreters may use only in extremely difficult conditions, when experiencing cognitive overload. Nevertheless, Viaggio (2002), Visson (2005) and Pym (2008) draw attention to the pragmatic approach to omission, treating it as a conscious decision made by the interpreter rather than a mistake resulting from miscomprehension. The main purpose of the study is to check whether both interpreting trainees and professional interpreters are sensitive to the pragmatic aspect of omissions. We ask whether they tend to use deliberate omission in a real interpreting task in order to eliminate message redundancy or whether they stick to the original, despite repetitions, digressions and unnecessary information contained in the text. The results of the study may shed new light on the issue of omission in simultaneous interpreting.