GHung's Blog for Open Salon

Creative Spirit for a Ready Writer

GHung

GHung
Location
Lombard, Illinois, United States of America
Birthday
December 27
Title
Consulting Media Arts Communications
Company
Communications, Languages & Culture, Inc.
Bio
Creative spirit for a ready writer... Gardenia C. Hung has been writing prose, poetry, fiction, and non-fiction topics for the last forty-two (42) years in English, Spanish, French, and sometimes into Portuguese translation. She has written poetry for Scholastic Magazine in Spanish encouraged by her lyrical expression and descriptive style. Ms. Hung completed Elementary and Middle School in Santiago de Cuba with a diploma and certification in Spanish. Then, Gardenia C. Hung continued studies in the United States of America for Middle School, grades 6th with Miss Honeywood, 7th, and 8th at Avondale Elementary School where she graduated with High Honors in Mr. Herbert Hebel's 8th grade homeroom, in Chicago, Illinois. For Middle School English. Ms. Hung wrote original stories which received praise for writing style and authentic narrative topics, encouraged to continue studying English by Miss Kardos, her ESL teacher at Avondale Grammar School and other mentors, family, and friends. Later at Madonna High School received, Ms. Hung received a High School Diploma with High Honors for graduation in the top ten percent of the Class of 1977 with majors in English, French, Art, History, and the Humanities in Chicago, Illinois. Gardenia C. Hung was admitted at Northeastern Illinois University with Advanced Placement in English, French, and Spanish where she majored in Education, English, French, Spanish, Linguistics and minors in Music, Dance, and Physical Education to receive a Bachelor of Arts degree for the Class of 1982. At NEIU, she received a summer scholarship from Laval University in Ville de Québec, Canada to major in French Linguistics, Syntax, and Phonetics. The following year, in 1983, Ms. Hung continued graduate studies at the University of Illinois at Chicago for a Master of Arts in Communications & Theatre, which included majors in Rhetoric, Ethnography, and Theatre. Gardenia C. Hung has written publications for professional associations and community groups. In addition, Ms. Hung writes for online media CNN iReport, Triblocal, Blogger, Facebook, WordPress, Typepad, and other social media groups on the world wide web.

APRIL 21, 2010 11:56AM

Interpreting and Translation as Communication Processes

Rate: 0 Flag
“Interpreting and Translation as Communication Processes for the 21st Century” 

                                                         

Communications, Languages & Culture, Inc. 
ABSTRACT 
This proposal will present “Interpreting and Translation as Communication(s) Processes for the 21st Century” in order to associate the status of interpreting and translation to existing communication processes and establish the future of the interpreting and translation profession within the field of communication(s) using the Transactional Model of Communication (Barnlund, 1970) as a frame of reference.  Interpreting and translation are both expressions of communication processes in a different way, shape, and form.  Consequently, interpreting and translation are to be included, considered, and taught as related disciplines to the field of communication(s) for the future of the profession. The transactional communication model perceives human communication as a simultaneous, interdependent process, in which the speaker servers as the listener and the listener as a speaker, in tandem.  It is also symbiotic, that is to say, mutually beneficial to the source and the receiver, since each one exists in relation to the other.  The source of communication, as well as the receiver of the message, are continuously exchanging information in a cyclical pattern. In the same way, the interpreter and the translator, both have dual communicative functions, outputting and inputting messages, be these spoken or written.  Interpreting requires verbal interaction between an interpreter and a speaker in an oral mode—unless it is an interpretation of sight reading of a written document.  Translation invites non-verbal interaction between a translator and a reader in written form.  Given that communication(s) involve speaking, listening, reading, and writing, then interpreting and translation are means of communication(s) and should be associated as communicative processes within the same field; thus granting interpreting and translation the status deserved for the future of the profession as partners in the field of communication(s).
INTRODUCTION 
This proposal will present “Interpreting and Translation as Communication Processes for the 21st Century” in order to associate the status of interpreting and translation to existing communication processes and establish the future of the interpreting and translation profession within the field of communication using the Transactional Model of Communication (Barnlund, 1970) as a frame of reference.  Interpreting and translation are both expressions of communication processes in a different way, shape, and form. Consequently, interpreting and translation are to be included, considered, and taught as related disciplines to the field of communication for the future of the profession. 
I want to propose the integration of interpreting and translation in the field of communication because these two disciplines are expressions of human communication processes.  Based upon years of experience as a communicator, who is also an interpreter and translator, I perceive the relationship that interpreting and translation have in communication(s) through speaking, listening, writing, and reading, here and now,  in our everyday world.   
I have been a community college professor teaching Medical Spanish communication(s) to healthcare professionals, as well as Conversational Spanish, English (093): Preparation for College Writing III, English 101, 102, 103, and 105, in DuPage County, Illinois, USA.  I have worked with nurses, therapists, paramedics, physicians, assistants, social workers, volunteers, and administrative personnel at local hospitals and medical training centers in the area who wanted to use Spanish for Communication(s) in a health care setting as interpreters and translators to facilitate communication in Spanish and English for the patients and visitors at their medical facility.  In addition, I have also taught college students taking English courses who enrolled in the Independent Learning Center at the College of DuPage in Glen Ellyn, Illinois. Moreover, as a graduate college student, I have been a volunteer at the Emergency Room of the University of Illinois Hospital in Chicago, Illinois for a study on the delivery of healthcare and medical communication(s) to elderly patients who spoke English and Spanish.  This medical communication(s) study was sponsored by the American Gerontological Association in the United States. Furthermore, I have been a professional interpreter and translator since 1981 while I worked for the Illinois Industrial Commission in Chicago, Illinois during hearing arbitrations due to employment-related injuries suffered by Spanish-speaking workers.  Since then, I have interpreted for other government levels in the United States and miscellaneous business organizations. An interpreter and a translator, both have dual communicative functions, outputting and inputting messages, simultaneously and intertwined, be these spoken or written, to exchange and negotiate meaning with a third party. Interpreting and translation processes are examples of transactional communication(s).
For this presentation and proposal, I have applied the Transactional Model of Communication, (Barnlund, 1970), to include interpreting and translation in the field of communication(s) because it is a dynamic theory which requires interdependent and simultaneous exchange between the participants, be they interpreters, speakers, translators, readers, and writers, to negotiate meaning from one language to another.  In the Essentials of Human Communication (2002), DeVito describes the Transactional process of communication to be a more satisfying view of the exchange in which a person serves simultaneously as speaker and listener.  At the same time that a message is sent, one is also receiving messages from one’s own communication(s) and from the reactions of the other person.  The transactional point of view perceives each person as both speaker and listener, as simultaneously communicating and receiving messages (Watzlawick, Beavin & Jackson, 1967), (Barnlund, 1970), (Wilmont, 1995).  In addition, the transactional view sees the elements of communication as interdependent (never independent).   Each one exists in relation to the others. Interpreting requires verbal interaction between an interpreter, a speaker, and a third party,  in an oral mode—unless it is an interpretation of sight reading of a written document.  Translation invites non-verbal interaction between a translator, a writer, and a reader in written text form.    All the elements of  human communication processes are present in interpreting and translation.   Therefore, interpreting and translation ought to be included in the teaching of communication(s) as integrated disciplines, part of the whole field of communication(s), in order to make these two professions more pervasive and available to the general population as introductions to the fields; that is to say, we may include and offer communication courses in the Communication(s) Department of a learning institution, such as Introduction to Interpreting, Translation 101, which demystify interpreting and translation as totally separate, specialized disciplines, only taught in certain language programs, at certain designated institutions.  The integration of Interpreting and Translation in the Communication(s) curriculum and the Humanities division of higher learning bodies may be an interdisciplinary effort.  By doing so, students have more open options and the flexibility to use communication(s) beyond the scope of what has been defined and to include foreign language skills through interpreting and translation in a global forum, the local community, in the media, the business world, healthcare, the courtroom, at work, at home, etc.                                                                                                      
Including interpreting and translation in the curriculum for communication(s) would popularize these two disciplines and make interpreting and translation more acceptable choices and less ominous subjects of study to the general public specializing in communication(s) at learning institutions.  Communication(s) students would then perceive interpreting and translation as part of their curriculum and also as viable job options and skills to acquire in the 21st century, along with language skills, in addition to their mother tongue.  By offering interpreting and translation as part of the communication(s) curriculum program, learning institutions improve the students’ opportunities and job marketability in the field of communication(s) for the new millennium.  Why not integrate interpreting and translation as communication processes for the 21st century?   

 

Given that communication involves speaking, listening, reading, and writing, then interpreting and translation are means of communication and should be associated as communicative processes within the same field; thus, granting interpreting and translation the status it deserves for the future of the profession as partners in the field of communication(s).

 What is communication? 
Communication is interaction among people to convey a message.  The communication process involves verbal and non-verbal dynamics to promote understanding and cooperation.  It is speaking, listening, reading, and writing.  Communication is also imaging through graphics and visuals in the media. (Hung, ICTFL 2000)   Human communication is the process by which people exchange information, (Hung, ICTFL 2001), through languages and otherwise.  Foreign languages promote understanding through interpersonal communication on a one-to-one basis, people-to-people, verbally and non-verbally, using interpreting and translation as forms of communication, from one language to another.   Languages are implemented through interpreting and translation in the fields of technology, research, and development throughout diverse professional disciplines.  Thus, languages become communication tools in the 21st century by means of interpreting and translation.  
How are interpreting and translation related to communication? 

 

Interpreting and translation are communication processes which involve speaking, listening, reading, and writing to express and negotiate messages between participants in the communication exchange.

 Given that these are modes of communication in our global and local community, (Hung, ICTFL 2001), interpreting and translation of languages are to be perceived as communication processes for the 21st century.   Whether we are at work, in the courtroom, during doctor-patient interviews, at the immigration  office, conferences, business meetings, etc., we need to speak, listen, read, and write in any language to communicate.  For instance, other applications of language interpreting and translation uses can be seen in satellite and global positioning systems, world-wide assistance telecommunication(s) centers; geo conferencing, videoconferencing, videophones, teleconferencing; internet delivery of instruction on-line; email tutorials; intranet web-based education; audio computer-based tests for ESL listening skills, remote learning, multimedia, etc. Interpreting through spoken communication is used simultaneously or consecutively, on a regular basis in the business world, consulate offices, legal settings, in the medical field, technically, for liaison and group escorts, telephone transactions, conferences, etc.  Translation is also a written mode, a process of communication and a language tool on-line, on the internet and the world wide web, through machines, electronically, commercially, legally, medically, and otherwise.      Ian Mason has defined spoken dialogue interpreting in Triadic Exchanges as a generic term covering diverse fields of interpreting which have in common the basic feature of face-to-face interaction between three parties: the interpreter and (at least) two others, a source-speaker, a receiver-listener.  The communication exchange and/or transaction consists of spontaneous dialogue interaction, involving turn-taking conversation, in two languages, a source and a target. It is usually goal-directed in the sense that there is some outcome or message to be negotiated.  The interpreter is perceived as one of the parties to this three-way exchange, in which each participant’s moves can affect each participant and thus the outcome of the event.  The interpreter is a “critical link” in spoken triadic communication. Translation as a communication process also involves a three-way transaction for meaning between the writer, the reader, and the translator in a written format–it is a semantics exchange.  According to Random House Webster’s Dictionary, a translation is a rendering of the same ideas in a different language from the original text.  A translator communicates the writer’s message to the reader from one language to another through written text.  In the same way that a computer compiler decodes and encodes data from a high level language to a machine language, a human translator decodes and encodes the assigned meaning of symbols from a source language to a target language. 
From where is the Transactional Model of Communication derived? 
Dean C. Barnlund discussed a Transactional Model of Communication in 1970 while working with J. Akin, A. Goldberg, G. Myers, and J. Stewart on their research using Computer Compilers as seen in Language Behavior: A book of readings in communication, (pp.43-61), published by The Hague: Mouton. For our purposes, a Computer Compiler is a software that translates a program written from a high-level language into another language, usually a machine-based language, by means of a “compiler”, that is a “translator”.  Compilers in computer-based formats convert a program, data, code, etc., from one form to another, that is to say, a Fortran program into assembly-based machine language, according to Random House Webster’s Unabridged Dictionary. 
In the 21st century interpreters and translators might as well be human “compilers” and/or information processors from one language to another.  Interpreters and translators facilitate communication(s) from one language to another on behalf of others.  These communicators convert a message from the source to the receiver, from one language to another, in a triadic exchange of information.  Although some people address interpreters as translators interchangeably, we know that interpreters work primarily in a spoken/aural format and translators function primarily in a written/visual mode.  Just as a computer compiler translates a software program written from a high-level language into another, interpreters and translators process an exchange of semantics information simultaneously from the source speaker/writer to the receiver/reader, from one language to another, in a verbal or written format.  Interpreters and translators negotiate the meaning and content of a message formulated by the source and/or the receiver in sync with the transactional model of communication(s) based upon computer compilers (Barnlund, 1970).  
In addition to the application of the transactional theory to communication(s), Ling Liu, Calton Pu, and Robert Meersman have also researched and developed a computer-based Transactional Activity Model for Organizing Open-Ended Cooperative Flow Activities.  This computational application is based upon a number of extended transaction models which have been proposed to support information-intensive applications, such as CAD, computer-aided drafting, CAM, distributed operating systems, and software development It is a mathematical algorithm which integrates two mergeable activities to ensure a merged history from two correct histories.  It establishes the existent dependencies between two activities.  These activities are structured programs that exchange information with other activities, databases, files, and users.  The system covers a family of dynamic activity restructuring operations, as well as other important features of the Transactional Activity Model (TAM). 

 

CONCLUSION

This proposal has presented “Interpreting and Translation as Communication(s) Processes for the 21st Century” in order to associate the status of interpreting and translation to existing communication processes and establish the future of the interpreting and translation profession within the field of communication(s) using the Transactional Model of Communication (Barnlund, 1970) as a frame of reference.  As you know, interpreting and translation are both expressions of communication(s) processes in a different way, shape, and form.  Consequently, interpreting and translation are to be included, considered, and taught as related disciplines to the field of communication(s) for the future of the profession. As we have discussed earlier, the transactional model of communication perceives human communication as a simultaneous, interdependent process, in which the speaker serves as a listener and the listener as a speaker, in tandem.  It is also symbiotic, that is to say, mutually beneficial to the source and the receiver since each one exists in relation to the other. The source of the communication, as well as the receiver of the message, both are continuously exchanging information in a cyclical pattern.   In the same way, the interpreter and the translator, both have dual communicative functions, outputting and inputting messages, be these spoken or written.  Interpreting requires verbal interaction between an interpreter and a speaker in an oral mode—unless it is an interpretation of sight reading of a written document.  Translation invites non-verbal interaction between a translator and a reader in written form.  Given that communication(s) involve speaking, listening, reading, and writing, then interpreting and translation are means of communication(s) and should be associated as communicative processes within the same field; thus granting interpreting and translation the status deserved for the future of the profession as partners in the field of communication(s). Although I have taught at the community college level for many years, I am not aware of any learning institutions that currently include Interpreting and Translation in the Communication(s) curriculum program.  That is one of the reasons why I decided to present this proposal at this FIT 2002 conference focusing on Translation: New Ideas for a New Century in Vancouver, British Columbia, CANADA.  As far as I am aware, Interpreting and Translation are not widely taught nor included in the curriculum programs at institutions of higher learning.  As far as I know, there are designated institutions world-wide that teach Interpreting and Translation.  However, these two disciplines are not readily available now as courses of study to the general public or communication(s) enthusiasts at institutions of higher learning.  Perhaps my proposal to regard Interpreting and Translation as Communication Processes in the 21st Century will note and highlight the need to include and integrate Interpreting and Translation in the field of Communication(s) at academic institutions for the benefit of future communicators in the new millennium. 
REFERENCES AND SOURCES 
Barnlund, Dean C.  (1970) A Transactional model of communication.  In J. Akin, A. Goldberg, G. Myers, and                J. Stewart (Compilers), Language behavior: A book of readings in communication, (pp.43-61).                The Hague: Mouton, The Netherlands. Baron, Sara, M.A., M.S.  http://www.lilb.umb.edu~sara  (2001) COMSTU 200, Introduction to Communication(s),                University of Massachusetts, Boston, USA                DeVito, Joseph A.  (2002) Essentials of Human Communication.  Fourth Edition.  Hunter College.  The City of                New York.  Boston: Allyn & Bacon, A Pearson Education Company, USA. Diccionario de Informática Inglés-Español.  Glosario de Términos Informáticos.  Sexta Edición.  (1985)                ParaInfo Madrid.  Olivetti Centro de Formación Personal. Hung, Gardenia C., M.A.  Conversational Spanish for Business.  (1997-2000) Business Professional Institute.                College of DuPage, Glen Ellyn, Illinois, USA. Program Managers Kim Ramey and Donna Marchant.                Hung, Gardenia C., M.A.  Spanish for Healthcare Professionals.  Bilingual Resources by Small Group   Collaboration.  Winter 2000.  College of DuPage, Continuing Education for Healthcare Professionals.                Glen Ellyn, Illinois, USA.  Prepared and edited medical interpreting and translation information for                healthcare professionals in DuPage County, Illinois from 1997 through 2000. Hung, Gardenia C., M.A.  Spanish for Healthcare Professionals & Service Learning.  Winter 1999.  Prepared for               Kathy Hennessy, Service Learning Coordinator, College of DuPage, and  Continuing Education for                Healthcare Professionals, Glen Ellyn, Illinois, USA. Hung, Gardenia C., M.A.  Spanish Tutoring.  (1999-2000) Continuing Education Program.                College of DuPage, Glen Ellyn, Illinois, USA.                 Hung, Gardenia C., M.A.  “Communicate: Speaking, Listening, Reading, and Writing in Foreign Languages”.                Presentation at the Illinois Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages Conference 2000, Friday,                October 20, 2000, Carlyle Room at the Wyndham Hotel, Itasca, Illinois, USA.   
REFERENCES AND SOURCES 
Hung, Gardenia C., M.A.  “How Are Languages Used as Communication Tools in the 21st Century?”.                Presentation at the Illinois Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages Conference 2001, Saturday,                October 20, 2001, Barrington Room at the Wyndham Hotel, Itasca, Illinois, USA. International Book Distributors, ibd ltd., Freek Lankhof, P.O. Box 467, Kinderhook, NY 12106 USA Internet Website, http://www.americantranslators.org/divisions/FLD/fldfaqs.htm                 FAQs about Interpreting, Gardenia C. Hung, M.A., (1999) French Language Division, Frequently Asked                Questions about Interpreting, American Translators Association, USA. Kelling, George W.  (1975) Language: Mirror, Tool, and Weapon.  Chicago: Nelson-Hall.  Levinson, Paul.  (2001) Digital McLuhan.  A Guide to the Information Millennium.  London and New York:               Routledge, Taylor & Francis. Liu, Ling and C. Pu.  A transactional activity model for organizing open-ended cooperative activities.              Technical Report TR96-11.  Department of Computer Science, University of Alberta, Canada                http://citeseer.nj.nec.com/43023.html Logan, Robert K.  (2000) THE SIXTH LANGUAGE.  Learning a Living in the Internet Age.  Toronto:  Stoddart                                                                                                                                                                                    Mason, Ian, Editor.  (2001) Triadic Exchanges.  Studies in Dialogue Interpreting.  United Kingdom:          St. Jerome Publishing.  Edited by Ian Mason, Heriot-Watt University, Edingburgh Centre for                           Translation and Interpreting Studies in Scotland, United Kingdom.Mason, Ian.  (1997)
                                                                                                                                                                            The Translator as Communicator.  Routledge. Mikkelson, Holly.  (1994) A Training Program for Spanish/English Medical Interpreting.                Spreckles, California: ACEBO. Nuevo Espasa Ilustrado 2000.  Diccionario enciclopédico.  Espasa Calpe, S.A. España. Petit Larousse Illustré.  (1987) Larousse: Paris, France. Public Speaking Module One.  Public Speaking as a Communication Process.  Notes from the Instructor.                On-Line Learning.  Web-based instruction for Communications Models and Theories. Random House Webster’s Unabridged Dictionary (1998) New York, USA. 

Consulting Media Arts Communications©2010 Gardenia Hung. 

All Rights Reserved.

Your tags:

TIP:

Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Recipient's email address:
Personal message (optional):

Your email address:

Comments

Type your comment below: