Difference Between Interpreting And Translation

Language is a basic need of human beings to interact with one another. As a tool of communication people use it to express their needs, ideas, thoughts, and feelings. In our daily interaction with other people, communication can be done through speaking and writing. The message of the conversations which is the most important part of the conversation should be delivered from the speaker to the listener. When someone speaks a foreign language to communicate, we need someone else who is able to interpret/translate what the speaker means.

In this globalization era along with the modern technology development, there is almost no barrier for one human being to another to do social interactions. However, in such a kind of interaction, when a communication

On the surface, the difference between interpreting and translation is only in the medium: an interpreter translates orally, while a translator translates written texts. Pochhacker (2004:2) states that the basic principle of interpreting is the time of rendition which is performed ‘here and now’ for the people who want to be engaged in communication across barriers of language and culture. It means that interpreting is done immediately after the utterances delivered by the speaker. Then, the interpreter conveys the message to the hearer within only a few seconds owned by the interpreter. It is different from the written translation which is not conveyed directly but in certain time and the translator still has time to consult dictionaries during the translation process. That is why the interpreter should be able to transfer the messages of the uttered language into the target language based on their knowledge and competencies. According to Pocchhacker (2004: 9-10), the word ‘interpreter’ is derived from a Latin word interpres, denoting someone ‘explaining the meaning’, making sense of what others have difficulty in understanding, a highly appropriate semantic foundation for ‘interpreter’ and ‘interpreting’ in current

Much of the interpreting performed at conferences is simultaneous; at some meetings with a small number of attendees, consecutive mode may also be used. Meanwhile, in the judical system, interpreters may use all kinds of interpreting modes: simultaneous, consecutive, whispering, liaison and even a sight translation because they work in a variety of legal settings. Mikkelson, (2006:4) proposes the community interpreting i.e. people who are not fluent speakers of the official languages of a country enable to communicate with the provider of public services as so as to facilitate full and equal access to legal, health, education, goverment, and social services. In this community interpreting, the interpreter may use various modes in his/her performances depending on the settings of interpreting because the interpreters may use different modes of interpreting in different settings, based on how the interpreting is performed.

The research on interpreting especially that which is performed at conferences is still rare and it is interesting to conduct a study on interpreting because it is a real event, not a fiction. In this study, the research focuses on the product of interpretation performed by the interpreter in the International Co-operative Alliance Asia Pacific Conference held in Nusantara Ballroom, Bali International Convention