Divergences and the sermonic replications in interpreters’ oral interpretation and communication among Pentecostal Churches
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.20525/ijrbs.v12i2.2328Keywords:
Congregants, Divergences, Interpreting/Translation, Language And Communication, Sermon, PreachingAbstract
Oral interpreting in the setting of diverse languages and multicultural congregants is often understood as integrating the message's content to the receiver. Like any communication or campaign, preaching or sermon takes people's multiple contexts seriously. The one who provides the best insight into understanding "the other," traditionally speaking, could be an interpreter in a multilingual context. Nonetheless, there are reflections, replications, and the loss of spiritual communication with sermonic translation and interpretive dialogue. Sometimes, the sermon the preacher delivers is only the one the congregation hears through the interpreter. In other occurrences, however, interpreting can lead not only to distorted messages but also to dissatisfied audiences and preachers being overshadowed by the pranks of the interpreter. Understanding the context of litotes and hyperbolism embedded in rhetoric and the features of the language, no matter how eloquent the preacher is, an understatement, overemphasis, or repetition of words by the interpreter can make or mar the sermon (speech). Using a qualitative methodology, this paper explores the divergences and conventional assumptions about preachers' interpreters as influenced by spirituality, culture, and language from an empirical and theoretical perspective. Biased translation and the basis of reality suppressing or devaluing spiritual/sacred communication are examined. The results indicate that the interpretation of the declaration of guilt, the history of the congregation, spirituality, attitudes, morals, customs, specific practices, the education of the interpreter, and the environment form intertwined interpreting and misinterpretation. The paper concludes by re-examining these qualities and rearticulating them into a preliminary theory for practice, distinguished from theory, which could enhance the development of more sustainable multilingual interpretation in South African Pentecostal churches.
Downloads
References
Adebayo, R. O. (2018). Adoption and adaptation of rhetorical devices in South African Pentecostal churches. African Journal of Rhetoric, 10(1), 39-64. https://hdl.handle.net/10520/EJC-11a57fb982
Adebayo, R. O., & Zulu, S. P. (2018). Use of language and communication among the Pentecostal evangelical charismatic churches in Durban, South Africa. Journal of Emerging Trends in Educational Research and Policy Studies, 9(1), 14-25.
https://hdl.handle.net/10520/EJC-f12b3f33e
Beukes, A.M. and Pienaar, M. (2010). Veeltalige Vertaalterminologie / Multilingual Translation Terminology. Pretoria: Van Schaik.
Biamah, J. J. S. O. (2013). Factors that necessitate interpretation of sermons in churches in Uasin Gishu County, Kenya. Journal of Emerging Trends in Educational Research and Policy Studies, 4(2), 327-332. https://hdl.handle.net/10520/EJC137551
Carr, S. E., Steyn, D., Dufour, A., & Roberts, R. P. (1997). The critical link: Interpreters in the community. 1-330. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.19
De Campos, E. (2011). Translation and Interpretation: Twin Sisters for Cross-Cultural Communication. Sénégal, 9(10): 56-84.
Denshire, S.A. (2013). Autoethnography. Sociopedia, 2013: 1-12. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/160940691301200110
Dickinson, J. (2019). The Interpreter’s Role in the Workplace. N/A
Downie, J. (2016). Being a successful interpreter: Adding value and delivering excellence. Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315652191
Du Plessis, M. (2016). Church Interpreting in an Interdenominational Christian Context in Urban Johannesburg. Unpublished Master’s Research Report. Johannesburg: University of the Witwatersrand.
Ellis, C., & Bochner, A. (2000). Autoethnography, personal narrative, reflexivity: Researcher as subject.
Gillies, A. (2013). Conference interpreting: A student’s practice book. Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203114926
Hokkanen, S. (2017). Experiencing the interpreter’s role: Emotions of involvement and detachment in simultaneous church interpreting. Translation Spaces, 6(1), 62-78. https://doi.org/10.1075/ts.6.1.04hok DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/ts.6.1.04hok
Judicial Council on Cultural Diversity (2021). Understanding the Role of the Interpreter, N/A
Choi, J. (2003). The interpretive theory of translation and its current applications. Interpretation studies: The Journal of the Japan Association for Interpretation Studies, 3, 1-15.
Kalina, S. (2015). Ethical challenges in different interpreting settings. MonTI. Monografías de Traducción e Interpretación, 63-86.
https://doi.org/10.6035/MonTI.2015.ne2.2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.6035/MonTI.2015.ne2.2
Knight, C. (2016). Puzzles and mysteries in the origins of language. Language & Communication, 50, 12-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langcom.2016.09.002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langcom.2016.09.002
Language Scientific. (2017). What Is the Difference Between Translation and Interpreting? Available at: http://www.languagescientific.com/what-is-the-difference-between-translation-and-interpreting/ (Accessed 15 April 2022).
Ma, J. (2013). A Study of Interpreting Skills from the Perspective of Interpreting Process. Journal of Language Teaching & Research, 4(6), 1232-1237. doi:10.4304/jltr.4.6.1232-1237 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4304/jltr.4.6.1232-1237
Melby, A. K., & Foster, C. (2010). Context in translation: Definition, access and teamwork. Translation & Interpreting, The, 2(2), 1-15.
Mikkelson, H., & Jourdenais, R. (Eds.). (2015). The Routledge handbook of interpreting, 456. London: Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315745381
Musyoka, E. N., & Karanja, P. N. (2014). Problems of interpreting as a means of Communication: A Study on Interpretation of Kamba to English Pentecostal Church sermon in Machakos Town, Kenya. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 4(5), 196-207. https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/
Pearsonhighered.com. (n.d.). Speaking in Public: Speech Delivery. Available at: https://www.pearsonhighered.com/assets/samplechapter/0/2/0/5/0205627870.pdf (Accessed 24 June 2022).
Pöchhacker, F. (2015). Simultaneous Interpreting. In Pöchhacker, F., Grbi?, N., Mead, P. and Setton, R. (eds). Routledge Encyclopedia of Interpreting Studies, 382-385. London and New York: Routledge.
Qiang, K. A. N. G. (2013). Application of the interpretive theory of translation in interpreting practice. Canadian social science, 9(6), 236-241.
Salawu, A. (2010). Evaluation of interpretation during congregational services and public religious retreats in south-west Nigeria. Babel, 56(2), 129-138. https://doi.org/10.1075/babel.56.2.03sal DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/babel.56.2.03sal
Seleskovitch, D., & Lederer, M. (1993). Interpreter pour traduire, 3-? edition. Paris: Didier Erudition.
Shandu, T. P. (2014). The pitfalls and pyrotechnics of interpreting live speeches: from church sermons to political speeches. African Journal of Rhetoric, 6(1), 168-194. https://hdl.handle.net/10520/EJC160848
The Holy Bible. (2014). The Holy Bible (With Read-Along Cross-References) – Concordance. King James Version with Tropical Headings and Read-Along Referencing. Lagos, Nigeria: The Bible Society of Nigeria.
Tison, A. B. (2016). The interpreter's involvement in a translated institution: a case study of sermon interpreting (Doctoral dissertation, Universitat Rovira i Virgili). https://www.tdx.cat/handle/10803/378648
You, Y. (2018). The rhetoric of persuasion in preaching: a homiletical investigation within a South Korean context (Doctoral dissertation, Stellenbosch: Stellenbosch University). http://hdl.handle.net/10019.1/103355
Zergui, S. (2014). The Interpretive Sense Theory. Available at: https://www.scribd.com/doc/248884249/The-Interpretive-Theory (Accessed 24 November 2022).
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Rufus O. Adebayo, Sylvia Phiwani Zulu

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
For all articles published in IJRBS, copyright is retained by the authors. Articles are licensed under an open access Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 license, meaning that anyone may download and read the paper for free. In addition, the article may be reused and quoted provided that the original published version is cited. These conditions allow for maximum use and exposure of the work, while ensuring that the authors receive proper credit.