Tact in Translation Negotiating Trust by the Russian Interpreter, at Home

Tact in Translation Negotiating trust by the Russian interpreter, at home and abroad Eline Helmer University College London Anthropology of Russia and Interpreting Prof Anne White Dr Seth Graham Declaration I, Eline Helmer, confirm that the work presented in this thesis is my own. Where information has been derived from other sources, I confirm that this has been indicated in the thesis. Eline Helmer 2 Abstract Being the only conversational participant with the ability to follow both sides of a cross- linguistic dialogue gives the interpreter the power to obscure or clarify. Because of heightened mutual dependency, all interpreters need trust to perform their roles. They actively build trust, both between self and client and between clients. In academic linguistic contexts, trust is often regarded as based on impartiality: the more objective and invisible the interpreter, the better and more professional he or she will be. In practice, this approach is not always possible, or desirable. The trust relationship between client and interpreter can also be based on closeness and personal interdependence. Interpreting po-chelovecheski (lit. ‘approaching someone in a humane way’) is a colloquial way for Russian interpreters to describe this approach. This thesis explores the negotiation of trust by Russian interpreters. The Russian translation market’s unregulated character, and historical framing of ‘the foreigner’ as someone to be protected and mistrusted, make for an interesting case to study face-to-face interpreting at all levels of the international dialogue. Based on ethnographic fieldwork with interpreters from St Petersburg, Moscow and Pskov, I argue that becoming ‘someone’s voice’ presents a specific caring relationship. Interpreters deliberately 'perform trustworthiness' by actively working towards becoming ‘one of them’ (svoi) and avoiding actions that could spark mistrust. This trust then allows them to encourage trust between interlocutors through practices of smoothening (‘smoothen’ = sgladitʹ) and softening (‘soften’ = smiagchitʹ). Drawing on 37 interviews with 41 interpreters, supplemented by participant observation, I explore the gender dynamics, emotional load and moral ambiguity of these practices. Instead of evaluating interpreters’ work along formal-informal, professional- intimate and economic-social binaries, studying interpreting through the interdisciplinary lens of care demonstrates the deficiencies of these divisions. This thesis provides a starting point for a relational and embodied understanding of interpreting, as well as insights into professional trust relationships in Russia at large. 3 Impact statement Why am I doing this? Six years ago, I started studying Russia by commencing on an MSc in Russian and East European studies. During the past years, and particularly in the four years I lived in Russia myself, I have witnessed how trust is often hard to find at several stages of the international dialogue. Widespread mistrust dominates the way popular media frame the relations between Russia and Western Europe, which in turn is reflected in the stories I hear from friends and family. My own struggles dealing with this lack of trust made me eager to learn from experts in this field. In my own studies, I quickly realised the importance of language: as my Russian language skills improved, I found it easier to engage in conversations based on empathy and trust. After helping out during a training session for interpreters at the Dutch Institute in St Petersburg, I realised that interpreters have elaborate experience navigating conversations across linguistic and cultural boundaries. I could learn a lot from them. This, in combination with a lack of acknowledgement of their skills extending beyond ‘simple translation’, made me eager to document and investigate their stories. Who is this study for and what will they get from it? This research presents a detailed and systematic overview of trust-building elements in interpreting. First, it will be interesting for interpreters in training and practising interpreters. Nearly all participants in this study stressed the importance of contact with practising interpreters during their time at university. However, not all young interpreters get this opportunity, and experienced interpreters often miss the exchange of professional experience. Second, gaining a better understanding of what an interpreter does is relevant for users of interpreting services. It allows them to have realistic expectations of interpreters’ performance. Trust building is not an exception, but an integral element of the profession. Thirdly, this thesis is a relevant read for anthropologists interested in gaining a deeper understanding of interpreting and translation in their work. I point out several parallels between the anthropologist and the interpreter, showing how academic literature from both fields can complement each other. Finally, this study is relevant for people engaging in all types of international 4 dialogue. I learned a lot from the interpreters’ practical expertise that helped me in my day-to-day conversations crossing linguistic and cultural boundaries. How can I evidence it? So far, I have published two articles in interdisciplinary, online, open-access journals. The first article was published as one of the online Working Papers of the CGES (Centre for German and European Studies) in 2019, the second as part of the online Global Encyclopeadia of Informality, also in 2019. On this last article I received the following comment from one participant: “I really liked your way of studying interpreting from the point of view of chelovechnost, I never thought about it that way. And I agree with all the statements about the Russian market, that’s really how it is.” Additionally, I have given an online lecture in June 2020. Of the forty attendees, many were practising interpreters. These interpreters later indicated that the presentation was relevant for them. One participant commented the following: “I really liked your lecture. I even made some notes for myself.” 5 Acknowledgements I would like to thank all interpreters who have been eager to share their stories with me during the past years. I am grateful that they found time in their busy schedules for long conversations, for walks and coffee, and for staying in touch. I am very grateful for the financial support that I received throughout this project. My project was funded by the CEELBAS CDT, UCL SSEES, the Sir Richard Stapley Educational Trust, the Center for German and European Studies (St Petersburg State University, University of Bielefeld), the Fund for Women Graduates, and the Prins Bernhard Cultuurfonds. Without their generosity I would have been unable to pursue a PhD. I would like to thank my supervisor Prof Anne White for her enthusiasm, for her good eye for detail, and for always making me feel that what I was doing mattered. I am thankful to my secondary supervisor Dr Seth Graham for his feedback at different stages of my research, as well as to Dr Michał Murawski for his helpful comments during the upgrade. I would like to thank Dr Nikolai Ssorin-Chaikov (St Petersburg Higher School of Economics) for helping me formulate my project proposal at an early stage, and for incorporating me in the anthropology ‘kruzhok’. I would like to thank Dr Elena Liarskaya (European University in St Petersburg) for inviting me to the anthropology seminars. The anthropologists attending these groups taught me a lot about what it means to be an anthropologist both of and in Russia. I am grateful to the Department of Scandinavian and Dutch Philology at St Petersburg State University for allowing me to be their colleague for a year and for showing me the university from the inside. My sincere thanks to the Dutch Institute in St Petersburg for providing me with a quiet place to work, a cup of tea and inspiring company. I am grateful to Vitalik for always being there for me, and for helping me improve my Russian. I wish to thank my parents for their listening ear, for supporting me throughout my studies across three different countries, and for putting things in perspective. Eline Helmer, 30 September 2020, International Translation Day 6 Table of contents Declaration ...................................................................................................................................... 2 Abstract ........................................................................................................................................... 3 Impact statement ............................................................................................................................ 4 Acknowledgements ......................................................................................................................... 6 Table of contents ..................................................................................................................................... 7 List of figures ........................................................................................................................................... 9 Chapter 1. Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 10 1.1 Introduction to the introduction ....................................................................................... 10 1.2 The politicised role of interpreting in (Soviet) Russia ....................................................... 17 1.3

Load more