Sophie Llewellyn Smith is a conference interpreter with 15 years' experience of interpreter training. On her site theinterpretingcoach.com, you will find eBooks and eCourses to help you consolidate or update your interpreting skills in areas such as note-taking, research skills, analytical skills, and retour interpreting (working into a B language). Each course breaks the skills down into manageable sections and uses a mixture of text, audio and video to examine underlying principles and work on practical exercises. In this way, you can use self-study at your own pace to target your weaknesses, improve your performance and become more marketable.
In my last blog post, I attempted to convince you of the value of speech prep, especially if you are a retourist and you use speech preparation as an exercise to develop your retour.
I outlined the process I use to create well-structured speeches, and listed 3 simple structures: linear, pros/cons, and ‘logical argument’.
In this post, I want to get down to the nitty gritty and talk about some of the shortcuts you can use to make speech prep a painless and rapid process.
Use an interview, panel debate, TV report or podcast for inspiration
The great thing about interviews or podcasts is that they often present contrasting points of view.
In the UK, for instance, if I were to watch Question Time on TV, listen to Any Questions on Radio 4, or tune in to the Today programme for some of the interviews, I would be able to pick out several viewpoints, which I could then incorporate into a speech.
This is particularly useful when you yourself have a strong opinion on a subject, and you need inspiration for the opposing viewpoint.
Let’s say you listen to a programme an EU proposal relating to Member States’ obligations to report on the gender pay gap.
Right off the bat, I can think of two ways you could structure your speech:
Explain the EU proposal and why it’s being introduced (i.e. the European Commission’s point of view)
Explain other parties’ point of view or reaction (for example, some of the Member States, if they have concerns; and/or women’s groups; or the European Parliament position)
Come to a conclusion, and perhaps give your own opinion. Of course, you also need an introduction to lead into the subject.
Here’s a second option:
Briefly outline the proposal
Explain the benefits of such legislation.
Outline the pitfalls. Here, you could explain who is opposed: NGOs, certain countries?
Draw your conclusion. Again, you will also need an introduction.
It’s clear, I think, that both speeches would cover much the same material, but with a slightly different slant. The first version focuses more on different points of view; the second is more of a ‘pros and cons’ speech.
A third possibility would be for you to play the role of a particular individual or organisation (for example, an employers’ organisation, an anti-discrimination NGO, a representative of the European Commission, a Minister for Equality from a Member State, etc.) and speak in favour or against the proposal. Your speech might look something like this:
Greetings/introduction
Background to the proposal
Your organisation’s view – list of reasons why you support or oppose the proposal
Call to action
Example (in English)
Let’s prepare a speech about asylum seekers crossing the Channel in small boats. The UK government is proposing that anyone entering the UK illegally via this route should be barred from receiving asylum.
DON’T START YET! Read through the next couple of paragraphs.
[If you’re reading this before 8th April 2023 and you have plenty of time to get more background, you can listen to quite a lengthy interview with the Home Secretary Suella Braverman on Radio 4’s Today programme, followed by some analysis by the political editor. The interview begins at 2:10:00.]
Alternatively, here’s a clip from Al-Jazeera which we’ll use for this exercise, looking at the issue from several different angles (the UK government position, the charities’ position, the asylum seeker position).
Now set a timer.
As you listen to the Al-Jazeera clip, note down the arguments on either side.
Add any of your own thoughts or background knowledge.
If your English is a B language, and you’re preparing your speech in English (see my previous posts for the many benefits of doing this to improve your retour), now is the time to list a few useful terms or phrases to include in your speech (just one example: ‘a totemic issue’).
Now think about your conclusion. Here are a few starting points; you can pick the one that speaks to you the most, or something else:
Do you think the proposal is shocking? Sensible?
Can you draw parallels with the approach taken in another country?
Do you want to say something about the potential consequences?
Do you think the proposal is unlawful and in violation of international law?
This is your chance to send out an unequivocal message to wrap up your speech, and to give your personal opinion.
Finally, now that you know the ‘destination’ of your speech, think about the starting point, which will form your introduction. Here are some possibilities:
you could simply mention hearing this interview on the radio or seeing images on tV, and finding it fascinating/shocking/revealing/depressing
you could do a quick bit of extra research to start your speech with a figure, for example the number of people making this dangerous crossing in 2022 compared to previous years
you could mention refugee crises elsewhere, to put this one into context (Ukraine, Syria)
you could use a different context, and talk about people trying to reach Lampedusa and drowning
you could begin with a reference to human rights, e.g. the right to safety and security, and international law on asylum
you could start with a personal anecdote, for instance if your parents or grandparents were refugees or immigrants
I’m sure you can think of many more.
OK, you’ve got your intro, conclusion, and the middle bit. 🙂
Now write out your speech outline in a more organised form, whether that be a mind map or a bullet point outline. As I said in my last post, some people write the whole thing out in longhand, but I think the result is generally much better if your speech is based on bullet points, which you (semi-)improvise around.
That’s it! Stop the timer. How long did it take you?
If you have time and you want to practise your speech (for example, if it’s in a B language), rehearse it now. Why not record it and listen back to your performance?
Here are my outline and my speech. Normally, I would just write keywords in bullet point form, but I fear that would be totally illegible, so I’ve written something a little longer to make sure you can follow my reasoning.
Intro: In 2022, 46,000 people attempted the dangerous Channel crossing in a small boat. Hundreds of people have drowned. This is an illegal route into the UK; the question is, is this a criminal issue that the government needs to crack down on, or a humanitarian crisis that needs solving?
Government point of view: this is a right wing government (i.e. generally anti-immigration), and the issue has become totemic. It’s costly (hotels cost £6 million per day); there is an illegal trade in people-smuggling that must be stopped. Drawing inspiration from Australia, the latest proposal is that if people enter the UK via an illegal route, they will NEVER be able to receive asylum, and will be detained and removed (to Rwanda). This is a necessary and proportional deterrent, and if people’s route into a country is blocked, the numbers attempted entry fall (Australian example).
Local charities: asylum seekers are treated like criminals. They are fleeing conflict and persecution. There should be a humanitarian route into the UK, e.g. with a visa scheme like the one in place for Ukrainians.
For the asylum seekers in Calais, the situation is dire. French police break up the camps every two days, there are no welcome centres to host them, and no legal way to enter the UK. They feel like they have no other choice. But this new legislation won’t stop them trying to cross the Channel.
Conclusion: intractable problem. In an astonishing piece of spin, the government is trying to present a crackdown as a humanitarian act, by suggesting that this is humanitarian deterrence (and if anyone manages to cross, they will be sent to a safe place, i.e. deported to Rwanda!). Will they succeed in presenting the issue in this way? Or in stopping the boats and deporting asylum seekers (no-one has gone to Rwanda so far; the proposal is mired in legal controversy). The problem for the government is their very clear slogan: “stop the boats”. There will be no fudge, as it will be very easy to judge whether this has been achieved or not.
This is a speech lasting nearly six minutes; it contains several points of vie, one or two figures, some important background knowledge (e.g. the names of the Home Secretary, the whole situation of asylum seekers in Calais), and a bit of logic in the conclusion.
In sum, I would class this as an exam-style speech, which took me less than 30 minutes to research, outline, and record.
In my next blog post, I’ll be talking about other shortcuts to help you prepare speeches quickly and easily.
I ran a webinar recently about improving your retour (i.e. interpreting into a B language – a language other than your mother tongue), and I asked participants to send me any questions in advance, so I could tailor the content to their needs.
This is a useful exercise, as it often provides inspiration or discussion points for the webinar, but it can also be a double edged sword, because it’s not unusual to receive questions that you really don’t want to address, for whatever reason – they’re too controversial, they would take up too much time, they’re too specific, they don’t match your knowledge, expertise, or niche, and the list goes on.
On this occasion, one of the participants said this:
I’ve been on retour courses before, and the trainer nearly always suggests preparing speeches in your B language as a good exercise for improving your retour. Who has time for that?!
I confess this stung a little, as I do indeed often suggest speech preparation as a great exercise, and I was going to do so on this occasion as well! So I had to give extra thought to alternative exercises I could suggest; but my first instinct was to defend speech prep, and above all, to stress the fact that it doesn’t have to be time-consuming, and it can be fun and creative as well as beneficial! You can prepare a consecutive speech from start to finish in less than 20 minutes.
In this post, I’d like to explain why I think speech prep is such a great exercise for retourists, and give you some time-saving tips to make it less of a chore (if that’s how you think of it), whether you’re preparing a speech in your mother tongue or in your B language.
How speech prep can boost your retour
The bottom line for a good retour, as I see it, is this: if you can’t speak spontaneously on a given subject in your B language, using appropriate terminology and correct grammar, how can you hope to interpret someone else’s thoughts convincingly?
Doing a decent job of interpreting is a corollary of speaking well on a given subject; hence the importance of language enhancement work when you’re trying to develop your retour, as opposed to focusing exclusively on interpreting practice.
[On a side note: this principle, which appears self-evident to me, is generally unpopular with interpreting students, who tend to feel that anything other than practising interpreting from A>B is a waste of time.]
Speech preparation is therefore an excellent way of expanding the range of subjects on which you’re able to speak with authority.
I think it’s probably fair to say that the weaker your retour is, the more beneficial speech prep will be. If you already have a very strong retour or near-native competence in your B language, you can pick up important vocab in other ways.
Benefits of speech prep
Here’s a breakdown of some of the benefits of preparing speeches in your B language:
it improves your general and subject knowledge because of the research you have to do.
it’s an opportunity to practise and improve your public speaking skills (eye contact, pace, intonation).
it’s a great way to ‘activate’ vocabulary, i.e. make it part of your active vocabulary, rather than vocabulary you understand passively but never use.
if you prepare your speech in the form of interpreters’ notes, rather than bullet points, it’s a good way to improve your ability to decipher your own notes, i.e. it can help improve your consecutive skills.
similarly, if you’re working on consecutive, it’s a great way to introduce or consolidate symbols.
it’s a good way to prepare for an assignment on a specific topic.
learning to prepare well-structured speeches is a good way of improving your analytical skills and recognising structure in other people’s speeches.
By the way, all of these points are true of preparing speech in your A language as well, although in this case there will be less emphasis on vocabulary acquisition or consolidation.
So far, I’ve covered benefits that are related to your language or interpreting skills, but there are others:
speech prep can be important if you’re a member of a practice group, or you work with a practice partner. You can give speeches to each other!
if you’re an interpreter trainer, there’s a good chance you will give speeches to your students at some point, either because you can’t find suitable source material, or because you want to be in control of the type of challenge or level of difficulty of the speech.
Preparing speeches is an excellent way of ‘giving back’ to the interpreting community, by contributing to practice groups or repositories such as Speechpool.
A method for rapid speech prep
Topic selection
There are many ways to prepare speeches. I can’t possibly cover all of them, nor produce a framework that suits everyone.
Here’s an important caveat, for starters: I’m giving your advice for preparing the type of speech that you would have to interpret at an EU accreditation or retour test, or at a final exam in interpreting school. You would need to follow a different method if you were preparing practice material for certain types of public service interpreting, say.
Now that’s out of the way, let’s take a look at a simple method for preparing practice speeches.
Often, the hardest thing is finding a good topic! Once something catches your interest (on a news programme or podcast, for instance), you’re off and running.
if you’re preparing a speech for as a ‘swap’ for a practice partner, or for an interpreting practice group, why not choose a topic that will help you improve your subject knowledge (e.g. if you’re weak on finance, pick a financial topic)?
if you’re preparing a speech in your B language, think about areas where your vocabulary is lacking.
Another option would be to prepare a speech in your B language to prepare for an assignment where you already know the topic.
If you regularly prepare speeches, it’s a good idea to keep a note of topics that inspire you. You could have a document on your computer (or use a Notes app) to keep track of links to interesting blog posts or newspaper articles. (Back in the day, interpreter trainers sometimes kept a file with newspaper clippings to turn to when they needed inspiration.)
Once you’ve found a topic or looked for one by browsing the news headlines, you can get to work designing your speech. I’ll give you a 4-step process for doing this,
Step 1: Researching your speech
The amount of research you do will depend on the purpose of your speech, and your existing background knowledge.
You may not need to do much (or indeed, any!) research if:
the speech is for interpreting students who are beginners. If they are just starting to pick up consecutive without notes, in particular, you may be able to give a speech based on your existing knowledge of a topic, or your opinions, since you won’t want to include many names, dates, or figures.
the speech is rather philosophical or based on your opinions or reactions to a film or book. You already have all the knowledge you need to outline this speech!
You will want to do more research if:
the speech is designed as a simultaneous (for an EU accreditation test, this would be 10-12 minutes long, instead of 5-6 minutes for a consecutive). That amount of material usually requires an outside source of information!
you’re preparing a speech in a B language, and you want to make sure you’re using appropriate vocabulary.
you’re preparing a speech on a technical subject or one that is unfamiliar to you.
In my next blog post, I’ll give you three shortcuts for researching a topic quickly and efficiently.
An exam-style speech typically contains a range of challenges, e.g. contrasting opinions (to check the interpreter is conveying them accurately), some facts and figures, a personal comment or opinion, and perhaps a reference to current affairs, to check the interpreter’s background knowledge.
So when you’re doing your research, you might want to look for:
a few facts and figures about your topic – you’ll only need a few for a consecutive, more for a simultaneous
a ‘hook’ from the newspapers, i.e. some event in the news that make this topic relevant and interesting
how different people or organisations feel about this topic
your own opinion!
You can find relevant information in all sorts of places: the news, an article you’ve read in a magazine, a podcast episode, a blog post, a conversation with a friend or colleague. Or you could build a speech based on your reflections about a film you’ve just seen, for example, or a book you’ve read.
When you’ve done the research, jot down your ideas, arguments, figures, dates, etc. on a piece of paper. At this stage, it doesn’t matter if the material isn’t organised.
Step 2: Structuring your speech
Speakers organise their material in all sorts of ways. I’ll stick to three simple speeches structures:
linear. Typically, this would be a chronology, or a story that starts at point A and finishes at point B.
pros and cons. You can either list all the pros, then all the cons; or you could give one ‘pro’, then a matching ‘con’, and so on. This ‘opposites’ structure is particularly suited to consecutive without notes, because it’s very easy to remember.
an logical argument that leads the audience from a premise or hypothesis to a conclusion, using logical connectors like ‘and, ‘but’, ‘so’.
Realistically, most speeches contain a mixture of several structures: perhaps a more narrative introduction (linear), then the argument.
Think about your research: does your material lend itself to a pros and cons structure? Or is it a story (linear structure)? Do you want to make an argument that will persuade the audience or win them over to your opinion, in which case you’ll need to be very clear about cause and effect or other logical connections between your ideas, and have a strong conclusion?
Step 3: Create a detailed outline of your speech
People do this in different ways. Some people like to produce a spider diagram or mind map; others visualise their speerch as a tree with a trunk and branches; and still others write a bullet point outline. This is the most common way of organising material, I think, although something like a mind map can give a speaker more freedom when giving a simultaneous speech.
Now’s the time to organise your facts, figures, explanations, details, etc. into a legible outline. Make sure your bullet points are connected clearly with links.
Once you’ve organised your material, you can write a conclusion. This often follows on logically from the body of your speech.
Personally, I often add the introduction at the end of this process, because by that stage, I know where I’m going and what I want to say, and it’s easier to find a good ‘entry point’ into the speech. The introduction is a good place to say something personal to ease the audience into the speech quite gently, and to engage them and make your speech more relatable. Or you can use the introduction to mention an event in the news which makes your speech topic relevant.
Step 4: Rehearse your speech
How much you rehearse your speech will depend on its purpose.
If you’re an interpreter trainer giving a speech for an interpreting exam, you’ll obviously want to go through it several times to make sure the timing is right.
Be careful not to overrehearse: this removes all the spontaneity from a speech and makes it very dense, and often rather too fast.
And on that subject: I do know some colleagues who write out their entire speech in longhand, or type it out, rather than having a bullet point outline. While I understand that this makes them more confident, particularly when they’re giving an exam speech, personally I much prefer to speak (semi-)spontaneously from an outline. This produces something more conversational and closer to normal speech, rather than read-out material; it’s usually much more engaging, and means the speaker makes more eye contact with the audience.
Speech prep in a B language
If you’ve read this far, you’ll have realised that almost everything I’ve said applies to preparing speeches in your mother tongue or in a B language.
So what’s different or special about preparing speeches in your B language?
The process is exactly the same, but the emphasis is different.
If you’re preparing a speech in your B language, your primary aim is likely to be vocabulary acquisition or consolidation.
To this end, when you’re researching the topic (reading a couple of articles, or listening to a podcast), make sure you note down a few key words, phrases, or idioms that strike you as useful in other contexts.
Incorporate them into your speech. The more you say them out loud and hear yourself saying them, the more likely they are to become part of your active vocabulary.
I find when I’m preparing a speech in my B language that
I research it more (i.e. I read several articles, or listen to more material, rather than just working with the ideas that are already in my head).
I write down whole chunks, or sometimes whole sentences, to reuse in my speech.
I rehearse it more.
The risk, in your B language, is that you will end up reading out a speech that you’ve basically rehashed from a newspaper article, rather than ‘digesting’ the material and reformulating it.
Voilà!
Have I made it sound long and complicated? Probably! 🤣
In fact, it’s probably taken you longer to read this blog post than it would be outline a consecutive speech.
I’ll leave my examples and shortcuts to a second blog post, so that my word count doesn’t explode!
I’m sure you’ve been told at some point in your career as an interpreter (or when you were a student) that you should be more concise.
Working into English, being more concise than the original is often desirable because wordy, flowery, or convoluted structures sound very strange when converted into English more or less verbatim. For example, abstract French or verbose Italian both sound very unnatural if you don’t rework the original and turn it into something more English-sounding.
So being concise can be helpful for your audience and relay takers: it sounds more natural in English, it helps prevent linguistic interference, and it’s cognitively easier to cope with. Instead of masses of words that your listeners have to retain in their working memory, they are spoon fed something shorter, clearer, and more structured, which relieves the load on their cognitive processes.
Not only is a concise version easier for the audience and relay takers, it can help the interpreter do a better job.
Why? Because if you’re uttering fewer words, you have more time to listen, and therefore more time to analyse the message. In turn, this gives you more opportunity to take decisions about what and how to edit the material. Better analysis = more faithful rendition of the message, as well as a clearer output.
Another advantage of freeing up some of your processing capacity by speaking less is that you have a little more time to reformulate, so your output (linguistically) may benefit.
A final advantage is that if you’re more concise, you’re less likely to be sitting right on your speaker’s shoulder, following very closely – in décalage* terms – because you’re trying to say everything. You’re likely to find that your décalage varies a bit more if you’re deliberately being concise, giving you more breathing space in places, and helping to avoid the kamikaze technique of interpreting, where your EVS* is so short that you hit a brick wall if you misunderstand something in the original or encounter an unknown word (i.e. you may be left with no other option than to leave a sentence unfinished, which is less than ideal!).
I’ve already said a lot about being concise, but what does it mean? Is it simply a matter of using fewer words?
The Oxford Language Dictionary defines concise thusly:
“giving a lot of information clearly and in a few words; brief but comprehensive”
This is interesting because it suggests that a) being concise isn’t just about editing out information (i.e. dropping it), but about conveying the same the information using fewer words, and b) clarity and concision go hand in hand (more on that in a separate blog post, perhaps).
Remember this scene from the film Amadeus? Mozart wrote too many notes (according to the Emperor); sometimes interpreters are tempted to use too many words in simultaneous.
How can you prune the dead wood?
Well, there are some fairly uncontroversial approaches to reducing your word count [please bear in mind that this is written from the perspective of a conference interpreter, not a court interpreter, for example]:
leave out hesitations (‘um’, ‘er’)
eliminate fillers (e.g. if the speaker says ‘you know’, ‘I mean’, ‘basically’, etc.)
cut out repetition or redundancy
choose your words wisely; for instance, avoid unnecessarily long versions of words (like utilise instead of use, or transportation instead of transport)
avoid redundant pairs (a terrible tragedy)
use the active voice where possible
don’t ‘hedge’ if the speaker isn’t doing so (e.g. with phrases like ‘it seems that’, ‘if you like’, ‘it may be the case that’. This is something that interpreters often do when they are afraid to commit, especially if the speaker has said something that sounds controversial or implausible. If you make your output more concise, you’ll have more time to listen and analyse – and be clearer about the speaker’s message! 🙂
One caveat: it’s important to distinguish between source language features that are typical of a particular language (e.g. long-winded syntax in Italian), as opposed to features that are deliberate on the speaker’s part, because he or she is aiming for a particular effect. If the verbosity is a question of style or tone, you will have to decide whether it’s important to retain those features and potentially sacrifice some other information, or vice versa.
Now, you may think I’ve reached the end of this blog post. After all, I’ve gone over a list of ways to reduce your word count.
However, in my opinion, it’s not that simple.
If you have a few spare minutes, I invite you to listen to these two clips, in which I interpret a French speech about hydrogen from the SCIC Speech Repository in simultaneous. [Please note I did zero preparation for this, so I can’t claim to have been firing on all cylinders when it came to technical vocabulary.]
If you have French in your combination, please have a go at interpreting the first 2 or 3 minutes yourself, before listening to my version.
Can you hear the difference between these two versions? Does one of them sound clearer and more concise to you? Does one of them sound more rushed, and less natural in English?
In one of these clips, I tried to stick as closely to the speaker as possible, and to say everything, more or less in the same way that she had.
The other version is closer to my natural style. I devoted more effort to analysis and editing.
You may of course disagree with my opinion, but for me, the more concise version sounds calmer, more in control, and clearer.
I typed out a transcript of these two versions, and discovered, somewhat to my surprise, that the ‘short’ version was only 62 words shorter than the ‘long’ version, which didn’t seem like a lot over a period of 2 1/2 minutes.
Perception is important
I’m going to use this example to argue that being concise isn’t just a matter of using fewer words.
It’s also a matter of the ‘digestibility’ of your output for the audience and relay takers, i.e. it’s about their perception of whether you are being concise. 😉
Here are some of the tricks I used in the audio clip to sound more concise:
Use ‘salami technique’, also known as ‘chunking’, to chop the source material into shorter pieces.
If the target language allows, use SVO word order (subject-verb-object).
Start the sentence with the subject, rather than with long adverbial phrases, so the audience immediately knows what you’re talking about.
Keep the subject close to the verb, thus avoiding conjugation errors, and reducing the load on everyone’s working memory (this includes yours!).
Make sure the links between ideas are clear, using logical connectors such as and, but, so, if.
Use active voice where possible.
Use intonation as a fantastic shortcut. Intonation is great for conveying meaning. For example, you can use your voice to show whether something is an important point, a digression, a question, a humorous interjection, etc. (show rather than telling!).
A similar caveat to the one I made earlier: if the speaker is using long and complicated sentences, passive voice, etc., you need to give some thought to why they are doing this. Is it just their normal way of speaking? Or are they doing this to try to sound intelligent or knowledgeable, or to sound more scientific and therefore more credible? Remember that as an interpreter, part of your job is to have the same effect on the audience as the speaker was aiming for. If the speaker is using long-winded platitudes for a reason, you’ll need to decide whether to do the same, or whether you can achieve the same effect in the target language while still remaining concise.
Conclusion
Being concise isn’t always desirable, I suppose. Alongside some of the reasons I’ve mentioned above (style, tone, the effect the speaker is aiming for), there’s also the fact that your target language may be one that values flowery and lengthy sentences as a sign of intelligence and erudition.
In English, though, I would argue that being concise and using salami technique won’t, as some interpreters fear, make them sound childish. The trick is to use simple syntax, but appropriate vocabulary – which may mean sophisticated, high register, or technical vocabulary.
I hope to have persuaded you in this blog post that being concise isn’t as simple as using fewer words.
Instead, it’s a lot to do with making shorter chunks, joining them up withclear links, inserting pauses in the right place, and shaping the chunks with intonation so the meaning is clear.
*décalage = Ear/Voice Span = the time lag between the original speaker’s words and the interpreters’ rendition.
Transcripts
For anyone who’s interested, here are the transcripts of my two attempts at the hydrogen speech.
Version 1 (366 words):
Ladies and Gentlemen, now that the end of the pandemic is almost here, we can go back to taking an interest in those subjects that were fascinating for us before the beginning of the pandemic, namely climate change and the environment, and that was the challenge that we needed to take up before the beginning of this crisis, and it is therefore essential that we return to taking an interest in this subject. There is some good news connected to our interest in the environment, and I know we’re all keen on hearing good news. For 2020, the share of renewables in energy production in Europe has now exceeded fossil fuels, and that is the case for the second year running, because it was already that way in 2019. Now solar power is cheaper than anywhere else in the world, and its production has increased by 20 % in Europe. And finally, the price of carbon has increased exponentially. So much for the good news, but I know that you’re not naïve, and I know that you are aware that we are a long way from having achieved any significant change or reached our environmental objectives. Today, I’m going to talk about an element which is a sign of hope for some, an element that will allow us to reach our objectives, and that is hydrogen. Now before going into any more interesting details, let me just recap on a bit of chemistry. Hydrogen is a basic chemical element, H, which is present in the universe and on Earth. On Earth, it is present principally in the form of water. Hydrogen is associated to the molecule O, oxygen, and together they form H2O, water. In order to produce hydrogen, you need to break the bond between hydrogen and oxygen. In order to do that, we use a process called electrolysis, where we use an electrical current in order to break the bond between the two molecules and obtain hydrogen. Now, you might ask me why we would want to produce hydrogen, and the answer is because it has a number of applications. Hydrogen can be used as a fuel, it can also be stored and transported.
Version 2 (302 words):
Ladies and Gentlemen, the end of the pandemic is in sight, soo we can go back to those topics that gripped us before coronavirus: climate change and the environment. Those were the real challenges that we were facing before the crisis, and it’s crucial that we return to taking an interest in these subjects. There is some good news when it comes to the environment, and I know that at the moment we’re all keen to hear good news. In 2020, the share of renewable energies in electricity production in Europe was greater than the share of fossil fuels, for the second year running. Solar power is cheaper in Europe than anywhere else in the world, and its production increased by 20% in Europe. And the price of carbon has increased exponentially. That’s the good news. But you’re not naïve, and I’m sure you’re very aware that we are a long way from reaching our environmental goals and making any significant changes. Today, I’m talking about an element which could help us to reach these objectives. It could be very promising. And that is hydrogen. Before I go into details, let me recap some chemistry. Hydrogen is a basic chemical element, represented by the letter H. It’s present in the universe and on Earth. On Earth, it generally takes the form of water. It is associated with the molecule O, oxygen, and that makes water, H2O. In order to produce hydrogen, you have to break the chemical bond between the two molecules. You do that through electrolysis, which is where you use an electrical current to separarate the two molecules, and obtain hydrogen. Now you might say: why produce hydrogen? Because it has a number of applications. You can use hydrogen as a fuel. You can store it, you can transport it.
The exercise is based on an article in The Guardian (theguardian.com), with minor adaptations.
Your task is to find suitable words or expressions to fill in the gaps, taking into account syntax as well as register, and bringing to bear your background knowledge.
I have given some suggestions following the exercise.
Exercise
President Volodymyr Zelensky has publicly ___________ that a treaty of neutrality may be on offer; and he is right to do so. For two things have been made absolutely clear by this war: that Russia will fight to prevent Ukraine becoming a military ally of the West, and the West will not fight to defend Ukraine. In view of this, to keep open the possibility of an offer of Nato membership that Nato has no intention of ever _______________, and asking Ukrainians to ____________, is worse than ______________.
As to “demilitarisation” and “denazification”, the meaning and terms of these will have to be negotiated. Demilitarisation is obviously unacceptable if it means that Ukraine must unilaterally _______________ its armed forces; but the latest statement by Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has suggested that Russia would accept a ban on missiles based in Ukraine. This could be _____________ on a similar guarantee to the US that ended the Cuba Missile Crisis.
There remains the demand for recognition of the Russian annexation of Crimea. Here, respect for international law (slightly ambiguous in the case of Crimea, which was only transferred from Russia to Ukraine by Soviet decree in 1954) must ______________ considerations of reality, the prevention of future conflict, and the interests of ordinary people in the region – which is essentially what we have been asking Russia to do in the case of Kosovo.
These proposals will be ____________ as “_____________ Russian aggression”; but if Putin’s original aim really was to ___________ the whole of Ukraine, then by such an agreement Moscow would ___________ maximal goals. Moreover, such an agreement would give Russia nothing that it had not in practice already achieved before launching the invasion. The West is morally right to oppose the monstrous and illegal war ____________ Russia and to have imposed exceptionally severe sanctions on Russia in response, but would be morally wrong to oppose a decision by Ukraine to ___________with a reasonable agreement that would end the invasion and _____________the people of Ukraine terrible suffering.
President Volodymyr Zelensky has publicly hinted that a treaty of neutrality may be on offer; and he is right to do so. For two things have been made absolutely clear by this war: that Russia will fight to prevent Ukraine becoming a military ally of the West, and the West will not fight to defend Ukraine. In view of this, to keep open the possibility of an offer of Nato membership that Nato has no intention of ever honouring, and asking Ukrainians to die for this fiction, is worse than hypocritical. [You could say suggested instead of ‘hinted’. Stated or declared are grammatically correct, but the meaning is different. For ‘honouring’, since the meaning here is close to ‘keeping a promise’, you could say fulfilling, or making good on. You may have struggled to find a solution for ‘die for this fiction’, because you may not have had enough information to go on. Other options include asking Ukrainians to sacrifice themselves or to make the ultimate sacrifice or to fight to the end. ]
As to “demilitarisation” and “denazification”, the meaning and terms of these will have to be negotiated. Demilitarisation is obviously unacceptable if it means that Ukraine must unilaterally dissolve its armed forces; but the latest statement by Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has suggested that Russia would accept a ban on missiles based in Ukraine. This could be modelled on a similar guarantee to the US that ended the Cuba Missile Crisis. [You could replace ‘dissolve’ with disband or do away with, and ‘modelled on’ with based on.]
There remains the demand for recognition of the Russian annexation of Crimea. Here, respect for international law (slightly ambiguous in the case of Crimea, which was only transferred from Russia to Ukraine by Soviet decree in 1954) must betemperedby considerations of reality, the prevention of future conflict, and the interests of ordinary people in the region – which is essentially what we have been asking Russia to do in the case of Kosovo. [‘tempered by’ means ‘softened by’, but you might be better off here with alternatives such as go hand in hand with, be reconciled with, leave room for.]
These proposals will be denounced as “rewarding Russian aggression”; but if Putin’s original aim really was to subjugate the whole of Ukraine, then by such an agreement Moscow would fall far short of its maximal goals. Moreover, such an agreement would give Russia nothing that it had not in practice already achieved before launching the invasion. The West is morally right to oppose the monstrous and illegal war prosecuted by Russia and to have imposed exceptionally severe sanctions on Russia in response, but would be morally wrong to oppose a decision by Ukraine to sue for peace with a reasonable agreement that would end the invasion and spare the people of Ukraine terrible suffering. [For ‘denounced’: criticised, reviled, decried; for ‘rewarding Russian aggression’: pandering to. For ‘subjugate’: conquer, vanquish, crush, tame, triumph over, bring to heel, rule over, keep under his thumb – but the word order is getting a little dodgy here. For ‘fall far short of its maximal goals’: fail to achieve, be thwarted in its maximal goals. For the war ‘prosecuted by’, you could say waged by; or you could say initiated, started, or launched. The sentence containing ‘sue for peace’ is a little tricky. You could replace ‘sue for peace’ with seek a diplomatic settlement or seek an agreement with Russia or something of that ilk, if not for the following phrase (‘with a reasonable agreement’). I suppose you could say something like a decision by Ukraine to move forward with a reasonable agreement, or a decision by Ukraine to put an end to the conflict with a reasonable agreement. As for ‘spare the people of Ukraine’, there are not many other options; save is one of them.]
———————————————————————————————————————
Interested in more material like this to help you boost your retour? Why not join my monthly membership site, Rock your Retour, with tailor-made written materials and weekly live group classes (online)?
Sophie Llewellyn Smith, writing as The Interpreting Coach, is a coach, interpreter trainer, conference interpreter, designer of online teaching materials, and creator of Speechpool. Follow the blog to pick up tips on how to improve your interpreting skills.
This week, Nicolas Sturgeon, the First Minister of Scotland, rather unexpectedly announced her resignation.
You may be called upon at some point to interpret a Minister or President’s resignation speech. This is the kind of task that is less daunting if you have some useful set phrases to draw on. Let’s see if we can build up a ‘toolkit’ for you to use if you’re ever in this situation again.
Exercise 1 – activating your vocabulary
Grab a pen and paper, set a timer for 5 minutes, and write down all the phrases you can think of that might be useful if you were writing a resignation speech.
When you’ve finished, you can compare your list with mine.
it has been a privilege
it has been the honour of my life
I have given my all
I have given it everything
when I look back
I am proud of what we have achieved
we have achieved a huge amount
we have faced tremendous challenges
my position is no longer tenable
I am stepping down
time will tell
history will judge
for the good of my party/the country
to know when it’s time to go
I wish to thank the Italian/British/Greek people
with privilege comes responsibility
a fresh set of shoulders
I did what I thought was right
Exercise 2 – terminology mining
Here is an edited version of Nicola Sturgeon’s resignation speech. Go through it with a highlighter (if you’ve downloaded and printed it), or just write down some of the phrases she uses that you could repurpose in somebody else’s speech. Think about what effect she is trying to achieve.
“Good morning, everyone. Thank you for coming along. I’m sorry to break into your half-term break. The First Minister of Scotland is, in my admittedly biased opinion, the very best job in the world. It is a privilege beyond measure, one that has sustained and inspired me in good times and through the toughest hours of my toughest days. I am proud to stand here as the first female and longest serving incumbent of this office, and I’m very proud of what has been achieved in the years I’ve been in Bute House.
However, since my very first moments in the job, I have believed that part of serving well would be to know almost instinctively when the time is right to make way for someone else. And when that time came, to have the courage to do so, even if to many across the country and in my party it might feel too soon. In my head and in my heart I know that time is now. That it is right for me, for my party, and for the country. And so today I am announcing my intention to step down as First Minister and leader of my party. I have asked the national secretary of the SNP to begin the process of electing a new party leader and I will remain in office until my successor is elected. I know there will be some across the country who feel upset by this decision and by the fact I am taking it now.
Of course, for balance there will be others who will – how should I put this – cope with the news just fine. Such is the beauty of democracy. But to those who do feel shocked, disappointed, perhaps even a bit angry with me. Please know that while hard – and be in no doubt, this is really hard for me – my decision comes from a place of duty and of love. Tough love, perhaps, but love nevertheless, for my party and above all, for the country.
Let me set out as best as I can my reasons. First, though I know it will be tempting to see it as such, this decision is not a reaction to short-term pressures. Of course, there are difficult issues confronting the government just now. But when is that ever not the case? I have spent almost three decades in frontline politics. A decade and a half on the top or second top rung of government when it comes to navigating choppy waters, resolving seemingly intractable issues or soldiering on when walking away would be the simpler option. I have plenty of experience to draw on. So if this was just a question of my ability or my resilience to get through the latest period of pressure, I wouldn’t be standing here today. But it’s not. This decision comes from a deeper and longer term assessment. I know it may seem sudden, but I have been wrestling with it, albeit with oscillating levels of intensity, for some weeks.
Essentially, I’ve been trying to answer two questions. Is carrying on right for me and more importantly, is me carrying on right for the country, for my party, and for the independence cause I have devoted my life to. I understand why some will automatically answer ‘yes’ to that second question. But in truth, I have been having to work harder in recent times to convince myself that the answer to either of them, when examined deeply, is yes. And I’ve reached the difficult conclusion that it’s not.
Giving absolutely everything of yourself to this job is the only way to do it. The country deserves nothing less.
But in truth, that can only be done by anyone for so long. For me, it is now in danger of becoming too long. The First Minister is never off duty, particularly in this day and age. There is virtually no privacy. Even ordinary stuff that most people take for granted, like going for a coffee with friends or for a walk on your own becomes very difficult. And the nature and form of modern political discourse means that there is a much greater intensity – dare I say it? – brutality to life as a politician than in years gone by. All in all, and actually for a long time without being apparent, it takes its toll on you and on those around you. And if that is true in the best of times, it has been more so in recent years.
Now there are two further reflections that have weighed in my decision. These, I suppose, are more about our political culture and the nature and impact of the dominance and longevity that come from success in politics. And the first I hope my party will take heart from. One of the difficulties in coming to terms with this decision is that I am confident that I can and would lead the SNP to further electoral success. We remain by far the most trusted party in Scotland, and while for every person in Scotland who loves me, there is another who, let’s say, might not be quite so enthusiastic, we are firmly on course to win the next election while our opponents remain adrift. But the longer any leader is in office, the more opinions about them become fixed and very hard to change. And that matters.
Now, a couple of final points before I take a few questions. While I am stepping down from leadership, I am not leaving politics. There are many issues I care deeply about and hope to champion in future. One of these is the promise, the national mission so close to my heart, to improve the life chances of care experienced young people and ensure they grow up, nurtured and loved. My commitment to these young people will be lifelong. And obviously there is independence. Winning independence is the cause I have dedicated a lifetime to. It is a cause I believe in with every fibre of my being. And it is a cause I am convinced is being won. I intend to be there as it is won every step of the way.
Lastly, there will be time in the days to come for me and others to reflect on what has been achieved during my time as First Minister. I’m pretty certain there will be plenty of commentary on my mistakes as well. There is so much that I am proud of. But there is always so much more to be done. I look forward to watching with pride as my successor picks up the baton.
There will also be time in the days to come for me to say thank you to a very, very long list of people without whom I would not have lasted a single day in this job, let alone eight years. I won’t do so today. I might inadvertently forget someone, or perhaps more likely start to cry. But there are a couple of exceptions. Firstly, my husband and family. Few people understand the price families of politicians pay for the jobs we choose to do. Mine have been my rock throughout. And of course the SNP since I was 16 years old. You have been my extended family. Thank you for the honour of being your leader. And it seems to me that eight emphatic election victories in eight years isn’t a bad record together. Finally, and above all, the people of this beautiful, talented, diverse – at times disputatious – but always wonderful country, we faced the toughest of times together. I did everything I could to guide us through that time. Often from my very familiar podium in St Andrew’s house. In return I was sustained through that period by a wave of support from you that I will remember and value for the rest of my life. So to the people of Scotland, to all of the people of Scotland, whether you voted for me or not, please know that being your First Minister has been the privilege of my life. Nothing. Absolutely nothing I do in future will ever come anywhere close. Thank you. From the very bottom of my heart.”
What did you come up with? Here are mine:
It is a privilege beyond measure
I am proud to stand here as the first woman…
longest serving incumbent of this office
I’m very proud of what has been achieved
to know almost instinctively when the time is right to make way for someone else
In my head and in my heart I know that time is now
And so today I am announcing my intention to step down as First Minister and leader of my party.
I have asked the national secretary of the SNP to begin the process of electing a new party leader
and I will remain in office until my successor is elected.
I know there will be some across the country who feel upset by this decision
my decision comes from a place of duty and of love
Let me set out as best as I can my reasons.
this decision is not a reaction to short-term pressures
almost three decades in frontline politics.
I have been wrestling with this decision for some weeks
Is carrying on right for me and more importantly, is me carrying on right for the country, for my party
Giving absolutely everything of yourself to this job is the only way to do it.
The country deserves nothing less.
it takes its toll on you and on those around you
Now there are two further reflections that have weighed in my decision.
we are firmly on course to win the next election while our opponents remain adrift.
While I am stepping down from leadership, I am not leaving politics.
It is a cause I believe in with every fibre of my being
there will be time in the days to come for me and others to reflect on what has been achieved during my time as First Minister.
There is so much that I am proud of. But there is always so much more to be done.
I look forward to watching with pride as my successor picks up the baton.
Few people understand the price families of politicians pay for the jobs we choose to do. Mine have been my rock throughout.
Thank you for the honour of being your leader.
I did everything I could to guide us through that time.
So to the people of Scotland, to all of the people of Scotland, whether you voted for me or not, please know that being your First Minister has been the privilege of my life. Nothing. Absolutely nothing I do in future will ever come anywhere close. Thank you. From the very bottom of my heart.
Organising your resources
You should now have a good list of expressions that you can group into categories. How about a table like this? I’ve filled in a few phrases, just to start you off. You can do the rest.
Introductory words
what we’ve achieved
reasons for resignation
it’s been a privilege
it’s time to go
what happens next
thanks
– I am very proud to stand here as the first woman…
– there is so much that I am proud of
– let me set out my reasons -there has been a lot of speculation… – I have wrestled with this decision…
– it has been the privilege of my life
– in my head and in my heart, I know the time to go is now
– as my successor picks up the baton -while I am stepping down from the leadership, I am not leaving politics
– thank you from the very bottom of my heart
You may of course have more or fewer columns, or slightly different ones.
Exercise 3
Now, at last, it’s your turn!
Use your table of expressions to write your Prime Minister/President’s resignation speech. You could keep it quite general, or if you like, brainstorm or research the main achievements of their time in office, to make it more realistic.
If you like, film or record yourself and post your recording in the RyR group!
Interested in more material like this to help you boost your retour? Why not join my monthly membership site, Rock your Retour, with tailor-made written materials and weekly live group classes (online)?
Sophie Llewellyn Smith, writing as The Interpreting Coach, is a coach, interpreter trainer, conference interpreter, designer of online teaching materials, and creator of Speechpool. Follow the blog to pick up tips on how to improve your interpreting skills.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information
The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.
