Neutralising a text about Trump - The Interpreting Coach

The aim of this post is to get you thinking about register, emotive language, and ‘hedging’ when you’re interpreting.

I’ve chosen an extract from one of my simultaneous speeches as the basis for the exercises, because it contains quite a few idioms and some emotive language.

Here’s the extract:

‘Personally, I think the US is becoming a rogue nation under a rogue president. The one thing that used to perhaps influence Donald Trump, or keep him in check, was whether his electorate liked what he was doing, because he wants to be popular. But at the moment he’s engaged in many activities that voters on both the left and the right dislike: what’s happening in Minnesota, the threats to Greenland, the economic warfare. His own electorate was mostly interested in him cracking down on illegal migration and improving the economy and the cost of living. But it seems that Donald Trump just doesn’t care anymore what the electorate thinks. He goes his own way, with endless U-turns — enough to give you whiplash.

So my conclusion is this. In his first term, and even in his first year, people would say Donald Trump is unpredictable — that’s part of his negotiating tactics. He’s a dealmaker. He threatens dire consequences, keeps his opponents on their toes, and then backpedals at the last minute, so the other party thinks, “Goodness me, I got off lightly. It could have been so much worse.” That was how it was perceived.

Now, I don’t think that’s what we’re seeing. I think he’s increasingly erratic. He’s behaving like a cross between a toddler and a dictator. He goes wherever his whims and political urges take him, with no endgame and no long-term vision. And what has become abundantly clear is that any deal you make with Trump can be undone tomorrow. Nothing lasts. Nothing is permanent.

In the past year, we’ve had the rather unedifying spectacle of world leaders — and the NATO leader — falling over Donald Trump, flattering him, licking his boots, pandering to his desires, like the desire for a state visit to the UK. But there’s no point, because, as I’ve said, any deal can be broken tomorrow.

So what I would like to see now is European leaders not being so supine. I would like them to show some backbone, stand up to Donald Trump, and show their countries and their electorates that there are principles and values they believe in and will defend, rather than doing whatever Donald Trump wants.’

Exercise 1: from polemical to neutral

Let’s practise ‘neutralising’ some of the emotive language in the text. By the way, I’m not saying interpreters should systematically do this when interpreting! On the contrary. It’s just an exercise to help you focus on the differences between neutral, official language and emotionally loaded phrases.

Your task is to read the following text in your head, then tackle each sentence out loud, and see if you can use a more neutral, analytical register for the emotive phrases (suitable for an academic commentary, for instance).

To do this, you will need to remove emotive or judgemental language and possibly introduce some appropriate ‘hedging’ (for instance, introducing indirect constructions like it has been suggested that), while preserving the core argument.

Here’s the text:

I think he’s increasingly erratic. He’s behaving like a cross between a toddler and a dictator. He goes wherever his whims and political urges take him, with no endgame and no long-term vision. And what has become abundantly clear is that any deal you make with Trump can be undone tomorrow. Nothing lasts. Nothing is permanent.

This suggested version goes a LONG way towards neutralising the original, as it has removed the speaker’s opinion completely, so it has really taken this exercise to extremes! It may give you ideas for how to sound more formal, indirect, and neutral.

Recent developments suggest that President Trump’s decision-making has become increasingly inconsistent and difficult to predict. His actions often appear to be driven by short-term political considerations rather than by a clearly articulated long-term strategy. As a result, agreements reached with his administration may lack durability, as policy positions can change rapidly and with little warning.

Over the past year, a number of international leaders, including figures within NATO, have sought to maintain favourable relations with President Trump through diplomatic gestures and personal accommodation. However, the effectiveness of this approach is open to question, given the apparent fragility of commitments made and the ease with which previously agreed arrangements can be reconsidered or reversed.

In this context, some observers argue that European leaders could adopt a more assertive and coherent stance. By articulating and defending clearly defined principles and policy priorities, they may be better positioned to demonstrate consistency to their domestic audiences and to engage more effectively in transatlantic relations, rather than relying primarily on responsiveness to the preferences of the US administration.

Here are some of the techniques used:

Replace metaphors with descriptive phrasing

Avoid first-person opinion markers

Use modal verbs and evidential language (e.g. appears to, may suggest, can be interpreted as)

Here’s a less extreme version of para 1. The personal opinion is still present, but the language is more formal and there is some hedging (e.g. the word appearing to have).

To my mind, he is less predictable than in the past. He resembles a small child, but with authoritarian tendencies. He follows his political urges without appearing to have a long term strategy. And it is increasingly clear that any agreement struck with Donald Trump could be rescinded almost immediately.

Exercise 2: Idiom game

Reformulate the following expressions using either:

a more formal equivalent, or
a different idiomatic expression with the same meaning

Original expression	Reformulation
“rogue nation”
“keep him in check”
“enough to give you whiplash”
“keeps his opponents on their toes”
“licking his boots”
“show some backbone”
“being so supine”
endless U-turns
with no endgame and no long-term vision
pandering to his desires

Here are some possibilities. You will see that some of them are idioms, and others are more formal/neutral versions of the original. What did you come up with?

Original expression	Reformulation
“rogue nation”	renegade state; pariah state
“keep him in check”	rein him in; limit his worst excesses
“enough to give you whiplash”	enough to make you dizzy; observers never know where they stand; his constant backtracking creates uncertainty
“keeps his opponents on their toes”	keeps his opponents guessing
“licking his boots”	adopting a deferential tone; being sycophantic
“show some backbone”	demonstrate greater resolve; stand up to him
“being so supine”	being too passive; not being assertive enough; letting him walk all over them
endless U-turns	frequent policy reversals
with no endgame and no long-term vision	with no clearly defined long-term strategy
pandering to his desires	seeking to accommodate his requests

Exercise 3: toning down emotive language

Take a look at the following sentences:

“He goes his own way, with endless U-turns.”
“He threatens dire consequences.”
“World leaders falling over Donald Trump.”
“Doing whatever Donald Trump wants.”

They all contain imprecise or emotionally loaded wording. Reformulate each one to make it:

more precise
less emotive
more formal

Exercise 4: gap filling

To finish off, here’s a gap filling exercise.

Read the following passage and fill in the gaps (1-12) with the most appropriate words or phrases. These gaps focus on colourful, emotive, or idiomatic language.

“Personally, I think the US is becoming a (1)__________ nation under a (1)__________ president. The one thing that used to perhaps influence Donald Trump, or keep him (2)__________, was whether his electorate liked what he was doing, because he wants to be popular. But at the moment he’s engaged in many activities that voters on both the left and the right dislike: what’s happening in Minnesota, the threats to Greenland, the economic warfare. His own electorate was mostly interested in him (3)__________ on illegal migration and improving the economy and the cost of living. But it seems that Donald Trump just doesn’t care anymore what the electorate thinks. He goes his own way, with endless (4)__________ — enough to give you (5)__________.

So my conclusion is this. In his first term, and even in his first year, people would say Donald Trump is unpredictable — that’s part of his negotiating tactics. He’s a dealmaker. He threatens (6)__________ consequences, keeps his opponents (7)__________, and then (8)__________ at the last minute, so the other party thinks, “Goodness me, I got off lightly. It could have been so much worse.” That was how it was perceived.

Now, I don’t think that’s what we’re seeing. I think he’s increasingly (9)__________. He’s behaving like a cross between a toddler and a dictator. He goes wherever his (10)__________ and political urges take him, with no endgame and no long-term vision. And what has become abundantly clear is that any deal you make with Trump can be undone tomorrow. Nothing lasts. Nothing is permanent.

In the past year, we’ve had the rather (11)__________ spectacle of world leaders — and the NATO leader — falling over Donald Trump, flattering him, (12)__________, pandering to his desires, like the desire for a state visit to the UK. But there’s no point, because, as I’ve said, any deal can be broken tomorrow.

So what I would like to see now is European leaders not being so supine. I would like them to show some (13)__________, stand up to Donald Trump, and show their countries and their electorates that there are principles and values they believe in and will defend, rather than doing whatever Donald Trump wants.”

rogue nation: it’s difficult to replace this, as it is a set phrase.
in check. You could also use under control or accountable.
cracking down. Alternatives might be toughening his stance or clamping down.
U-turns. How about (policy) reversals, policy shifts, volte-face?
give you whiplash: this is difficult to replace if the verb ‘give’ is preserved. I suppose give you a headache would work.
dire: or catastrophic, terrible, disastrous, grim…A lot of adjectives meaning ‘awful’ would fit here. You will need to think about tone and nuance the pick an appropriate one.
on their toes: guessing would work, or off balance.
backpedals: retreats, climbs down, rows back, relents.
erratic: we obviously can’t use unpredictable because of the previous sentences, so how about volatile, unstable, or capricious? Be careful with whimsical, which has a different meaning from the noun ‘whim’.
whims: impulses, sudden desires.
unedifying: or distasteful, undignified, unpleasant, revolting.
licking his boots: many options here, including grovelling, kowtowing, being obsequious, toadying up to him, currying favour with him.
backbone: or courage, grit, resolve, strength of character.

Simultaneous reformulation

How could I forget… as well as working on a text, you can use the oral version of the speech to practise reformulation. Work from English into English, and try to paraphrase where possible (you will obviously have to keep key terms, names, numbers, etc. the same).

I hope you had fun with these exercises!

Exercise 1: from polemical to neutral

Exercise 2: Idiom game

Exercise 3: toning down emotive language

Exercise 4: gap filling

Simultaneous reformulation

Leave a comment Cancel reply

Enjoy this blog? Please spread the word :)