Abstract

The present study pays tribute to Straniero Sergio’s (2003) analysis of simultaneous interpreting (SI) at Formula One Press Conferences (FPCs) by resuming the examination of this characteristic form of media interpreting twenty years after its inauguration. The corpus analysed is composed of three video-recordings of the EN>IT SIs of the press conferences that preceded the Grand Prix in Mexico, the United Arab Emirates and the USA in 2022. The recordings have been downloaded from the website of Sky Sport and transcribed using the Elan software. As the corpus is limited and contains performances by one interpreter only, it is analysed building on the data scrutinised and the findings outlined by Straniero Sergio (2003), who examined quality in the FPC context and illustrated the norms that characterise interpreting in this setting. Against the background of his analysis of FPCs, the present study yields apparently contradictory results: while, to a certain extent, omissions, generalisations, neutral finishes, parallel formulations and summarised renditions do appear to be used as emergency strategies, the interpreter’s turns stand out for his ability to translate technical terms and expressions accurately and effectively. Besides contextual knowledge, he displays procedural knowledge: strategies including the deliberate omission of hedges, the skilful use of repetitions to enhance clarity and the production of nominal sentences all enable the interpreter to keep up with the fast pace of delivery and make up for the difficulties that notoriously render the FPC ‘a terrible experience for interpreters’ (Straniero Sergio 2003: 139).

Keywords: Formula One Press Conference FPC, interview, simultaneous interpreting, speed, Thursday Press Conference TPC

1. Introduction

Source speech delivery rate has always been acknowledged in Interpreting Studies as one of the major challenges faced by simultaneous interpreters. Gile (1995: 192) includes a high rate of delivery of the source speech among the most frequent sources of interpreting problems, noting that when a speaker produces a rapid speech, it can be seen as a cognitive problem trigger in that the interpreter’s speech is paced by the speaker. With her experimental study, Pio (2003) also investigates the relation between source speech delivery rate and quality in simultaneous interpreting, concluding that ‘when facing rapidly read out STs [source texts], interpreters may tend to lengthen their EVS [ear-voice span] as well as to shorten their distance from the speaker in order to lose the least information possible and not to undermine their performance in terms of quality’ (Pio 2003: 98). More recent studies on speed include Barghout, Ruiz Rosendo and Varela García (2015) and Dose (2020) who, by means of an experimental and a corpus-based study respectively, both examine professional interpreters’ choice of strategies when interpreting fast-paced speeches.

In his 2003 seminal paper on simultaneous interpreting at Formula One Press Conferences, Straniero Sergio also focuses on speed and notes that the communicative context at issue, in which ‘interviewer and interviewee share the same language [and] answers follow questions without interruptions’ (Straniero Sergio 2003: 141), is governed by the rules of speed just as the racetrack is.

The absence of inter-turn pauses together with a very high rate of speed put interpreters in the position of always being late. (Straniero Sergio 2003: 141)

The adverb always, used by Straniero Sergio in relation to the interpreters’ chronic delay and highlighted in italics in the original manuscript, reveals the aim of that 2003 study, namely the identification of norms or ‘regularities of translational behaviour’ (Straniero Sergio 2003: 136) in the context of Formula One Press Conferences and beyond.

Straniero Sergio’s 2003 paper presents the analysis of a series of simultaneous interpretations (SIs) from English into Italian at Formula One Press Conferences (abbreviated FPCs), which were given after each Grand Prix. The recordings of FPCs are included in a larger ‘corpus on Media Interpreting (MI), made up of 1200 interpreters’ performances’ (Straniero Sergio 2003: 135-136) pertaining to the two genres of talk shows and media events. He examines 80 performances by 11 professional media interpreters and describes the distinctive interpreting context of the FPC, an instance of ‘“professional-lay discourse” […] which addresses an undifferentiated mass audience within an entertainment logic’ (Straniero Sergio 2003: 167), and which is characterised by dialogicity, brevity, intertextuality and rituality (Straniero Sergio 2003: 136-137). The ‘interviewer (voice-off)’ (Straniero Sergio 2003: 137) chats with the F1 drivers in English (dialogicity) while the interpreter does not share their context of situation; ‘each conference lasts four minutes’ (Straniero Sergio 2003: 136) and is characterised by few questions and ‘very short turns’ (Straniero Sergio 2003: 136) (brevity); thematically, references are regularly made to what happened during the race (intertextuality) and this type of interaction recurs ‘fortnightly, throughout the whole season’ (Straniero Sergio 2003: 137) (rituality).

Building on these contextual premises, Straniero Sergio discovers that the FPC is ‘a terrible experience for […] interpreters’ (Straniero Sergio 2003: 139). Emergency strategies, including parallel formulations (Gile 1995: 201), summarised renditions (Wadensjö 1998: 108) and generalisations become the norm in this context (Straniero Sergio 2003: 140), as interpreters must keep up with the ‘frantic pace’ of speech delivery, interpret the drivers’ messages ‘not […] correctly but convincingly well’ and produce ‘an apparently smooth and coherent discourse’ (Straniero Sergio 2003: 172).

The norm here in the real interpreting world is the rendition of the essentials. (Straniero Sergio 2003: 170)

Providing and thoroughly expounding 109 examples, Straniero Sergio’s 2003 analysis gifts his readership with a detailed and riveting tale of what interpreting at Formula One Press Conferences means and entails, a tale that is still a point of reference for interpreting scholars.

2. Corpus, methodology and aim

The present paper builds on a ‘new’ corpus of simultaneous interpretations from English into Italian, which was assembled with a view to carrying on the study inaugurated by Straniero Sergio and investigating whether the nature of interpreting in the context of the FPC has changed over the past few decades. Compared to the data gathered and analysed by Straniero Sergio, the corpus that has enabled the present study is smaller, to use a euphemism. It is composed of three video recordings of the SIs of the ‘Thursday Press Conferences’ (TPCs) held in 2022 in Austin, Mexico City and Abu Dhabi ahead of the Sunday races. The videos of the interactions in English have also been downloaded and included in the corpus, whose details are displayed in Table 1.

Table 1: Details of the corpus

As shown in Table 1, besides the video-recordings of the interpretations into Italian of the TPCs, the original, English-language press conferences have been downloaded to enable the contrastive analysis of source-text (ST) and interpreted-text (IT) material. The two types of recordings are indicated with _EN and _IT, respectively. While the recording of the conference in English is split into two videos, the recording of the SI into Italian is found in a single video. For the Austin TPC in English, only the recording of the second part of the press conference was found and downloaded from the web.

The corpus is limited in size because the video-recordings of Formula One Press Conferences are not easy to retrieve from the internet, especially those featuring the SI into Italian. The videos have been downloaded from the website of Sky Sport, which, however, only provides few incomplete recordings (the same holds true for YouTube) that have been cut and reduced in length by the broadcaster itself. The TPC approximately lasts one hour but, as Table 1 shows, roughly half of the conference is made available by Sky Sport on their website and on YouTube. At given points in the recording, a notice appears informing users that ‘The next section of this Press Conference is for written media use only and not for broadcast’; advertisements and reports on the race, the cars, the teams and the pilots follow, preceding further bits of the press conference. In this respect, the length of the _IT recordings as indicated in Table 1 is an approximate sum of the durations of each portion in which the press conference is shown. For instance, the Austin_IT video lasts two hours and fourteen minutes, but the press conference is only shown between minutes 26:00-43:00 and 01:48:00-02:02:46, totalling 32 minutes of recording in which the SI of the TPC can be listened to.

In light of the hurdles in retrieving complete, authentic audiovisual material from the internet, the best option for future research would be that of recording the whole press conferences from pay-per-view satellite television platforms, such as Sky, which provide their users with the chance to record TV programmes.

A few additional remarks concerning the specific communicative context of the TPC are in order to outline what differentiates it from the FPCs examined and described by Straniero Sergio (2003). The weekend of the Grand Prix actually starts on Thursday with the TPC. The main difference between TPCs and the conferences analysed and illustrated by Straniero Sergio lies in the fact that the former are given before each Grand Prix, which determines a slight difference in the themes addressed. Owing to the fact that the TPC is held before the race, the interviewer does not congratulate the winners, ask them to express their feelings about the race or talk of the most exciting moments of the race (Straniero Sergio 2003: 137), but rather asks questions about previous races, investigates team strategies and enquires about the drivers’ pre-race feelings and expectations.

Despite these thematic differences, the TPC is also characterised by rituality, in that it ‘is a regular event which takes place […] throughout the season’ (Straniero Sergio 2003: 137). Moreover, it is also characterised by intertextuality, because the interaction is based on continuous references to what happened during the previous race and what could, could not, should or should not happen in the following.

The interaction format of the TPC does not differ much from that of the FPCs explored by Straniero Sergio: the TPC also ‘belongs to the “interview” genre and, more specifically, “the press conference format”’ (Straniero Sergio 2003: 136), thereby being characterised by dialogicity. The interviewer is off-screen and only the drivers can be seen. Yet, as Straniero Sergio (2003: 136) maintains in relation to FPCs, ‘unlike Conference Interpreting, there is no shared situationality’ and ‘interpreters have no access to the primary participants who are totally unaware that in Rome [in this case, in Milan] a SI of their interview is going on’. This holds true for a variety of media interpreting events, which are ‘often characterized by displaced situationality’ (Viezzi 2013: 384). The drivers in the TPC first answer a series of questions asked by one journalist, the interviewer, who does not appear on screen and later take questions from the floor, composed of various journalists working for different newspapers or TV channels. Notably, these latter interactions are often cut in the Sky Sport videos, which predominantly show the interaction between the interviewer and the drivers.

While the 2022 TPCs and the FCPs recorded by Straniero Sergio between the late 1990s and the early 2000s can be said, with certain reservations, to be both characterised by dialogicity, intertextuality and rituality, they cannot be said to share the feature of brevity. Notably, the TPC is another type of conference, different from those described in Straniero Sergio (2003). They are often subject to changes: in 2017, the conference saw eight drivers divided into two groups of four and talking for approximately 25 minutes^[1]; yet, this ‘new’ format was soon changed, and since 2022 the conference has seen two groups composed of five Formula One pilots who answer questions for approximately 55 minutes^[2]. Hence, the TPCs are comparatively longer than the FPCs held twenty years ago.

The videos of the SIs of the TPCs have been transcribed using the Elan software (Brugman and Russel 2004) and adopting the transcription conventions listed in Straniero Sergio (2007: 22-23) and adapted as shown in Table 2.

Table 2: Transcription conventions, adapted from Straniero Sergio (2007: 22-23)

Despite the presence of both STs and ITs in the corpus, as in Straniero Sergio (2003) the interactions in English have not been transcribed and excerpts from the edited transcriptions^[3] will be shown in the following section, in that the analysis of the spoken features of the journalist’s and drivers’ turns is beyond the scope of the present paper.

In particular, the same transcription method used by Straniero Sergio (2003) has been used in this study and examples from the corpus will be presented the way he presented his examples.

Fig. 1: Excerpt drawn from Straniero Sergio (2003: 143)

Q indicates a question by the interviewer, A indicates an answer by a driver and INTERPRETER signals the interpreter’s rendition of the preceding textual content. For STs, the edited transcription is shown, while for ITs, the transcription exported from Elan by the author of the present paper and covering a variety of speech features (e.g. false starts, pauses and vowel lengthening) is displayed. Question marks also appear in the transcription to help the reader understand that a question is being asked. Moreover, a retranslation into English of the interpreter’s turns is provided between square brackets in the following sections. At the end of each excerpt, the place of the Grand Prix and, hence, of the interview, is indicated. The name of the F1 pilot who produces the turn is also specified.

The aim of the present study does not differ much from that pursued by Straniero Sergio (2003); this investigation also focuses on the assessment of quality and the identification of norms, but only insofar as its results are not considered in isolation but linked to those outlined by Straniero Sergio. This is because the corpus only includes the performances by one media interpreter, and this prevents the study from bearing any statistical significance. Incidentally, the name of the interpreter working for Sky Sport Italia is Salvatore Torrisi; details about his academic background, professional career and passion for interpreting can be read in an article that reports an interview with him and that is entitled ‘Quando il lavoro è passione. Intervista a Salvatore Torrisi, interprete di Sky’^[4].

Given the limited size of the corpus and the presence of only one interpreter, the broader aim of the present study could simply be said to be that of resuming the investigation of the FPC interpreting context twenty years after its inauguration by Straniero Sergio. As suggested earlier, unlike Straniero Sergio’s 2003 study, the present paper will not show 109 excerpts or usher in the examination of an uncharted interpreting context. Rather, it merely aims at enabling readers to cast a contemporary glance at an interpreting context that was already explored and described accurately at the dawn of the new millennium.

3. Findings

By watching a Thursday Press Conference, the fact that – as in all FPCs – ‘the interaction takes place in a relaxed and informal atmosphere’ (Straniero Sergio 2003: 139) can be observed. This can also be inferred from Figure 2, displaying a snapshot of a TPC.

Fig. 2: Picture of a 2022 Thursday Press Conference

The Thursday Press Conference follows a script: the drivers are divided into two groups of five, they sit in line next to each other and they are asked a minimum of two questions in turn, either from left to right or viceversa. The first question generally entails a digression from the main topic, that is the Sunday race, as each driver is asked something about his arrival to the venue, his passion for other sports, his new haircut, and the like. The second question introduces the audience to the main theme, that of the Sunday race. It is a more technical question, concerning the forthcoming race and the previous one, too. In this part of the interaction, the use of ‘FPC jargon […] characterized by the presence of technical terms’ (Straniero Sergio 2003: 137) stands out; FPC jargon comprises not only technical terms but also verbs and expressions that describe driving, ‘the speed, the movement of cars and the actions taken by drivers’ (Straniero Sergio 2003: 137) and their teams.

Example [1] is drawn from the transcription of one of the first questions asked during a TPC, which always trigger an informal digression. In particular, it is an excerpt from the Abu Dhabi conference: driver George Russell, who has recently won his first Grand Prix, is asked a question about the party he and other drivers were supposed to have on the plane from Brazil to Abu Dhabi.

[1]

Q George, if we could start with you, please. How was the party on the flight here?

A The flight didn’t take off until 3 am and I was just absolutely knackered. […] I slept quite a long time. It was a tough race! No, celebrations have been put on hold until this Sunday.

INTERPRETER

Q George cominciamo con te per favore (.) com’è stata: (.) la eh la festa:? [George let’s start with you please (.) how wa:s (.) the eh the party:?]

A e l’aereo non è (.) partito non è decollato fino (.) prima delle tre di notte ero totalmente (.) eh scoppiato (.) […] è stata una dura gara eh soltanto per quello mica per altro (.) eh: l- la festa diciamo che è stata: (.) tenuta: eh fino al: giorno dopo [the flight didn’t (.) leave didn’t take off until (.) 3 am I was so (.) eh knackered (.) […] it was a tough race eh only for that reason not for others (.) eh: th- the party let’s say it wa:s (.) ke:pt eh until the: following day]

(George Russell, Abu Dhabi 2022)

When asked the question ‘How was the party on the flight here?’, driver George Russell answers that the plane was late, he was knackered, he slept a lot because it was a tough race and, therefore, celebrations were put on hold until the following Sunday. As [1] indicates, the interpreter struggles to translate this interaction. He makes no mention of the flight when translating the question, omits any references to sleeping and misinterprets the fact that celebrations were postponed. In other words, his rendition is evidently characterised by a series of omissions and a sentence concluding the turn that could be interpreted either as a parallel formulation or a neutral finish. The recourse to parallel formulations and neutral finishes can be observed elsewhere in the corpus when the drivers are asked these first, general questions.

[2]

A I guess after so many years and races, there’s the routine of Thursday. But I think it’s difficult in a way to grasp but I’m aware of what’s happening and I’m happy about it, as far as I can be.

INTERPRETER

A ho passato così tanti anni: nelle gare: ho già vissuto questa routine del giovedì (.) ma credo che: (.) per certi versi è difficile: eh comprenderlo però sono consapevole di quello che sta accadendo (.) e spero che: vada tutto bene [I have spent so many yea:rs ra:cing I have already lived this routine of Thursday (.) in a way it’s difficu:lt eh to grasp but I’m aware of what’s happening (.) and I hope tha:t everything goes well]

(Sebastian Vettel, Abu Dhabi 2022)

[3]

Q Alex, coming to you now. You’ve gone blonde again.

A First time. Don’t they say blondes have more fun? I don’t know. Is that the thing?

Q [by Lewis Hamilton] Are you blonde everywhere?

A Blonde everywhere.

Q [by Lewis Hamilton] Yeah!?

A Oh! I was like, yeah Lewis, can’t you see the sides are blonde, everything’s blonde.

INTERPRETER

Q Alex eh ora veniamo a te (.) ti sei di nuovo: rifatto biondo [Alex eh coming to you now (.) you’ve gone blonde agai:n]

A è la prima volta (.) s:i dice che i (.) biondi si divertano di più? è questo il detto no? è per questo che mi sono fatto biondo (.) [it’s the first time (.) d:on’t they say that the (.) blondes have more fun? this is the saying, isn’t it? This is why I have gone blonde]

sì (.) oh [yes (.) oh]

sì Lewis vedi? (.) è tutto biondo (.) sono biondo ovunque [yes Lewis can’t you see? (.) everything is blonde (.) I am blonde everywhere]

(Alexander Albon, Austin 2022)

In [2], Sebastian Vettel is answering a question about the forthcoming weekend, which is particularly emotional for him as it is going to be his last as a Formula One driver. The turn is translated accurately but his closing thought, ‘and I’m happy about it, as far as I can be’, turns into a more general ‘e spero che: vada tutto bene’ (and I hope everything goes well).

In [3], driver Lewis Hamilton intervenes in the exchange between the interviewer and driver Alexander Albon, who was asked an innocent question about his newly blonde haircut, provocatively enquiring ‘Are you blonde everywhere?’. This question generates a certain embarrassment in the TPC and, apparently, the interpreter does not catch Hamilton’s inappropriate allusion, producing a turn in which omissions stick out. Moreover, when Alexander Albon answers that ‘the sides are blonde’, showing that all his head is blonde and steering the conversation to a less indecent dimension, the interpreter does not appear to grasp the speaker’s words and intentions, as he refrains from translating most of the source-speech turns and concludes his rendition with a vague ‘è tutto biondo (.) sono biondo ovunque’ (everything is blonde (.) I am blonde everywhere).

Broadly, examples [1], [2] and [3] suggest that a significant number of omissions, neutral finishes, parallel formulations and generalisations are likely to be observed in the translation of this first question-answer group, possibly because this question-answer group does not thematically focus on the race; its content is unpredictable, cannot be anticipated and the interpreter might have a hard time grasping and reproducing it. Omissions occur when the interpreter fails to grasp the extemporaneous and/or ridiculous themes of the conversation; moreover, as in Straniero Sergio’s data (2003), neutral finishes and parallel formulations often show up as they ‘allow interpreters to bring their utterances to an end’ (Straniero Sergio 2003: 161) in emergency situations and ‘may be idiosyncratic’ (Straniero Sergio 2003: 162).

Generally, technical jargon cannot be observed in this first, digressive conversational exchange. Yet, technical terms can crop up at any moment of the interaction, as shown in [4]. It reports the interpretation of the question that the journalist asked driver Esteban Ocon in Austin, and displays another example of how the interpreter handles the first digressive section of the interaction.

[4]

Q Esteban, before flying here you attended the Ballon d’Or ceremony in Paris. Tell us about it: it struck me you were a very brave man doing all those donuts and things with the Ballon d’Or just sat above your head.

INTERPRETER

Q Esteban prima di venire qui (.) s:ei stato presente alla cerimonia del Pallone d’Oro a Parigi parlacene un po’ (.) eh sei stato molto coraggioso: eh facendo tutte le: le donuts le sgommate con il Pallone d’Oro sulla tua testa [Esteban before flying here (.) you: attended the Ballon d’Or ceremony in Paris tell us about it (.) eh you were very brave: eh doing all the: the donuts squealing off with the Ballon d’Or sat above your head]

(Esteban Ocon, Austin 2022)

Example [4] shows that FPC jargon permeates the whole interaction between the interviewer and the drivers. Even though the topic of discussion is the Ballon d’Or ceremony, for instance a football event, a Formula One-related term is used, namely donut, an impressive manoeuvre performed while driving a vehicle. In this case, the interpreter displays familiarity with the term: he opts for preserving the anglicism in his output and provides an additional explanation of the term; however, the Italian expression fare le sgommate (meaning to squeal off, with the noun sgommate meaning either skid mark or tyre screech) is not enough to explain that the skid mark left by the car during a donut is circular.

Despite the occurrence of donut in [4], the presence of specialised lexicon is all the more evident in the second, technical question that the journalist asks the drivers. In relation to his corpus, Straniero Sergio notes that, when tackling FPC jargon, ‘Generalization is the prevailing strategy. Nearly all technical explanations are rendered with hyperonyms and generic terms’ (Straniero Sergio 2003: 149). He adds that strategies to make up for a lack of understanding of technical passages include stereotyped formulas or rhetorical routines (Straniero Sergio 2003: 154) and parallel formulations (Straniero Sergio 2003: 159).

Fig. 3: Excerpt drawn from Straniero Sergio (2003: 167)

He observes, for instance, that the interpreter whose translation of a question-answer group is shown in Figure 3 did not grasp the acronym DNF (did not finish) and repeated the final part of the preceding question to say something, just to prevent communication from breaking down, which is one of the prerequisites of media interpreting. ‘If Rubens has one DNF, things could change around’ thus became ‘any chance to arrive second? Well, things could change around’.

The study of the small 2022 corpus of TPCs began with the hypothesis that the same interpreter behaviour noted in Straniero Sergio’s data would have been observed. Yet, the Sky Sport interpreter surprisingly shows himself to be at ease with technical terms. In fact, the acronym DNF, which also occurs frequently in the 2022 corpus, is always translated correctly. When, for example, driver Valtteri Bottas says ‘there’s obviously many DNFs’, the interpreter displays his familiarity with the technical term and translates ‘ci sono stati ovviamente tanti ritiri’ (there have obviously been many DNFs).

[5]

A there’s obviously many DNFs but for sure some other teams have been able to improve more than us.

INTERPRETER

A ci sono stati ovviamente tanti ritiri però (.) altri team eh sicuramente sono riusciti a migliorare più di noi [there have obviously been many DNFs but (.) some other teams eh have certainly been able to improve more than us]

(Valtteri Bottas, Austin 2022)

Example [6] sees Mick Schumacher using the technical term high downforce and, again, the interpreter translating the term accurately.

[6]

A I think that our car has been performing well, under the high downforce circumstances that we had across the other tracks up to now.

INTERPRETER

A la macchina (.) credo sia andata bene (.) eh nelle: situazioni ad alto carico aerodinamico che abbiamo trovato in altre piste fino ad ora [the car (.) I think it performed well (.) eh in the: high downforce circumstances that we had across the other tracks up to now]

(Mick Schumacher, Mexico City 2022)

Example [7], containing the specialised expression to take the slipstream, also illustrates that the interpreter generally translates technical terms with ease, apparently resorting to ready-made solutions that seem to have been internalised through practice.

[7]

A I took the slipstream until the last moment.

INTERPRETER

A io ho preso la scia fino all’ultimo momento [I took the slipstream until the last moment]

(Fernando Alonso, Mexico City 2022)

The many technical terms that are iterated in the corpus and that the interpreter regularly translates correctly without struggling include DNF (ritiro), flow (scorrevolezza), elevation change (cambi di pendenza), high-speed corners (curve ad alta velocità), front wing (ala anteriore), floor diffuser (diffusore per il fondo), lateral g (forze laterali g), option tyre (gomme più morbide), prime tyre (gomme più dure). The interpreter is also clearly acquainted with the translation of specialised expressions, including the systematic translation of ‘to score points’ with the idiomatic expressions ‘andare a punti’ and/or ‘arrivare a punti’, which in Italian are exclusively used in the context of Formula One races.

[8]

Q Three points finishes in the last five races. How confident are you in the Alpha Tauri package now?

A Well, we know it’s a tight battle. We know it hasn’t been easy for us this season to score points.

INTERPRETER

Q sei s- sei arrivato a punti tre volte nelle ultime cinque gare quanta f- fiducia hai ora nel pacchetto Alpha Tauri? [you y- you’ve collected three points finishes in the last five races how c- confident are you in the Alpha Tauri package now?]

A beh eh è una battaglia molto serrata (.) non è stata: una stagione semplice per noi non è stato facile andare a punti [well eh it’s a very tight battle (.) it hasn’t bee:n an easy season for us it hasn’t been easy to score points]

(Pierre Gasly, Austin 2022)

[9]

Q You’ve scored points every time you’ve raced at COTA.

INTERPRETER

Q tu s:ei andato a punti ogni volta che hai gareggiato su questo circuito [you’v:e scored points every time you’ve raced on this circuit]

(Carlos Sainz, Austin 2022)

Examples [10] and [11] show that these Italian idiomatic expressions are used not only as equivalents of ‘to score points’ but also and more broadly to translate any formulation whereby the speakers refer to the actual or expected positive outcome of a race. Notably, example [11] also reports the English expression to be in the points, which, like the Italian ‘andare/arrivare a punti’, is also exclusively used in the context of racing.

[10]

A I think otherwise we were on for a good position in around, I think, P6 or P7 even, so would have been great points for the team having a double points finish

INTERPRETER

A altrimenti eh: saremmo →stati in lotta per una buona posizione addirittura s:esto settimo posto← sarebbero stati punti molto preziosi per il team perché in due saremmo arrivati a punti [otherwise eh: we would →have been on for a good position in around even s:ixth seventh position← those would have been very precious points for the team because two of us would have scored points]

(Mick Schumacher, Mexico City 2022)

[11]

A if we get everything right I’m sure there’s potential to be in the points

INTERPRETER

A se riusciamo a fare tutto alla perfezione sono sicuro che ci sia il potenziale per andare a punti [if we do everything perfectly I’m sure there’s potential to be in the points]

Not only does the interpreter display familiarity with FPC jargon and the use of ‘stereotyped formulas’ (Straniero Sergio 2003: 154)^[5], he also generally adopts an appropriate register and elegant expressions. This translation behaviour often results in register shifts, rendering the IT more formal or elegant than its English counterpart. In this respect, the fact that English is not the mother tongue of most drivers must be taken into account when analysing the corpus; the drivers are all proficient in English but their expressive choices are not always admirable from a pragmatic point of view. Take example [12]: Fernando Alonso is complaining about a controversial decision made by the FIA (Fédération Internationale de l’Automobile, in English International Automobile Federation), concerning a post-race protest by a rival team about the safety of his own car. According to Alonso, this protest was filed out of time, so he claims:

[12]

A The protests arrived too late […] When is too late? So that, I think, we cannot afford […] if this goes ahead, I think we will open a very… we don’t want to open that box.

INTERPRETER

A il reclamo è stato sporto troppo tardi […] chi stabilisce quando è troppo tardi? e io non penso che (.) questo possa essere concesso […] se la cosa dovesse essere confermata (.) credo: eh che è un- è un vaso di Pandora che non vogliamo aprire [the complaint was filed too late […] who decides when it is too late? and I don’t think that (.) this can be permitted […] if this was confirmed (.) I thi:nk eh that it is a- it is a Pandora’s box that we don’t want to open]

(Fernando Alonso, Mexico City 2022)

While Fernando Alonso sounds hesitant, his words take on a more powerful and evocative character when they are uttered by the Italian interpreter: with ‘sporgere un reclamo’ (to file a complaint) he proves his ability to select the most appropriate and elegant collocation; with ‘chi stabilisce quando è troppo tardi?’ (who decides when it is too late?) he emphasises the argumentative power and allusive force of Alonso’s invective; and with ‘è un vaso di Pandora che non vogliamo aprire’ (it is a Pandora’s box that we don’t want to open) he bestows a classical flavour on the speaker’s message.

Example [13] also displays a shift of register, together with a shift in perspective: as driver Max Verstappen vaguely complains about the fact that ‘I looked very bad, you know, in the media’, the interpreter turns his sentence from active to passive (‘sono stato dipinto come il cattivo della situazione nei media’, translatable as ‘I was depicted as the bad guy in the media’), thereby blaming the media for the way the driver was treated.

[13]

A But after that race, of course, yeah, I looked very bad, you know, in the media.

INTERPRETER

A ma dopo: eh quella gara (.) s:enza dubbio (.) eh eh sono stato dipinto come il cattivo della situazione nei media [but afte:r eh that race (.) undoubtedly (.) eh eh I was depicted as the bad guy in the media]

(Max Verstappen, Abu Dhabi 2022)

Despite a series of comprehensible omissions and difficulties, which appear to be due to the high rate of source-speech delivery, the interpreter often displays his ability to select appropriate translation equivalents for the idiomatic expressions that are used in the ST, as shown in example [14].

            [14]

A When you said former, I thought you were saying Max is hanging it up!

INTERPRETER

A quando: eh (.) eh: parlavi di ex compagno di →squadra pensavo che stessi dicendo che che Max stesse pe:r appendere gli stivali al chiodo← [whe:n eh (.) you were talking about a former teammate →I thought you were saying Max was abou:t to hang it up←]

(Daniel Ricciardo, Abu Dhabi 2022)

As a general rule, the interpreter appears to make use of a series of interaction-oriented strategies, which ‘favour mutual understanding and display the interpreter’s involvement and alignment towards primary speakers’ (Straniero Sergio 2012: 51) ‘and the audience’ (Straniero Sergio 2012: 46). One example is the ‘insertion of the affirmative reply sì (“yes”)’ (Straniero Sergio 2012: 41), used to exhibit the driver’s agreement with the interviewer’s opinion.

[15]

Q Would you say that was one of your best races in Formula 1?

A I think it’s been a good race for sure.

INTERPRETER

Q la de.finiresti una delle tue migliori gare in Formula 1? [would you de.fine it one of your best races in Formula 1?]

A sì credo sia stata una: gran gara di sicuro [yes I think it’s been a: good race for sure]

(Esteban Ocon, Austin 2022)

The interaction-oriented strategies that can be observed in the corpus also include repetitions (Straniero Sergio 2012). Notably, repetitions are also ‘an interactional resource through which the interpreter (as the second speaker) ensures cohesion and coherence among turns (mainly made up of questions and answers) produced by speakers of two different languages’ (Straniero Sergio 2012: 30). In his study of repetitions in dialogue interpreting, Straniero Sergio (2012) highlights that repetitions are also ‘comprehension-oriented, in that they serve to make utterances more intelligible for the audience and production-oriented, in that they facilitate the selection of translation equivalents, particularly in emergency situations’ (Straniero Sergio 2012: 51). These aspects can frequently be observed in the transcriptions of the Sky Sport interpreter’s renditions, as suggested, for instance, in example [4], where the interpreter selected two different options (‘le donuts le sgommate’) to translate the English term ‘donuts’. [16], which shows a comment uttered by driver Sebastian Vettel together with its interpreted version, provides a further insight into the interpreter’s use of repetitions:

[16]

A I don’t think it’s fair to pick one. […] I guess the firsts, in a way, always stand out.

INTERPRETER

A non credo sia giusto scegliere soltanto uno: […] s:uppongo che: eh le prime (.) le prime volte di ogni cosa ehm per certi versi spicchino sempre sulle altre [I don’t think it’s fair to pick only one: […] I s:uppose tha:t eh the firsts (.) the first times of anything ehm in a way always stand out]

(Sebastian Vettel, Abu Dhabi 2022)

When asked to choose one abiding memory from his Formula 1 career, Sebastian Vettel answers ‘I don’t think it’s fair to pick one. I guess the firsts, in a way, always stand out’. The interpreter straightforwardly translates this ‘firsts’ with ‘le prime’ and then feels the need to propose an alternative, clearer translation and specifies ‘le prime volte di ogni cosa’ (the first times of anything).

These repetitions, aiming at enhancing clarity, can be observed throughout the whole corpus. Some examples are shown below.

[17]

Q Final one for me: what are your goals for the weekend?

A Finish as high as we can, I guess.

INTERPRETER

Q quali sono i tuoi obiettivi per il weekend? [what are your goals for the weekend?]

A concludere: con un acuto con: il risultato migliore possibile [fini:sh on a high note with the best possible result]

(Mick Schumacher, Abu Dhabi 2022)

[18]

A I think, as a person, he’s always been very caring

INTERPRETER

A come persona credo che sia sempre stato molto: (.) eh premuroso molto affettuoso [as a person I think he’s always been very: (.) eh caring very affectionate]

(Max Verstappen, Abu Dhabi 2022)

[19]

A Green light on parc fermé, and then the protests arrive too late

INTERPRETER

A c’è stata la ban- eh la: luce verde: eh: il via libera al parco chiuso e poi la pro- il reclamo è stato sporto troppo tardi [there was the flag- eh the: green li:ght eh the go-ahead on parc fermé and then the prot- the complaint was filed too late]

(Fernando Alonso, Mexico City 2022)

As illustrated in examples [17], [18] and [19], given lexical items often ‘double’ in translation, as the interpreter provides his Italian audience with two translation equivalents that improve the clarity of the drivers’ turns.

Regarding repetitions in the source – rather than interpreted – speech, a significant behaviour pattern stands out throughout the corpus, as the interpreter almost systematically omits one lexical or phrasal item of the interviewer’s and drivers’ repetitions, resorting to what appears to be an automatised strategy enabling him to save time and cognitive resources while producing a more elegant rendition.

[20]

A I went in with the approach to enjoy each opportunity, to try to make the most of it, and try to enjoy as much as I can and not sweat or stress about the little stuff, or what seems like the little stuff.

INTERPRETER

A ho cercato di a:ssumere un approccio (.) per cercare di eh godermi (.) ogni opportunità: e di: divertirmi senza stressarmi su quello che: eh possono sembrare dei piccoli dettagli [I tried to ta:ke on an approach (.) to try and eh enjoy (.) each opportunity: a:nd have fun without stressing about wha:t seems like the little stuff]

(Nicholas Latifi, Abu Dhabi 2022)

In [20], driver Nicholas Latifi says he was determined ‘to enjoy each opportunity, to try to make the most of it’; he then adds that he wanted to enjoy the race without sweating or stressing (‘not sweat or stress’) ‘about the little stuff, or what seems like the little stuff’. The interpreter only preserves one linguistic element of both repetitions, omitting references to sweating and mentioning the little stuff only once (‘godermi ogni opportunità’, meaning ‘to enjoy each opportunity’; ‘senza stressarmi su quello che: eh possono sembrare dei piccoli dettagli’, translatable as ‘without stressing about wha:t seems like the little stuff’).

[21]

Q How much was your race compromised by accident damage?

A Yeah, it was unfortunately quite damaged, the car, it affected quite a few different areas of the car.

INTERPRETER

Q quanto la tua gara è s:tata compromessa da quell’incidente? [how much wa:s your race compromised by that accident?]

A sì: eh purtroppo: eh la macchina (.) è stata piuttosto danneggiata: eh ←in varie aree diverse→ [yeah: eh unfortunately: eh the car (.) was quite da:maged eh ←in several different areas→]

(Mick Schumacher, Mexico City 2022)

[22]

A He cares about the sport as a whole, but he also cares about, let’s say, us drivers.

INTERPRETER

A tiene molto a questo sport ma anche a noi piloti [he cares about this sport but also us drivers]

(Daniel Ricciardo, Abu Dhabi 2022)

[21] and [22] show that the interpreter is used to ‘turning’ repetitions in the ST into single lexical items in the IT, thereby reducing the redundancy and prolixity of original utterances. In the light of their recurring character, the choices made by the interpreter to render source-text repetitions are likely to be the result of conscious decisions; therefore, they can be considered ‘deliberate omissions’ enabling him ‘to eliminate message redundancy’ (Korpal 2012: 103) and keep up with the pace of speech delivery.

The interpreter’s habit to ‘slim down’ the propositional content of the ST in the IT can also be observed in the frequent production of nominal sentences, which allow him to get rid of verb forms, save time and produce relatively concise sentences in Italian. Examples of this strategy are shown in [23], [24] and [25].

[23]

A We had a tough day on Saturday.

INTERPRETER

A giornata molto difficile per noi sabato [very tough day for us on Saturday]

(Lance Stroll, Austin 2022)

[24]

A The flow the track has, the elevation change, the high-speed corners, it’s really something that I enjoy.

INTERPRTER

A la scorrevolezza i cambi: di pendenza (.) eh le curve →ad alta velocità sono tutte cose← che mi piacciono [the flow the eleva:tion change (.) eh the high-speed →corners it’s really something← that I enjoy]

(Valtteri Bottas, Austin 2022)

[25]

Q you had tremendous pace in Brazil

INTERPTRETER

Q ah: passo fantastico da parte vostra in Brasile [ah: tremendous pace on your part in Brazil]

(Fernando Alonso, Abu Dhabi 2022)

As regards the omission of redundant lexical and/or phrasal items, example [22] also suggests that certain expressive solutions, such as ‘let’s say’, are dismissed in the IT. The same happens in example [17], where ‘I guess’ is left out. Hedges, understood as a ‘manipulative non-direct strategy of saying less than one means’ (Hübler 1983: 23), are, indeed, systematically omitted. Among others, the pragmatic marker you know, used ‘in highly intersubjective contexts’ (Buysse 2017: 40) as an ‘intersubjective marker’ (Buysse 2017: 55), the markers I think and I mean (Östman 1981: 34), and the adverb obviously are almost regularly omitted, suggesting the implementation of an automatised strategy by the interpreter. Example [26] shows an excerpt drawn from Lewis Hamilton’s answer to a question concerning his predilection for the United States Grand Prix:

[26]

A Yeah, I think just being in the States, I’m very happy when I’m out here. I think already when I came to Indianapolis – was it 2007? – was a good time.

INTERPRETER

A sì (.) essere negli Stati Uniti mi rende molto: felice (.) sono sempre: contento quando sono qui (.) anche: a- a Indianapolis nel 2007 mi ero divertito [yes (.) being in the States makes me very: happy (.) I am a:lways happy when I am here (.) also: i- in Indianapolis in 2007 I had a good time]

(Lewis Hamilton, Austin 2022)

The verb ‘I think’ and the question ‘was it 2007?’ are hedges, forms of non-direct speech that reveal that Hamilton is not a hundred percent sure of the truthfulness of his utterances. These discursive elements that mitigate the impact of the speaker’s message disappear in the interpreter’s rendition, which sounds more direct and less hesitant.

[27]

Q Quick word on the battle for P4 in the Drivers’ Championship between you and Carlos. What is it, sixteen points between you?

INTERPRETER

Q p:arliamo r- brevemente della battaglia per il quarto posto tra te e Carlos ehm (.) d- del campionato (.) ci sono sedici punti tra di voi [let’s t:alk r- briefly about the battle for P4 between you and Carlos ehm (.) o- of the championship (.) there are sixteen points between you]

(George Russell, Mexico City 2022)

[28]

Q And do you take some confidence coming back to a track where you’ve been quick in the past? And I’m thinking of your pole here, back in 2018.

A It always helps, I think. […] I don’t come into a circuit relying on like previous success, but of course it helps. And I think honestly, what helps is just coming into a race weekend fresh again.

INTERPRETER

Q ritrovi un po’ di fiducia ah: tornando eh: a una pista →dove sei stato veloce in passato← avevi fatto una pole nel 2018 se non sbaglio [do you take some confidence ah: coming back eh: to a track →where you’ve been quick in the past← you earned a pole position in 2018 if I’m not mistaken]

A aiuta sempre […] e quindi non posso arrivare a un s- a un circuito affidandomi al successo passato però sicuramente aiuta eh: aiuta allo stesso modo arrivare (.) a un weekend di gara fresco [it always helps […] and so I can’t come into a s- into a circuit relying on previous success but of course it helps eh: just as it helps coming (.) into a race weekend fresh]

(Daniel Ricciardo, Mexico City 2022)

[29]

Q You had a brilliant weekend here in Abu Dhabi last year. How difficult is it going to be to repeat the performance this time around?

A […] In Brazil, it wasn’t as good as what I wanted. So obviously, I wish, hopefully, I can continue like the result I had last year which was best results for me.

INTERPRETER

Q l’anno scorso il tuo weekend ad Abu Dhabi è stato molto brillante eh per te quanto sarà difficile ripetere (.) eh questa prestazione stavolta? [last year your weekend in Abu Dhabi was really brilliant eh for you how difficult is it going to be to repeat (.) eh this performance this time around?]

A […] eh: in Brasile non è andata bene come avrei voluto (.) eh: s:pero però di pote:r eh ripetere il risultato che ho avuto l’anno scorso che era stato il migliore per me [[…] eh: in Brazil it wasn’t as good as what I wanted (.) eh: I h:ope however I ca:n repeat last year’s result which was the best result for me]

(Yuki Tsunoda, Abu Dhabi 2022)

[30]

A This is a fact, I think. We are fighting for nearly every pole position.

INTERPRETER

A questo: eh è un fatto perché siamo sempre in lotta quasi per ogni pole position [this: eh is a fact because we are fighting for nearly every pole position]

(Carlos Sainz, Austin 2022)

As in example [26], in [27] a question that reflects a driver’s doubt is turned into an affirmative sentence (‘ci sono sedici punti tra di voi’, translatable as ‘there are sixteen points between you’), suggesting that the interpreter is aware that there are sixteen points between the two drivers in question. In [28], ‘I think’ is left out in the interpreter’s rendition, together with the adverb ‘honestly’. Examples [29] and [30] also bear witness to the fact that hedges are regularly omitted, but also show that the interpreter does not refrain from adding connectives (‘però’ and ‘perché’, meaning ‘however’ and ‘because’) that streamline the speaker’s argumentation and enhance the intelligibility of the message for the target audience. In this respect, the omission of hedges and the sporadic and sensible addition of connectives are indicators of the interpreter’s competence.

Regarding the systematic ‘elimination’ of hedges in the IT, a doubt arises as to whether these omissions be considered inappropriate from a pragmatic point of view. For sure, the preservation of some of these elements is advisable for the sake of pragmatics, because it would reflect the speakers’ attitudes towards their own utterances. Yet, as Barik (1971: 202) maintains, most omissions of pragmatic markers (like that of ‘you know’) are ‘inconsequential omissions’ that ‘are even desirable’. Other omissions, such as that of the question ‘was it 2007?’ in [26], however questionable, enable the interpreter to save time and cognitive resources in this highly demanding situation, also considering that the propositional content of the question is preserved in the IT, though in the form of an assertion. In this respect, these omissions can, to a certain extent, be considered ‘emergency strategies, i.e. strategies which usually are considered “last resort” but in this type of SI they become the norm’ (Straniero Sergio 2003: 140). This is a further demonstration of what Straniero Sergio (2003: 170) maintains, namely that ‘the norm here […] is the rendition of the essentials’.

4. Conclusions

In light of the findings outlined in section 3, the present study can be said to corroborate the results outlined by Straniero Sergio (2003) in his seminal investigation of simultaneous interpreting at Formula One Press Conferences. Emergency strategies such as omissions, generalisations, neutral finishes, parallel formulations and summarised renditions can still be observed, because they are the interpreting norm in the context of the FPC (Straniero Sergio 2003: 140); they are essential for the interpreter to keep up with the rapid pace of speech delivery and sum up information in a context where technical discussions about cars and races are both accelerated and rendered more informal by the rules of TV infotainment.

However, based on the present study, the TPC cannot be said to be a terrible experience for the Sky Sport interpreter, unlike what Straniero Sergio (2003: 139) argues in relation to his larger corpus of SIs during FPCs. This finding concerning the overall quality of the SI broadcast on the Sky Sport channel is, therefore, in contrast with those that Straniero Sergio (2003) outlines in his study. Yet, what emerges from this investigation actually confirms his findings. Straniero Sergio (2003: 170) describes a similar study by Romeo (2001), who noted that in her corpus of SIs only one interpreter delivered a quality service and, therefore, concluded ‘that such an outstanding performance was possible thanks to the interpreter’s extralinguistic knowledge and familiarity with the subject matter’ (Straniero Sergio 2003: 171). As he claims based on the poor quality of the SIs included in his corpus, ‘the problem [of interpreting FPCs] is the recognition of technical words in the flow of the speech’ (Straniero Sergio 2003: 171); as regards the present study, it was precisely this ability to recognise and translate virtually all the technical terms uttered by source-language speakers that enabled the interpreter to deliver a quality service. The Sky Sport interpreter outperformed his colleagues who worked between the late 1990s and the early 2000s simply because he was familiar with Formula One jargon and did not struggle to translate technical terms and expressions. The fact that he struggled more to translate non-technical passages, condensed in the first questions to the drivers, further suggests that.

As Straniero Sergio (2003: 171) maintains, the point is precisely specialised vocabulary, rather than ‘extralinguistic knowledge per se, [which is] part and parcel of any SI, particularly of a technical nature’. What is sure is that Salvatore Torrisi constantly gives the impression of feeling like a fish in the water. Take an additional excerpt ([31]), showing that the interpreter always knows what the interviewer and the interviewee are talking about:

[31]

Q Mick, thank you for waiting, coming to you now. This is a difficult moment for you, given the recent news about Nico Hulkenberg and Haas. First of all, can we get your reaction to the news?

A Yeah, obviously it’s disappointing in some ways.

INTERPRETER

Q Mick eh grazie per l’attesa eh (.) è un momento difficile per te abbiamo sentito eh: l’ultima notizia riguardo a Nico Hulkenberg che guiderà per la Haas innanzitutto come reagisci a questa notizia? [Mick eh thank you for waiting eh (.) this is a difficult moment for you we have heard eh: the recent news about Nico Hulkenberg who will drive for Haas first of all how do you react to the news?]

A ovviamente è: è deludente per certi versi [obviously i:t’s it’s disappointing in some ways]

(Mick Schumacher, Abu Dhabi 2022)

The journalist merely hints at ‘the recent news about Nico Hulkenberg and Haas’, but the interpreter knows what this unspecified update is about and demonstrates it with his rendition, which is enriched with an explanatory clause (‘che guiderà per la Haas’, meaning ‘who will drive for Haas’) that seems to be produced to help the Italian audience better understand the theme that is being addressed.

Besides displaying an extraordinary familiarity with Formula One people, issues and vocabulary, the interpreter also proves his competence as far as simultaneous interpreting is concerned. The deliberate omissions of hedges and redundant lexical or phrasal items, the recourse to interaction-oriented strategies, a non-casual use of repetitions and the occasional production of nominal sentences all enable him to deliver a ‘smooth and coherent discourse’ (Straniero Sergio 2003: 172) that, unlike in Straniero Sergio’s data, is actual rather than apparent, and does not result in the discouraging ‘rendition of the essentials’. Though the source-speech delivery rate is – as Straniero Sergio notes in relation to the FPC context – fast, frantic and characterised by the absence of interruptions between questions and answers, the interpreter’s output is also fast, as accurate as the ST and, at times, more elegant and polished.

About the author(s)

Emanuele Brambilla is Associate Professor at the Department of Legal, Language, Interpreting and Translation Studies (IUSLIT) of the University of Trieste, where he teaches EN-IT dialogue interpreting. His research interests include Corpus-based Interpreting Studies and the application of argumentation theories to dialogue and conference interpreting studies. He is a member of the editorial boards of the international journals Journal of Argumentation in Context (John Benjamins), Argumentation (Springer) and The Interpreters’ Newsletter (EUT). He co-edited issues 27 and 28 of The Interpreters’ Newsletter. He is author of the monograph The Quest for Argumentative Equivalence. Argumentative Patterns in Political Interpreting Contexts (John Benjamins, 2020). His recent publications include “Etiamsi omnes, ego non: an exploratory study of argument types in separate opinions” (Comparative Legilinguistics, forthcoming) and “On the defence of antifascist Italy in Alcide De Gasperi’s 1946 speech to the Paris Peace Conference” (Discourse Studies, 2023).

Email: [please login or register to view author's email address]

•  Previous article
• Next article