1 Interpreters as orators: Cicero’s classical canons of rhetoric and their relevance to interpreter training Jiaming (Damien) FAN Graduate Program of Translation and Interpretation, National Taiwan University Although most interpreter training programs incorporate a few classes of public speaking early in the curriculum, the emphasis is often on the “exterior” of the task, not the “interior”. Teachers emphasize such aspects as voice, intonation, register, gestures, postures, and the establishment of rapport with the audience. and form of the speech. Less emphasis, if any, is placed on the content The reason for this imbalance is two-fold. On the one hand, there is the valid presumption that the audience may not be able to judge whether one is a good interpreter or not in terms of accuracy, but can certainly tell whether the interpreter sounds and looks good or not, thus the focus on the delivery part of public speaking. On the other hand, it is often taken for granted that interpreters could and should only say what speakers have said. There seems to be no need of teaching students the skills of formulating a brilliant speech. As a result, public speaking in interpreter training is somewhat incomplete. However, the “interior” of public speaking is integral to training interpreters. Understanding how speakers design their speeches could help interpreters better grasp the contour of a speech and catch the nuances more accurately. Going through the entire process of writing and delivering a speech could also sharpen interpreters’ sensitivity to how rhetorical language is used. If interpreting teachers wish to learn about the art of rhetoric and train students accordingly, it would be useful to consult one of the most well-known and influential references on the art of oratory, namely Cicero’s De Oratore. In this seminal work that was published around 55 BCE, Cicero depicted his ideal orator through interlocutions between some of the most respected orators in the first century BCE. Readers would find great resemblance between the ideal orator and the ideal interpreter. For example, Cicero believed that in order to become an ideal orator, one needed to possess natural gifts of intellect, practice diligently, and fully understand what he or she is talking about by acquiring universal knowledge. These qualities correspond to those that have been confirmed from empirical studies or proposed by interpreting scholars.1 Cicero also described the ways to master rhetorics through five activities, which were mentioned in his earlier work, De Inventione: inventio (invention, thinking out the ideas), dispositio (arrangement, sequencing the ideas), elocutio (style, putting the ideas into words), memoria (memory, memorizing the speech), and pronuntiatio (delivery, the act of delivering the actual speech). These activities were the stages through which the orator went in composing and delivering a speech. Many of the concepts and principles mentioned in these five principles could help interpreters better anticipate the organization of the speech 1 Russo Mariachiara, “Aptitude Testing over the Years,” Interpreting 13, no.1 (2011). 2 they are to interpret. Some would even help them structure the speech, memorize the content, and provide a more effective delivery. This paper will first provide a brief explanation of these activities, and then illustrate their relevance to interpreter training. The five canons and their relevance Inventio. Inventio, or invention in English, is the act of discovering arguments to write about and developing these arguments. It includes strategies such as “initiating discourse, exploring alternatives, framing and testing judgments, interpreting texts, and analyzing audiences”.2 As classical rhetoric stemmed from judicial cases, it was natural for orators to discover and develop ideas by debating on the pros and cons of an issue.3 Although Cicero 4 concurred with the treatment of invention by adopting the status theory in his earlier work De Inventione, he avoided the technicalities of dwelling into meticulous classifications of all possibilities in a judicial debate in De Oratore. Instead, he reinterpreted Aristotle’s idea of ethos and pathos so that orators were given more flexibility.5 To Cicero, ethos is the image of the speaker, and pathos is playing upon the feelings of the audience. Therefore, in addition to using the status theory to discover the content (logos) of the argument, orators can also find sources of argument in their own background, character, or credibility (ethos). They can also discover ideas by appealing to the audience’s sense of identity, self-interest, and emotions (pathos). Although interpreters do not need to worry about discovering ideas, understanding how speakers developed their ideas is critical when analyzing the speakers’ talks. It is important to keep in mind that for an interpreter, anyone that needs to be interpreted is a speaker, so not only the ones bearing the title of “speaker” on the conference agenda are speakers, moderators, discussants, masters of ceremony, and even members of the audience are speakers. Therefore, interpreters should first “discover” the identity of the speaker (ethos) and audience (pathos) before plunging into the analysis of the content (logos) of the speech. In terms of analyzing the speaker, interpreters should first determine the “role” or “function” of the speaker (“What is the speaker?”) before identifying the “title” of the speaker (“Who is the speaker?”). A speaker might bear the title of a professor, a minister, a CEO, or an ordinary citizen, but what she says and how she says it largely depends upon the role she is playing in the speech setting, because the role of the speaker provides a framework to the discourse. 2 For example, the schema6 of a professor serving the role of a moderator would Janice M. Lauer, Invention in Rhetoric and Composition (West Lafayette, IN: Parlor Press, 2004), 2. Cicero, “Da Oratore” in Cicero on the ideal orator: Translated, with Introduction, Notes, Appendixes, Glossary and Indexes, trans. James May and Jakob Wisse (55 BCE; repr., Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001), 5. 4 The status theory was introduced in the second century BC by Hermagoras. It is an elaborate classification of all the possibilities in a judicial case. These statuses include conjecture (question of fact), definition (e.g., “murder or self-defense?”), quality (e.g., “X killed Y, but Y’s death was beneficial to the state”), and transference (objection to legal procedure). 5 Cicero, Da Oratore, 34. 6 Here, schema is defined in the context of cognitive psychology. It refers to the structures that 3 3 probably not differ greatly from that of a CEO serving the same role. But the same professor would probably adopt a different schema when she becomes a keynote speaker or a discussant. These schemas roughly demarcate the boundary of what is usually said and in turn shape the way ideas are developed. When analyzing the speaker, interpreters also need to take into consideration the characteristics of the target audience (pathos). Although the audience usually serves the sole role of “audience”, its composition and background could greatly affect the ideas speakers include into their talks. For example, if the knowledge and expertise of the audience is at par with the speaker, the speaker will probably touch less upon the fundamental knowledge of the subject matter and elaborate deeper. In contrast, if the knowledge gap is wide between the speaker and audience, interpreters should foresee a more incremental buildup to the core, or a shallower treatment of the subject matter. Another example is when the composition of the audience is more homogeneous, the speaker would probably adopt a single schema, whereas when it is heterogeneous, it could be more difficult to predict the kind of schema the speaker would adopt. When the power and/or status relationship between the speaker and audience is stable, it is easier for the interpreter to predict the schemata of the speaker. more difficult. When it is variable, it is This difficulty is manifested most clearly during the question and answer portion of most conferences.7 During the presentation part of the conference, interpreters can usually distinguish the power relationship between the speaker and the audience. Usually speakers are given this role because of their expertise in a particular field, and the audience is there to receive information and gain insight from the speaker. In this particular circumstance, the status of the speaker would be higher than that of the audience. However, during the Q&A, rarely could interpreters readily identify the background of the interlocutor, not to mention his power or status in relation to the presenter. to figure out the purpose of the interlocutor. speaker, or simply express concurrence? It is even more troublesome Is he going to challenge to speaker, cajole the If he challenges the speaker, then the ensuing exchange between the two parties would more resemble that of the judicial cases imagined by Cicero. In response, the speaker might respond by proving his own assertions or refuting the interlocutor.8 In short, the relationship between the speaker and audience should be carefully analyzed before the interpreting assignment and constantly monitored during the interpreting. For the speaker, inventio is the discovery of ideas, while for interpreters the emphasis is on the constant analysis of the audience. After all, the logos is a function of ethos and organize our knowledge and assumptions about something and are used for interpreting and processing information. 7 Chia-chien Chang and Min-chia Wu, “Address Form Shifts in Interpreted Q&A Sessions,” Interpreting 11, no.2 (2009). 8 Cicero, Da Oratore, 2.293. 4 pathos, and should be examined in light of the latter two. Cicero summed up the discussions on inventio by pointing out that in addition to discovering the arguments of the case, one can also investigate whether it would be more effective to move people by winning favor or stirring emotions.9 Interpreting students are therefore advised to pay closer attention to analyzing the macro-context. To draw an allegory, the words heard by the audience (and interpreter) are like a circle of light projected onto a wall in a dark room. The interpreter’s job is to trace the trajectory of the light beam and discover its source, including where and what it is from and who is holding it. Should conditions permit, identifying why the person chose that particular source of light, why the light beam is cast towards a particular part of the wall, and what the unlit parts of the wall represent in relation to the luminated parts, could prove beneficial to better comprehend the words heard. Dispositio. If inventio is the “what” of classical rhetorics, dispositio, or arrangement in English, is about the “where”, i.e. where to put the ideas discovered in the inventio stage. Classical rhetoricians devised a set of rules to guide speech writers in arranging their ideas into different parts. Exordium, or the prologue, informs the audience of the subject matter, and make them well disposed, attentive, and receptive.10 Narratio, or narration, describes the features and facts concerning the topic of the discourse. plausible. It should be brief, clear, and Cicero described clearly that a lucid narration should use ordinary vocabulary, preserve the chronological order of events, and maintain the continuity of a story.11 Argumentatio, which usually includes confirmatio and refutatio, is the proof and corroborations of the speaker’s arguments, and the refutation of possible disagreements from the audience. Speakers could deploy various tools to undermine opposing claims, including reason, emotion, ethics, wit, or word play.12 Peroratio, or conclusion, aims to amplify the speaker’s arguments and win over the audience by stirring their emotions.13 As with inventio, interpreters do not have much sway over how speakers arrange their speeches. But the framework laid out by Cicero and classical rhetoricians provides an overarching structure that helps interpreters keep track of speakers’ whereabouts in a speech. Sometimes there would be verbal cues such as conjunctions to signal a shift to the next part. Interpreters are trained and drilled for these markers. But many times speakers do not gesture such turns with obvious transitions, so interpreters need to constantly monitor and judge whether a particular sentence should be re-classified into a different part. Interpreters are usually given materials to prepare in advance, and they should learn to categorize the content according to the structure of dispositio. In consecutive interpreting, bearing this structure in mind could help interpreters weed out 9 Ibid., 2.292. Ibid., 2.315-325. 11 Ibid., 2.329. 12 Ibid., 2.331. 13 Ibid., 2.332. 10 5 trivial digressions that could either cram their notes with unnecessary details or jeopardize their memory capacity. During simultaneous interpreting however, interpreters cannot simply stay silent when identifying such digressions. Instead, they should heed Cicero’s reminder that speakers are encouraged to digress from the proposition to stir the audience’s emotions. These digressions might appear anywhere in the speech to propel or deflect the audience’s emotional impulses.14 Some speakers do not realize that they are going on a tangent, but interpreters need to sense the change of current by detecting the nuances of content, tone, and voice so as to adjust their renditions accordingly. Many interpreting students often follow these digressions (such as jokes or anecdotes) too closely, or interpret such contents with inappropriate earnestness, as if treating them as theses of a speech. As a result, when the speaker returns to the core content, the interpreter would still be lost in the labyrinth of digressions and fail to catch up. frivolous remarks often bodes trouble. Losing the big picture at the expense of Therefore, interpreting students are advised to actively analyze the content and be vigilant of digressions. Elocutio. The first two canons of classical rhetoric dealt mainly with the construction of the speech, i.e. what to say and where to say the ideas. The third canon, elocutio, or style, sets guidelines on “how” to say the ideas. Style was discussed in two ways during Cicero’s time. stylistic “types”, with which Cicero agreed. One organized style into three The other delineated the qualities of style, which Cicero favored over the technical rules that were prevalent in his time. The three types are plain, middle, and high. The plain style is used to prove and instruct. should not ramble. It is loose in structure but the speakers It has no noticeable ornament, and uses metaphors, figures of speech, humor, and wit moderately to explain clearly but not to entertain, and it is not bound by rhythm. The middle style is used to pleasure and entertain. There is a minimum of vigor and a maximum of charm, so all ornaments are appropriate (especially metaphors). high (or grand) style is used to persuade and sway. The This style is magnificent, opulent, stately, ornate, grand, impetuous, fiery, and has the greatest power. However, speakers will be despised if they do not learn the two other styles and focus solely on the grand style.15 As for the four qualities of style, they include the correct use of language, clarity, distinction, and appropriateness. Correct use of language means using correct grammar, pronouncing correctly, and enunciating pleasantly.16 Clarity means employing words in common use, avoiding ambiguous words or language, eschewing excessively long periodic sentences and metaphors.17 14 Distinction is elaborated generously in Book Three of De Ibid., 2.311-312. Cicero, “Orator ad M. Brutum” in Readings in Classical Rhetoric, trans. Thomas Benson and Michael Prosser (46 BCE; repr., Davis, CA: Hermagoras Press, 1988), 101. 16 Cicero, Da Oratore, 3.39-47. 17 Ibid., 3.48-51. 15 6 Oratore. Cicero believes that presenting with distinction requires the orator to be knowledgeable on a wide variety of subjects, be an avid learner, practice often, and lead a contemplative life.18 When the orator has acquired these qualities, he will be able to impart a general character into his speech to hold the attention of his audience.19 Appropriateness is dealt with rather briefly in De Oratore, because Cicero thinks it is a matter of intelligence to know what is appropriate at each speech occasion.20 However, he reiterates the importance of ethos and pathos, reminding orators to analyze the audience, consider their own identity, and evaluate the macro-context. This is intertwined with inventio, so the discussion on the creation of the speech is brought to a full circle. Apparently, elocutio deals mainly with language usage, so it highlights the importance of an interpreter’s language proficiency. Although it is a given that interpreting students need to continuously enhance their language proficiency, Cicero’s aforementioned views on style underscore some oft-mentioned pointers. Firstly, speakers usually map the type of style (plain, middle, or high) they intend to employ with the goal they wish to achieve (instruct/inform, please/entertain, or persuade). The verbal and nonverbal language they use would usually fall into one of Aristotle’s three categories of rhetorical speech: deliberative, forensic, or epideictic.21 Therefore, interpreting students should build depositories of stock phrases in each of these categories. They must familiarize themselves with the kind of language used in these rhetorical situations. For example, what kind of phrases or sayings or most commonly used to exhort or dissuade in deliberative contexts (as in marketing rallies), accuse or defend in argumentative circumstances (as in roundtables or negotiations), and praise or blame in demonstrative situations (as in the opening addresses of ceremonies)? These depositories serve as the foundation of creating schemas, help interpreters anticipate upcoming messages, and use appropriate language, especially in terms of the register. building these depositories is studying parallel texts. 22 An efficient and important way of Students could identify corresponding wordings, equivalent expressions, and similar structures. More importantly, gaps between comparable discourses reveal cultural asymmetries to which should be paid great attention. Parallel texts readily reveal these differences and offer interpreters a wealth of resources to prepare for linguistic challenges. Secondly, Cicero’s emphasis on cadence sheds light on the importance of sentence length and pause. For interpreters whose native tongue is Chinese, sentence length is often only given priority when learning to interpret into their non-native, often European, 18 Ibid., 3.80-82. Ibid., 3.96-97. 20 Ibid., 3.210-212. 21 Aristotle, “The Rhetoric” in Readings in Classical Rhetoric, trans. Thomas Benson and Michael Prosser (c. 367-322 BCE; repr., Davis, CA: Hermagoras Press, 1988), 1354A-1359A. 22 Georgios Floros, “Parallel Texts in Translating and Interpreting,” Translation Studies in the New Millennium: An International Journal of Translation and Interpreting 2. 19 7 language(s). Usually such suggestions are given out of linguistic concerns, for example, long and embedded clauses are discouraged so as to avoid getting entangled in a grammatical quagmire. Interpreters are also reminded to keep the sentences short to help colleagues relaying from the Chinese booth maintain a reasonable lag behind the original speaker. Pauses are stressed to take care of the audience’s ears: the delivery has to sound pleasant and not too rushed, forced, or dull. These valid suggestions could be substantiated by practicing two exercises. The first one is to read aloud a good speech. Reading aloud helps native speakers of Chinese gain a better grasp of the “feel” for phonetic languages. fail to realize the importance of prosody in phonetic languages. Interpreting students often Since the syntax of these languages determines the phonology of the sentence,23 non-native English speakers often are unaware of the mismatch between the sentence structures they have chosen and the prosody (or the lack thereof) they have used. A misplaced stress or pause not only interrupts the listening process, it can also create confusion in comprehension24. Therefore, interpreting students should record their reading aloud sessions and pay close attention to the modulation of breath in order to create a natural rhythmic pattern so championed by Cicero.25 The second one is to phonetically shadowing the recording of a good speaker. Speech shadowing has long been used as a medium to introduce simultaneous interpreting techniques. Although scholars have warned against phonetic shadowing, i.e. simply parroting the words and sounds heard without analyzing or understanding the text repeated,26 studies have shown that semantic and syntactic analyses of the input material do occur,27 so this “close shadowing” could facilitate the imitation of intonation, pronunciation, and cadent contour of the speech. Constant practice would help interpreting students notice the nuances of oral style. In short, style is manifested not only in the syntactic and semantic levels, but also at the prosodic level. Memoria. Memoria, or memory in English, is the shortest section among the five canons. It dealt with the memorization of the speech content. 23 Ancient orators believed that Elisabeth Selkirk, Phonology and Syntax: The Relation Between Sound and Structure (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1984). 24 Prosody disambiguates sentences with identical sequence of words but with different meanings. For example, both logical meanings of the sentence “John gave her cat food” could be distinguished by the stress and length of the last two words, the intonation, or the speed and pause of various phrase combinations. 25 Cicero, De Oratore, 3.173-176. 26 Barbara Moser-Mercer, “Aptitude Testing for Conference Interpreting: Why, When, and How,” in Bridging the Gap: Empirical Research in Simultaneous Interpretation, ed. Silvia Lambert and Barbara Moser-Mercer (Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1994). 27 Annette de Groot, “A Complex-skill Approach to Translation and Interpreting,” in Tapping and Mapping the Processes of Translation and Interpreting: Outlooks on Empirical Research, ed. Sonja Tirkkonen-Condit and Riitta Jääskeläinen (Amsterdam: John Benjains, 2000). 8 the sense of sight was keenest among all our senses, so our thoughts can be easily grasped by the mind if they were converted into images.28 memory at that time were localities and images. Therefore, the two central concepts of The basic rule was to first choose a familiar place with a continuous series of fixed localities, then attach mental images of the elements of speech that needed to be remembered to these localities. Memory is one of the most researched issues in interpreting studies, and one piece of advice that came out of numerous studies is that memorizing the idea or message is more important than remembering the exact words. on memory of content rather than words.29 This coincides nicely with Cicero’s emphasis Apart from the problems that might arise from not being able to find an equivalent counterpart in the targeted language, interpreting students who cannot resist the instinct of memorizing the exact words would immediately find that they are incapable of memorizing more than a dozen words accurately. The memory span of an ordinary human being is very limited30, so the key to better memory is developing an efficient and operable mechanism to structure and organize the content. This paper proposes a “Spatial Spheres Model” that can be used when organizing messages during consecutive interpreting. It is modeled on the spatial structures favored by ancient orators. Spheres represent the ideas that are formed by words interpreters hear. are placed in a three dimensional space. These spheres The X-axis deals with the temporal logic of the ideas, i.e., what happened first, what came second. Interpreters need to decide the temporal relationship of different ideas, and place them accordingly along the X-axis. The Y-axis deals with the relevance among ideas, i.e., which ideas are more important, which are only background information. their importance. Therefore, spheres are placed along the Y-axis according to Core ideas, or the theses, are placed towards the front, while trivial ones are placed in the back. The Z-axis deals with the hierarchical structure of the ideas, i.e., which idea is supra-ordinate, which idea is subordinate. Z-axis is to organize ideas according to their size. could envelop smaller ones. An alternative interpretation of the Some ideas are “larger” in scope, and As interpreters place spheres in the three-dimensional space, some spheres would merge as ideas find their relationship with other ideas. number of spheres left, interpreters’ memory load is reduced. With a fewer However, the contents contained within the spheres have become richer, which helps create a more digested output afterwards. Pronuntiatio. Pronuntiatio, or delivery in English, is the last but not least of the five classical canons of rhetoric. Cicero believes it is the dominant factor in oratory, and cited Demosthenes’s comment that delivery is given “the first, second, and third place” in oratory, 28 Cicero, De Oratore, 2.357. Ibid., 2.359. 30 George Miller’s famous paper in 1956 (“The Magical Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two: Some Limits on Our Capacity for Processing Information”) suggested that the number of items an average human can hold in working memory is 7 plus or minus 2. 29 9 because a speech is only as effective as its delivery make it.31 Despite its criticality, delivery was not expounded in De Oratore, because Cicero did not believe in the technical elaboration of details, but instead focused on the importance of tying emotion with the voice, gestures, and facial expressions (the eyes). His treatment of the subject stemmed from the objective of stirring the emotions of the audience. If orators wanted to bond with the audience with only words, they would fail, because some parts of the speech might not be understood by some members of the audience. However, delivery displays the feelings of the soul and affects everyone, because the audience would be able to recognize the same feelings and therefore be stirred emotionally.32 Orators need to link appropriate emotions with the contents they have discovered, arranged, fashioned, and memorized. Then they must project such emotions in consideration of pathos. Again, Cicero brings the final discussion on rhetoric and oratory to a full circle by linking pronuntiatio with the first canon inventio. Naturally, delivery is also an important part of interpreter training. Evaluation of interpreting performance is usually based on the delivery of the target text. However, as with prosody (or in Cicero’s words, cadence and form), the elements of voice, gestures, and facial expressions are often downplayed by interpreting teachers. Gestures and facial expressions are discouraged in consecutive interpreting so as not to steal the limelight from the original speaker, or conveniently disregarded in simultaneous interpreting since no one looks at interpreters. Interpreting students and teachers alike are too preoccupied with accuracy, language, logic, strategies, and techniques to pay due attention to voice and emotional effect. However, revisiting the main purpose of why an interpreter is needed at any event not only reveals the importance of delivery (and its emotional relevance), but also could shed light on how an interpreter should comprehend, analyze, organize, or even render a speech. Since the main purpose of professional interpreting is “to help people who speak different languages communicate in specific situations”,33 and communication “is any act by which one person gives to or receives from another person information about that person's needs, desires, perceptions, knowledge, or affective states”,34 it is the interpreter’s responsibility to convey the information that the speaker intends to impart to the audience. delivery, such information could not be transmitted successfully. Without effective When communication becomes the main purpose and thus center of the entire interpreting activity, interpreters are more likely to realize that there might be different approaches to understanding, analyzing, organizing, converting, and delivering the speaker’s messages. 31 For example, they should Ibid., 3.213. Ibid., 3.223b. 33 Daniel Gile, Basic Concepts and Models for Interpreter and Translator Training (Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2009), 27. 34 National Joint Committee for the Communication Needs of Persons with Severe Disabilities, Guidelines for Meeting the Communication Needs of Persons with Severe Disabilities, (available at www.asha.org/policy, 1992), 3. 32 10 analyze more carefully the ethos and pathos of the context, rather than solely focusing on the logos, especially the words. They should strive to create the same impact on the audience listening to their interpretation as those listening to the original language. They should also detect the affective undertones and perceive the emotions manifested through prosody, gestures, and facial expressions and judge how these pieces of information should (or should not) be conveyed in the target language. activities ex-ante. In short, delivery is a function of the rhetorical However, the performance of the delivery is a verdict of the success of discovery, arrangement, style, and memory, so interpreting teachers and students are advised to increase their awareness of the importance of delivery. Conclusion Interpreters are impersonators of the speaker. temporarily to don the personas of others. break the speaker. They forgo their own identities Their capacities (or the lack thereof) can make or They should see themselves as orators so that they can effectively communicate to the audience and relay the speaker’s intentions. Cicero’s portrayal of the ideal orator is not that different from the current criteria for an ideal interpreter: both need to possess aptitude, practice diligently, and acquire universal knowledge. His five canons of rhetoric also reminded interpreting teachers some of the most important skills to impart to students: know thy speaker, know thy audience, investigate the intention, analyze the structure, organize the content, polish the language, memorize the ideas, use the voice, etc. To people whose culture understates the oral tradition or the power of eloquence, it is surprising that rhetoric has so much to do with the spoken language, not to mention with communication and politics. Further research into the world of classical rhetoric could open up a treasure chest for today’s interpreting teachers and benefit interpreting students in more ways than expected. Bibliography Aristotle. “The Rhetoric”. In Readings in Classical Rhetoric, 53-62. Translated by R.C. Jebb, Edited by Thomas Benson and Michael Prosser. Davis, CA: Hermagoras Press. (Original work published c. 367-322 BCE). 1988. Chang, Chia-chien and Wu, Min-chia. “Address form shifts in interpreted Q&A sessions.” Interpreting 11, no.2 (2009): 164-189. Cicero. “Orator ad M. Brutum”. In Readings in Classical Rhetoric, 232-239. Translated by R.C. Jebb, Edited by Thomas Benson and Michael Prosser. Davis, CA: Hermagoras Press. (Original work published 46 BCE). 1988. Cicero. “De Oratore”. In Cicero on the Ideal Orator: Translated, with Introduction, Notes, Appendixes, Glossary, and Indexes, 57-297. Translated by James May and Jakob Wisse. Oxford: Oxford University Press. (Original work published 55 BCE). 2001. De Groot, A. “A Complex-skill Approach to Translation and Interpreting.” In Tapping and mapping the processes of translation and interpreting: Outlooks on empirical research, 11 53‐70. Edited by Sonja Tirkkonen‐Condit and Riitta Jääskeläinen. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 2000 Floros, Georgios. “Parallel texts in translating and interpreting.” Translation Studies in the New Millennium: An International Journal of Translation and Interpreting 2, (2004): 33-41. Gile, Daniel. Basic Concepts and Models for Interpreter and Translator Training. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2009. Lauer, Janice. Invention in Rhetoric and Composition. West Lafayette, IN: Parlor Press, 2004. Mariachiara, Russo. “Aptitude Testing over the Years.” Interpreting 13, no. 1 (2011): 5-30. Miller, George. “The Magical Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two: Some Limits on Our Capacity for Processing Information.” Psychological Review 63, no. 2 (1956): 81–97. Moser-Mercer, Barbara. “Aptitude Testing for Conference Interpreting: Why, When and How.” In Bridging the Gap: Empirical Research in Simultaneous Interpretation, 57-68. Edited by Silvia Lambert and Barbara Moser-Mercer. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1994. National Joint Committee for the Communication Needs of Persons with Severe Disabilities. Guidelines for meeting the communication needs of persons with severe disabilities. [Guidelines]. Available from www.asha.org/policy or www.asha.org/njc. 1992. Selkirk, Elisabeth. Phonology and Syntax: The Relation between Sound and Structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1984.