Volume 36, Issue 1
  • ISSN 0924-1884
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9986
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



In this article, I investigate how interpreters handle humorous utterances during plenary debates of the European Parliament, focusing on the input by one Polish Member of the European Parliament (MEP), Janusz Korwin-Mikke. The source speeches (in Polish or English) are analysed bottom-up to identify the types of humour favoured by the speaker. The most frequent ones are irony, arguments with an element of ridicule, absurdity, and shifts in register. Subsequently, a pragmatically oriented comparative analysis is conducted to assess whether and how individual instances of humour are transferred by interpreters. Additionally, possible side effects are considered, such as shifts accompanying transferred humour and message incoherence resulting from humour loss. Register humour is typically removed by interpreters. The successful handling of absurdity relies mainly on compression and often fails, while and irony appear to be relatively less challenging to interpret. Interestingly, irony is occasionally added by interpreters, either to boost the speaker’s comical intent or to distance themselves from his views.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Antonini, Rachele
    2010 “And the Oscar Goes to…: A Study of the Simultaneous Interpretation of Humour at the Academy Awards Ceremony.” InTranslation, Humour and the Media: Translation and Humour, vol.21, edited byDelia Chiaro, 53–69. London: Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Attardo, Salvatore
    2001Humorous Texts: A Semantic and Pragmatic Analysis. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110887969
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110887969 [Google Scholar]
  3. 2015 “Humor and Laughter.” InThe Handbook of Discourse Analysis, 2nd ed., vol.21, edited byDeborah Tannen, Heidi E. Hamilton, and Debora Shiffrin, 168–188. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. 2017 “Humor in Language.” InOxford Research Encyclopedia of Linguistics, edited byMark Aronoff. https://oxfordre.com/linguistics/10.1093/acrefore/9780199384655.013.342
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780199384655.013.342 [Google Scholar]
  5. Bartłomiejczyk, Magdalena
    2016Face Threats in Interpreting: A Pragmatic Study of Plenary Debates in the European Parliament. Katowice: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Śląskiego.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. 2017 “The Interpreter’s Visibility in the European Parliament.” Interpreting19 (2): 159–185. 10.1075/intp.19.2.01bar
    https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.19.2.01bar [Google Scholar]
  7. 2020 “How Much Noise Can You Make through an Interpreter? A Case Study on Racist Discourse in the European Parliament.” Interpreting22 (2): 238–261. 10.1075/intp.00042.bar
    https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.00042.bar [Google Scholar]
  8. 2022 “Interpreting Nonmainstream Ideology (Euroscepticism) in the European Parliament.” Perspectives30 (4): 678–694. 10.1080/0907676X.2021.1939740
    https://doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.2021.1939740 [Google Scholar]
  9. . Under review. “Interpreting Sexist Discourse in the European Parliament: A Case Study.”
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Beaton-Thome, Morven
    2020 “Flagging the Homeland: Interpreting Brexit à la Nigel Farage in the European Union.” InMultilingualism and Politics: Revisiting Multilingual Citizenship, edited byKaterina Strani, 105–128. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1007/978‑3‑030‑40701‑8_5
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-40701-8_5 [Google Scholar]
  11. Bogdanowska-Jakubowska, Ewa, and Nika Bogdanowska
    2021 “Addressing the Other in Poland (the 20th and 21st Centuries): Different Times, Different Contexts, Different Meanings.” Journal of Pragmatics1781: 301–314. 10.1016/j.pragma.2021.03.015
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2021.03.015 [Google Scholar]
  12. Chernov, Ghelly V.
    (1987) 2004Inference and Anticipation in Simultaneous Interpreting: A Probability-Prediction Model. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Colebrook, Claire
    2004Irony. Abingdon: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203634127
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203634127 [Google Scholar]
  14. Collard, Camille, and Bart Defrancq
    2020 “Disfluencies in Simultaneous Interpreting: A Corpus-Based Study with Special Reference to Sex.” InNew Empirical Perspectives on Translation and Interpreting, edited byLore Vandevoorde, Joke Daems, and Bart Defrancq, 264–299. New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Chrobak, Marzena
    2008 “O dziesięciu bokserkach i opuszczaniu humoru [On ten boxers and the omission of humour].” Między oryginałem a przekładem [Between original and translation] 131: 69–75.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Culpeper, Jonathan
    1996 “Towards an Anatomy of Impoliteness.” Journal of Pragmatics25 (3): 349–367. 10.1016/0378‑2166(95)00014‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(95)00014-3 [Google Scholar]
  17. Espinoza-Saavedra, María-José
    2018 “The Chimera of Interpreting Humor in Simultaneous Conference Interpreting: Improbable, Unnecessary or a Methodological Gap?” RISU1 (2): 103–111.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Ferreira, Fernanda, and Nikole D. Patson
    2007 “The ‘Good Enough’ Approach to Language Comprehension.” Language and Linguistics Compass1 (1–2): 71–83. 10.1111/j.1749‑818X.2007.00007.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-818X.2007.00007.x [Google Scholar]
  19. González, Luis D., and Glenda M. Mejias
    2013 “The Interpreter’s Ultimate Challenge: Humor in Conferences.” Translation Journal17 (4). www.translationjournal.net/journal/66humor.htm
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Gumul, Ewa
    2017Explicitation in Simultaneous Interpreting: A Study into Explicitating Behaviour of Trainee Interpreters. Katowice: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Śląskiego.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Hutcheon, Linda
    1994Irony’s Edge: The Theory and Politics of Irony. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Igras-Cybulska, Magdalena and Bartosz Ziółko
    2016 “Akustyczne korelaty intonacji ironicznej [Acoustic correlates of ironic intonation].” InSens i brzmienie [Sense and sound], edited byMagdalena Danielewiczowa, Joanna Bilińska, Katarzyna Doboszyńska-Markiewicz, and Joanna Zaucha, 33–48. Warsaw: Wydawnictwo UKSW.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Kuperberg, Gina R., and T. Florian Jaeger
    2016 “What Do We Mean by Prediction in Language Comprehension?” Language, Cognition and Neuroscience31 (1): 32–59. 10.1080/23273798.2015.1102299
    https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2015.1102299 [Google Scholar]
  24. Liendo, Paula J.
    2013 “The Challenges of Interpreting Humor (a.k.a. ‘Don’t Kill the Killjoy’).” Translation Journal17 (1). www.translationjournal.net/journal/63humor.htm
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Martínez Sierra, Juan José, and Patrick Zabalbeascoa Terran
    2017 “Humour as a Symptom of Research Trends in Translation Studies.” MonTI91: 9–27. 10.6035/MonTI.2017.9.1
    https://doi.org/10.6035/MonTI.2017.9.1 [Google Scholar]
  26. Mateo, Marta
    1995 “The Translation of Irony.” Meta40 (1): 171–178. 10.7202/003595ar
    https://doi.org/10.7202/003595ar [Google Scholar]
  27. Michael, Elsa-Maria
    2003 “Interpreting Jokes, Swear Words and Brusque Remarks: Experience from the European Parliament.” AIIC Webzine221. https://aiic.org/document/528/AIICWebzine_AprMay2003_5_MICHAEL_Interpreting_jokes_swear_words_and_brusque_remarks_Experience_in_the_European_EN.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Moser, Barbara
    1978 “Simultaneous Interpretation: A Hypothetical Model and Its Practical Application.” InLanguage Interpretation and Communication, edited byDavid Gerver and H. Wallace Sinaiko, 353–368. New York: Plenum Press. 10.1007/978‑1‑4615‑9077‑4_31
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-9077-4_31 [Google Scholar]
  29. Noonan, Will
    2014 “Absurdist Humor.” InEncyclopedia of Humor Studies, edited bySalvatore Attardo, 1–4. London: SAGE.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Partington, Alan
    2006The Linguistics of Laughter: A Corpus-Assisted Study of Laughter-Talk. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203966570
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203966570 [Google Scholar]
  31. Pavlicek, Maria, and Franz Pöchhacker
    2002 “Humour in Simultaneous Conference Interpreting.” The Translator8 (2): 385–400. 10.1080/13556509.2002.10799139
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13556509.2002.10799139 [Google Scholar]
  32. Plevoets, Koen, and Bart Defrancq
    2018 “The Cognitive Load of Interpreters in the European Parliament: A Corpus-Based Study of Predictors for the Disfluency uh(m).” Interpreting20 (1): 1–32. 10.1075/intp.00001.ple
    https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.00001.ple [Google Scholar]
  33. Plug, H. José
    2010 “Ad Hominem Arguments in the Dutch and the European Parliaments. Strategic Manoeuvring in an Institutional Context.” InEuropean Parliaments under Scrutiny: Discourse Strategies and Interaction Practices, edited byCornelia Ilie, 305–328. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/dapsac.38.15plu
    https://doi.org/10.1075/dapsac.38.15plu [Google Scholar]
  34. Pozzan, Lucia, and John C. Trueswell
    2016 “Second Language Processing and Revision of Garden-path Sentences: A Visual Word Study.” Bilingualism: Language and Cognition19 (3): 636–643. 10.1017/S1366728915000838
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728915000838 [Google Scholar]
  35. Pöchhacker, Franz
    1993 “‘This Isn’t Funny.’ A Note on Jokes in Simultaneous Interpreting.” InTranslation – The Vital Link, edited byCatriona Picken, 455–464. London: Institute of Translation and Interpreting.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Pradas Macías, E. Macarena, and Cornelia Zwischenberger
    2022 “Quality and Norms in Conference Interpreting.” InThe Routledge Handbook of Conference Interpreting, edited byMichaela Albl-Mikasa and Elisabet Tiselius, 243–257. Abingdon: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Rawski, Tomasz
    2020Między śmiechem a mową nienawiści: Meandry języka polityki [Between laughter and hate speech: Meanders of the language of politics]. Cracow: Impuls.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Săftoiu, Răzvan, and Carmen Popescu
    2014 “Humor as a Branding Strategy in Political Discourse: A Case Study from Romania.” Revista Signos. Estudios de Lingüística47 (85): 293–320.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Scovel, Thomas
    1998Psycholinguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Tsakona, Villy, and Diana Elena Popa
    2011 “Humour in Politics and the Politics of Humour: An Introduction.” InStudies in Political Humour: In Between Political Critique and Public Entertainment, edited byVilly Tsakona, and Diana Elena Popa, 1–30. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/dapsac.46.03tsa
    https://doi.org/10.1075/dapsac.46.03tsa [Google Scholar]
  41. Vasta, Nicoletta
    2004 “Consent and Dissent in British and Italian Parliamentary Debates on the 1998 Gulf Crisis.” InCross-Cultural Perspectives on Parliamentary Discourse, edited byPaul Bayley, 111–149. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/dapsac.10.04vas
    https://doi.org/10.1075/dapsac.10.04vas [Google Scholar]
  42. Viaggio, Sergio
    1996 “The Pitfalls of Metalingual Use in Simultaneous Interpreting.” The Translator2 (2): 179–198. 10.1080/13556509.1996.10798973
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13556509.1996.10798973 [Google Scholar]
  43. Vymĕtalová, Daniela
    2017Strategies of Interpreting Humour in the European Parliament. Diploma thesis. Palacký University Olomouc.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Yetkin-Karakoç, Nihal
    2021 “Accidental Humor in Consecutive Interpreting: Accidentally Useful Food for Thought.” Litera31 (2): 783–810. 10.26650/LITERA2021‑887195
    https://doi.org/10.26650/LITERA2021-887195 [Google Scholar]
  45. Zajączkowska, Maria Katarzyna
    2016 “Influence of Voice Intonation on Understanding Irony by Polish-Speaking Preschool Children.” Psychology of Language and Communication20 (3): 278–291. 10.1515/plc‑2016‑0017
    https://doi.org/10.1515/plc-2016-0017 [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): European Parliament; humour; irony; parliamentary discourse; simultaneous interpreting
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error