JAIS

特別講演

The Origin and Challenges of Simultaneous Interpretation:
The Nuremberg Trial Experience
Siegfried Ramler
A Senior Adjunct Fellow, East-West Center, Hawaii
E DITOR ’ S N OTES : The following is based on the special lecture given by Mr.
Siegfried Ramler on February 18, 2006, at Tokyo University of Foreign Studies,
under the sponsorship of the Japan Association for Interpretation Studies. We
express our heartfelt appreciation to Mr. Ramler for kindly giving us permission toreprint the entire lecture in this Journal.

I

t is a great pleasure to be here with you. My current association with
Hawaii’s East-West Center brings me into frequent contact with Japan – withJapanese schools, universities and students, as well as with many colleagues andfriends. Hawaii, with its geographical location and its multi-ethnic population andculture, functions as a bridge between the United States and the Asia-Pacific region.
I feel privileged to contribute as a small link in strengthening that important bridge.
Today I welcome the opportunity to share with you my experiences at the
Nuremberg trials, more than 50 years ago, and particularly to discuss with you someof the challenges we faced as pioneers of simultaneous interpreting. In addition, I’ll
deal in a general way with the impact of the Nuremberg trials –with the meaning of
the trials for Germany, for the international community, and for the imperative of
establishing a global rule of law – still an elusive aim in the 21st century world. The
twentieth century represents a milestone in international law. Nuremberg formed theSiegfried Ramler, "The Origin and Challenges of Simultaneous Interpretation: The
Nuremberg Trial Experience."
Interpretation Studies, No. 7, December 2007, Pages 7-18.
(c) 2007 by the Japan Association for Interpretation Studies

『通訳研究』第 7 号 (2007)

Nuremberg trials, considered the most significant international legal event in theprecedent for the Tokyo trials which followed, as well as laid the foundation for theinternational court at the Hague and the recently established International Criminal
Court.
1.

Autobiographical Comments – How I Came to Nuremberg
First, some autobiographical comments to illustrate how I came to the

Nuremberg trials: I was born in Vienna, Austria – with relatives both in Austria andEngland. After primary and secondary studies in Vienna, I moved to England where I
lived with family members and continued my studies.
I was in England in 1939 when World War II broke out, continuing with mystudies and experiencing the bombardment of London – the so-called London “blitz”.
When the fighting on the European fronts came to an end in 1945, with the allied
forces advancing in to Germany, there was an urgent need for linguists, fluent inGerman and English, to assist with logistical support for the allied troops inGermany, with disarmament procedures, and with interrogations.
In response to a call for linguists, I took a test in London, and was immediately
accepted and assigned to an American Mobile Battalion. I served with that battalion
as interpreter when the war ended with Germany’s capitulation. My battalion was in
the vicinity of Nuremberg when I heard that this city was to be the site of the trialsof the leaders of Germany who had been arrested and gathered at the Nuremberg
Palace of Justice. Motivated by interest and curiosity, I took a jeep, drove to
Nuremberg, and presented myself at the administrative offices for the trial. The
preparations were just beginning and after a short interview I was asked to join the
Nuremberg staff as quickly as possible.
2.

Condition of Nuremberg and Post-war Germany
Just a word about the condition of Nuremberg at that time. The old part of thecity was destroyed by allied bombing, as were many other key cities in Germany.
The infrastructure of Germany had totally collapsed, and a military government andoccupation by four allied nations – USA, Great Britain, the Soviet Union and France
was in force. Nuremberg was located in the United States zone of occupation.
3.

The Pre-trial Interrogation Phase – Consecutive Interpreting
Assigned to the language division, my first duties were to act as one of several

interpreters during the pre-trial interrogation phase, working principally with the8The Origin and Challenges of Simultaneous Interpretation: The Nuremberg Trial Experience

American legal staff.
Under the charter establishing the basis and framework for the trials, the tribunal
consisted of judges representing the four allied nations – USA, Great Britain, France
and the Soviet Union – and prosecuting teams representing the same nations.
German defense counsel, distinguished German lawyers chosen by the defendants,
were involved from the very beginning.
The interpretation during the pre-trial interrogation phase was consecutive,
mostly German-English, with the accused brought up to the interrogation room by aguard, with the interrogation conducted by allied legal counsel and with theinterpreter and court reporter- stenotypist or stenographer – present in the room.
We were working extremely hard during that phase – from morning to late in theevening.
4.

Uniqueness of Pre-trial Interrogation: “Autopsy” of a Defeated Nation
In some respects this was the most interesting and memorable phase of the trials

because it was the very first time at the end of the war that the leaders of a defeatednation were asked to comment on their role in the war and on the period leading up
to it. I was involved in the interrogations of such key leaders as Hermann Goering,
second to Hitler, the leaders of the armed forces, foreign minister, and others. It wasa slice of fresh and authentic history, a kind of autopsy of a nation in ruins. The
testimony given at that time was not yet filtered and shaped by the defense strategy
and by the structure of the formal trial to follow.
5. The Concept of Simultaneous Interpreting to Cope With Four Working Languages
As preparations for the opening of the international trial were being made, thelanguage challenge had to be addressed and solved. While it was essential that thetrial be conducted in four working languages – German, English, French and Russian– consecutive interpretation was not a reasonable option. It would have been atedious and laborious procedure to deal with four languages consecutively, not tomention the unacceptable increase in the length of the trial. Beyond Germany, thetrial attracted world attention with media from all over covering Nuremberg andrequiring language access. At the League of Nations in Geneva before the war only
French and English were the working languages; French was considered to be thekey diplomatic language and the principal international communication tool in the
19th and early 20th century.
In this way the concept and practice of simultaneous interpretation came about.
9

『通訳研究』第 7 号 (2007)

It brings to mind the proverb: “Necessity is the mother of invention.” There had
been some sporadic attempts at simultaneous interpretation at the League of Nations
with two languages – French and English – but Nuremberg launched the firstcomprehensive and large scale practice of simultaneous interpreting using multilanguage teams. As you can imagine, there were skeptics at this early stage who
predicted failure, but our early preparation indicated that we could be successful.
A former professor of French language at Georgetown University, U.S. Army
Colonel Leon Dostert, who had been General Eisenhower’s interpreter, was theleading individual in the planning and launching of this effort.
6.

Technical Support – Language Channels
As is obvious to us now, there are two fundamental elements in simultaneousinterpretation: the human element – the skills needed to perform effectively as asimultaneous interpreter – and the technical element – to make the procedure work.
For technical support we had the help of the IBM Corporation who installed thesystem of language channels, earphones and switch boxes, a system which would
seem very primitive by today’s standards but was quite innovative at the time.
7.

Recruiting and Testing Candidates for Simultaneous Interpreting
The human element represented a formidable challenge. Where and how to findcandidates for this task, and how to judge their ability to perform this function?
We turned first to the consecutive interpreters already in Nuremberg and to thepool of linguists working as document translators and researchers who werepreparing the documentary evidence for the trial. When we tested them to explore
their potential as simultaneous interpreters, we found that many of them, while
possessing language mastery and good academic credentials, tended to be
perfectionists and froze at the microphone when the right word did not come to mind
immediately.
We were looking for candidates with language agility, with ability to findinstantaneously the second or third choice of a word in the target language if thebest word did not come to mind, so that the pace and flow of interpretation could bemaintained. Obviously we tried to select individuals with a broad educational
background and a wide range of vocabulary.
There were also recruiting trips to Switzerland, to Paris and to London, until
finally 36 individuals – three teams of 12 simultaneous interpreters were gathered.

10The Origin and Challenges of Simultaneous Interpretation: The Nuremberg Trial Experience

8.

Characteristics of Successful Candidates
The most promising candidates were usually individuals who had spent

substantial portions of their life in the countries of both target languages. In my case,for example, my childhood and early adolescence was in the country of my birth –Austria – with German as my mother tongue, followed by study, work and some
professional experience in my second country – Great Britain.
In the selection process we recognized that perfect bilingualism is a rare
phenomenon and that there was usually some differential, even if slight, between
skills in one language and another. Somewhat greater speaking facility was requiredfor interpreting into a language than interpreting from a language. Generally aconsistent and recent experience with the language was required for the active,
speaking role on the microphone. Recent experience of living in the country of thetarget language was required to produce the needed ability to cope with idioms,
regional accents and technical vocabulary.
During the pre-trial phase we practiced with the equipment and set up mocktrials to test candidates and train ourselves. Keep in mind that we had no standard bywhich to measure ourselves, so we had to rely on instinct in developing techniques.
9.

Logistics of Courtroom installation for Simultaneous Interpreting
Three teams of 12 interpreters were needed for the 4 working languages. The

glass booth in the courtroom was divided into 4 language sections or channels toserve the working languages of the international trial: English, German, French andRussian. Three interpreters were sitting at the desk in each section. In this way, forexample, the English desk with its microphone would have three interpreters sittingside by side: one from German into English (This was my station), one from French
into English, and one from Russian into English.
The same applied to the German, French, and Russian channels. One channel was
the original or “verbatim” channel which transmitted the language spoken in the
courtroom at any given time. If the language spoken was Russian, for example, theinterpreters in the Russian booth would be silent, while the other booths would be
active. All the seats in the courtroom for judges, counsel, defendants, witnesses andobservers were equipped with a dial box that could be switched to the desired
language channel.
As in traffic, we developed a system of orange and red lights which would be
flashed by a monitor, signaling judges and counsel. On frequent occasions,especially during the subsequent trials after the main trial, I acted as monitor. The
11

『通訳研究』第 7 号 (2007)

yellow light was a signal to slow down and to prevent two parties from speaking at
the same time. The red light, used sparingly – only in the case of a mechanical or
human breakdown – was a sign to the presiding judge to declare a short recess todeal with the problem.
10.

Linguistic Challenges

Let me briefly discuss some of the linguistic challenges we faced.
1)

Language Structure – Anticipating the German Verb: Anticipating the Germanverb in the German language structure where the verb is placed at the end of asubordinate clause. As you know, in English the verb must be placed immediately
after the noun. If the interpreter waits to hear the German verb, he or she would fall
far behind and the simultaneous system would break down.

How to solve thisproblem? Sometimes the context allows the interpreter to anticipate the verb
correctly before it is heard, but often that is impossible. It is also risky andirresponsible to guess at a verb when so much is at stake during a trial.

Wedeveloped a special technique to cope with that problem by forming short segments
using parts of the sentence which precede the verb. This sounds complicated, but
actually it worked quite well.
2)

Dialects and Technical Terms: Another challenge was dealing with technicalteams, with military terminology, with governmental and military ranks, and withbureaucratic terms. We prepared ourselves as best as we could with glossaries, lists
and other helpful sources.
In one of the subsequent Nuremberg trials, where the accused were German
medical doctors who performed medical experiments on concentration camp inmates,
our challenge was to cope with the extensive medical terminology. In such cases theLatin roots of many medical terms could be transposed into other languages, with
only a change in pronunciation. This allowed the interpreter to cope with such terms,
even if he did not himself understand their meaning.
3)

Language Ambiguities: There were German language ambiguities, used deliberately

in documents and reports by the Nazi leadership to camouflage the meaning andimpact of an expression. Let me give you an example which I faced in the
courtroom: The German verb “Erfassen” has two possible English translations: oneis “seize” physically, a word which has an aggressive connotation and the other is

12

The Origin and Challenges of Simultaneous Interpretation: The Nuremberg Trial Experience“register” which is harmless, as in the sentence “The Jewish population was“seized” or the Jewish population was “registered”. When I interpreted with the verb
“seized”, consistent with the context of the testimony, there was an objection by the
defense, taking issue with my interpretation of that word. Here I found myself in theodd situation of having to interpret an objection to the accuracy of myinterpretation!
4)

There were other similar examples.

Documentation and Briefing for Interpreters: Another challenge for interpreters

related to reading from documents. It was essential for interpreters to have thedocument at hand if they were to keep up effectively with the reader of the document.
If the document was not made available, the interpreter would be under great stress.
As you well know, there is a substantial difference between interpreting
extemporaneous and conversational dialogue and dealing with documents andwritten material.
5)

Emotional Impact on Interpreters: I am often asked how the interpreters

coped with the graphic testimony of brutality in concentration camps, of torture, of
medical experiments on prisoners, and how this affected them. Keep in mind that wewere focused on the linguistic challenge, on the importance to do our job effectively.
In my case it was only later in my life that I reflected on the substance and impact of
the trials, and wrote and spoke about the meaning and impact of Nuremberg.
6)

Recording, Editing and Transcripts: It was essential for the key participantsin the trial – judges, prosecutors and defense counsel to receive an accurate andcomplete transcript of each day’s proceedings in four languages – German, English,
French and Russian as quickly as possible in order to review the conduct of the cases.
It was also essential to review the accuracy of the record in the four languages
before the print-out.
This presented a challenge, but was handled quite efficiently. It was a three-stepprocedure: the proceedings were recorded with wire recording devices – this was
before the use of tape recording. The recording was made of the original language,
as spoken in the courtroom. A team of four court reporters – stenotypists or
stenographers, listening to the proceedings through their earphones in English,
German, French and Russian, were in the courtroom for approximately 20 minutes
when they were relieved by another team. Each team of court reporters would then
go to their office and transcribe their segment in their respective language.
13

『通訳研究』第 7 号 (2007)

The interpreters, at the end of their session in the courtroom, would then review
the transcription of their interpretation by comparing it with the original wire
recording. This would be a check of accuracy – there was no time for editing or
polishing language. In this manner the transcript was available in four languages atthe end of the trial day.
11.

Simultaneous Interpreting After Nuremberg
Simultaneous interpreting grew after Nuremberg. It is practiced at the United

Nations, at international conferences, and at venues around the world. As you wellknow, it is now an academic subject at universities and training institutions in many
parts of the world, as here at your institution.
With today’s population mobility and travel, as well as study abroad programs,
there is now a much larger pool of individuals with potential for simultaneousinterpretation – in contrast to 1945 when it was difficult to find qualified individuals.
12.

Milestone in International Law – Key Legal Principles and Precedents
Let me briefly discuss the impact of Nuremberg trials: Nuremberg is a milestone

in international law, setting the precedent for trials to follow, such as the Tokyo
trials; the trials at the Hague in Holland dealing with former Yugoslavia and
Rwanda; and the recently constituted International Criminal Court.
Nuremberg established aggressive war as a crime. This was one of the key legal
issues at the trial, challenged by the defense as an “ex post facto” law. (“Ex post
facto” meaning the accusation of committing a crime for which no establishedstatute or legal code exists.) In response the prosecution argued that “natural” law
underlies “codified” law as its basis. Was the first man who committed murder any
less of a murderer because the crime of murder was not yet in law books codified asa crime? Nuremberg established that superior orders cannot be used to justify
criminal acts. Nuremberg established that even if domestic law does not impose apenalty for an act, there is still responsibility under international law.
13.

Patterns of Defense

War conditions and the survival of the nation required unusual measures. Many of
the accused claimed that they had no knowledge of atrocities, of the holocaust, thatthey were not involved and not responsible.
The “you also” defense came up frequently – meaning that “you also” committed
such acts – particularly directed at the Soviet Union. The tribunal ruled that this14

The Origin and Challenges of Simultaneous Interpretation: The Nuremberg Trial Experience

defense as not admissible, since the German leadership was on trial and not theSoviet Union or any other nations.
14.

Impact on Germany
It wrote the record of events leading up to and during World War II – the writingof the record was more important than the conviction and sentencing of individual
Nazi leaders.
The Nuremberg trials were an essential element for Germany in drawing a line
behind the past, transforming itself with a democratic constitution, and becoming a
key member of the European Union. Nuremberg represented a repudiation of
extreme and radical nationalism.
Nuremberg avoided attribution of collective guilt by placing responsibility on
individual leaders. The evidence of aggression, of human rights abuses, thetestimony of witnesses, the documentary evidence of conspiracy, all prevented Nazi
leaders to be seen as martyrs by the German population.
15.

Criticism of Nuremberg Trials – “Victor’s Justice” and Response
Victor’s justice – a trial conducted by the victors in the war over the defeated.

But what was the alternative?
Civilized society could not ignore acts of aggression and massive crimes against
humanity. The millions of victims could not be denied the process of law in bringing
perpetrators to justice. Germans or Japanese sitting as judges was not a reasonable
alternative in 1945. They would have lacked credibility.

United Nations not yet

established.
16.

Comparison with Tokyo Trials and Comparison between Post-war
evolution of Germany and JapanLet me bring up some differences between Germany and Japan: how the impactof the two trials can be seen in those two nations, how they dealt with their past, andhow they evolved after the end of World War II.
The Tokyo trials were also international, but the U.S. took the initiative. The
chief prosecutor was an American, and the chief judge an Australian. The trials wereconducted in English and Japanese only. The Emperor system continued – the Showa
Emperor was not indicted in the interest of social stability and historical continuityof Japan (despite objections by the Soviet Union). The basic infrastructure of Japanremained intact – unlike Germany where there was a complete breakdown and15

『通訳研究』第 7 号 (2007)

destruction. Consequently there was more continuity in the case of Japan between
pre and post-war periods. Many politicians and industrial leaders returned topositions of power and influence.
17.

Contemporary issues pertaining to Memory and Reconciliation – Contrasts
between Germany and Japan
This explains differences in attitudes which are still at issue today and where

there are key differences between Japan and Germany. Examples: the Japanese
textbook issue – conservative/nationalistic stance, causing tensions in Asia, Yasukuni
Shrine visit by Prime Minister, apology issue.
In Germany the Nazi period and the holocaust is a key part of the social studies
curriculum in the schools. School children are taken to visit concentration camps.
All this raises fundamental questions about memory and reconciliation. Let me
draw a contrast between the Hiroshima and Nagasaki Memorials, depicting thehorror of the atomic attack, but at the same time holding out the hope for reconciliationand peace, and the Nanjing Massacre Museum in China, severe in its condemnation,
but not offering a path towards reconciliation.
18.

Establishment of the International Criminal Court – Rationale and Opposition
As we consider the legacy and impact of Nuremberg, let us review contemporary

initiatives for the exercise of international law in response to aggression and humanrights abuses.
The tribunals at the Hague under the umbrella of the United Nations were
established to deal with crimes committed in the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda.
Keep in mind that these are not permanent, but ad-hoc tribunals established in
response to international violations.
In 1998 at an international conference in Rome a charter for a permanentInternational Criminal Court (ICC) was proposed and has since been instituted at theHague with 139 nations who have signed in and 76 who have ratified it. Rationale of
ICC: Permanent court to end impunity for international crimes, to function as adeterrent and to provide redress for victims.
Japan is in favor but has not yet ratified, pending domestic legislation. Japan
here acts in step with the United States who so far refuses to sign on.
Why is the United States opposed? Reluctance to give up sovereignty to aninternational court; with concerns that U.S. military and civilians abroad might betargeted for politically motivated reasons.

16The Origin and Challenges of Simultaneous Interpretation: The Nuremberg Trial Experience

However, adequate safeguards against such use by the ICC exist – there arechecks and balances: court will prosecute only when a country is without the means
to bring criminals to justice on its own.
19.

The Quest for a Global Rule of Law for a Civilized International Community
in the 21st Century
When we look at the global community at the beginning of the 21st century,

when we consider the global interdependence – economically, politically and culturally –and when we also consider the instability and the threats in danger areas around theworld, it is clear that a global rule of law is imperative for human stability – indeed
for survival. This quest for a global rule of law continues to be a work in progress. It
is an essential basis for a harmonious world in the 21st century. I am confident thateventually human goodness in human understanding will prevail. Thank you verymuch.

S IEGFRIED R AMLER is currently a Senior Adjunct Fellow at Hawaii's East-WestCenter, a key research and training institution in Honolulu. He was born in Austria
in 1924, received his early education in Vienna, moving to London after the
Anschluss where he continued his secondary and beginning university studies. After
his service at Nuremberg, Ramler obtained graduate degrees at the University ofParis and, moving to the Pacific, at the University of Hawaii. He is past president of
the Japan-America Society of Hawaii and founding member and Vice Chair of the
Crown Prince Akihito Scholarship Foundation. The government of Japan awarded
Ramler the Imperial Order of the Sacred Treasure, the government of France named
him Chevalier dans l'Ordre des Palmes Acadmiques and awarded him the Ordre
National du Mrite.

Reference
Gaiba, F. (1998). The Origins of Simultaneous Interpretation: The Nuremberg Trial.
University of Ottawa Press.

17

『通訳研究』第 7 号 (2007)

日本通訳学会主催 特別講演会の報告

2006 年 2 月 18 日 （ 土 ） 世 界 初 の 同 時 通 訳 が 行 わ れ た ニ ュ ル ン ベ ル ク 裁 判 の 同 時 通 訳 者 で ある ジ ー ク フ リ ー ト ・ ラ ム ラ ー 氏 を 招 き 、 “The Origin and Challenges of SimultaneousInterpretation: The Nuremberg Trial Experience” と 題 し た 講 演 会 を 開 催 し ま し た 。 講 演 会
は 、 同 時 通 訳 の 技 術 的 な 内 容 か ら 、 言 語 学 、 国 際 社 会 と 多 岐 に わ た り 、 200 名 近 い 参 加
者 は ラ ム ラ ー 氏 の 講 演 に 深 く 聞 き 入 っ て い ま し た 。ま た 、大 学 院 生 に よ る 同 時 通 訳 も 円
滑 に 進 み 、 講 演 会 は 成 功 に 終 わ り ま し た 。（ 鶴 田 記 ）2006 年 2 月 19 日 （ 日 ） ラ ム ラ ー 氏 の 講 演 会 は 日 本 通 訳 学 会 主 催 で 関 西 で も 開 催 さ れ ま し た（ 会 場 ： 神 戸 女 学 院 大 学 講 堂 ）。 講 演 会 に は 、 学 会 会 員 だ け で は な く 、 広 範 囲 の 分 野 か
ら 、ま た 、遠 方 か ら の 参 加 者 も あ り 、準 備 し た 150 個 の 同 時 通 訳 用 イ ヤ フ ォ ン が ほ と ん
ど 出 払 い ま し た 。東 京 と 同 じ く 内 容 の 濃 い 、聴 衆 を 惹 き つ け る 講 演 で 、津 田 守 会 員 、水野 真 木 子 会 員 の コ メ ン ト 、会 場 か ら の 質 問 も 続 き 、充 実 し た 2 時 間 で し た 。ま た 、夕 刻
か ら の 懇 親 会 に は 24 名 の 参 加 が あ り 、 ラ ム ラ ー 氏 の 気 さ く で 誠 実 で 温 か い お 人 柄 に 触れ な が ら 、 楽 し い ひ と 時 を 過 ご し ま し た 。（ 船 山 記 ）【編集註】神戸女学院大学におけるラムラー氏講演の講演全文録（翻訳付き）がエンタイトル出版から出版されています。書誌情報は以下のとおりです。

『ニュルンベルク裁判と同時通訳』
エ ン タ イ ト ル 出 版 (2007-03-31 出 版 )松縄 順子（監修）
ISBN:9784903715148 (4903715140)
http://entitle.jp/18