Coffee Break
Member
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2022
- Member Type
- Student or Learner
- Native Language
- Korean
- Home Country
- South Korea
- Current Location
- South Korea
I read this expression, "This was not aided by the fact that", but am finding it difficult to understand it. Could you please let me know what it means? Here is the excerpt:
There followed another highly technical discussion, the content of which was obscure at best and as the minutes stretched onward, I began to lose track of what was actually under discussion.
This was not aided by the fact that interpretation can be profoundly disorienting, you can be so caught up in the minutiae of the act, in trying to maintain utmost fidelity to the words being spoken first by the subject and then by yourself, that you do not necessarily apprehend the sense of the sentences themselves: you literally do not know what you are saying. Language loses its meaning. This was happening to me now, in the conference room. I was absorbed by the task at hand, of decoding the legalese in which the content of the discussion was encased, so securely that nothing seemed to penetrate and nothing escaped.
- Katie Kitamura, Intimacies, Chapter 9
This is a novel published in 2021 in the United States of America. The protagonist is an interpreter working at the International Criminal Court at The Hague. Now she is interpreting for the accused in the conference room, but is beginning to lose track of what is being said.
In this part, I wonder what is not aided.
Would that mean, that the idea about the disorienting nature of the interpretation gave no comfort to her, who is experiencing the phenomenon in which she began to lose track of discussion...? (Though this is just my guess.)
There followed another highly technical discussion, the content of which was obscure at best and as the minutes stretched onward, I began to lose track of what was actually under discussion.
This was not aided by the fact that interpretation can be profoundly disorienting, you can be so caught up in the minutiae of the act, in trying to maintain utmost fidelity to the words being spoken first by the subject and then by yourself, that you do not necessarily apprehend the sense of the sentences themselves: you literally do not know what you are saying. Language loses its meaning. This was happening to me now, in the conference room. I was absorbed by the task at hand, of decoding the legalese in which the content of the discussion was encased, so securely that nothing seemed to penetrate and nothing escaped.
- Katie Kitamura, Intimacies, Chapter 9
This is a novel published in 2021 in the United States of America. The protagonist is an interpreter working at the International Criminal Court at The Hague. Now she is interpreting for the accused in the conference room, but is beginning to lose track of what is being said.
In this part, I wonder what is not aided.
Would that mean, that the idea about the disorienting nature of the interpretation gave no comfort to her, who is experiencing the phenomenon in which she began to lose track of discussion...? (Though this is just my guess.)
)
