As a matter of fact, there are studies underscoring that omissions in interpreting can be due to pragmatic strategies:

https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/960700

Thank you Prof. Patrizia Giampieri for sharing with me this article.

Actually, omission is less relevant in interpreting than in translation as it often engenders sense disrupt or a lack of info. In SIM, it is more due to unadequacy between the flow of the source message, the brain's time to analyze it and the one of rendering it than to any conscious strategy of the interpreter.

Thank you El Djouher Khalef for your answer.

Dear Doctor

Go To

Omission in Simultaneous Interpreting: A Multidisciplinary Perspective to U.S. Presidential Debates

Dr. Safa'a Ahmed

Occasional Papers Vol. 65 July (2018)

ISSN 1110-2721

[Abstract This paper attempts a new categorisation of omission in simultaneous interpreting through exploring and investigating omission in the simultaneous interpreting of U.S. presidential debates from English into Arabic in order to improve the interpreter's performance. This is not an attempt, however, to answer the question why the interpreter uses omission, intentionally or impromptu, because it is not a cognitive study of the reasons why this phenomenon occurs. Instead, it aims to evaluate omission in real, professional contexts to determine how far omissions convey the functions of presidential debates. The data is collected from the second 2016 U.S. presidential debate between the two candidates Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. An interdisciplinary approach combining between interpreting studies (especially Pym's Risk Analysis 2008) and political sciences (basically Benoit's Functional Theory of Political Campaign Discourse 2017) is employed. The paper reaches the conclusion that there is a gap in understanding omission in interpreting a discourse type as such from English into Arabic and that interpreters used omission in their renditions, a matter which affected the three functions of presidential debates. Omission should be accounted for in the light of an interdisciplinary approach combining between a multi-layered linguistic and pragmatic analysis, interpreting studies and a functional theory of political campaign discourse. The product and its potential impact(s) for the aims of communication determine the level of functionality entailed in the interpretation: 'functional', 'nonfunctional, or 'semi-functional''. If the interpreter becomes aware of the functions of this discourse type and how it behaves, then his performance should presumably be improved; and at this particular point, further empirical, experimental research is recommended.]

We have to remember that omission in interpretation should be use conscientiously as a strategy. The key point to consider is that (particularly in our Language) we need to interpret to send the message in an understandable manner. Omission at some point is inevitable since there is no direct or absolute translation for most context, hence omission is deduced as both a strategy and liability.