A Multi-model Approach to Consecutive Interpreting (2012)

8/11/2019 A Multi-model Approach to Consecutive Interpreting (2012)

1/24

This article was downloaded by: [88.15.196.196]On: 09 October 2014, At: 00:57Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

The Interpreter and Translator TrainerPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ritt20

A Simplified Multi-model Approach to

Preparatory Training in Consecutive

InterpretingRobert Neal Baxter

a

aUniversity of Vigo, Galiza, Spain

Published online: 12 Feb 2014.

To cite this article:Robert Neal Baxter (2012) A Simplified Multi-model Approach to Preparatory

Training in Consecutive Interpreting, The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 6:1, 21-43, DOI:

10.1080/13556509.2012.10798828

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13556509.2012.10798828

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (theContent) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to orarising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms

& Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditionshttp://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13556509.2012.10798828http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditionshttp://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditionshttp://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13556509.2012.10798828http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/13556509.2012.10798828http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ritt20


2/24

The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 6(1), 2012, 21-43

ISSN: 1750-399X St. Jerome Publishing, Manchester

A Simplified Multi-model Approach to

Preparatory Training in Consecutive

Interpreting

Robert Neal Baxter

University of Vigo, Galiza, Spain

Abstract.With the onset of the new Bologna framework, pre-

paratory training is set to become the backbone of undergraduate

interpreter teaching. Based on over fifteen years of teachingexperience, this paper offers an overview of the approach used

for basic training in consecutive interpreting, designed to provide

a solid grounding for would-be interpreters before moving on to

more advanced, professional-standard training. Bringing together

what are sometimes seen as contradictory theoretical models,

used here as purely pedagogical tools, rather than focusing on

recall and translation, the approach described focuses on a sim-

plified two-step model geared to active listening and production,

underpinned by the concept of the rational management of finitecognitive resources (effort) within the framework of the minimax

strategy. The paper also introduces and discusses the advantages

of the key concepts of knowledge mobilization (in the processing

stage) and the principle of simplicity (in the production stage).

Keywords.Preparatory training, Efforts model, Minimax strategy, Mobiliz-

ing knowledge, Principle of simplicity.

This paper provides an overview of the methodology developed over 15 years

of experience in preparatory teaching of consecutive interpreting within the

framework of the graduate degree in Translation and Interpreting offered at

the University of Vigo since 1992 (Baxter 2008). Despite a series of signifi-

cant structural modifications (Alonso Bacigalupe 2005:193), the approach

employed remains equally well-suited to the new Bologna Process.

Within this new framework, three compulsory, practice-oriented founda-

tion courses in interpreting are introduced in the third year, with a total of6 credits each: simultaneous (SI), consecutive (CI) and liaison interpreting.

In their fourth and final year, students then have the possibility to follow

up their basic training with a series of three optional courses in advanced

D

ownloadedby[88.15.196.1

96]at00:5709October201

4


3/24

22 A Simplified Approach to Training in Consecutive Interpreting

SI, advanced CI and interpreting from their second foreign language.1It is

important to stress that the approach described is not intended to lead to

professional-level proficiency, but rather to provide novice students who

have a background in translation with the basic skills they require in order

to fully appreciate what is involved in interpreting. Once the essential con-

cepts have been grasped and the basic skills mastered, students who aspire

to work as professional interpreters will be prepared to move on to more

advanced, professional-standard training available through optional subjects

and specialized masters degrees.

The methodology outlined is considered appropriate to preparatory phase

training as described by Ilg and Lambert (1996:73):

Teaching consecutive interpretation is one step in a chain of

successive learning situations designed to develop the skill of com-

municating orally between two languages .... CI should not be taught

right from the start because it presupposes students already have the

ability to carry messages across linguistic barriers. This must first

be taught and acquired: in simplified, didactically oriented settings.

Such initial training is of vital importance as it lays the foundations for

further progress, paving the way for full professional training. With the

advent of the new curricular reforms introduced by the Bologna Process,

basic training is set to become the backbone of undergraduate interpreter

training, as Arum Ribas (2010:42) suggests when she argues that inter-

preter training has evolved in the direction of a more general training which

places great importance on the techniques and preparatory exercises for the

various interpreting modalities most demanded in the job market today.

The approach described offers a user-friendly model, easily understood by

first-time interpreting trainees, which accurately reflects both the wider CI

setting and the CI-specific phases, whilst at the same time attending to the

skills required to perform the tasks involved.Much of the literature seems to present CI teaching as a collection of exer-

cises for the acquisition of specific microskills, such as the twelve preparatory

exercises described in Ilg and Lambert (1996:76), ranging from listening and

memory exercises and processing of digits, proper names, technical words

and acronyms to anticipation exercises. However, rather than building upon

a series of microskills, what is followed here is the methodology applicable

to both SI and CI outlined in Alonso Bacigalupe (1999; 2009), where inter-

preting is seen as a macrotaskmade up of a three main subskills(listening,

memory and note-taking in phase I, followed by production, memory andnote reading in phase II). The methodology described here hinges on three

1Full course details available at http://webs.uvigo.es/vicprof/index.php?option=com_co

ntent&task=view&id=1495&Itemid=572&lang=gl (accessed 30 December 2011).

D



4


4/24

Robert Neal Baxter 23

main guiding principles, namely: CI as an essentially natural process; the

implications of a user-oriented approach, and the usefulness of the concept

of effortas applied to CI. Each of these translates in practical terms into

a series of strategies put into practice via specific classroom exercises. In

order to mirror the actual CI process as closely as possible from the outset,

all skills are applied to actual texts to be analyzed and/or interpreted in such

a way as to reflect the interplay of the strategies derived from the main

guiding principles (Iliescu Gheorgiu 2001:40); for example, comprehen-

sion is a prerequisite to processing and analysis of the source text, critical

understanding and analysis of the source text serves as the basic script for

the target text, and so on.

A word of caution is in order regarding the way in which different and

ostensibly competing models are made to converge. Broadly speaking, thereexists a certain divide in the field of interpreting studies between those who

defend a deep, meaning-oriented explanation of the interpreting process

(thorie du sens) and others who advocate at least partially more translation-

based approaches that rely on the notion of formal equivalence. However,

as Gile notes (2003:62-63):

When considering deverbalisation in practical Translation terms,

as opposed to academic theories, there is probably a much larger

common denominator between the various schools of thought amongprofessionals than might be inferred from the theoretical literature,

which tends to stress differences.

Barring the innovative use of languages other than the students main

working languages, the aim of this paper is not to propose any new exercises

as such, but rather to provide a broad guiding framework for initial training

courses. This approach is informed by an over-arching framework that brings

together potentially contradictory theoretical postulates in a very pragmatic

way, allowing students to shift between theories, depending on the circum-stances, in order to find the best solution possible to any given problem. From

this perspective, the approach draws on both models, reclaimed as purely

heuristic tools, and is not intended as either an indictment or an endorsement

of either as a descriptive theory of actual processes of professional interpret-

ing. In other words, this article is exclusively concerned with the practical

usefulness of any given model as applied to the initial teaching and learning

process. The approach adopted is intended to provide students with a multi-

farious yet simple conceptual structure designed to heighten their awareness

of the various strategic options available in the early stages of interpretingpractice, as described by Gile (2003:62) in terms of a prescriptive paradigm

in reply to Djean Le Fal (2002:146). Therefore, apparently conflicting and

contradictory elements such as translation and language play can be made

D



4


5/24


to sit happily within a wider context of the underlying meaningfulness of

segments, with the former serving as a set of tactical devices set within a

broader conceptual framework of deverbalization-reverbalizationas an

underlying guiding strategy.

1. Consecutive interpreting as a natural process

In order to help students appreciate what is involved in interpreting, it is

important to underline that while SI violates the rules of natural discourse

and requires the acquisition of a specific, counter-intuitive technique that

involves talking over someone else, the techniques and skills involved in CI

are not in fact specific to it. Indeed, the basic CI process can be described as

natural inasmuch as it is something that people in general perform regularly

(Bowen and Bowen 1980/1984:21).With a view to building on as solid a base as possible, during the first

interpreting class students are requested to provide a rough-and-ready def-

inition of what they believe CI involves in order to dispel common myths

which potentially lead to apprehension and impede progress, namely that the

defining components of CI are essentially: (a) memory, (b) translation, and

(c) note-taking. Such common misconceptions are echoed in authoritative

manuals and serve only to further dismay trainees by detracting from the idea

that CI is something they basically already know how to do. Nolan (2005:3),

for example, explains the process as follows:

A consecutive interpreter listens to the speaker, takes notes, and then

reproduces the speech in the target language. The consecutive

interpreter relies mainly on memory, but good note-taking technique

is an essential aid.

While these elements certainly do feature prominently in any professional CI

setting, the approach argued for here does not consider them to be an integral

part of the basis of the CI processper se, which is understood instead moresimply in terms of telling someone else something that had previously been

told to them by another person.

Realizing that at the very basic level CI involves nothing more, in es-

sence, than fine-tuning something that the students are already familiar with

and capable of also helps to reduce nervousness (Russell 2005:143), thereby

helping to improve overall confidence, the key to improved performance.

Furthermore, becoming aware that they are starting from a pre-existing base

rather than from scratch also helps pave the way for progression in the acqui-

sition of more specific techniques and strategies. The first lesson can thus beused productively to encourage students to find situations where they carry

out this process in their everyday lives, for example, when reporting back on

a phone conversation to a third party. In cases such as these, it also becomes

clear that the original message is not intentionally memorized, and that the

D



4


6/24


relayed (interpreted) message is naturally tailored to fit the perceived needs

of the receiver. In everyday situations such as these, the sequence of events,

the role and number of players and the basic relaying process involved are to

all intents and purposes similar enough to the basic CI process to be useful

as a starting point.

Another classroom exercise I have found useful involves asking one of

the students in the second session to report back on the contents of the first

session to any newcomers, for example in relation to timetables, groups, ma-

terials required, office hours, etc. In both cases, recall is inevitably involved

(in the latter case, unlike the actual CI process, long-term memory is also

involved). But once again, the focus is not on initially trying to memorize

the information with a view to relaying it later to a third party, but rather on

understanding, processing and appropriating the message before adapting

it to the perceived needs of the target receiver. This quintessentially natu-

ral character of CI at the basic level forms the mainstay of the approach

described and must be firmly and repeatedly impressed upon the students

from the beginning.

In the very early stages, the basic CI process can be seen as involving

verbalization-deverbalization-reverbalization as described in the thorie du

sensdeveloped by Seleskovitch, which can be profitably used as a peda-

gogical tool for preparatory training, as demonstrated by Gile (2003). As

illustrated by the previously described classroom exercises taken from real-

life, linguistic transfer is if not irrelevant at least marginal or incidental

to the actual CI process. Seleskovitch argues along the same lines (1975:163;

my translation):

strange as it may seem, the fact that the message must be expressed

in another language is of only incidental importance to interpreting.

Once the ideas conveyed by the original have been assimilated, they

can then be reformulated in any given language that the interpreter

is familiar with: interpretation never involves transposition at the

linguistic level.

In practical terms, what this means is that initial exercises should avoid in-

terlinguistic transfer (translation) in order to focus on the cognitive aspects

(Lambert 1986) involved in understanding and processing the originalLambert 1986) involved in understanding and processing the originalinvolved in understanding and processing the original

message; this is essential if the message is to be relayed effectively. Once

understanding/analysis and production can be performed satisfactorily in the

students A language, teachers can move on to integrate the interlinguistic

aspect required of any real professional situation, in monolateral (B-A) situ-

ations before progressing to active production in their B language in bilateralscenarios (B-A-B).2

2A fully annotated selection of the types of text used is available at http://sites.google.

com/site/nealsweb/my-forms (accessed 30 December 2011).

D



4


7/24


Full mastery of and fluency in their working languages are obviously

essential prerequisites for any would-be professional interpreters, to which

end the linguistic transfer variable is introduced as soon as possible into the

course. Language skills per seare not, however, seen as being central or

specific to the CI process and are not directly dealt with in this approach,

other than to provide students with strategies designed to help overcome

linguistic limitations, primarily by erring on the side of caution and simplic-

ity. It is fair to assume that undergraduate students have a sufficient basic

mastery of their working languages, and while learning to work within their

range of limitations during any specific interpreting event, they should also

continually seek to improve their linguistic skills and proficiency.

2. A user-oriented approach

In order to provide a very simple model which reflects actual professional

practice, the distinct teaching phases are designed to mirror as closely as pos-

sible the phases of the interpreting process itself. Here I depart from Bowen

and Bowens (1980/1984) classic three-phase model in order to reflect the

overall three-player (speaker-interpreter-listener) interpreting setting more

closely, whilst at the same time drawing a clear distinction between the situ-

ation itself and the actual interpreting phases through which the interpreter

proceeds within this wider chain of events: (a) ST production, (b) (ST recep-

tion) interpretation (TT production), and (c) TT reception.

Figure 1. Chain of interpretation phases

As Figure 1 shows, the apparently complex overall situation involving

several variables, as indicated by the three-player triangle, can ultimately be

reduced to a remarkably simple two-step interpreting process as far as the

interpreter is concerned, basically comprising nothing more than processing

the ST, involving active listening(i.e. aural comprehension and discourseanalysis), followed by delivery(i.e. production of the TT).3Indeed, there is

3For reasons of completeness, the schema also includes a third element (recall) which falls

outside the actual scope of the main process. Memory and recall are discussed in more detail

D



4


8/24


a generally agreed consensus (Albl-Mikasa 2008:198) that the simple two-

step chain of comprehension/analysis-production is the key to successful

consecutive interpreting, as Jones explains (1998:12):

To express ideas clearly and effectively, you must first have them

clear in your own mind. It follows that if you wish to re-express

someone elses ideas without having the possibility of repeating them

word for word which is the case for the interpreter then you must

make a clear, structured analysis of them. And to make that analysis

you have to understand the individual ideas that are the basic building

blocks of a speakers line of reasoning.

For this reason, I follow Seleskovitch and Lederer in insisting that [f]irst

and foremost, teachers must encourage students to pay attention to the mean-

ing of what is being said. When fully mastered, this becomes the basis of

interpretation as a whole (1989:16; my translation).

The learning process is gradual and involves a series of steps which must

be mastered and automated before moving on to the next. The first step

involves textual analysis of ST contents and structure as an indication of

full textual comprehension. In order to focus on the key need to foster full

comprehension and analysis before moving on to the TT production phase,

teaching is subdivided into two phases, corresponding to the distinction

established by Jones (1998:12), i.e.: an initial phase centred exclusively on

comprehension and analysis of the narrative and chronological structure of

the source text, and a second phase dealing in more detail with the way the

source text could be restructured. In interpreting settings, meaning, however

abstract in itself, is expressed using language. For example, the experiment

in fidelity described in Gile (1995:50-53) shows how the same simple idea

expressed as an image can be rendered linguistically in a range of seman-

tically equivalent or similar ways. Students are encouraged to identify the

thematic subject, object and main verb of each segment and to arrange themin the unmarked syntactic order of the target language (S-V-O, etc.), turning

passive sentences into active sentence wherever possible and splitting rela-

tive and subordinate clauses into new sentences for greater clarity in order

to determine who did what to whom, when, how and for what reasons.

Text analysis is performed initially without linguistic transfer (A language

ST A language TT), using short local items taken from newspapers. Typ-ically, these stories are constructed in a non-linear way and with a profusion

of potentially non-pertinent information. The following example shows a

typical analysis of a simple ST for initial CI training.

later in the article in order to avoid detracting from the basic simple two-step model.

D



4


9/24


Example 1 (translated from Galician4):

A woman aged 69, O.S.S. from San Xurxo

de Sacos in Cotobade dies of drowning atPortocelo Beach in the borough of Marn

in Pontevedra.

According to eye witness accounts, the

body revealed a slight blow to the head,

although this appears not to have been

the cause of death.

Emergency services stated that the in-

cident had occurred at 13:00 when out

walking with her husband.

Most of the following information

can be deemed irrelevant in non-specialized contexts (see Footnote

11): her initials (she is not identified),

and place names which are unfamil-

iar even to people from other parts of

the same Province of Galiza.

Misleading information: it has al-

ready been established how she died.

It is unnecessary to provide a list of

other unlikely causes of death.

Chronologically this information

could easily have been integrated

into the first paragraph, if deemed

relevant.

With no instructions given to students regarding how they are to proceed,

the text is read out once in its entirety and students are required to provide

an oral synthesis. This almost inevitably results in failure due to a misguided

attempt to memorize all of the material and then translate it. Having seen

firsthand that shallow, memory-based approaches are unfeasible at this stage

of their training, students are reminded once again of the two-step process

involved in the natural CI model, with active listening and analysis as the first

step. The same text is then reread a second time, section by section, calling

on one student to analyze each section and produce a synthesized version.

The teacher provides guidance during this process, with participation from

the rest of the class. This deeper analysis reveals that the basic contents of

the ST are significantly easier to grasp, retain and relay than a superficial

analysis would tend to suggest.

In order to focus on ST analysis, emphasis is initially placed almost

exclusively on the way the ST is processed rather than on the production of

the TT. As the students progress in their ability to analyze the ST, emphasis

shifts to their expression in the TT production phase in their A language

before finally moving on to the same exercise using B-A translation. At the

TT production level, attention can then be focused on the principle of sim-

plicity described more fully below. The success of any interpretation relies

on an adequate understanding of each CI situation, with special attention to

the target public.

4The original text is from Galicia Hoxe(29 September 2009). Available at http://www.

elcorreogallego.es/indexSuplementos.php?idEdicion=1489&idMenu=17&idNoticia=47

0007 (accessed 10 January 2012).

D



4


10/24


One of the main features which set interpretation apart from written transla-

tion is its immediacy: unlike the reader of a translation who operates in deferred

time vis--visthe ST and can freeze the text as and when necessary, the receiver

of the interpreted message cannot deliberate on the (translated) message relayed

and received in real time. This calls for a clearly user-oriented approach,

where quality has been defined as user satisfaction (Kurz 2001:407). It

means that the production phase is essentially driven by the perceived re-

quirements of the public, regarding not only contents/structure as dealt with

in previous sections, but also other, more formal elements such as register,

smooth delivery, and so on. In short, our ultimate goal must obviously be

to satisfy our audience (Djean Le Fal 1990:155).

Many variables can come into play when gauging user expectations

(ekov 1998:166-67). Drawing on the findings reported in Moser (1996)in relation to simultaneous interpreting, it is possible to extrapolate a certainnumber of key desiderata that can be extended to CI, including terminologi-

cal accuracy, faithfulness to meaning, rhetorical skills, and control of voice,

among others.

2.1 Situation management

European guidelines for convergence in higher education include a series of

competences.5

In compliance with European and Spanish guidelines, theUniversity of Vigo distinguishes between three types of strategy defined as

saber(tacit knowledge),saber facer(know-how/skills) andsaber estar/ser

(conduct). However, for the purposes of basic CI training, it is useful to draw

a simple two-way distinction between the two main complementary aspects,

referred to as attitude vs. aptitude.6

Students often see interpretation as more challenging than written transla-

tion, with which they are more familiar, both as would-be practitioners and

consumers. However, interpreters are at an advantage vis--vis translators

because they are able to see who their target audience is. This places themin a potentially better position to deploy not only their aptitude(technical

5Competence includes: i) cognitive competence involving the use of theory and concepts,as well as informal tacit knowledge gained experientially; ii) functional competence

(skills or know-how), those things that a person should be able to do when they are

functioning in a given area of work, learning or social activity; iii) personal competence

involving knowing how to conduct oneself in a specific situation; and iv) ethical com-

petence involving the possession of certain personal and professional values (European

Commission 2005:11) .6Despite possible confusions with the usual meaning ascribed to the term aptitude, which

is used in the literature to refer to innate talent for interpreting, it is maintained here as a

useful mnemonic device with the meaning of knowledge of technique, as opposed to the

way interpreters react in order to apply this knowledge creatively in situ(attitude).

D



4


11/24


skills) but also their attitude(evaluating the implications of the situation).

Understanding this and bearing it in mind when making strategic decisions is

the key to successfully complying with the user-oriented approach defended

here. In short, interpreters should not attempt to blandly transmit the contents

of the ST, but rather to shape their TT based on full awareness and appraisal of

the relationships which bind the three elements of the interpreting/translation

triad. In order to do this, students must take into account who is talking to

whom, contrasting how the speaker of the ST intends to relate to his or her

public and the way they themselves interact with their TT public. The aim

at all times should be to understand their audiences needs and expectations

(including cultural factors) in order to gauge the effects of their TT.

While equally applicable to SI, the situationality factor is particularly

salient in many instances of CI, and better suited to more intimate situationssuch as bilateral and community interpreting which provide greater leeway

for interpreters to interact and intervene in accordance with the situational

needs as they see them. For example, as Jones (1998:38) explains, it is

perfectly legitimate for the interpreter to benefit from the fact that they are

working in consecutive and put a question to the speaker. Consecutive

interpreters are often more highly visible than simultaneous conference

interpreters, which can make them potentially more vulnerable. By taking

the situational factors into account, interpreters can present themselves as

figures of confidence rather than a source of irritation, lulling their listenersinto a sense of security regarding the content of the interaction, and thereby

shielding themselves from mistrust.

A cursory overview such as this does not lend itself to an in-depth dis-

cussion regarding the role of the interpreter and the ethics of interpreter

(in)visibility. In line with the overall philosophy adopted here, interpreter

invisibility is not seen as a question of being in favour of or against a visibly

active role. Instead, students are taught to become aware of the way they

behave and to be prepared to take a back seat when they feel it is the most

advisable course of action but do not forego the right to adopt a more proactiverole when required by the circumstances. They are thus taught to gauge and

manage situations which require direct intervention. This has the double

advantage of facilitating an impression of direct communication between the

main parties involved, whilst at the same time mitigating the interpreters

own vulnerability as an extraneous element interrupting the desired natural

flow of discourse. By consciously adopting a flexible attitude in terms of

situation management, trainee interpreters learn to fulfil their duties towards

the three members which make up the interpreting triad: the receiver(s), the

speaker and the interpreters themselves.Role play can be used effectively in the classroom to train students to

manage situations (Russell et al. 2010). In a role play setting, while one

student delivers a short speech to the rest of the class, another student acts

D



4


12/24


as interpreter and has to begin by making a decision regarding where to sit

in order to interpret effectively and how to go about making his or her needs

clear to the other parties involved. Interpreters may not always be able to

talk to speakers prior to an interpretation in order to discuss the best way

to proceed. Alternatively, in the heat of the moment, speakers may become

carried away and forget any pre-interpreting agreements with the inter-

preter regarding the need for pauses, etc. In such cases, the interpreter has

to interrupt the speaker in order to be able to perform their task adequately.

Such role play settings where the rest of the class is reliant on the skills of

the student acting as interpreter make it clear that the interpreter must find

ways of intervening. The need for direct interpreter intervention can then be

discussed. Once again, the emphasis is on the whole setting within which

the interpreting takes place rather than merely on the two-step interpretingprocessper se. Interpersonal skills needed to manage such situations are often

ignored by novice students in favour of more equivalence/translation-oriented

concerns, memorizing and note-taking skills, but are key to the success of

CI, and as such should not be overlooked or underestimated when teaching

basic CI techniques.

2.2. An effort-based approach

The efforts modelfirst introduced by Gile is a comprehensive model forboth SI and CI, as well as on-sight and written translation, and has been

extensively developed in both areas, specifically by Fettig (2009) for CI.

Gile (1995:161) defines effortas some sort of mental energy that is only

available in limited supply. Interpretation takes up almost all of this mental

energy, and sometimes requires more than is available, at which times per-

formance deteriorates.

Like everyone else, students have a finite amount of cognitive reserves

that they can deploy at any one time, and resources must therefore be as-

signed in a rational way in order to resolve priority tasks rather than spreadingresources too thinly over both important elements and trivia alike and failing

to complete any of the attempted tasks correctly. The principle of judiciously

employing a finite capital, understood in terms of the total effortinvested at

any one time and on any one element, is extremely useful for making students

aware that less quantity can mean more and better quality. The corollary is

that students need to take charge of their own TT based on an analysis of the

ST in order to decide what can and should be discarded in order to be able

to transmit the core message, rather than embarking on a futile attempt to

mechanically remember and translate the ST in its entirety.At the very simple level of introductory training, the practical application

of the notion of effortcan be taken to mean that students should be taught how

to minimize cluttering by getting rid of any chaff which leads to unnecessary

D



4


13/24


depletion of the total available cognitive capital at any one time, in order to

focus on the basic two-step process of active listening (comprehension and

analysis) followed by the production phase. The concept of effortbecomes

a powerful tool for successful early-stage CI training when combined with

the minimax strategy, comparable to the scales and chords when learning

to play the piano. These techniques alone will not be enough to provide

professional-standard performance (analogous to becoming a concert pian-

ist), which requires that basic skills become second-nature through further

specialized training. Here, the minimax strategyis taken as the overarching

conceptual framework from which more specific tactical principles, such as

the principle of simplicity, derive. Lev (1967:1179) was the first to use the

term minimax strategy: the translator resolves for that one of the possible

solutions which promises a maximum of effect with a minimum effort. Thatis to say, he intuitively resolves for theminimaxstrategy.Although heused

the term in the context of written translation, the strategy has specific practical

benefits for interpreters who interact directly with the recipients of their TT.

Having to listen to even the most experienced SI interpreter can be tiring,

and this situation is aggravated in the case of CI where the interpreter has to

intervene and interrupt the natural flow of interaction between the two parties.

This renders the consecutive interpreter more vulnerable than the unseen

simultaneous interpreter, safely hidden away in the booth. Every interven-

tion (potentially perceived as an interruption) on the part of the consecutiveinterpreter runs the risk of antagonizing the audience. At the same time, it is

clear that the more interpreters say, the more likely they are to make mistakes,

including grammatical errors when working into their B language.

Ideally, therefore, the less often interpreters have to intervene and speak

while rendering the core of the ST accurately the better for both their own

self-preservation and for the speaker and the audience. Interpreters can be

seen as a necessary evil by parties who would, were it not for the language

barrier, prefer to be able to communicate among themselves without the need

for an extraneous intermediary. By reducing intervention to a minimum, theself-effacing interpreter can blend into the background of the interaction,

helping maintain the pretence of one-on-one communication between the

speaker and the target public, thus complying with the user-oriented principle

described above, whilst at the same time remaining loyal to the speaker.

At the pre-production level, i.e. during the processing phase prior to em-

barking on TT production, the key to a successful application of the minimax

strategy lies in paring the ST down to the bare bones (Alexieva 1998:185),

by getting rid of the non-essential information (Lambert 1986:794) in(Lambert 1986:794) inin

order to ensure that what is genuinely important is properly retained andtransmitted. Helping students break with the unproductive idea of trying to

memorize and relay the ST in extensoin order to focus on a more cognitive

approach based on ST comprehension, analysis and processing can be dif-

D



4


14/24


ficult. It is important to explain that, in many CI situations, the elimination

of secondary elements in order to capture the core of the message is often

imperative rather than expeditious, for at least one very practical reason: in

conference and other formal settings, the time allotted to speakers does not

as a rule make allowances for the time required for interpreting, so that all of

the time used up by the interpreter is, in effect, an encroachment on the time

available to the speaker. It should be borne in mind that although professional

interpreters should be able to provide a more complete rendition of the ST as

and when called upon to do so by any of the parties involved, what is being

taught at this stage is the basic techniques rather than professional-standard

specialization where novice students should aim to do the minimum well,

rather than trying to do the maximum shoddily. Nor should reduction within

the conceptual framework of the minimax strategy be taken to imply thatinterpreters are entitled to hack away at random at the ST. By contrast, it

means that the interpreter is not only entitled but indeed obliged to take full

responsibility for deciding what may need to be sacrificed based on his or

her perception of the needs of the audience at any moment in order to fulfil

the task of satisfying user expectations regarding the faithful transmission of

core contents and a smooth, convincing delivery. Once again, there is signifi-

cant overlap between this principle and the other key concepts underpinning

the overall approach, with successful deployment of the minimax strategy

depending on both a correct understanding of the ST and effective situationmanagement geared to the user-oriented approach described above.

As mentioned earlier, recall is another element of the CI equation that

often causes problems, with students complaining that they cannot remember

what was said. However, memory is seen as an addendum to rather than a

component of the basic two-step model, and efforts are directed to reducing

recall by focusing on what can be done within the scope of the basic concep-

tual model. Therefore, rather than specific drills to enhance memory, relying

on the successful deployment of the simple minimax strategy effectively

helps reduce the mnemonic burden, thereby reducing the effortinvested byavoiding unnecessary depletion of total cognitive capital available at any one

time. Or, to use a computing analogy, freeing up memory makes the whole

process run more smoothly. The more the interpreter can do by relying on

the first step of the inherently natural CI process of active listening (com-

prehension plus analysis), the easier the task will be, with the added bonus

of saving capacity to resolve any specific difficulties that may arise, whilst

at the same time helping to provide a more relaxed, natural delivery.

To sum up, it is preferable to lose accuracy when transmitting specific items,

such as numerical data, in order to maintain a clear, faithful and coherent basicmessage rather than vice versa. For example, in certain circumstances 72.8%

of the cases involved women as opposed the remaining 27.2% involving men

may be better rendered as the vast majority of cases affected women. This

D



4


15/24


would allow for smooth, confident delivery based on full understanding of the

content and mastery of production, and would be preferable to a failed attempt

to produce all of the figures exactly. Texts used for initial CI training should be

tailored to ensure that such processing is possible at the early learning stages.

Once the basics of the two-step model have been fully assimilated, mastered

and automated, this approach can be supplemented with note-taking to improve

accuracy as and when necessary.

While the minimax strategy provides the overall guiding rationale, two

other tactical principles can also be deployed to reduce the global effort

invested at any particular moment, with a view to avoiding wasteful deple-

tion of finite cognitive resources, namely: mobilizing knowledge and the

principle of simplicity.

2.3. Mobilizing knowledge

The concept of mobilizing knowledgeis akin to anticipation based on in-

ference, but unlike anticipation which takes place during the interpreting

process and is cued by linguistic, cognitive, situational and/or pragmatic

factors (Chernov 2004) knowledge mobilization takes place primarily

prior to the initiation of the ST output phase and is wholly semantic, in line

with the Factor Th (thematic factor) of cognitive inference (ibid.:74). For the

purpose of teaching at preparatory level, knowledge mobilization is more of

a brainstorming tool than a theoretical or descriptive notion. Unlike more

traditional tools of preparation, it relies not on external information sources,

but on what the interpreter already knows, thereby not only increasing the

actual knowledge base but also boosting self-confidence.

If an interpreter is lucky enough to be provided with even an outline of the

text to be interpreted and time enough to prepare it (Gile 1995:146-48), so much

the better. This, however, is not the case most of the time, at least in the con-

text of the highly specialized freelance Galizan market (Alonso Bacigalupe

2010:19) for which our students are primarily trained; one suspects that simi-

lar situations exist elsewhere. As texts are not always available, having thepotential to fill that gap is always useful. Developing a capacity to anticipate

is of key importance as it will inevitably lighten the burden of unexpected or

new information to be processed. Students are taught how to foresee what

is likely to be said prior to the interpreting itself, based exclusively on the

title/subject in combination with their own world knowledge or what Gile

refers to as: preexisting ELK [extralinguistic knowledge] (1995:85). On the

one hand, making their own world knowledge readily available and usable

(mobilization) provides students with a sense of self-confidence which helps

mitigate the apprehension that often hinders performance in the early stages

of interpreter training (Kuwahata 2005:173). More importantly, being able to

pre-empt what is to be interpreted effectively reduces the overall workload.

By having to work less over all, i.e. investing less effort (cognitive capital)

D



4


16/24


by reducing the amount of new information to be processed, retained and

transmitted, students are able to dedicate all of their attention to any seg-

ments or elements which require a greater effort to understand and process

correctly, thereby improving the overall quality of the interpretation. This

process also helps reduce the overall mnemonic burden (i.e. the volume of

new items that need to be remembered) by making students aware of what

they already know, and encouraging them to rely on their own knowledge

rather than trying to learn and retain new, extraneous knowledge. In other

words, the less students have to work by using up their limited supply of ef-

fortat any given time, the better they will be able to work when they really

need to. When asked to anticipate in this way, students often focus exclusively

on content. However, it is important to teach them that foreseeable textual

architecture is also very useful in anticipating important aspects of the textto be interpreted, with content and structure mutually interacting.7

In a practical exercise, one student is requested to prepare a coherent

short speech on a subject familiar to them in order to guarantee naturalness,

with the rest of the class then guided by the instructor to apply the deductive

knowledge mobilization process prior to the speech itself. This exercise is

based exclusively on the topic/title, in order to compare to what extent their

suppositions coincide with the actual text. A simple A-A consecutive can then

ensue as an introductory exercise. This exercise can be repeated until the

students feel comfortable with the concept, before moving on to applying itto simple, specially prepared texts. Students are guided from one idea to the

next and encouraged to organize content into blocs of ideas, which in turn

are organized in a logical way to create an overall structure. Finally, they

go on to perform a B-A consecutive. The important thing is not to proceed

necessarily in a linear order, but to be able to find pathways which enable

students to leap backwards and forwards among levels (structure, content,

vocabulary/translation) until they have exhausted all of the possibilities of

their own knowledge base, anticipating and therefore effectively avoiding

foreseeable difficulties.8

Knowledge mobilization should be seen as an ongoing process which

merges with the more traditional types of anticipation and inference once

the ST has been initiated, building upon students own knowledge base by

combining it with knowledge acquired from the text itself (Gile 1995:85).

Once again, this calls for active listening and processing in line with the

precepts of the thorie du sens as applied to CI (Gile 2003), as opposed to a

shallow approach geared to mimetic memorizing and translating. As such,

7A useful metaphor here involves the idea of planning a house, where the furnishingsrequired (content) depend largely on the way the space is divided and the functions al-

lotted to each space (structure).8A more detailed example of how this process is applied in practice to a text on AIDS

can be found in the Appendix.

D



4


17/24


mobilization is practised systematically prior to any CI exercise, moving

steadily from a slower teacher-guided approach to a quicker, autonomous

moment of reflection.

2.4. The principle of simplicity

Perhaps the most innovative aspect of the approach described involves the

emphasis placed on the principle of simplicity. Unlike the minimax strategy,

which serves as the overall rationale applied to the CI process as a whole, the

principle of simplicity is specific to the TT production phase, and involves

controlled output on the part of the trainee interpreter.

The key to a controlled and simplified production is a heightened sense

of self-awareness, and lessons should thus be used to allow students toexplore and determine their own limits and range of possibilities which

should not be overstepped when producing their TT. Although this would

be more obviously applicable to production in their B language, over which

they inevitably have less mastery, it is equally relevant to production in their

A language, where their tongue tends to run away with them. Interpreters

should be aware of their own limitations, with the classroom helping them

to both determine and to broaden their scope, especially when producing

their own discourse.

Keeping it simple and never overstepping the bounds of ones own cap-abilities by erring on the side of simplicity rather than running the risk of

becoming suddenly bogged down due to pointless over-elaboration is useful

for maintaining the tacit pact with the receivers of the TT. Interpreters can

reinforce the perception of themselves as trustworthy figures rather than a

potential source of annoyance by reducing their margin of error, whilst at the

same time providing a smoother production on the whole. This inevitably

entails a high degree of planning on the part of the interpreter, and students

should be continually warned to think ahead and plan not only what they

intend to say based on the comprehension and processing of the ST, but how

they are going to say it, avoiding unfamiliar lexicon and overly-complex

structures, as Ilg and Lambert note (1996:75):

In a CI course trainees need to focus on speech comprehension and

production, i.e. ways of enhancing active listening ..., and how to

organise ones thoughts in order to plan a convincing statement (to

chart, start, and finish, linguistically acceptable and meaningful

sentences).

During lessons, students should constantly be advised to know beforehand

where their sentences are going to end in order to avoid the frequent mistake

of trailing off, back-tracking and generally waffling at the end of segments

D



4


18/24


which may have already been fully and correctly transmitted.

Although basic training centres on B-A interpreting, because it is required

by the market as a basic technique, liaison interpreting is introduced at a later

stage. One of the problems encountered is that when actively using their B

language (in this case English), students often overstretch themselves by

assuming that they should be able to do things and express themselves in

ways which they are unable to do, at least within the pressing context of in-

terpreting, which does not afford them the benefit of time to consult external

sources such as dictionaries and grammars. One way of practising the ap-

proach described here in the classroom involves getting students to perform

CI drills based on apparently complex texts (again, newspaper articles are

useful) into languages with which they only have a basic but sufficient

working knowledge (C languages). In this case, planning is required inorder to identify very simple structures which are nonetheless capable of

conveying the basic message, resorting to hyponyms and avoiding any

structures which may be troublesome, for example irregular verbs, the use

of the subjunctive, relative and subordinate clauses, etc. Once this mindset

based on the principle of simplicity has been grasped and interiorized as a

useful and necessary strategy for C languages, it can profitably be applied

to the students main working languages (A and B).

The guiding concept of situation management described above is an

essential factor in determining how to apply the principle of simplicity

appropriately, and students should be reminded at all times of the context

within which they are operating, especially who they are translating for

within the framework of the user-oriented approach. For example, there is

greater leeway for simplification when there is the possibility of (semi-)direct

interpersonal interaction, including situations which involve interpreting

questions for a single listener (notably television or radio settings) and where

the interpreters main task is to ensure that the questions posed are clear and

answerable. Here, simplification might involve the following:

avoiding repetition of superfluous information about the TT receiver

which the latter already knows. This applies to information that could

easily be very conspicuously mistranslated, and is best replaced with

expressions such as: The presenter is now introducing you and going

over your list of published works;

eliminating or integrating statements by the person posing the question

into the question itself, especially in journalistic interviews where it

is more important for interviewees to be able to express their views

on the question posed rather than transmitting the question unclearly

amidst a muddled attempt to transmit the interviewers standpoint. For

example, a segment such as It has been suggested that W, X and Y...

What is your own view on Z? can potentially be reduced to: What is

D



4


19/24


your view on Z? if necessary, and depending upon the situation;9

refraining from translating complex details which are likely to be

transmitted inaccurately and incompletely and which the public can

access from alternative sources in a more convenient manner, e.g. long

lists of programme changes, including the names of foreign speakers,room numbers, times, titles, etc., can all be adequately rendered as:

Changes have been made to the programme. For more details please

do not hesitate to enquire, or even more simply as: Please ask at the

information desk.

Situations such as these are repeated and altered until students learn to

become autonomous and take full responsibility for the way they decide to

handle each event.

Having achieved a command of the basics and feeling the need to go fur-ther, one question often raised by students and which needs to be addressed

is whether simplification of this kind is ethical. On the pragmatic level, it is

a truism that would-be interpreters should only attempt to do what they can

do well, and should avoid biting off more than they can chew: knowing and

staying within ones limits, providing a clear, simplified account is always

preferable to a muddled attempt at a more complete one, especially at the

initial training stage dealt with here. The more they progress, the more their

limits will expand, although concision and simplicity always remain values

to be aspired to. This assumes that trainees must be capable of performing

the basic tasks with a sufficient mastery of their A and B languages for both

aural comprehension and oral expression, which is a fair assumption to make

for third-year undergraduate students. If, however, these skills are deficient,

students must take it upon themselves to improve matters or alternatively

resign themselves to being unable to interpret properly. If simplification is

a result of a conscious decision on the part of the interpreter based on text

management (i.e. not just due to a fault in the comprehension/processing

phase) and situation management (tailored to the needs of the public), thennot only is it deontologically acceptable, but for the reasons described above,

it is legitimate and integral to the CI process, to a greater or lesser extent

depending on the exact context when applied professionally. Within this

model, the concept of simplicity is intimately bound with the user-oriented

approach, with the interpreter paid to provide a quality of service that is defin-

able, according to this model, as fitness for purpose, meaning that quality

is deemed to have been attained if the intended purpose has been fulfilled or

when the customers expectations have been satisfied (Grbi 2008:247).

9Whether or not any given segment or item is considered irrelevant or less relevant

will depend on the situation. The onus is on the interpreter to decide which elements are

irrelevant or otherwise, based on the factors described, i.e. not only the ST, but also the

perceived needs of the receivers of the TT as well as time constraints.

D



4


20/24


As we have already seen, especially at the introductory level, in many

cases simplification is not only necessary, but also desirable and integral to

the CI process itself. To what extent translators and interpreters are ethically

entitled to simplify at any given moment depends on a sense of responsibil-

ity (Pym 1997:67-82), not only towards the ST (assumed by the receiver

to be correct in content unless suggested otherwise by faulty delivery) but

primarily towards the client, and towards themselves, since it is in the inter-

est of their own self-preservation not to overstretch and expose themselves

to unnecessary vulnerability.

3. Concluding remarks

It may seem strange that little mention has so far been made of what novicestudents often see as the crux of successful CI. However, relegating the issue

of note-taking to a final aside mirrors the rationale behind the way note-taking

is dealt with within the wider methodological framework.

While little consensus exists among scholars (Ilg and Lambert 1996:78),

there nevertheless seems to be a trend to ascribe a central role to the system-

atic teaching of note-taking as an essential training skill for CI. As a case in

point, despite repeatedly stating that [t]he essential part of a consecutive

interpreters work is done in analysis, re-expression (Jones 1998:43-70),

the same author goes on to dedicate almost half of the space devoted to CIin his volume to questions related to note-taking, as compared with a much

more varied approach to SI in the same book. However, experience has

shown that while notes can be a helpful tool for more experienced interpret-

ers who already have a full and automated grasp of the basic tasks required

of them, for the novice who has not yet mastered the basic tasks of process-

ing (understanding and analyzing the ST) and reformulating (producing

the TT), note-taking can represent an additional effort, detracting from the

main task in hand (Jones 1998:43) and becoming a hindrance rather than a

aid. For this reason I fully agree with Ilg and Lambert (1996:75) that note-taking explanations and demonstrations should come as late as possible in

the curriculum.

In the current approach, note-taking is forbidden in the initial stages in

order to ensure that students focus on the key process of understanding,

analyzing and reducing the mnemonic load. At a midpoint stage, note-taking

begins to appear naturally as the students become more familiar with their

main task and is then dealt with in very basic terms (clarity, structure, etc.).10

Once notes are permitted, it should be stressed that, while good note-taking

10While the training is essentially oriented towards interpreting practice, basic theoret-

ical notions should be introduced in order for students to appreciate the rationale behind

what they are being taught, with recommended reading of key authors and concepts

discussed in class.

D



4


21/24


can be useful, bad note-taking is worse than no note-taking, and attempts

should be made to keep notes to an absolute minimum. As Ilg and Lambert

argue (1996:78),

Note-taking is no more than a means to help overcome memorys

short-comings and could be likened to a crutch. Its use should

therefore be restricted to the kind of information which is not easily

stored and retrieved from memory, that is structural aspects of a text,

characteristic details (facts, figures, names) and deliberate nuances.

Drawing on Giles efforts model reduces the mnemonic load via the ap-

plication of the minimax strategy in the form of the principle of simplicity,

which makes note-taking unnecessary for the basic training phase discussed.

Note-taking is only allowed once the basics have been fully grasped, and

is only ever used as an aid to improve the process, never substituting it or

distracting trainees from the true task in hand. The onus is on students to

judge the situation in order to take full responsibility for their decisions,

with a view to ensuring that the TT responds to the perceived expectations

of their target audience, described in terms of user-oriented situation and

text management.

Finally, the success of preparatory courses such as this should not be

gauged in terms of whether students provide professionally acceptable in-

terpretations, but in terms of the extent to which they become familiar with

the situation in which they operate and are able to take a fully proactive role:

they are taught not to interpret, but to think and act like interpreters. Having

acquired and fully automated the basic skills and attitude required, students

are then equipped to go on to make the leap to professional-standard inter-

preting by attending specialized courses.

ROBERT

Gabinete C38, Faculdade de Filoloxa e Traducin, Universidade de Vigo,E-36200 Vigo, Galiza, Spain. [email protected]

References

Albl-Mikasa, Michaela (2008) (Non-)Sense in Note-taking for Consecutive

Interpreting,Interpreting10(2) : 197-231.

Alexieva, Bistra(1998) Consecutive Interpreting as a Decision Process, in Ann

Beylard-Ozeroff, Jana Krlovand Barbara Moser-Mercer (eds) Transla-

tors Strategies and Creativity, Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins,181-88.

Alonso Bacigalupe, Luis (1999) Metodologa de iniciacin a la interpretacin

simultnea,Perspectives: Studies in Translatology7(2): 253-63.------ (2005)Pedagoga de la interpretacin: investigacin emprica sobre per-

NEAL BAXTER

D



4


22/24


cepcin de estudiantes, Sendebar16: 193-217.

------ (2009) El procesamiento de la informacin durante la interpretacin

simultnea: un modelo a tres niveles, Granada: Atrio.

------ (2010) O mercado profesional da traducin e a interpretacin, in Luis

Alonso Bacigalupe (ed.)Insercin profesional d@s estudantes de traducine interpretacin, Granada: Atrio, 13-25.

Arum Ribas, Marta (2010) Redefinir la enseanza-aprendizaje de la inter-

pretacin en el marco del EEES: Propuestas en un contexto de cambio,Redit,

Revista Electrnica de Didctica de la Traduccin y la Interpretacin4 : 42-62.

Available at http://www.redit.uma.es/Archiv/n4/mono_ArumiRibas_redit4.pdf

(accessed 30 December 2011).

Bowen, David and Margareta Bowen (1980/1984) Steps to Consecutive Inter-

preting, Pen Booth: Washington

Baxter, Robert Neal (2008)Proxecto docente, Unpublished manuscript, Vigo:Universidade de Vigo.

ekov, Ivana (1998) Quality of Interpreting A Binding or a LiberatingFactor?, in Ann Beylard-Ozeroff, Jana Krlov and Barbara Moser-Mercer(eds) Translators Strategies and Creativity, Amsterdam & Philadelphia:

John Benjamins, 163-70.

Chernov, Ghelly Vasilievitch (2004)Inference and Anticipation in Simultaneous

Interpreting: A Probability-Prediction Model, Amsterdam & Philadelphia:Amsterdam & Philadelphia:

John Benjamins.

Djean Le Fal, Karla (1990) Some Thoughts on the Evaluation of Simultane-

ous Interpretation, in David Bowen and Margareta Bowen (eds)Bowen and Margareta Bowen (eds)(eds)Interpreting

Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow, Binghamton: SUNY, 154-60.

------ (2002) La thorie du sens au banc dessai, in Fortunato Isral (ed.)

Identit, altrit, quivalence ? La traduction comme relation, Paris & Caen :

Lettres Modernes Minard, 145-56.

European Commission (2005) Towards a European Qualifications Framework

for Lifelong Learning, Brussels: Commission of the European Communities.

Available at http://ec.europa.eu/education/policies/2010/doc/consultation_

eqf_en.pdf (accessed 30 December 2011).

Fettig, Daniela (2009) Giles Effort Model fr das Konsekutivdolmetschen, Mu-nich: GRIN Verlag.

Gile, Daniel (1995)Basic Concepts and Models for Interpreter and Translator

Training, Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

----- (2003) Justifying the Deverbalisation Approach in the Interpreting and

Translation Classroom,Forum1(2): 47-63.

Grbi, Nadja (2008) Constructing Interpreting Quality, Interpreting10(2) :232-57.

Ilg, Gerard and Sylvie Lambert (1996) Teaching Consecutive Interpreting,

Interpreting1(1): 69-99.Iliescu Gheorgiu, Catalina (2001)Introduccin a la interpretacin. La modalidad

consecutiva, Alicante: Publicaciones de la Universidad de Alicante.

Jones, Roderick (1998) Conference Interpreting Explained, Manchester: St

Jerome.

D



4


23/24


Kurz, Ingrid (2001) Conference Interpreting: Quality in the Ears of the User,Meta46(2): 394-409.

Kuwahata, Minako (2005) Sink or Swim: Five Basic Strokes to E-J Consecutive

Interpreting,Interpretation Studies 5: 173-81.

Lambert, Sylvie (1986) Approche cognitive de la traduction conscutive,in Alain Giacomi and Veroneque Daniel (eds) Acquisition dune langue

trangre. Perspectives et recherches, Universit de Provence: Aix-en-

Provence, 791-805.

Lev, Ji (1967) Translation as a Decision Making Process, in To Honor Ro-man Jakobson. Essays on the Occasion of his Seventieth Birthday, Vol. II,

The Hague & Paris: Mouton, 1171-82.

Moser, Peter (1996) Expectations of Users of Conference Interpretation, In-

terpreting1(2): 145-78.

Nolan, James (2005)Interpretation Techniques and Exercises, Clevedon: Mul-tilingual Matters.

Pym, Anthony (1997)Pour une thique du traducteur, Ottawa : Artois Presses

Universit & Presses de lUniversit de Ottawa.

Russell, Debra L. (2005) Consecutive and Simultaneous Interpreting, in Terry

Janzen (ed.) Topics in Signed Language Interpreting: Theory and Practice,

Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 135-64.

------, Risa Shaw and Karen Malcolm (2010) Effective Strategies for Teaching

Consecutive Interpreting,International Journal of Interpreter Education 2.

Available at http://www.cit-asl.org/Journal/2010_Vol2/Russell-abstract.html(accessed 30 December 2011).

Seleskovitch, Danica (1975)Langage, langues et mmoire. Etude de la prise de

notes en interprtation conscutive, Paris: Minard.

------ and Marianne Lederer (1989) Pdagogie raisonne de linterprtation,

Paris:Didier Erudition.

D



4


24/24


APPENDIX

A schematic example of how the mobilization of knowledge as a preparatory

exercise can be applied to a text on the subject of AIDS.

The order is unimportant: what is essential is to seek as many pathways

as possible to move between levels, hopping from one element to the next

until as a complete a structure as possible is formed.

Trigger Reflection Level

Subject What type of subject is it? Medical Structure(useful for other structural

deductions)

Subject/Title What does AIDS stand for?Acquired Human Immune Defi-ciency Syndrome

Therefore it affects the ImmuneSystem.

How is this translated in the target

language?

What is a syndrome? Look it up.

Vocabulary/Translation

AIDS Related acronyms, etc.? HIV

What does it stand for?How do I translate it?

Content


Subject/Title How can I start?Definition: Say what AIDS standsfor.

Perhaps a historical introduction:

when was it first detected?Use lateral pathways, e.g. When was

the film Philadelphia set?

Syndrome Symptoms

Use this as a heading for a sectionideal for a medical text.

Structure

Symptoms What other sorts of headings (i.e. struc-tural subsections) go with this?

Treatment; Transmission;Prevention

Structure

Headings Organize sections into a logical or-der

Headings Fill each structure with content, e.g.

how is it transmitted, who does itaffect and why?Translations for syringe, blood

transfusion, etc.

Content


D



4

A Multi-model Approach to Consecutive Interpreting (2012)

Documents

Transcript of A Multi-model Approach to Consecutive Interpreting (2012)