Consecutive Interpreting - Newcastle University ePrints

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License

Newcastle University ePrints - eprint.ncl.ac.uk

Jin Y. Consecutive Interpreting. In: Shei C; Gao Z-M, ed. The Routledge

Handbook of Chinese Translation. London: Routledge, 2018, pp.321-335.

Copyright:

This is an Accepted Manuscript of a book chapter published by Routledge in The Routledge Handbook of

Chinese Translation on 18 October 2017, available online: https://www.routledge.com/The-Routledge-

Handbook-of-Chinese-Translation/Shei-Gao/p/book/9781138938267

Date deposited:

23/10/2017

Embargo release date:

18 April 2019

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/deed.en_GB

http://eprint.ncl.ac.uk/

https://myimpact.ncl.ac.uk/ViewPublication.aspx?id=242356

https://www.routledge.com/The-Routledge-Handbook-of-Chinese-Translation/Shei-Gao/p/book/9781138938267

https://www.routledge.com/The-Routledge-Handbook-of-Chinese-Translation/Shei-Gao/p/book/9781138938267

Chapter 19. Consecutive interpreting in The Routledge Handbook of Chinese Translation

1

Consecutive Interpreting

Yashyuan Jin (Michael)

Newcastle University

Introduction

Consecutive interpreting is a versatile form of verbal translation between languages. With or without

taking notes, an interpreter begins to deliver messages in a target language when a speaker pauses

his/her speech or conversation. It was the default interpreting service in the United Nations before

technology became available to enable SI in 1927 (Flerov 2013). Although CI has become less central

in conferences and meetings of larger scale, it still is in demand elsewhere, mainly due to its lower

technological requirements than SI. It is practised by professional as well as non-professional

interpreters with limited training and proficiency, such as interpreters in conflict zones (Baker 2010).

Different user groups in different settings naturally have different needs and expectations from their

interpreters from different training backgrounds. Andrè Kaminker was said to receive rounds of

applause after virtuoso CI for an hour without taking any notes (Jalón 2004: 46). However, most

interpreters’ memory can be seriously stretched when note-taking is prohibited or discouraged for

reasons of confidentiality. Among other things, the requirement for an interpreter to mediate but not

dominate or guide communication, to take notes while a speaker delivers a speech at speed, to read

the notes while planning a target-language (TL) version on the fly, and to be economical with words

without losing the intended impact on end users all create challenges in practice, training (Sawyer

2004) and research.

Modern-day practice of CI

The exponential increase in new BA and MA programmes in interpreting (Wang and Mu 2009)

reflects its recognised status as an autonomous discipline in academia (Xu 2014) and also reflects the

market demand for quality interpreters and translators. The market expanded from high officials

meetings to international conferences of all specialities and fairs of all kinds in the MICE (Meetings,

Incentives, Conferences and Exhibitions) industry. Shanghai topped the first-tier cities by hosting 382

international fairs in 2015, 15% of the total in China (中国国际贸易促进委员会 2016). Notably, the

‘One Belt and One Road Initiative’ led to nearly 40% of total overseas exhibitions being hosted in

countries along the belt and road (ibid.). Private meetings and visits, associated with MICE events or

not, form the lion’s share of a market which demands top-rate services (Setton & Dawrant 2016b; 贺

莉丹 2004) which test interpreters’ CI more than their SI skills. In addition, the current demand for

public service interpreting in China is on the rise too (Zeng and Zhang 2014). It stands to reason that

one common skillset sought in an increasingly specialised and diversified market is a combination of

extra-linguistic skills and CI in both dialogic and conference modes.

Training Chinese Interpreters

There were fifteen newly approved MTI (MA in T&I) programmes in 2007, nineteen new BTI (BA in

T&I) in 2009, and altogether there are now (Autumn 2016) about 206 higher-education institutions in

China that offer MTI degrees (Tao 2016). The scale and speed of development are unrivalled in nearly

all Chinese-speaking regions. Elsewhere in the world, a notable on-going increase in translation or

interpreting MA programmes is in the UK. A comparison of postgraduate degree programmes of

translation or interpreting listed in the UKPASS website shows an increase from 85 programmes

across 37 institutions in 2012 (Graham 2012) to 131 across 40 institutions in 2016. Some new

programmes have been established in universities which had never previously offered them, and some

are new additions of language strands (particularly Chinese) to existing MTI degree programmes. A

few of them show clear specialisation, for example, Business Translation with Interpreting at Bath,


2

Strathclyde and Surrey. The cohort of students wishing to enrol, however, shows no sign of shrinking.

Despite the increase in total trainee interpreters, it is believed that a big gap still exists between the

demand and the supply of proficient interpreters (Tao 2016). To fill this gap, general challenges have

been identified (Sawyer 2004), and shifts of teaching philosophy have been proposed (for example,

topic-based to skill-based teaching, teacher-centred to student-centred approach, behaviourism to

constructivism) (Wang and Mu 2009; Tao 2016). These shifts will be discussed next together with

recommendations specific to CI training and learning.

Pedagogy and curricula design

When training schools have been founded in European countries, the general principles and standards

set by the AIIC have largely been followed, unless a programme has a clear target market or client,

such as UN staff interpreters. For example, in the late 1970s, selected trainees at the Beijing Institute

for Foreign Languages only spent 360 hours on CI, but 1440 hours on SI exercises (Jalón 2004).

Currently, in the majority of MTI programmes worldwide, CI is a compulsory module which lasts the

full length of a degree course, and it is usually taught (alongside Sight Translation) before SI, for

compelling reasons (Setton and Dawrant 2016b: 83). Typically, CI or SI would require four stages

(Initiation, Coordination, Experimentation, Consolidation) for students to progress and acquire the

necessary skills in a two-year programme (ibid.: 78). Faced with ever changing market needs and

resource availability, modules organised around topics will not work, and instead “the curriculum

must focus on skills training” (ibid.: 529). It is recommended that at least 800 hours of training and

practice (contact hours, group work and self-directed learning) are required for a learner to become

market-ready.

Shift from Theme-based to Skill-based CI training

An independent professional interpreter is equipped with an array of skills (Setton and Dawrant

2016b: 80) in addition to superb language proficiency. To meet the challenge of producing

interpreters who can adapt to the fast-changing world, traditional theme-based training has gradually

given way to a more systematic approach. Limited class contact hours have to be ‘protected’ and

devoted to skill development, whereas knowledge acquisition should be part of students’ daily routine

outside their classes. This makes it easier for trainers to set milestones and monitor students’ progress.

Despite the shift away from a theme-based curriculum, training materials should cover general as well

as topical subjects. Re-positioning trainee interpreters as semi-professional (Tao 2012) and

intercultural consultants is conducive to a switch of mentality from a linguist to an all-round

communication specialist.

Key skills at each stage of CI training

Active Listening

“Learning to interpret begins with learning how to listen effectively” (Setton and Dawrant 2016a: 82).

During the Initiation stage, trainees must be made aware of the difference between and relevance of

passive listening and active listening in the first four to five weeks of training. By practising exercises

such as Idiomatic Gist, Listening Cloze, Discourse Modelling, Outlining and Compression (Setton

and Dawrant 2016a: Chapter 4), active listening should gradually become trainees’ default listening

mode. Similar exercises were proposed by Gillies (2005), but in that case, students model a written,

rather than a spoken discourse at the beginning. The lesser time pressure of Gillies’s exercise makes it

suitable for trainers to demonstrate the procedure of spoken discourse modelling, and also for students

to become familiar with the procedure before taking on the more challenging spoken discourse

modelling.

Public Speaking


3

Public speaking is another key skill to be introduced and practised at the Initiation stage: “A good

interpreter must be a trained public speaker” (Herbert 1952: 59). Very often, students are not briefed

adequately about the relevance of public speaking exercises, particularly when they are asked to

compose and deliver semi-prepared speeches. The benefit of public speaking training is

predominantly associated with better verbal and non-verbal presentation. The value of public speaking

exercises, however, also lies in training in conducting the appropriate ‘background work.’ Well-

selected example speeches on various topics can illustrate different types and purposes of public

speeches. To meet these different purposes, these talks might be opened, elaborated and concluded

very differently in style and rhetoric (consider, for example, Aristotle’s three appeals of argument).

Because speakers give talks to make a point, any point made, the way the points are connected or

sign-posted, together with their supporting information, should reach the listeners who rely on the

interpretation service. By practising active listening (to get the point) and delivering semi-prepared

speeches (to make a point), the keywords, connectives and phrases captured in an outlining exercise

could seamlessly become part of students’ note-taking system.

Right at the beginning of CI training, it cannot be stressed enough that active listening and the

contextualisation which supports comprehension are impossible without a solid knowledge base.

Seleskovitch (1989: 69-72) used the word ‘alone’ in an example speech to illustrate why the speaker

deliberately chose this word, the historical episode associated with the word, and how the single word

can help interpreters to pack in information for later interpretation. When an interpreter is not aware

of a referred episode, his/her interpretation can sound dry and often out of context. Therefore,

carrying out exercises on active listening or public speaking without any background knowledge is a

futile effort, and it has been a leading cause of students’ frustration.

Short CI without notes

After the Initiation stage come the Coordination of and Experimentation with individual skills.

Appropriate materials for these stages include monologue and lively dialogues with a duration of

between ten seconds and ninety seconds (Setton and Dawrant 2016b). By using relatively short and

engaging dialogues, it is easier for students to focus on the sense, not the wording. As the training

materials are relatively short, messages are not intentionally memorised and then retrieved (Baxter

2012), so trainers’ and students’ discussion points will most likely fall within the domain of accuracy

or precision, keeping the learning objectives clear. A similar rationale behind using short and lively

material can be seen in Baxter’s argument where CI is a “natural” process (ibid.: 23) and a task which

“people perform regularly” (ibid.: 24). Understandably, the longer the source text (ST) becomes, the

more likely there is to be secondary information lurking around and luring beginners to attempt the

“relay of the ST in extenso” (ibid.: 32). At this stage, students should be reassured that they should

“aim to do the minimum well, rather than trying to do the maximum shoddily” (ibid.: 33). The stages

of coordination and experimentation give the trainer and students the best window of opportunity to

spot areas for improvement in their rendition (Setton and Dawrant 2016a: 121-122) and in public

speaking.

CI with notes

The mechanism of the interference of note-taking during the comprehension phase of CI is not fully

understood, but its prevalence and persistence are typical after note-taking has been introduced to CI

classes. This frustrates many students who misconceive CI as an exercise to display memory power

and note-taking brilliance. Despite their frustration, it is not uncommon for interpreting trainers to

receive open comments in a module survey in which students demand even earlier introduction and

hands-on practice of note-taking. Dispelling the urban myth is not made easier when CI textbooks

often devote a considerable amount of their space to illustrating CI notes for speeches on various

topics. Although many students view the note-taking demonstration in books or in action as a gift

bestowed only on a few, a more constructive perspective should be offered at the beginning of this

stage, which is that notes are traces which mark individual interpreters’ thinking styles and analytical

skills. Before students have “a full and automated grasp of the basic tasks require of them …, note-


4

taking can represent an additional effort … a hindrance rather than an aid.” For this reason, “note-

taking explanations and demonstrations should come as late as possible in the curriculum” (Baxter

2012: 39). And even after note-taking has been officially introduced to CI classes, it is advisable for

trainers to offer timely reminders of the pivotal skill of active listening whenever there are signs of an

inadequate grasp of the ST discourse structure and key points. In fact, CI without notes (or without

looking at them after they have been taken), as a diagnostic tool, can be brought back into classes to

expose hidden problems, and “force a retreat from the words back to the message and point of the

speech” (Setton and Dawrant 2016b: 181).

One way of defining CI note-taking as a skillset is describing what it is and what it is not. When a set

of notes is a product of an operation following general principles (Setton and Dawrant 2016a: 137),

they are “structured and condensed idea-by-idea recall cues for the meaning, reflecting the

interpreter’s analysis of the speech and support the interpreter’s memory” (ibid.: 139). This skillset

cannot be developed or discussed independent of interpreters’ knowledge base and language

proficiency. The word ‘alone’ in Seleskovitch’s (1989) example conjures up different episodes in

listeners’ long-term memory. For those without knowledge of the referent (Russia), it is nothing more

than an adverb, whereas for those who are versed in modern history, ‘alone’ could get one to rumble

on. The opposite is also true; episodes familiar to an interpreter need not take up too much space in a

notepad, whereas fresh information would require numerous triggers to support memory. With

adequate preparation, capturing most effective cues at the best timing is achievable under excellent

guidance and systematic training (see Rozan 1956; Ilg and Lambert 1996; Liu 2008; Ficchi 1999;

Setton and Dawrant 2016a, b).

Challenges specific to CI from and into Chinese

The impact of directionality has been explored in sight translation (Chang 2011) and in SI (Chang and

Schallert 2007), but under-explored in CI. This is perhaps because the processing cost which incurs in

SI due to the asymmetry at different levels between Chinese and an interpreter’s other working

language (English in most cases) may be offset by lesser time pressure on TL re-expression in CI.

This is an over-simplistic postulation because the processing of speech production is not automatic or

cost-free. Interpreters’ CI delivery is further complicated by a ‘hidden force’ (the priming effect) and

interpreting tactics. In the vast literature on the priming effect, syntactic structures shared between

languages have been found to increase the probability of their reuse in speech production after

participants have heard or produced a particular construction, for example, passive construction in

Chen et al. (2013). The structural priming effect across languages in a sentence translation task shows

that participants have preserved the source-language (SL) grammatical structure and repeated the

order of thematic roles in the TL output (Maier, Pickering and Hartsuiker 2016). Furthermore, this

effect has been shown to be persistent across ten intervening trials (Bock et al. 2007), implying that in

CI, SL grammatical structures could still bias the choice of grammatical form in a TL when the ST

stretch of speech is more than ten sentences. There are other boosting factors in the priming effect

literature. For example, when the verbs are the same in a prime and its target sentences, the priming

effect is stronger. In interpreting or translation, the verbs are identical (or nearly identical) in SL and

TL, potentially driving up the influence of the SL syntactic structure. Another boosting effect is

expected (not empirically tested yet) from note-taking in CI. In nearly all priming studies, participants

are not allowed to take notes. The observed priming effect in the literature comes principally from

their mental representation of heard or uttered sentences. But when note-taking is allowed, the mental

representation could be further consolidated, boosting the priming effect, and promoting the form-

based interpretation. Take ‘The banker was fined £20,000 by the FCA’ for instance; interpreters might

take down ‘banker 20000 FCA’ as their memory triggers. As the thematic roles of ‘banker’ and ‘FCA’

appear in the same order in the note as in the SL sentence, it is more likely for the same order of

thematic role to repeat in the TL sentence than otherwise, that is, ‘那个银行家被金融行为监管局罚

了两万英镑’, rather than ‘金融监管局罚了那个银行家两万英镑.’ Contrastive studies of passive

constructions in English and Chinese have shown that Chinese passives denote unpleasant or

undesirable consequences more often than English passives (Xiao, McEnery and Qian 2006; Chen et


5

al. 2013). Although this justifies the passive construction in this particular example, direct mapping of

the passive voice of some English sentences onto their Chinese equivalents can produce awkward

results. Take ‘How do you want to be remembered?’ as an example, its interpretation ‘你希望如何被

記得?’ as one variant of passive construction in Chinese is certainly not as idiomatic as its active

alternative ‘你希望別人怎麼記住你?’ or ‘你希望給人留下什麼印象?’.

Direct mapping between languages can be explained, at least partially, by the priming effect. Note

that the implication and influence of the priming effect on CI output are also dependent on other

factors at different stages of the task: the way sentences are analysed, noted and utilised by

interpreters. The less verbatim in form and order the notes appear, in comparison with those of the ST,

the less likely an interpreter would be to come under the influence of the ST priming. This conjecture

remains to be tested, but it already has support in the priming literature. Due to the incremental nature

of speech comprehension, interpreters normally take down notes for the elements in the same order as

they appear in ST, for example, ‘纽卡司尔的冬天, 我听说每天下雨, 风也很大’ can be noted as

‘NCL 冬雨/d W!’. This topic-comment construction is typical of Mandarin Chinese, highlighted by

Setton (1993) as one of the most notable features of non-Indo-European languages. Setton argued that

this construction “reflects traditional conventions in communication in which the theme … is first

established and explored before the ‘predicate’ or ‘rheme’ i.e. decisions and actions, are addressed”

(ibid.: 247). When it comes to note reading in preparation for CI into English, beginners often struggle

to break away from their notes. In particular, they would read their notes from left to right, like they

would a sentence. As a result, they often deliver sentences which show exact word-for-word mapping

from the notes onto the interpretation; for example, In Newcastle, in winter, it rains every day and it’s

windy. This problem can be addressed by having the rheme of the sentence ‘雨/d W’ marked during

note-taking. This can guide students’ gaze to fall on the item ‘雨/d W’ when they read their notes

before beginning their TL construction. To combat the differences between English, Chinese and

Japanese, Setton believed that a radical form of paraphrase is helpful; for example, “requiring students

to present the ideas, content or argument of the original in the reverse sequence” (ibid.: 251).

The challenges associated with the differences between Chinese and Indo-European languages are not

confined to their linguistic domains. It is more likely for novice interpreters to deal with formal

discourse in Chinese (Setton 1993) than their European counterparts. At the same time, Chinese

students “do not recognise or sense the ‘logic’ in Indo-European discourse as spontaneously as

European students do” (ibid.: 251). To address the language- and culture-specific challenges in

interpreting into and from Chinese, students have to develop a better cross-cultural competence in

addition to their linguistic competence.

Student-centred learning in the paradigm shift

The apprenticeship approach to interpreting training has historical roots and was actually supported by

AIIC (Orlando 2016). But this ‘transmissionist’ tradition has gradually shown its limitation in the face

of multiple challenges, for example, “education that develops the necessary competences to perform

well in the job market; and training that guarantees autonomous, multi-purpose and continuous or

lifelong learning which can be adapted to a constantly changing world” (Albir 2007: 164). Above all,

the main driving forces of the shift to a more student-centred approach are the notions of social

constructivism and translator competence (Kiraly 2000). In the context of translation, the teacher’s

role is that of a facilitator who guides students’ autonomous and collaborative exploration of the

translation process (González-Davies and Enríquez-Raído 2016; Ficchi 1999). Successful

implementation of a constructive model in translator training has been reported (Tao 2012) at Fudan

University, where key translator competence is developed by carrying out the following tasks: task-

based reading and group discussion; skills-based translation workshop, and project-based translation

practice. With the advancement of technology, time became ripe for bold experimentation, such as the

Digital Pen (Orlando 2014; Jin 2015), the Virtual Institute (Motta 2016) and Google tools for

translation projects (Prieto-Velasco and Fuentes-Luque 2016). Mock conferences and internships are


6

also increasingly integral to MTI curricula (Li 2015; Chouc and Conde 2016), echoing the

recommendations made by Pöchhacker (1991: 219).

Critical Issues and Topics

CI arguably has the longest history among modes of interpreting, but nevertheless our current

understanding of the operational mechanism of CI is very limited. Whereas similar conclusions can

apply effectively to many other emerging areas of study, it is imperative for the hurdles in the

interpreting studies of CI to be identified. Some key issues, including frameworks within which

interpreting is studied, have been highlighted and discussed in depth (Moser-Mercer 2011;

Pöchhacker 2011, 2009, 2013; Shlesinger 1995), but others appear to have received lighter treatment.

What follows is a selective review of the key concepts that warrant revisits or refining, as they will

continue to guide CI training and research.

Memory – what memory?

One of the greatest challenges in advancing knowledge is formulating testable research questions. The

testability of these questions, the researchers’ understanding and the sophistication of existing

knowledge combined can determine how far the research findings can be generalised and the extent to

which existing knowledge can be updated. Since ‘completeness’ is a crucial element in interpreting

assessment (Kurz 2001) in general, and in CI particular, any data-driven or theory-driven model must

define and specify memory, its operation and its performance adequately.

Working memory has regularly appeared in the literature of interpreting research since the 1970s.

It is an evolving construct (Miyake and Shah 1999) which is as influential as it is controversial

(Baddeley 2003). The theoretical implication of memory in general, and working memory in

particular, to interpreting has been somewhat intuitive but plausible. This is because constant

decoding, recoding and temporary storage of accessed knowledge in almost all modes of interpreting

is a process reminiscent of the operational definition of working memory: a work space with limited

capacity that can handle information processing and temporary storage. Specifically, speech analysis

and memorisation in prose recall bear a remarkable resemblance to what interpreters seem to be doing

in CI without note-taking. But resemblance surely does not imply shared mechanisms. There have

been lively debates on task decomposability of SI (Setton 2001) and on SI aptitude as the sum of key

component skills. Similarly, a few critical questions can be asked of CI: is the memory the memories

discussed, engaged, and tested in tasks reported in interpreting literature vis-à-vis psychological

research? Is there strong evidence to suggest that memory is trainable and that the training effect is

actually transferrable to CI, and if so, to what extent?

CI taxes interpreters’ memory capacity very heavily. This is reflected in CI modelling (Gile 2009) and

psychological research in prose retention (Baddeley 1999), both of which can be taken to attest to the

challenge of CI when note-taking is not allowed. Understandably, the phenomenal CI performance of

Kaminker is therefore all the more awe-inspiring, but at the same time it can reinforce the idea that

formidable memory power is one of or even the prerequisite of CI. Perhaps inadvertently, this

impression is driving the way that CI-related topics are discussed and researched. For instance,

memory and comprehension were often discussed separately in textbooks until the processing aspect

of memory became more recognised in interpreting studies. This is surprising, because the intimate

link between comprehension and memory was proposed quite a while ago in psychology (Kintsch

1988; Kintsch and van Dijk 1978; also see Mackintosh 1985). In interpreting studies, Seleskovitch

(1998) was one of the first, and is still among very few, to discuss memory in the context of

comprehension, suggesting that “substantive memory is a function of comprehension …

comprehension is synonymous with retention” (ibid.: 32). Although this argument has not been

empirically tested, it is psychologically plausible and indeed has been proposed elsewhere (Craik and

Lockhart 1972). Additionally, rote learning (verbatim memory) is not the type of memory interpreters


7

should or can rely on because of the limit of short-term memory to two seconds or four chunks

(Cowan 2001). On the contrary, some variants of working memory measures (English listening span

and Chinese speaking span) appear to play bigger roles in English-Chinese CI (Cai and Dong 2012).

In other words, it is also the capacity to process information, not just to store it, that matters. A recent

correlational study (Cai et al. 2015) supported the role of working memory in English-Chinese CI,

even though only L2 proficiency was found to account for the variance in CI competence

development, that is, the progress made after an academic year.

Even if it is the skill to store information or to learn verbatim that matters in CI, what is proposed to

improve memory does not necessarily enlarge domain-general memory capacity per se. Rather, it is a

set of mnemonic strategies which structure information in such ways that they alleviate the burden on

working memory. For example, the mnemonics that associate to-be-recalled items with distinct

objects that are familiar to participants consistently help them recall better and improve their memory

span. But even if a training regime does work, it is problematic to suppose the causality between

memory capacity and interpreting performance. Existing evidence (Liu, Schallert and Carroll 2004;

Köpke and Nespoulous 2006) has shown that professional and novice interpreters did not differ in

working memory measure. In addition, there are mixed findings about whether interpreting training

can improve memory capacity (Timarová et al. 2015). Until more research findings converge to

support the impact of memory training on interpreting performance, caution is in order when

designing memory training activities in interpreting classes, and in explaining their purposes and in

promising their effects.

Long-Term Memory

Memory recall and recognition are popular tasks for measuring comprehension because they tap prior

knowledge. When Seleskovitch (1998: 34) claimed that “memory in consecutive interpretation

consists of nothing more than understanding the meaning that the words convey”, it is crucial to

underline that ‘understanding’ engages both working memory and Long-Term Memory (LTM). Due

to the crucial role of LTM in speech comprehension and memory recall, the traditional view and

emphasis of interpreter trainees’ capacity and training of short-term memory need to be updated.

Although STM is crucial at the stage of comprehension in CI, adequate understanding requires the

efficient coordination of other components, the central executive and robust knowledge base.

Research in developmental psychology suggests that a domain knowledge which is “highly organised

with many strong connections among the items within the base” (Schneider 2015: 222) not only

shows easier activation of related items within the knowledge base, it also speeds up the processing of

domain-specific information. In other words, “the more people know about a topic, the easier it is for

them to learn and remember new information about it” (ibid.). Although mnemonics will help during

memory retrieval, students must expand their knowledge base, in terms of both linguistic (Kalina

2005) and world knowledge (Kohn and Kalina 1996). To this end, caution is necessary when

designing materials for aptitude tests (Liu and Chiu 2009) or competitions to ensure their validity.

Additionally, materials should be well-targeted and powerful enough to differentiate interpreter

trainees’ ability to learn fresh information from a speech vis-à-vis their interpreting skills (Wilss

1992; Moser-Mercer 1994). Aptitude tests prior to and during different training stages are supposed to

be diagnostic of learners’ learning outcome in individual skills or a combination of them (Choi 2006;

Pöchhacker and Liu 2014).

Optimal vs. Absolute Completeness

Potentially driven by the task requirement and users’ expectation of interpreting, it appears that more

attention has been paid to what and how much is remembered than forgotten. However, interpreting

quality assessment criteria can vary according to perspectives, that is, the perspectives of employers,

interpreters, end users and experimenters (Moser-Mercer 1996; Pöchhacker 2001; Grbić 2008), as

well as the technicality of the subject matters (Kurz 2001). Interpreting performance in terms of

completeness, for instance, is generally defined as the percentage of what is reproduced among all


8

propositional units, as if CI is a variation of typical prose recall (for example, Goldman and

Varnhagen 1986; O’Brien and Myers 1987). In ecologically sound interpreting research, however, the

concept of completeness may be more trained and contextualised to assessors. It is not the relative

completeness, but the optimal completeness that interpreters should aim to achieve most of the time,

particularly in CI. This idea was succinctly captured by Setton (2005: 288) in a relevance-theoretical

framework:

Any global measure of quality should therefore include a measure of procedural effectiveness,

i.e. of how effectively the interpreter’s discourse evokes the relevant context, in addition to

the traditional check on whether information explicitly encoded is sufficiently explicitly

rendered. Recognising the role of inference in communication will lead to a very different

assessment of completeness: for example, referents not explicitly reproduced in the output

will not be penalised as omissions if they are easily inferable.

(Also see Albl-Mikasa (2006), who took the Relevance Theory approach to notation

analysis).

When the scoring protocol, typically used in memory research, is deemed to be oversimplified for the

purpose of CI assessment, its modification needs a working definition of ‘optimal completeness’,

adaptable for different speech types, for example, more technical speeches require fuller completeness

of secondary information. The bottom line is recognising that different evaluation of learning outcome

(including CI, by the widest possible definition of learning) from a piece of prose will require

different scoring protocols, for instance, to distinguish learners’ level of comprehension alone vis-à-

vis the level of comprehension plus the effectiveness of interpreter-mediated communication, as is the

case in CI. The large body of literature on memory recognition and memory recall in psychology is a

source of inspiration.

Research in note-taking

Note-taking is not trivial and cannot be dismissed as a “faux problème” (Maurizio 2012: 380).

Although note-taking is taught in effectively all interpreting courses and practised by professional and

non-professional interpreters on a daily basis, it is not well understood. Intuitively, its

underdevelopment could be linked to the skill being portrayed as an individual affair, thus implying

variability, heterogeneity and a slim chance of discovering generalisable mechanisms. Additionally,

note-taking behaviours could just be the reflections of trainers’ beliefs or even traditions of different

Schools. It is no surprise that new research topics and approaches are slow to emerge.

Early landmark literature (Rozan 1956; Seleskovitch 1976) on CI note-taking came from a time when

knowledge and theories were primarily data-driven and experience-informed. But they asked

important questions and laid out practical principles. Seleskovitch’s théorie du sens (Seleskovitch

1998) was instrumental in preparing interpreter trainees for taking on demanding training courses.

The notion of deverbalisation was also embodied in note-taking principles later (Gillies 2005). In

practice, however, it is not clear what sense means or looks like on a notepad as ‘the signifier’ in

semiotic terms. A paradox intrinsic to deverbalisation was highlighted by Albl-Mikasa (2016), where

ST should be stripped down to its language-independent sense on the one hand, but the notes

generated by interpreters are almost always language-dependent or symbolic (for example, Matyssek

2002) in nature, whereas the mechanism of conversion from sense to note is still ellusive (Albl-

Mikasa 2016: 79). These long-standing issues created by the notion of linguistic-independent notation

motivated Alba-Mikasa’s (2016: 78) “paradigm shift from the prevailing view of notation as a more

or less language-independent technique towards a thorough cognitive-linguistic understanding of the

issues involved.” The proposed theoretical framework regards notation as a written language, that is, a

notation language (NL), which also distinguishes between notational performance and notational

competence (ibid.: 81). This acquired language is also characterised in many ways similar to any

written language. Using Matyssek’s notation system as the principal reference, Albl-Mikasa (2016)

illustrated the NL use and principles at all levels, guiding interpreting trainers and trainees in building


9

individual notation systems. Neat links between the features of NL and natural languages may be

taken as an encouraging message to learners that building a personal system is achievable. Beginners,

however, need to be reminded that building an NL is not creating one symbol per word (Gillies 2005

in Albl-Mikasa 2016: 87), but at the same time, guidance should be available as to what principles

should apply when creating symbols for different types of words and word classes, such as concrete

vs abstract nouns. This is still an under-researched area, but findings in bilingual lexicon and existing

rules (Matyssek 2012) which are “highly generative” (Krenz-Brzozowska 2013) have paved the way

for systematic research and for building individual notation systems. In her empirical study, Krenz-

Brzozowska (ibid.: 326) identified 34 out of 57 rules from Matyssek’s notation system as language-

non-specific, that is, they can be applied to other languages in addition to Polish and German. For

instance, a colon ‘:’ can be used to note an instance when a speaker is quoting someone else. Based on

her findings and Matyssek’s rules, she proposed a basic model of note-taking (ibid.: 337), including

the apparatus which structures notation, such as using a horizontal line at the edge of notes to separate

clusters of message (my paraphrase).

NL can be understood as a toolkit from which interpreters choose the most appropriate item(s) to

generate notation as a product of active listening for a given stretch of speech. It is very common that

an ST is reduced by interpreters in different ways to different sets of notes. Under the influence of

multiple factors, Albl-Mikasa (2016: 99) argued that specific conditions have to be met for the type of

processing close to Seleskovitch’s deverbalisation to take place. When sentences undergo deeper

processing, chosen words or symbols for notation may not be directly linked to the surface form of the

ST, and such ‘distance’ or lack of resemblance between the notation and the ST may be considered a

manifestation of deverbalisation. When global and local contexts are formed and utilised, and the

retrieval structure (van Dijk and Kintsch 1983) of a given ST is robust, the notation generated as a

product of active listening should become effective cues, regardless of its resemblance to the surface

form of the ST. With adequate practice, and when the ST features permit, it is not necessary to take a

full set of S-V-O (Gillies 2005: Ilg and Lambert 1996: 79) or content words from ST for CI notation

in order to deliver accurate interpretation. Keywords could just work as well (Norton 1981 in Ilg and

Lambert 1996). This reasoning and the relation between the types of notation in NL and their

effectiveness in cued memory retrieval will require empirical testing.

Since Rozan (1956) proposed seven principles and suggested twenty symbols for CI note-taking, the

principle of noting the idea rather than the word has never been challenged. What is underspecified is

the operational definition of idea, and how it is noted in CI. Alba-Mikasa (2016) re-conceptualised

idea (or sense), defined notation as a written language, and positioned CI as “situated cognition” (p.

99), all of which are fundamental to future research design. A holistic model which emphasises the

communicative motivation and function (Żmudzki 2008; Hejwowski 2004; see Płońska 2006 for a

summary of Hejwowski's approach) is a constant reminder for researchers to bear the ecological

validity in mind when designing their tasks. Slowly but surely, more theories and methods will be

brought from neighbouring disciplines to bear on studying the cognitive processes and to inform CI

training (Chmiel 2010; Lim 2013; Sandrelli and Jerez 2007; Abuín González 2012; Capaldo 1980; Ilg

and Lambert 1996; Andres and Behr 2014; Seleskovitch and Lederer 1995; Liu 2008), learning

(Ficchi 1999; Lee 2014), and assessment (Dam, Engberg and Schjoldager 2005; Dam and Engberg

2006; Gile 1995; Setton 2005; Kalina 2005; Lee 2015), and to inform good practice.

Further Reading

Graesser, Arthur C. (2013). Prose Comprehension Beyond the Word. Springer New York.

This lays a sound foundation for reviewing more recent literature on discourse processing and

memory.


10

Gerver, David & Sinaiko, H. Wallace eds. (1978). Language Interpretation and

Communication: Plenum Press. This is a classic edited volume in which the first-generation

of interpreting researchers paved the way for interpreting studies.

Pöchhacker, Franz (2004). Introducing interpreting studies. Routledge. This is a

comprehensive review of interpreting studies.

English References

Abuín González, Marta (2012) ‘The language of consecutive interpreters' notes: Differences

across levels of expertise’. Interpreting 14 (1):55-72.

Albir, Amparo Hurtado (2007) ‘Competence-based curriculum design for training translators’.

The interpreter and translator trainer 1 (2):163-195.

Albl-Mikasa, Michaela (2006) ‘Reduction and expansion in notation texts’, in Gerzymisch-

Arbogast Heidrun, Carmen Heine, and Klaus Schubert (eds) Text and translation:

Theory and methodology of translation. Tübingen: Gunter Narr, 195-214.

Albl-Mikasa, Michaela (2016) ‘Notation Language and Notation Text: A Cognitive-Linguistic

Model of Consecutive Interpreting’, in Yasumasa Someya (ed.) Consecutive Note

Taking and Interpreter Training. Routledge.

Andres, Dörte and Behr, Martina (2014) To Know How to Suggest …: Approaches to Teaching

Conference Interpreting. Frank & Timme.

Baddeley, Alan D. (1999) Essentials of Human Memory. Hove: Psychology Press.

Baddeley, Alan D. (2003) ‘Working memory: looking back and looking forward’. Nature

Reviews, Neuroscience 4:829-839.

Baker, Mona (2010) ‘Interpreters and Translators in the War Zone Narrated and Narrators’.

Translator 16 (2):197-222.

Baxter, Robert Neal (2012) ‘A Simplified Multi-model Approach to Preparatory Training in

Consecutive Interpreting’. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 6 (1):21-43.

Bock, Kathryn, Dell, Gary S., Chang, Franklin and Onishi, Kristine H. (2007) ‘Persistent

structural priming from language comprehension to language production’. Cognition

104 (3):437-458.

Cai, Rendong and Dong, Yanping (2012) ‘Effects of information type, encoding modality and

encoding language on working memory span: Evidence for the hierarchical view’.

Foreign Language Teaching and Research 44 (3):376-388.

Cai, Rendong, Dong, Yanping, Zhao, Nan and Lin, Jiexuan (2015) ‘Factors contributing to

individual differences in the development of consecutive interpreting competence for

beginner student interpreters’. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 9 (1):104-120.

Capaldo, Stephen (1980) ‘An Apology for Consecutive Interpreting.’. Meta 25:244-248.

Chang, Chia-chien and Schallert, Diane L. (2007) ‘The impact of directionality on

Chinese/English simultaneous interpreting’. Interpreting 9 (2):137-176.

Chang, Chieh-Ying Vincent (2011) ‘Translation directionality and the revised hierarchical

model: An eye-tracking study’. In Cognitive explorations of translation, 154-174.

London: Continuum.

Chen, Baoguo, Jia, Yuefang, Wang, Zhu, Dunlap, Susan and Shin, Jeong-Ah (2013) ‘Is word-

order similarity necessary for cross-linguistic structural priming?’. Second Language

Research 29 (4):375-389.


11

Chmiel, Agnieszka (2010) ‘How Effective is Teaching Note-Taking to Trainee Interpreters?’.

The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 4 (2):233-250.

Choi, Jung Yoon (2006) ‘Metacognitive evaluation method in consecutive interpretation for

novice learners’. Meta 51 (2):273-283.

Chouc, Fanny and Conde, José María (2016) ‘Enhancing the learning experience of

interpreting students outside the classroom. A study of the benefits of situated learning

at the Scottish Parliament’. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 10 (1):92-106.

Cowan, Nelson (2001) ‘The magical number 4 in short-term memory: a reconsideration of

mental storage capacity’. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24:87-114.

Craik, Fergus. I. M. and Lockhart, Robert. S. (1972) ‘Levels of processing: A framework for

memory research’. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 11:671-684.

Dam, Helle V. and Engberg, Jan (2006) ‘Assessing accuracy in consecutive interpreting: a

comparison of semantic network analyses and intuitive assessments’. Text and

translation: theory and methodology of translation:215.

Dam, Helle V., Engberg, Jan and Schjoldager, Anne (2005) ‘Modelling semantic networks on

source and target texts in consecutive interpreting: a contribution to the study of

interpreters’ notes’. Knowledge Systems and Translation 7:227.

Ficchi, Velia (1999) ‘Learning consecutive interpretation: An empirical study and an

autonomous approach’. Interpreting 4 (2):199-218.

Flerov, Cyril (2013) ‘On Comintern and Hush-a-Phone: Early history of simultaneous

interpretation equipment.’ http://aiic.net/page/6625/early-history-of-simultaneous-

interpretation-equipment/lang/1#authors_bio. [Accessed 12 August 2016].

Gile, Daniel (1995) ‘Fidelity assessment in consecutive interpretation: an experiment.’ Target

7 (1):151-164.

Gile, Daniel (2009) Basic Concepts and Models for Interpreter and Translator Training. Rev.

edn. John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Gillies, Andrew (2005) Note-taking for consecutive interpreting: a short course. Manchester:

St Jerome Publishing.

Goldman, Susan R. and Varnhagen, Connie K. (1986) ‘Memory for embedded and sequential

story structures’. Journal of Memory and Language 25 (4):401-418.

González-Davies, Maria and Enríquez-Raído, Vanessa (2016) ‘Situated learning in translator

and interpreter training: bridging research and good practice’. The Interpreter and

Translator Trainer 10 (1):1-11.

Graham, Anne Marie (2012) ‘Training provision for Public Service Interpreting and

Translation in England. PSIT report-routes into languages’.

Grbić, Nadja (2008) ‘Constructing interpreting quality’. Interpreting 10 (2):232-257.

Hejwowski, Krzysztof (2004) Translation: a cognitive-communicative approach:

Wydawnictwo Wszechnicy Mazurskiej.

Herbert, Jean (1952) The Interpreter's Handbook: How to Become a Conference Interpreter.

Geneva: Librairie de l'Université.

Ilg, G. and Lambert, S. (1996) ‘Teaching consecutive interpreting’. Interpreting 1 (1):69-99.

Jalón, Jesús Baigorri (2004) Interpreters at the United Nations. A history: Ediciones

Universidad de Salamanca.

Jin, Yashyuan (2015) ‘Ourself- as well as self-directed learning in Consecutive Interpreting

enabled by technologies: a case study at Newcastle University’. The Sixth International

Symposium on Teaching Translation and Interpreting 'Translation/Interpreting

Teaching and the Bologna Process: Pathways between Unity and Diversity',

Germersheim, 27-29 Nov.

Kalina, Sylvia (2005) ‘Quality assurance for interpreting processes’. Meta 50 (2):768-784.


12

Kintsch, Walter (1988) ‘The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: a construction-

integration model’. Psychological Review 95:163-182.

Kintsch, Walter and van Dijk, Teun A. (1978) ‘Toward a model of text comprehension and

production’. Psychological Review 85:363-394.

Kiraly, Donald (2000) A social constructivist approach to translator education: empowerment

from theory to practice. Manchester, UK & Northampton MA: St Jerome Publishing.

Kohn, Kurt and Kalina, Sylvia (1996) ‘The Strategic Dimension of Interpreting’. Meta 41

(1):118-138.

Köpke, Barbara and Nespoulous, Jean-Luc (2006) ‘Working memory performance in expert

and novice interpreters’. Interpreting 8:1-23.

Krenz-Brzozowska, Lucyna (2013) Das Notationssystem von Heinz Matyssek: Die Realität

seiner Anwendung und sein generatives Potenzial beim Konsekutivdolmetschen: Peter

Lang GmbH, Internationaler Verlag der Wissenschaften.

Kurz, Ingrid (2001) ‘Conference interpreting: Quality in the ears of the user’. Meta 46:394-

409.

Lee, Sang-Bin (2014) ‘An Interpreting Self-Efficacy (ISE) scale for undergraduate students

majoring in consecutive interpreting: Construction and preliminary validation’.

Interpreter and Translator Trainer 8 (2):183-203.

Lee, Sang-Bin (2015) ‘Developing an analytic scale for assessing undergraduate students’

consecutive interpreting performances’. Interpreting 17 (2):226-254.

Li, Xiangdong (2015) ‘Mock conference as a situated learning activity in interpreter training:

a case study of its design and effect as perceived by trainee interpreters’. The Interpreter

and Translator Trainer 9 (3):323-341.

Lim, Lily (2013) ‘Examining students’ perceptions of computer-assisted interpreter training’.


Liu, Minhua and Chiu, Yu-Hsien (2009) ‘Assessing source material difficulty for consecutive

interpreting: Quantifiable measures and holistic judgment’. Interpreting 11 (2):244-

266.

Liu, Minhua, Schallert, Diane L. and Carroll, Patrick J. (2004) ‘Working memory and expertise

in simultaneous interpreting’. Interpreting 6:19-42.

Mackintosh, Jennifer (1985) ‘The Kintsch and van Dijk model of discourse comprehension and

production applied to the interpretation process’. Meta 30 (1):37-43.

Maier, Robert M., Pickering, Martin J. and Hartsuiker, Robert J. (2016) ‘Does translation

involve structural priming?’ The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, DOI:

10.1080/17470218.2016.1194439

Matyssek, Heinz (2012) Handbuch der Notizentechnik für Dolmetscher: Julius Groos Verlag

Tübingen.

Miyake, Akira and Shah, Priti (eds). (1999) Models of Working Memory: An Introduction.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Moser-Mercer, Barbara (1994) ‘Aptitude testing for conference interpreting: Why, when and

how’, in Lambert and Moser-Mercer (eds) Bridging the gap: Empirical research in

simultaneous interpretation. Amsterdam and Phildelphia: John Benjamins, 57-68.

Moser-Mercer, Barbara (1996) ‘Quality in interpreting: some methodological issues’. The

Interpreters’ Newsletter 7:43-55.

Moser-Mercer, Barbara (2011) ‘Identifying and interpreting scientific phenomena:

Simultaneous challenges to interpreting research’, in Brenda Nicodemus and Laurie

Swabey (eds) Advances in interpreting research: Inquiry in action. Amsterdam and

Phildelphia: John Benjamins, 47–58.


13

Motta, Manuela (2016) ‘A blended learning environment based on the principles of deliberate

practice for the acquisition of interpreting skills’. The Interpreter and Translator

Trainer:1-17.

Norton, Linda S (1981) ‘Patterned Note-Taking: An Evaluation’. Visible Language 15 (1):67-

85.

O’Brien, Edward J. and Myers, Jerome L. (1987) ‘The role of causal connections in the

retrieval of text’. Memory & Cognition 15 (5):419-427.

Orlando, Marc (2014) ‘Implementing Digital Pen Technology in the Consecutive Interpreting

Classroom’. In To Know How to Suggest…: Approaches to Teaching Conference

Interpreting: 171-200. Frank & Timme.

Orlando, Marc (2016) Training 21st century translators and interpreters: At the crossroads of

practice, research and pedagogy: Frank & Timme GmbH.

Płońska, D. (2006) ‘Process of translation from the psycholinguistic perspective. A review of:

Krzysztof Hejwowski, Kognitywno-komunikacyjna teoria przekładu’. Psychology of

Language and Communication 10 (1):101-106.

Pöchhacker, Franz (1991) ‘The role of theory in simultaneous interpreting’. Teaching

Translation and Interpreting, Denmark.

Pöchhacker, Franz (2001) ‘Quality assessment in conference and community interpreting’.

Meta: Journal des traducteurs Meta: Translators' Journal 46 (2):410-425.

Pöchhacker, Franz (2004) Introducing interpreting studies: Routledge.

Pöchhacker, Franz (2009) ‘Issues in interpreting studies’, in Jeremy Munday (ed.) The

Routledge Companion to Translation Studies. London: Routledge, 128-140.

Pöchhacker, Franz (2011) ‘Consecutive Interpreting’, in Kirsten Malmkjær and Kevin Windle

(eds) Oxford Handboook of Translation Studies. Oxford University Press, 294-306.

Pöchhacker, Franz (2013) ‘The position of interpreting studies’, in Carmen Millan and

Francesca Bartrina (eds) The Routledge Handbook of Translation Studies. Routledge:

60-72.

Pöchhacker, Franz and Liu, Minhua (2014) Aptitude for Interpreting. John Benjamins

Publishing Company.

Prieto-Velasco, Juan Antonio and Fuentes-Luque, Adrián (2016) ‘A collaborative multimodal

working environment for the development of instrumental and professional

competences of student translators: an innovative teaching experience’. The Interpreter

and Translator Trainer 10(1): 76-91.

Rozan, Jean Francois (1956) Note-taking in Consecutive Interpreting. Translated by Andrew

Gillies and Bartosz Waliczek: Tertium.

Sandrelli, Annalisa and Jerez, Jesus De Manuel (2007) ‘The impact of information and

communication technology on interpreter training: State-of-the-art and future

prospects’. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 1 (2):269-303.

Sawyer, David B. (2004) Fundamental Aspects of Interpreter Education: Curriculum and

Assessment. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Schneider, Wolfgang (2015) ‘Effects of the Knowledge Base on Memory Development’. In

Memory Development from Early Childhood Through Emerging Adulthood, 231-253.

Springer International Publishing.

Seleskovitch, Danica (1976) ‘Interpertation: A psychological approach to translating’, in

Richard W. Brislin (ed.) Translation: Application and research. New York: Gardner,

92-116.

Seleskovitch, Danica (1989) ‘Teaching Conference Interpreting’, in Peter W. Krawutschke

(ed.) Translator and Interpreter Training and Foreign Language Pedagogy.

Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 65-89.


14

Seleskovitch, Danica (1998) Interpreting for international conferences: problems of language

and communication. Washington (DC): Pen and Booth.

Seleskovitch, Danica and Lederer, Marianne (1995) A Systematic Approach to Teaching

Interpretation. Translated by Jacolyn Harmer. Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf.

Setton, Robin (1993) ‘Is non-intra-IE interpretation different? European models and Chinese-

English realities’. Meta: Journal des traducteursMeta:/Translators' Journal 38

(2):238-256.

Setton, Robin (2001) ‘Deconstructing SI: A contribution to the debate on component

processes’. The Interpreters’ Newsletter 11:1-26.

Setton, Robin (2005) ‘Pointing to contexts: a relevance-theoretic approach to assessing quality

and difficulty in interpreting’. In Knowledge Systems and Translation, Berlin/New

York, Mouton De Gruyter, 275-312.

Setton, Robin and Dawrant, Andrew (2016a) Conference Interpreting A Complete Course.

Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Setton, Robin and Dawrant, Andrew (2016b) Conference Interpreting A Trainer's Guide.

Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Shlesinger, Miriam (1995) ‘Stranger in Paradigms: What Lies Ahead for Simultaneous

Interpreting Research?’ Target 7 (1):7-28.

Tao, Youlan (2012) ‘Towards a constructive model in training professional translators’. Babel

58 (3).

Tao, Youlan (2016) ‘Translator training and education in China: past, present and prospects’.


Timarová, Šárka, Čeňková, Ivana, Meylaerts, Reine, Hertog, Erik, Szmalec, Arnaud and

Duyck, Wouter (2015) ‘Simultaneous interpreting and working memory capacity’.

Psycholinguistic and Cognitive Inquiries into Translation and Interpreting 115:101.

van Dijk, T. A. and Kintsch, Walter (1983) Strategies of discourse comprehension: Academic

Press.

Wang, Binhua and Mu, Lei (2009) ‘Interpreter training and research in mainland China: Recent

developments’. Interpreting 11 (2):267-283.

Wilss, Wolfram (1992) ‘The future of translator training’. Meta: Journal des traducteurs/Meta:

Translators' Journal 37 (3):391-396.

Xiao, Richard, McEnery, Tony and Qian, Yufang (2006) ‘Passive constructions in English and

Chinese: A corpus-based contrastive study’. Languages in Contrast 6 (1):109-149.

Xu, Ziyun (2014) ‘Chinese Interpreting Studies: Genesis of a Discipline’. FORUM. Revue

internationale d’interprétation et de traduction/International Journal of Interpretation

and Translation 12(2): 159-190.

Zeng, Yu and Zhang, Hongying (2014) ‘Comparative Study on Training in Public Service

Interpreting Using Chinese as Work Language in China and other Countries’.

FITISPos-International Journal 1:66-75.

Żmudzki, Jerzy (2008) ‘Ein holistisches Modell des Konsekutivdolmetschens [A holistic

model ofconsecutive interpreting]’, in B. Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk & M. Thelen

(eds) Translation and Meaning, Part 8. Proceedings of the Łódz´ Session of the 2005

Maastricht-Łódz´Duo Colloquiumon “Translation and Meaning”, Łódz´, Poland, 23–

25 September 2005. Maastricht: School of International Communication, Department

of Translation and Interpreting, 175–183.

Chinese References

He, Lidan贺莉丹 (2004) ‘同传译员是不是“金领”？同声传译因炒而烫手’ (Are

simultaneous interpreters really ‘Gold-collar workers’? Simultaneous interpreter is an over-


15

hyped job title. http://www.people.com.cn/GB/jiaoyu/1055/2462871.html. [Accessed 22

September 2016].

Kwan, Uganda Sze Pui關詩珮 (2012) ‘翻譯與調解衝突: 第一次鴉片戰爭的英方譯者費倫’ (Translation and Resolving Conflict: The First Opium War Interpreter of the British Empire,

Samuel T. Fearon (1819-1854)) . 近代史研究所集刊 (Bulletin of the Institute of Modern

History Academia Sinica) 76: 41-80.

Liu, Minhua劉敏華 (2008) 逐步口譯與筆記 (Consecutive Interpreting and Note-taking). 書

林出版有限公司 Taipei: Bookman.

中国国际贸易促进委员会 (2016) 中国展览经济发展报告 2015

(Annual Report on China’s Exhibition Industry 2015). 中国展览经济发展报告（2015）编

委会 (Editorial Board of Annual Report on China’s Exhibition Industry (2015). Available at:

http://www.ccpit.org/Contents/Channel_3900/2016/0121/605710/content_605710.htm

[Accessed 20 April 2016].

Biographical Note

Yashyuan Jin (Michael) is a lecturer in translating and interpreting at the Newcastle

University, UK. His research interests include second language reading comprehension with

a focus on prosody, psycholinguistics of interpreting, and technology-assisted interpreting

training.

Consecutive Interpreting - Newcastle University ePrints

Documents

Transcript of Consecutive Interpreting - Newcastle University ePrints