Interpreters' consecutive note-taking preferences in light of a small-scale survey
Abstract
Consecutive interpreting plays a key role in the language mediation market and features on the palette of training institutions as a part of their curricula, as well as their aptitude and certification tests. This small-scale empirical research paper describes the results of a questionnaire involving 52 respondents (each with a qualification in interpreting and/or experience to varying degrees) to gain an insight into their note-taking preferences predominantly in terms of their choice of form (full words, abbreviations, symbols or drawings) and their choice of language (source text [ST] vs. target text [TT], mother tongue [A language] vs strongest foreign language [B], or mixed languages). Even though this mini research only
relied on subjective impressions of the respondents and did not involve an analysis of their notes, the majority of the findings corroborated previous empirical research findings and, at the same time, showed once again how individual, preferential and coincidental note-taking can be.
References
Abuín González, M. (2012): The language of consecutive interpreters’ notes: Differences across levels of expertise. Interpreting 14/3. 55–72
https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.14.1.03abu
Ahrens, B. (2015): Note-taking. In: Pöchhacker, F. (ed.): Routledge Encyclopaedia of Interpreting Studies. 283-286
Ahrens, B., – Orlando, M. (2021): Note-taking for consecutive conference interpreting. In: The Routledge Handbook of Conference Interpreting. Routledge. 34-48
https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429297878-5
AIIC (International Association of Conference Interpreters). (1994). Interpreter Training Workshop, Poznan, April 8–10, 1994. Geneva: AIIC
Allioni, S. (1989): Towards a grammar of consecutive interpretation. The theoretical and practical aspects of teaching conference interpretation. 191–197
Andres, D. (2002): Konsekutivdolmetschen und Notation. Frankfurt: P. Lang
Andres, D. (2015): Consecutive interpreting. In: Pöchhacker, F. (ed.): Routledge Encyclopaedia of Interpreting Studies. Routledge, 84–87
Baselli, V. (2012): Which language do interpreters use in Consecutive Interpreting? Advanced Research in Scientific Areas. 2012. december 3–7.
Becker, W. (1972): Notizentechnik. Germersheim: BBK Gesellschaft für moderne Sprachen.
Błaszczyk P. – Hanusiak D. (2010): The Choice of Language for Note-taking for Consecutive Interpreting: A Polish Perspective. In: MikaEL Kääntämisen ja tulkkauksen tutkimuksen symposiumin verkkojulkaisu. Electronic proceedings of the KäTu symposium on translation and interpreting studies 4.
Chen, S. (2016): Note-taking in consecutive interpreting: A review with special focus on Chinese and English literature. The Journal of Specialised Translation 26/1. 151–171
Chen, S. (2017a): Note-taking in consecutive interpreting: New data from pen recording. Translation & Interpreting 9/1. 4–23.
https://doi.org/10.12807/ti.109201.2017.a02
Chen, S. (2017b): Exploring the process of note-taking and consecutive interpreting: A pen-eye-voice approach towards cognitive load. Kiadatlan doktori disszertáció.
Chen. S. (2021): The process and product of note-taking and consecutive interpreting: empirical data from professionals and students. Perspectives. 1-17.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.2021.1909626
Dam, H. V. (2004a): Interpreters’ notes: On the choice of form and language. In: Hansen, G. – Malmkjær, K. – Gile, D. (eds): Claims, changes and challenges in Translation Studies. John Benjamins: Amsterdam/Philadelphia. 251–261.
https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.50.21dam
Dam, H. V. (2004b): Interpreters’ notes: on the choice of language. Interpreting. 6/1. 3–17.
https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.6.1.03dam
Dam, H. V. (2021): From controversy to complexity: Replicating research and extending the evidence on language choice in note-taking for consecutive interpreting. Interpreting. 23/2. 222-244
https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.00062.dam
Dingfelder, S. M. (2014): The theory and practice of teaching note-taking. In: Andres, D. – Behr, M. (eds) To Know How to Suggest…: Approaches to Teaching Conference Interpreting. (Vol. 16). Frank & Timme: Berlin.145-166
García B. O. (2015): Survey Research on Quality Expectations in Interpreting: The Effect of Method of Administration on Subjects’ Response Rate. Meta: journal des traducteurs/Meta: Translators’ Journal. 60/3. 542-556
Gile, D. (1995/2009): Basic concepts and models for interpreter and translator training. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.8(1st)
Gile, D. (1998): Observational Studies and Experimental Studies in the Investigation of Conference Interpreting. Target. 10/1. 69–93.
https://doi.org/10.1075/target.10.1.04gil
Gile, D. (2022): CIRIN Bulletin 63. 28
Gillies, A. (2017): Note-taking for consecutive interpreting: A short course (2nd ed.) Routledge: London.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315648996
Gumul, E. (2021). Reporting stress in simultaneous interpreting. The analysis of trainee interpreters’ retrospective reports and outputs. Onomázein. Journal of linguistics, philology and translation. Special Issue 8. 16-42
https://doi.org/10.7764/onomazein.ne8.04
Hale, S. – Napier, J. (2013): Research methods in interpreting: A practical resource. A&C Black.
Hanusiak, D. (2021): The choice of language for note-taking for the purposes of consecutive interpreting: an English-Polish case study. Między Oryginałem a Przekładem. 27/4. (54). 51-61
https://doi.org/10.12797/MOaP.27.2021.54.03
Herbert, J. (1952): The interpreter's handbook: How to become a conference interpreter. Genève: Librairie de l'Universit.
Ilg, G., –Lambert, S. (1996) : Teaching Consecutive Interpreting. Interpreting. 1/1. 69–99
https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.1.1.05ilg.
Jones, R. (2002): Conference interpreting explained (rev. ed.). Manchester: UK/Northampton, MA: St Jerome Publishing.
https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.3.2.05mac
Károly, K. (2022): A nyelvi közvetítés empirikus kutatásának módszerei. In: Klaudy, K. – Robin, E. – Seidl-Péch,O. (eds) (2022): Bevezetés a fordítás és a tolmácsolás kutatásának módszertanába. Budapest. (előkészületben).
Láng, Zs. G. (2002): Tolmácsolás felsőfokon: a hivatásos tolmácsok képzéséről. Budapest: Scholastica.
Matyssek, H. (1989): Handbuch der Notizentechnik für Dolmetscher. Heidelberg: Groos.
Orlando, M. (2014): A study on the amenability of digital pen technology in a hybrid mode of interpreting: Consec-simul with notes. Translation & Interpreting. 6/2. 39-54
Rozan, J.F. (1956): La prise de notes en interprétation consécutive. Genève: Georg.
Setton, R. – Dawrant, A. (2016): Conference Interpreting: A Trainer’s Guide. 121. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Szabó, Cs. (2005): Note-taking Techniques and Strategies in Consecutive Interpreting: An Empirical Investigation of the Choice of Language, Choice of Form and Means of Compression. Pécs: Kiadatlan doktori disszertáció.
Szabó, Cs. (2006): Language choice in note-taking for consecutive interpreting. Interpreting 8/2. 129–147
https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.8.2.02sza
Szabó Cs. (2020): Empirikus kutatások és gyakorlati tapasztalatok a konszekutív jegyzeteléstechnikában. Fordítástudomány 22/1. 86‒104
https://doi.org/10.35924/fordtud.22.1.6
Szabó, Cs. (2021): Revisiting Consecutive Note-Taking: What, How, and in What Language? ELOPE: English Language Overseas Perspectives and Enquiries. 18/1. 107-124.
https://doi.org/10.4312/elope.18.1.107-124
Walczyński, M. (2019): The role of note-taking in coping with stress. In: Maliszewski, J. – Częstochowskiej, W.P. (eds.). Between Literary and Specialised Translation: Commonalities and Differences. Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Politechniki Częstochowskiej.
Zhan, C. (2019): Language Choice in Note-taking for C-E Consecutive Interpreting – an Empirical Study on Trainee Interpreters in China’s Mainland and Taiwan. Journal of Education and Culture Studies. 3/4. 457-467.
http://dx.doi.org/10.22158/jecs.v3n4p457
Internetes hivatkozások
AIIC (2016). Practical guide for professional conference interpreters.
Microsoft Word - Document1 (aiic.org)
AIIC (2019). Women take the mic in conference interpreting.
