Communications in Humanities Research ISSN: 2753-7072
Home> Volumes> Volume CHR Vol.2> Article
Research Article

Note-taking Traits and Interpreting Efficiency in Consecutive Interpreting

Xing ZhouSchool of Humanities and Social Science, Chinese University of HongKong(Shenzhen), ShenZhen, 518172, China*

* Corresponding author: [email protected]

Abstract

This article is going to explore the correlation between the efficiency of note-taking and interpreting ability by comparing different traits of consecutive interpreting notes. The author conducted a small-scaled empirical research by asking two professional students from interpreting major and two untrained students from other majors as samples, with a view to testing their interpreting ability. By comparing the note-taking numbers, forms, and language sources, the correlation between note-taking efficiency and note trait of interpreting can be illustrated by statistics. The result shows that the trained group wrote more words than the untrained group; they also used more abbreviations, symbols, numbers, Chinese, and logical connection words than the other two untrained students. However, they write down less complete words. Due to the significant difference between the results of the two groups, the efficiency of note-taking, a skill that can be improved by practicing, is closely related to note-taking. However, it is not a cause-and-effect relationship.

Keywords: Consecutive Interpreting; interpreting efficiency; Note-taking Traits
Published: February 28, 2023
DOI: 10.54254/2753-7064/2/2022652
Volume: CHR Vol.2
pp. 604-610
Download PDF

References

  1. Nolan J．2005．Interpreting：Techniques and Exercises．Clevedon：Multilingual Matters.
  2. Liu & M.D．Schallert＆P．Carrol．“Working memory and expertise in simultaneous interpreting” Interpreting6(1):19-42. (2004).
  3. Dam, Helle V. “The Interpreters’ Notes.” Claims, Changes and Challenges in Translation Studies, 2004, 251–61. https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.50.21dam.
  4. Merlini Raffaella. “Interpit- consecutive interpretation module”. The Interpreter Newsletter 7:31-41.
  5. Dam H. 2004a．Interpreters’ notes：On the choice of form and language. Claims, Changes and Challenges in Translation Studies: 6（1): 3-17.
  6. Yuwen Wang, Dandan Zhou. An empirical study on the relationship between the content of interpreting notes and interpreting output. Journal of PLA University of Foreign Languages:115-121.2014.
  7. Weihe Zhong. Discussion on Interpreting Teaching. Practical Interpreting Handbook:1998:18-21.
  8. Burgin, Mark, and John H Schumann. “Three Levels of the Symbolosphere.” Semiotica 2006, no. 160 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1515/sem.2006.045.