Early SIM exercises – Setton

This text first appeared in January 2008, FORUM Revue internationale d’interprétation et de traduction / International Journal of Interpretation and Translation 6(2):173-193

Progression in SI training

Introduction

Motivation in SI

Prerequisites in SI

3 stages to SI

Coordination (dual-tasking)

Experimentation (lag/decalage)

Robin Setton

SISU-GIIT (Shanghai); ESIT and ISIT (Paris).

Abstract: Simultaneous interpretation (SI) is required for access to the conference interpretation market, accounting for around 90% of conference interpreters’ work, but its dynamic nature presents a teaching challenge. In leading schools, students are trained for several months in memorising, summarising, paraphrasing, sight translation and consecutive interpreting before being initiated to SI. Many exercises have been proposed, but their empirical evaluation remains difficult. The paper recalls the pre-requisites for initiation to SI (language proficiency, knowledge and analytical ability), and describes some exercises, based on experience in various combinations of European and Asian languages, for SI training in three stages (coordination, experimentation, consolidation). Four exercises in particular – on-line paraphrase, paused SI, ‘taking the plunge’ and ‘tight chunking’ – are recommended for further testing in different phases of SI training. Following the seminal work by Seleskovitch and Lederer (2002), additional focus is placed on language enhancement and techniques for dealing with fast, text-based, institutional discourse (increasingly required, notably in emerging markets) particularly for interpreters working into B. The author welcomes feedback from colleagues who may experiment with any of the recommended exercises. 

1. Introduction

SI is widely seen, rightly or wrongly, as the skill which distinguishes conference or ‘high-level’ interpreters from the rest. SI is now well established as the interpretation mode of choice in the world’s high-profile international meetings and as a routine service in multilingual international organisations and many other private or public multilingual gatherings, accounting for 90% of all conference interpreting assignments. This is understandable in view of its obvious attractions as the only form of translation capable of handling multiple languages in real time (not to mention removing interpreters from the meeting room). 

            The best interpretation requires not just linguistic ability and background knowledge, but also empathy, analysis and an understanding of the context of the communication, and the best interpreters do not all necessarily do high-profile world summits in SI – many provide superb consecutive service behind the scenes to clients ranging from world leaders and financiers to disenfranchised welfare claimants, litigants or refugees. However, in today’s world, with the premium on immediacy and on formal and technical discourse, no interpreter can access the international conference circuit, with its attractive pay, status, variety and opportunities for travel, without offering SI. 

            In a training programme, therefore, ‘graduation’ to the SI booth is a significant rite of passage from both the trainee’s and the school’s point of view, and most serious programmes insist on ‘mid-point’ exams to ensure that baseline skills and proficiencies have been thoroughly acquired before initiating the trainee into SI. Since SI involves team work, and is also highly exposed, this is the segment of the market that the profession and its schools are most keen to protect by maintaining quality and professionalism. The stringency of the final diploma or certifying exam with SI testifies to their reluctance to admit unqualified candidates to professional practice. But since interpreting is not a legally protected profession, and recruiters are not beholden to schools, candidates who fail this exam may still go out and work, especially if they can offer scarce language combinations. Some may respond better to the real world than to the training environment and soon become acceptable and even excellent interpreters; but an unreliable interpreter – especially if providing relay from a ‘scarce’ but critical language for several other booths – can disable the work of a whole team, cause the failure of an international meeting and seriously damage the image of the profession. It seems that from the trainers’ point of view, the only policy which is at once responsible, realistic and efficient is to be very careful in admitting students to initiation into SI – having the courage to prescribe more preparation, or even advise a change of career plan for those experiencing more fundamental difficulties – and to offer the most intensive, well-thought-out and realistic programme possible to those who are admitted to SI training. 

            Governments and universities, too, are keen to train students with linguistic gifts to provide language services in the modern and popular form of SI. Politicians, administrators, even academics – and any ‘lay’ observer or user – tend to see interpreting as fast language transfer, and to admire SI as the acme of high-speed linguistic pyrotechnics. In contrast to consecutive, where observers can see some of the ‘workings’ of the task, SI seems rather magical. Rapid reactions and an excellent command of the languages are obviously necessary for SI, but they are supporting rather than core competencies. Inside the black box, and invisible behind the polished performance, there is a hidden ingredient : analysis. 

            Analysis is a condition sine qua non of SI because in the real world, most speeches will soon defeat even the best and fastest human on-line dictionary. Outsiders inevitably underestimate how fuzzily speakers, however respectable, may express themselves; the differences in the way ideas are expressed in different languages; and more fundamentally, the extent to which context and situation must be understood to make sense of discourse and convey meaning in real communicative situations. Useful set phrases and expressions certainly help, but as secondary tools to complement the basic work of mental analysis. The only thing that all speeches to be interpreted have in common is that the speaker has (or at least is pretending to have) some meaning or message to communicate; little else, in terms of linguistic correctness or coherence, is guaranteed. Only intensive, invisible analysis, drawing on knowledge of the world and the situation, can support the on-line techniques – half-visible and partly-teachable – needed to capture and express meaning from the wide variety of speech-types encountered in real life. 

            We are happy for our audiences to ignore the inner workings of the black box, but we ourselves need to understand these workings a little for training purposes. The most obvious difference which strikes a beginner moving from consecutive interpreting to SI is the time pressure. (S)he understands the need for analysis from her earlier training, but must now find a way of ‘fitting it in’ alongside listening and speaking. The first thing which seems obvious is that time and effort will need to be saved wherever possible, particularly in understanding the speaker and in searching for the right phrase. It will also help to be able to start, finish, lengthen and shorten sentences as easily as possible, again, to ‘make room’ for understanding and thinking. Clearly, any exercises that hone this kind of linguistic agility will be very helpful : syntactic and pragmatic flexibility are a more permanent and fundamental requirement to SI than the knowledge of words, which can be refreshed and topped-up for each specific event.  

            SI means making room, or making time, for the priority of each instant, by exploiting knowledge and the flexibilities of language. Knowledge helps to anticipate, and linguistic agility helps us manipulate time by compressing, paraphrasing or elaborating according to need. Without sufficient knowledge and linguistic freedom, there will be little hope of developing the more advanced flexibility needed to handle increasingly fast, difficult and technical speeches. This justifies the definition of baseline general knowledge and linguistic competencies as pre-requisites for beginning SI, along with the ‘analytic reflex’ which should have been acquired through early introductory exercises like same-language paraphrase or ‘retelling’, gisting and summary, followed by three or four months of consecutive interpreting.  

2. Motivation for the training strategy  

A programme for training simultaneous interpreters can be built on the experiences and intuitions of practising professional trainers, or inferred from a model of the task based on cognitive and linguistic theory, empirical research and the analysis of SI recordings and transcripts. Research and cognitive modelling are instructive, and should be pursued; but when it comes to teaching a task as complex and dynamic a task as simultaneous interpreting, and to groups of uniquely different individuals, the present state of knowledge does not justify replacing a training scheme based on fifty years’ experience with one built on theoretical constructs. This should be clear from a brief examination of the potential contribution of two disciplines, translation studies and psycholinguistics. 

            A traditional theme in translation studies contrasts form-based (literal) and sense-based (free, ‘de-verbalised’) translation. In observing SI, one thing is immediately clear : both processes must occur and complement each other. On the one hand, we cannot help but experience the sense of speech in a language we understand, forgetting the words used (Sachs 1967); but we also have to find and produce rigid equivalents of technical terms or the names of institutions. An important challenge for SI training in the intermediate stage is to show how to juggle these two processes when argument and terminology come in mixed up together (as they do in live, structured discourse). Can psycholinguistics help? In the literature, complex tasks are often analysed componentially as ‘multitasking’, from which it is often inferred that component sub-tasks for teaching can be mastered separately in targeted exercises, then finally combined into the full task. It is not clear how SI would be analysed into sub-tasks; and no attempt to train interpreters in this way has yet been documented to our knowledge. As for our specific problem, we know of no ‘dual-tasking’ research on how to juggle or combine the two tasks described above – analysis of an unfolding argument and lexical translation. 

            For the time being, then, we will be guided chiefly by the old pedagogical strategy, well-tried in society and in nature, of nudging the fledgling out of the nest and off the lowest branch of the tree – i.e. initiating her in a simple version of the integral task, in a protected environment (ideal working conditions) which already elicits the same reflexes, excitement, risks and rewards as the full task, but without most of the more notorious difficulties and hazards of real life. These hazards can then be added incrementally: the speeches become gradually more difficult, more formal or structured (or indeed, more problematically incoherent), are delivered faster, and in the later stages, are mixed up with other input like unfamiliar proper names, complex numbers, written text and slides. 

            Simultaneity is a challenge for the instructor. Theoretical explanations, recommendations and generalisations are hard to apply to classroom practice because of the immediacy, individuality and complexity of SI. Everything is happening at once: the instructor has to listen to two streams of speech and several different students; it is hard to separate problems of language and technique; and each individual student is discovering his or her own limits and abilities, and forming individual habits accordingly, so that suggestions may or may not suit different students. Most instructors rely on their instincts and personal experience, and it is certainly hard to conceive of SI being taught by non-professionals. Much depends on the instructor’s pedagogical gifts, patience and ability to put themselves in the beginner’s place. 

3. Prerequisites for SI

The pre-requisites for successful SI training are: trained instructors, preferably[1] themselves practicing professional interpreters; an installation simulating a real conference environment; access to speakers and realistic speech materials; and students who have already reached a baseline in language, knowledge and basic (consecutive) interpreting skills. 

2.1. Linguistic comfort and general knowledge

The mid-point exam must obviously filter out students who are too weak in the baseline competencies prerequisite to developing SI technique. These can be stated quite simply:

  1. Comprehension of most types of speech in their languages must be immediate, and comfortable enough to leave time to spare for analysis, lexical choice where necessary, and for experimenting on-line with techniques like lag control. 
  2. General knowledge and education must be deep and broad enough to ensure they are not constantly unsaddled by alien concepts, names and entities. 
  3. Trainees who must do SI into a B (acquired) language should show enough flexibility and resourcefulness in using that language.  

Comprehension and general knowledge should be acquired and strictly verified well before moving to SI, either at admission or during introductory consecutive training. Active SI competence in the B language is achieved by creating and actively exploiting an enabling environment, and by targeted exercises, which are outside the scope of this paper (see e.g. Mackintosh 1989); students’ progress is irregular and hard to predict. 

2.2. Linguistic agility and flexibility 

With this language-and-knowledge baseline in place, the next level of skill to be developed is linguistic resourcefulness and agility. Linguistic ‘limbering-up’ exercises already introduced include speech-making from sparse notes, but also consecutive interpreting and sight translation, taught as professional skills in their own right. But SI will require additional task-specific, on-line agilities which can be stimulated, for example, by same-language paraphrase, with restructuring (after the usual contextual preparation) of successive chunks of text scrolled down a screen, under (very) gradually increasing time pressure. A variation on this is register-switching, which is particularly challenging in the B language, but should in any case be persevered in, and mastered, in A. 

4. SI training in three stages

While we can expect some individual variation in the rate of progress, it seems possible to define periods in SI training : 

  1. Initiation and coordination: Discovering the booth environment, how to listen while talking, and the specific ‘ear-voice’ and time constraints of ‘single-pass’ SI, in contrast to ‘double-pass’ consecutive  interpreting (Materials : everyday, spontaneous speech)
  • Experimentation: Experimenting with time, rhythm and lag variation (Materials: oral speech, but with some more structured passages, and some names and numbers)
  • Consolidation: Practising on progressively more formal, denser/technical and faster material (Materials: mostly authentic conference speeches, with incrementally added hazards and difficulties, and maximum variety. Students practice the full task independently, monitoring each other.).  

These stages are similar to those described in Seleskovitch and Lederer’s Pédagogie raisonnée de l’interprétation (2002), the most complete blueprint for conference interpreter training so far published[2], and our proposals retain their strong emphasis on analysis. They differ in proposing some new exercises to smooth the passage from consecutive to SI, making more allowance for individual experimentation and variable styles, and finally, attempting to explore and expand on techniques to handle the (increasing) amount of fast, technical, and text-based or multimedia material, and the new context of contacts between the ‘traditional’ international community and emerging economies and political cultures.

            Teaching involves fostering the development of similar techniques, based on general principles, to a group of uniquely different individuals. In the first phase, the student has to find her own way of coordinating listening, thinking and speaking so that she doesn’t miss any part of the message. In the second phase, experimentation, she discovers how to make time, or ‘room’, to improve her rendition without losing touch with the speaker – which will involve falling behind, catching up, elaborating, accelerating, searching for words, provisionally simplifying, compensating, etc., at different times. The actual pattern of input to output, as observed in a transcript, will depend on many different subjective and objective factors, and will therefore vary widely from one interpreter, speech and occasion to another.  

            The third and last phase of training brings the trainee up to professional readiness through increasing and widening exposure and practice, incrementally adding the difficulties and hazards of real-life, with speeches varying in spontaneity/writtenness, formality, coherence, accent and diction, originality, speed and so on. Once the basic challenges are recognised, in Stage 1, and the interpreter has found her own style, in Stage 2, the key to reliable and versatile professional expertise is ultimately in her sensitivity to widely varying forms of discourse and her ability to adjust her technique to the speaker’s rhythm, and her product to the occasion. However, specific techniques, including tighter chunking closer to the original text structure, may be needed to process dense, unprepared input in more ‘cramped’ conditions. 

            Dozens of imaginative exercises have been proposed manipulating various parameters of live or semi-simultaneous translation: same-language or change of language; verbatim, gisting or paraphrase; varying the delay between input and output; input speed; register, formality and input delivery, and so on; and later, in preparation for simultaneous-with-text, similar variations on the time and extent of preparation allowed, or encouraged, and the use of an accompanying text before or during SI (for a selection, see e.g. Kalina 1998, 2000 and Gillies 2001, 2004).

            The effectiveness of different interpreter training methods is very hard to test empirically; and we do not know enough about the mind to rule out absolutely the possible benefit of any of these exercises for particular individuals. However, we see no good reason to choose tasks that seem alien to interpreting and more reminiscent of the psycholinguistics lab, i.e. designed for research rather than teaching, and which might be counterproductive – for example, repeating  the linguistic forms of the original (i.e. verbatim shadowing); combining listening or speaking with a task on entirely unrelated content; or being obliged to use certain words in production. We do not feel we know enough about the mind and SI to make such large inferences about the transposability or relevance of these tasks to SI. 

            The exercises we favour here are those which (i) seem related, albeit in simplified form, to real-life interpreting; (ii) elicit progressively sophisticated techniques; and, last but not least, (iii) have been used by us with some apparent success, including recognition by students, in one or more training programmes. 

            In class, every exercise should naturally be preceded by the usual contextualisation, and where necessary, brainstorming and/or (in the later stages) advance preparation of the subject-matter

4.1. Coordination : discovering the SI condition

4.1.1. Settling in and ear-voice coordination

On the principle that new skills and reflexes are best imprinted in a realistic environment, trainees should ideally be introduced at the same time to the SI booth and equipment, and to the conventions and manners of working there as a team. On the same principle, this will clearly be more effective if this is their first visit to the booth. 

            The first thing students will want (and need) to learn when settled in front of the console, with a view of a speaker in the conference room, is how to listen and talk at the same time.  The two exercises most commonly used and recommended in the literature for developing basic ‘ear-voice’ coordination are 

  • Counting aloud while listening to a speech – forwards, then backwards to make it harder – with someone checking that the numbers are produced regularly and accurately, and then, after the exercise, that they have heard and understood the speech. Counting and listening can be done in the same language to begin with (the trainee’s A), moving on to listening to speech in the B or C language and counting in A, to simulate the first combinations she will attempt in real SI.
  • (Verbatim) Shadowing.  In this task, often used in the psycholinguistics laboratory, the subject attempts to repeat, word for word, exactly what she hears coming in though the headphones, and is monitored for accuracy. 

Neither of these exercises simulates SI except in the very superficial sense of simultaneous speaking and listening. Counting while listening seems to be used in some schools for want of something better, on the assumption that ear-voice coordination is a distinct mechanical skill which can or should be developed before attempting the real task of reproducing content from one language to another. However, experience over the years with beginners in different schools and language combinations shows that the purely mechanical aspect of coordination is a relatively trivial skill that can be mastered almost immediately. 

            An exercise which involves both listening and producing language, rather than just numbers, might seem more relevant, but there is good reason to believe that verbatim shadowing is counter-productive. Professional interpreter trainers have generally advised against this exercise as an introduction to SI on the grounds that it is liable to cultivate exactly the wrong habits in the beginner, who should get into the habit from the outset of looking past the forms of the incoming language to the meaning, and forget or suppress these incoming forms as thoroughly as possible in order better to think and formulate idiomatically in the target language. This caveat seems more than justified. Because it is likely to imprint the forms and rhythm of the incoming language, verbatim shadowing would seem beneficial only for an entirely different purpose, and in the later stages of training: interpreters who must do SI into a B language may benefit from verbatim, imitative shadowing of the rhythm and intonation, in particular, of eloquent educated native speakers (live or on film), just before entering the booth to work into B. 

            In contrast, an adaptation of shadowing designed to break the attention to form and shift it to meaning, the first basis for SI technique,  is described below (4.1.2.2.). 

            For the very first steps, we see no reason not to begin with short sessions (2 or 3 minutes) of ordinary, slow and very simple speech in B for interpretation into A, followed each time by playback in the classroom and commentary to reveal major coordination problems – where the student simply did not hear something, leaving her either high and dry (abandoned sentences), or with incoherent fragments from which to guess or reconstruct a meaning. 

            There will also be instances where certain words were not heard or even remembered, but with no negative effects on the rendition. This can lead to an interesting discussion on selective listening, the process of ‘attunement’ to the most informative peaks in the input (‘new information’), which are different in each new speech and speaker, and the important point that forgetting the words of the original is a normal, indeed necessary part of the process of understanding . 

4.1.2. From consecutive to SI

A second class of exercises which can be introduced, for variety, build on and use the consecutive skills already acquired. It is also good for morale to switch back occasionally to something the students can do well and confidently. 

4.1.2.1. SI after consecutive

Students can do two or three segments in consecutive, then move to the booth to do a very similar speech on the same topic in SI, if possible containing one or two complex sentence structures; or begin a speech in consecutive and continue in SI (Seleskovich & Lederer 2002: 172) 

4.1.2.2. ‘Smart shadowing’ (also called on-line paraphrasing, or same-language SI).

Smart shadowing is the on-line version of the free paraphrase exercise used in the early, pre-consecutive stages of training (or at any time, for limbering-up or language enhancement), where the student paraphrases speech or text in the same language using as few of the original words and structures as possible while conveying the same meaning. 

            In this version, to prepare for SI, students listen and produce speech in the same language which as nearly as possible conveys the same message as the original, but using different words and structures: i.e. sense-preserving reformulation without translation. That this is not an artificial ‘component task’ of SI, but a natural sibling, is attested to by the fact that interpreters sometimes do this absent-mindedly during conferences (and may go on for several seconds before being alerted by a colleague).  

4.1.2.3 Paused simultaneous: from mini-consecutives to SI

In this exercise, a simple, informal speech in the trainees’ B language, with which the instructor must be thoroughly familiar, is recorded, preferably on video – although this can be difficult to operate precisely – and played to the students for interpretation into A, at first with pauses controlled by the instructor. Instructors are advised to practice among themselves first, since the procedure is tricky. It should also be carefully explained to students in advance, so that they know what to expect. 

            The speech is played or spoken one sentence or medium-sized sense unit at a time. At first, the speaker waits (or the instructor pauses the tape) until the student has finished her interpretation of the segment. After a few segments, the pauses are shortened so that the next sentence begins before the student has finished speaking. Pauses may then be progressively shortened until the process begins to resemble simultaneous. Breaks can be taken for discussion when felt appropriate, but with decreasing frequency. 

            Several students can practice on the same recording, although the instructor will obviously only be able to monitor one at a time. Other students can monitor the output to check that it makes sense and later, draw attention to verbal ticks, unfinished sentences, etc. 

            The instructor will find opportunities to draw attention to and discuss various tricks and techniques for students to experiment with: stalling, or learning how to stay in a ‘holding pattern’; padding (ideas can be given for useful fillers); ‘open’ grammar and how to finish a sentence; experimenting with lag and developing an instinct for when to listen and when to speak, when to fall behind and when to catch up, etc. These suggestions prepare the ground for the next stage: individual experimentation.  

            We have had success with these exercises, but consider them to be still experimental. They are probably not manageable with more than two students in the booths at a time; one at a time is too boring for the others, since the exercise has to go on for a little while to produce any benefit.  One is experimenting on human beings during a very narrow window in their training; but research ethics dictate that if the treatment is successful, the medicine should be distributed to all patients immediately !

4.1.2.4 Anticipation exercise 

Anticipation is key to successful SI, but it is something the comprehending mind does automatically rather than deliberately. Chernov (2004), for example, ties it in with the basic drive to make sense and seek to impose coherence on input which has given humans their cognitive advantage; it is related to the drives of curiosity and the desire to control an uncertain environment, and its success depends on maximising knowledge of and familiarity with this environment. Trainees are first filled in on as much as they would be expected to know about the event, situation, players, occasion, etc. Then a speech is read out (or a recording – preferably video – can be used, and paused appropriately), stopping in the middle of sentences and leaving the student to continue. This also seems to be a good consciousness-raising exercise: when we experimented with it at ETI (Geneva) for research purposes (comparing anticipatory abilities of subjects listening to their A, B, or C language), students asked for it to be introduced as an exercise in SI training. 

4.2. Experimentation

Trainees can now be shown how language, knowledge, and anticipation are exploited jointly to overcome the apparent difficulties of SI, and then given the opportunity to experiment with the many possibilities to find their own rhythm and style. The first of these exercises, in particular, should be used when students complain about the contrasting structures of the input and output languages. 

4.2.1. ‘Taking the plunge’ (or ‘starting differently’)

This exercise can be time-consuming for the trainer as it requires a careful choice of speech or text. The speech used (in English, for example), should contain sentences beginning with prepositional phrases or  subordinate clauses, e.g. 

‘With the economy picking up again after a long period of stagnation….’

‘Although only a minority of countries ratified the convention in the first five years…’ 

‘While drivers in their twenties are usually assumed to be reckless…’ 

‘Notwithstanding the continued prevalence of dengue fever in parts of Western Malaysia…

Students are instructed to ignore the subordination (opening preposition, subordinate conjunction, etc.) start their own sentence with a subject noun, and find out how they can still produce language conveying the same meaning, where necessary by making later, downstream adjustments. For example, a student may say (in her target language) something like 

            ‘The economy has picked up …, SO…’  

            ‘Only a minority [ratified etc.…], BUT…’; 

            ‘Drivers in their twenties […], BUT…’ etc. 

Other students may choose to delay longer, or restructure more boldly :

            ‘We have seen a long period of economic stagnation, but now the economy […] and…’; 

            ‘In the first five years after the convention was signed…’ ; 

            ‘Dengue fever remains prevalent […]. Nevertheless, …’ 

In practice, even wider variations will be found; all may be acceptable and show that the strategy is assimilated. The instructor monitoring performance should check that the meaning is restored in the restructured product.  

            What is more or less familiar, what should be spat out and what can be put off, is largely individual. But the exercise aims to instil a basic SI reflex: ‘If you feel the sentence is awkward, just say something, anything, and see where it gets you’. Numerous examples can be found in the literature, even if authors’ theoretical explanations may vary (e.g. Wilss 1978 after Mattern 1974; Lederer 1981; Setton 1999). Instructors will instinctively grasp the purpose of this exercise and will find appropriate texts, with constructions which prompting or requiring a similar approach, in their various language combinations.  

            Finally, reformulation should not be forced on students who succeed in producing an intelligent, quality rendition which happens to be structurally and ‘linearly’ quite close to the original (see below, section 4.3.). The aim is to uncover possibilities for when they are needed; imposed restructuring in this case would be perverse.  

4.2.2  Experimenting with time and rhythm and discovering lag variation 

Trainees have now reached the core of SI technique, and should have begun to understand implicitly the constraints and possibilities. The time, freedom and comfort we have in SI certainly depends on the type of speech we have to deal with, and on our preparation and linguistic resources – but there are ways of gaining – or losing – control. If you are too far behind, or looking for a word, when the speaker is saying something difficult or unfamiliar, you will lose content, or come unstuck. If you are too close, or lock yourself into certain sentence constructions, you may have to clumsily backtrack or restart. Students should now be encouraged to experiment with a longer or shorter lag, first on speeches of one type then another – not too suddenly, perhaps in successive weeks – until they find their own rhythm. Practice materials should be real-life or prepared substantive speeches, orally presented though perhaps with short written passages occasionally inserted. We have not yet reached the stage of addressing hazards like recitation, high speed, or awkward accents and delivery. ‘Complex’ or ‘awkward’ sentence structure per se is not a hazard in SI, but a routine part of all speech. 

            The instructor’s job at this stage is not to point out linguistic weaknesses or poor choice of words, but to draw attention relentlessly to missed or distorted content. The goal at this stage is still completeness of the message, even if clumsily or inelegantly expressed. Production quality should improve as students become more comfortable and gain control, making ‘room’ to polish their product; if not, the problem is usually best addressed separately by recommending language enhancement measures (active reading, same-language shadowing of selected quality speeches, etc., which are beyond the scope of the present paper).   

            Students still need special individual attention at this stage. Those who stick too close to the speaker can be shown where they failed to capture the sense for lack of perspective, or where the instant equivalents they produced turn out to be meaningless when strung together. Those who fall too far behind may need to be introduced earlier to the chunking exercise described below (4.3.3.).  

4.3 Consolidation through increasing difficulty, practice and variety 

4.3.1 From basic to professional SI

A student can be considered to have mastered basic SI technique when, if given appropriate contextual information, she can produce usable interpretation, in terms of content fidelity and acceptable language and delivery, of a variety of ‘standard’ speeches on general or semi-technical topics – i.e., speeches presented orally in more or less standard educated language, with structured argument and supporting details (names, examples, numbers), and at normal (i.e. irregular) speed, with local variations in information density, hesitations, parenthetical remarks, digression, and so on.

            Nowadays this definition of ‘standard’ speech probably only covers half, or less, of what we encounter on the market, so trainees have some distance to go to ‘market-readiness’. The last stage in SI training is therefore practice-intensive, and is probably the longest (several weeks or months). 

            Language and knowledge, as we have said, are ‘supporting’ competencies in SI, which trainees can and should continue to work on in their own time to improve their performance, as well as practising on a wide variety of speeches and speakers. But can the training programme offer any more in terms of techniques to deal with the many additional hazards and challenges of modern, professional SI  –  abnormally fast delivery from written text, formal and legalistic registers (often combined), mixed-media presentations, relay for other booths, and incoherent or non-standard speakers ?

4.3.2. Formal and institutional discourse

Schools which have traditionally placed strong emphasis on analysis and the need to ‘deconstruct’ the incoming speech have sometimes been reluctant to train students to deal with discourse which is more formalised and predictable in content, but presents other challenges like speed and formal register, and in some cases, audience expectations for a more literal rendition using recognisable standard (or even approved) terminology. 

            Some countries and delegations have a historical tradition of close, even intrusive, supervision of interpreters’ work, again usually by people who are not necessarily aware of the hidden and cognitive work operations. In many other settings, such as scientific conferences, interpreters have to deal with very fast and/or recited speeches, often with little or no preparation. To handle these, different skills must be acquired, which though possibly ‘dumber’, are nevertheless essential to survival. Trainees who have come this far can master these with intensive practice, for which time must be made, and materials provided, if the school is to turn out market-ready professionals.

            Trainees preparing to work for international (and some national) institutions, in particular, will need special practice in a certain kind of formal, recited discourse. In these settings, speeches may be read out, often fast or monotonously, while audiences may expect certain phrases to be rendered by established equivalents smoothly and with little or no hesitation. Similarly, confident use of formal, ceremonial styles is required for certain events. In this mode, structural agility remains vital, but language, style and terminology may be more important than the spontaneity and imagination needed for other, more impromptu speaking styles. 

4.3.3. Linear segmentation (‘tight chunking’) exercise

Working ‘conceptually’ with a longish lag, catching up only when necessary to catch frozen items like  names or numbers, may become risky with informationally-dense material – read from a slide, for example, that the interpreter is seeing for the first time. This kind of reformulation works (and produces better results) when the material is familiar enough to store large chunks conceptually, and to summarise easily and accurately if one falls too far behind, but not when each chunk, while representing a logical step in the argument, also contains lots of dense, unfamiliar technical and numerical material. The same may be true for diplomatic or official texts, often read out but provided only at the last minute, when set terminological equivalents are required even in preference (alas) to intelligent and idiomatic reformulation.  

            Trainees may also go further than necessary in restructuring, either in a bid to be more idiomatic or because they lack (especially in B) some handy phrases than would do the trick more simply, and fall too far behind, which if interpreting a television interview, or providing relay (especially with slides), can be disastrous. 

            In the linear (parallel) segmentation or ‘tight chunking’ exercise, text is scrolled chunk by chunk on a screen, with students taking turns to produce a self-contained rendition of each visible chunk, with an appropriate link to the previous discourse and with due regard for fidelity and acceptable language. The instructor – and here the need for a professional, practising interpreter becomes obvious – provides clues and (every now and then) practical tips for handy phrases and linking devices, which may show how (smaller) successive chunks could have been handled as units and elegantly joined up, with the necessary small adjustments, without meaning loss or distortion.          Such specific suggestions may indeed often be linguistic, covering useful links, alternative phrasing and so on. These will be especially precious to students working into B. All-round SI competence includes both the ability to reformulate radically, and the ability to stay as ‘linear’ as possible without compromising quality.

            For institutional discourse, exercises involving rehearsal (‘cheating’, as Gillies puts it), terminological research and reference to standard translations (available in all official languages for UN General Assembly sessions, for example) will be helpful. A. Dawrant (GIIT/SISU, Shanghai; p.c.) recommends the following exercises using such materials at an ‘early intermediate’ stage in SI training:

(i) read through a (source) speech transcript, identifying specialized terms and looking them up in the sample translation; then do the speech in SI without looking at the text; then listen to the recording of your performance while checking against the transcript, and finally, do the speech again.  

(ii)) listen to a recording of your own interpretation while checking against the SL transcript, and consult the sample translation for “good ready versions.” 

(iii) interpret the same speech a second time a few days later and listen critically to the playback; 

(iv) just occasionally, choose a very good quality speech and interpret it over and over until satisfied.

5. Pedagogical coordination and preparation for the real world

Finally, these differences in speech genre and in the appropriate strategies for dealing with them must be explained to students, to avoid the impression that instructors are giving conflicting instructions – for example, an instructor working mainly with UN materials may recommend a short lag and insist on certain terminology, while another will be stressing analysis, reformulation and a flexible lag. The diversity of speech types and situations which graduates will encounter when they enter the market – especially in freelance practice – can never be simulated in a training programme, and may come as a shock to the young beginner. Schools are strongly advised to prepare future graduates for the real world by inviting external speakers to give lectures; organising mock conferences with an agenda, a programme, a strict schedule and other realistic details; and last but certainly not least, arranging for internships in international organisations where students can work in ‘dumb’ booths – preferably through at least one entire meeting – followed by debriefings with their instructors. Experience has confirmed time and again that such visits are often nothing short of an epiphany, in which a latent understanding of the task cristallizes for the first time into a strategic individual style, audible in the booth as of the student’s return home and instilling the necessary confidence for the final exam and first steps on the market. 

6. Conclusion 

Simultaneous interpreting is a cognitively challenging and complex task, but it remains a social act of communication performed live for real people in specific situations speaking often technically, unpredictably, incoherently or incorrectly, and with more or less confidence, but with specific goals and expectations. Not everyone is cut out for SI, and no-one should embark on this training without the requisite language ability, general knowledge and aptitudes; and barring temporary and emergency  needs, trainers should themselves be practicing professionals with access to the proper equipment, installations, realistic materials, and a facilitating institutional environment. With these pre-requisites in place and a theoretical understanding of the successive challenges, it is possible to guide trainees from a solid basic competency in interpreting (consecutive) through an incremental progression of exercises which are never artificial, but from the outset contain elements of the realism, challenge and excitement of the full task, while gradually building the cognitive and linguistic agilities needed to deal with the reality – solemn, stimulating or hair-raising – of a modern multilingual conference. 

References

Chernov, Ghelly V. 2004. Inference and anticipation in simultaneous interpreting. Edited with critical foreword and notes by Robin Setton and Adelina Hild. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 

Gillies, Andrew. 2001. Conference Interpreting – A Students’ Companion. Krakow: Tertium. 

Gillies, Andrew. 2004. Conference Interpreting – A New Students’ Companion. Krakow: Tertium.

Jones, Roderick. 1998. Conference Interpreting Explained. Manchester: St. Jerome.

Kalina, Sylvia. 1998. Strategische Prozesse beim Dolmetschen: theoretische Grundlagen, empirische Fallstudien, didaktische Konsequenzen. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.

Kalina, Sylvia. 2000. Zu den Grundlagen einer Didaktik des Dolmetschens. In Kalina, S., Buhl, S., Arbogast, G. (eds.), Dolmetschen : Theorie – Praxis – Didaktik, 161-189. St. Ingbert: Roehriger UniVerlag.

Lederer, Marianne. 1981.La traduction simultanée. Paris: Minard Lettres Modernes.

Mackintosh, Jennifer. 1989. English up-date: An experiment in in-service training for practising conference interpreters. In L. Gran & J. Dodds (Eds.), The theoretical and practical aspects of teaching interpretation, 219-228. Udine: Campanotto.

Mattern, Nanza. 1974. Anticipation in German-English Simultaneous Interpreting. M.A. Thesis. (unpubl.), University of Saarbrücken. 

Sachs, J. 1967. Recognition Memory for Syntactic and Semantic Aspects of Connected Discourse. Perception and Psychophysics, 2, 437-442.

Seleskovitch, Danica and Lederer, Marianne. 2002. Pédagogie raisonnée de l’interprétation. Paris: Didier Erudition.

Seleskovitch, Danica and Lederer, Marianne. 1995. A Systematic approach to teaching interpretation. (Tr. J. Harmer). Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf.

Wilss, Wolfram. 1978. Syntactic anticipation in German-English simultaneous interpretation. In David Gerver and Wallace H. Sinaiko (eds.), Language Interpretation and Communication. Proceedings of the NATO Symposium on Language Interpretation and Communication, Venice, 1977, 335-43. New York: Plenum Press.

Robin Setton has been training conference interpreters since 1990 in various schools including ESIT and ISIT (Paris), ETI (Geneva), GITIS (Taipei, Fujen University), and currently Shanghai (GIIT/SISU) where he is in charge of the doctoral programme in interpreting studies. He holds a Ph.D. in Applied Linguistics and postgraduate degrees in Conference Interpretation, Translation, Chinese Studies and Linguistics, and has written on cognitive, linguistic and cultural aspects of interpreting.


[1] Given the scarcity of seasoned professionals available to teach in the early years of interpreter training in new language combinations, or on emerging markets, we are reluctant to rule out valuable contributions by conscientious non-interpreters with special skills and competencies who prepare themselves with a serious study of the needs of this specific type of training. But the reader will easily infer from the content of this paper that even if some team-teaching is inevitable, the core of the programme – including exams and key skills training – must be designed, (co-)taught and monitored by practising professionals in touch with market realities.. 

[2] An English translation of an earlier edition (Seleskovitch and Lederer 1989) is available: see bibliography. 

How do notes help? Andres

In the second part of her book, Konsekutivdolmetschen und Notation, (2002, Peter Lang), Doerte Andres offers probably the most thorough and systematic analysis of different interpreters’ note-taking techniques yet undertaken. A summary of the conclusions is offered here. Hier in Originalfassung (auf Deutsch)

Doerte Andres describes a study in which 14 students and 14 professional interpreters were asked to interpret the same speech, Jacques Chirac’s New Year address 1996/7 (Part 1Part 2), consecutively. Each was filmed taking notes and giving back the speech and Andres has painstakingly noted the exact second at which each element was spoken in the original, appeared in the note-pad, and also was spoken by the interpreter. Large sections of the notes are also recreated in printed and thus legible form for the purposes of the analyses she them makes. Much has been written about consecutive, but we interpreters tend to say what we think rather than what we see and herein lies the beauty of this large empirical study. We can see what really goes on. 

For TEACHERS and interpreting researchers this body of work is the single most valuable resource available for the analysis of consecutive notes and the problems they pose. And it is available, albeit in its rawest form, at the following web address.

http://www.uni-mainz.de/~andres/Notizen.html

For STUDENTS it represents an excellent opportunity to see that other students have the same problems in consecutive, and why they have them. There is also the invaluable possibility of seeing how professionals solve the same problems. 

The conclusions Andres draws from this exceptional study are extremely interesting and as follows, 

1. A clear system for notation which includes fixed rules for abbreviation and a core of unambiguous symbols can help save time, which can then be used for other operations. 

2. Verbs and expressions of time are significant in reproducing what was said. 

3. According different weights to and structuring the layout of elements within the notes serve to intensify the operation ‘comprehension’ and facililitate the reproduction of the [source] text. 

4. The segmentation and arrangement of the notes on the page can facilitate assignation [of meaning] and have a positive effect on oral reproduction. 

5. Noting link words is an important part of ensuring cohesion. 

6. The time lag [between hearing and writing] is dependent on and can be allowed to vary according to how quickly something has been understood. 

7. Everyone has to discover their own [ideal] time lag 

8. A continued time lag of more than 7 seconds causes gaps to appear in the comprehension or notation [of the original]. 

9. discontinuous noting [noting elements in a different order to the order they are presented by the speaker – or in practice, going back and adding something to your notes from a previous section] can be helpful in structuring and completing the information [noted]. 

10. Rhetorical components are more easily reproduced if they have been noted down. 

11. Gaps in the comprehension or notation processes among students reappear in the production phase. 

These observations show clearly, how important and helpful it is for students to deal in some detail with note-taking and how important a component skill [Teiloperation] an in-grained, reliable and efficient system for taking notes is. [It is] a skill which aids and intensifies the comprehension process and thus has a decisive influence on the target langauage output. (Andres p250, Translation into English ITR) 

( Note on the website. Students are numbered Ger, SB and HD, representing the different schools they were attending. The speech itself can be found under the first two links (Part 1, Part 2).

Wozu Notizen? Andres

Im zweiten Teil ihres Buches, Konsekutivdolmetschen und Notation, (2002, Peter Lang), bietet Doerte Andres dem Leser an, die bisher wahrscheinlich gruendlichste und systematischste Analyse der Notizentechnik beim Konsekutivdolmetschen. Ihre Schlussfolgerung sind hier wiedergegeben. (Conclusions in Englishavailable here)

In the second part of her book, Doerte Andres describes a study in which 14 students and 14 professional interpreters were asked to interpret the same speech, Jacques Chirac’s New Year address 1996/7 (Part 1Part 2), consecutively. Each was filmed taking notes and giving back the speech and Andres has painstakingly noted the exact second at which each element was spoken in the original, appeared in the note-pad, and also was spoken by the interpreter. Large sections of the notes are also recreated in printed and thus legible form for the purposes of the analyses she them makes. Much has been written about consecutive, but we interpreters tend to say what we think rather than what we see and herein lies the beauty of this large empirical study. We can see what really goes on. 

For TEACHERS and interpreting researchers this body of work is the single most valuable resource available for the analysis of consecutive notes and the problems they pose. And it is available, albeit in its rawest form, at the following web address. 

http://www.uni-mainz.de/~andres/Notizen.html

For STUDENTS it represents an excellent opportunity to see that other students have the same problems in consecutive, and why they have them. There is also the invaluable possibility of seeing how professionals solve the same problems. 

3.4. Notation

Die in dieser Untersuchung enthaltenen Daten lassen den Schluß zu, daß der Notation eine andere Bedeutung und Funktion zukommt, als in zahlreichen Publikationen bisher angenommen. Es geht bei der Notation nämlich letztendlich nicht um Fragen wie zielsprachliches oder ausgangssprachliches Notieren, um die Anzahl von Symbolen oder um den zeitlichen Abstand zwischen Informationsrezeption und Notation. Uns geht vielmehr darum, zu vermitteln, daß

1. ein deutlich geschriebenes Notationssystem mit festen Abkürzungsregeln und einem eindeutigen Stamm an Symbolen Zeitersparnis bewirkt, die für andere Operationen genutzt werden kann;

2. Verben und Tempusangaben fuer die Rekonstruktion des Gesagten ein wesentlicher Faktor sind;

3. Informationsgewichtung und -strukturierung in den Notizen die Verstehensoperationen intensivieren und die Textproduktion erleichtern;

4. Segmentierung und räumliche Anordnung in den Notizen das Zuordnen erleichtern und die Sprachproduktion positiv beeinflussen;

5. die Notation von Verknüpfungsmitteln ein wesentliches Element für die Herstellung von Kohäsion ist;

6. das Decalage in Abhängigkeit vom Faktor Verstehen Schwankungen unterworfen ist und sein darf,

7. jede Person das für sie individuelle Decalage herausfinden muß;

8. ein anhaltendes Decalage von mehr als 7 Sekunden zu Defiziten im Verstehens- oder im Notationsprozess führt,

9. diskontinuierliches Notieren zur Informationsstrukturierung oder – ver-vollständigung hilfreich sein kann;

10. rhetorische Merkmale in der Textproduktion leichter ücksichtigt werden, wenn diese in den Notizen markiert sind;

11. Defizite im Verstehensprozess und in den Notizen sich bei den Studierenden in der Präsentation widerspiegeln.

Diesen Schlußfolgerungen soll eine weitere Beobachtung hinzugefügt werden: In der Gruppe der Studierenden wurde in den Transkripten auch die Ausbildungsstätte vermerkt. Dies geschah in der Ueberlegung, ob sich Notationsschulen in den Notizen widerspielgen oder ob die Studierenden, losgelöst von der Notationsdiktion der jeweiligen Institute, ihre eigenen individuellen Notationstechniken entwickeln. Die Untersuchungen haben eindeutig gezeigt, daß die Studierenden das aufgreifen und eventuell weiterentwickeln, was ihnen an Notationsformen in den Instituten angeboten wird. Es bildet die Grundlage, auf der sie aufbauen und die sie als Professionelle beibehalten.

Die Studierenden der Universität Heidelberg arbeiten mehr als die übrigen Studierenden mit Symbolen, d.h. der Notation nach Matyssek (Matyssek 1989): sprachunabhängige Symbole, Buchstabensymbole, Tempusmarkierungen. Die wenigsten Symbole, viele ausgeschriebene Wörter und Abkürzungen in Form von Wortanfängen sind bei den Studierenden der Universität Saarbrücken zu finden. Die Studierenden der Universität Mainz/Germersheim benutzen ein Mischsystem der verschiedensten Notationsweisen: Matyssek, Rozan, Herbert, d.h. eine Mischung aus einigen Symbolen, ausgeschriebenen Wörtern, Wortanfängen und Abkürzungen.

Diese Beobachtungen machen insgesamt deutlich, wie wichtig und hilfreich für die Studierenden eine intensive Auseinandersetzung mit der Notation ist, wie wichtig ein trainiertes, verläßliches, effizientes Notationssystem als eine Teiloperation ist, die den Verstehensprozeß stützt und intensiviert und damit entscheidenden Einfluß auf die Qualität der zielsprachlichen Umsetzung nimmt.

Die Rede finden Sie unter folgenden 2 Links (Teil 1Teil 2)

Timing and tactical choices

The following passage from Robin Setton and Andrew Dawrant’s excellent Conference Interpreting – a complete course is reproduced without the publisher’s permission.

Simultaneous interpreting timing and tactical choices (1)

We have seen that timing and optimal ‘entry points’ in SI depend on three main factors:

1. A viable production base: Have I got enough sense to start saying something? Since sense comes from both incoming words and context, this base can consist of

a. EITHER, a ‘unit of sense’ (Lederer 1990:115 ff.) that fully expreses or completes an idea, or – more typically, at the beginning of sentences – a self-contained unit that can be translated with little or no risk, eg. ‘Furthermore, …’, ‘Next point…’, ‘A better example…’, as well as most adjuncts specifying time, place or circumstance (‘Since our last meeting…’);

b. OR, enough context and general sense of the direction of the speech to stall by padding, guessing or anticipating even without much evidence from the actual words heard so far. For example, to avoid a long and uncomfortable pause when a speaker starts off hesitant and confused, and syntax or word meaning is stilll unclear: ‘Erm, I think we can run, er… well, at least, just, at this point, …’, the interpreter can say ‘ Ensuite,… enfin je vous propose la chose suivante…’ . (‘Next let me suggest this…’)

2. Memory: Do I risk forgetting if I try to hold it in memory and delay expresing it? The answer depends on the density and newness of the information, especially for the interpreter, and on certain attested facts about short-term memory, such as (i) primacy and recency effects: the first and last items of a list may be remembered first, the others later; and (ii) the ‘solubility’ in memory of different items; numbers and unfamiliar names cannot always be associated with the surrounding meaning, so memory for them is very short. Finally expressing the content rehearses the memory of it and ‘renews’ it in the target language.

3. TL Availability: Which part of the input do I have TL words most ready to express, lexcially (a viable equivalent) and/or syntactically: can I continue or finish the current sentence, start a new one, produce a meaningful link? In either case, the first words uttered can either be definitive (if you find the perfect phrase…) or, if meaning is still vague, a placeholder, adjustable later (8.4.3 above)

Coping tactics

This extract is taken from pages 191-201 of Daniel Gile’s excellent Basic Concepts and Models for Interpreter and Translator training, 1995 & 2009, Benjamins of Amsterdam.

Basic Concepts and Models for Interpreter and Translator training 1995 & 2009

Coping Tactics in Interpretation

Introduction

In spite of interpreters’ preparation strategies, problems do arise in interpreting situations (see Gile 1989) because of processing capacity limitations (as ex­plained in chapter 7), errors in processing capacity management, and gaps in the interpreters’ Knowledge Base. Many of these problems can be said to be unavoidable, as shown by the fact that they are encountered regularly even by interpreters with a solid reputation and long professional experience. Interpre­tation has been referred to by some professionals as “crisis management,” and in the light of interpreters’ daily experience, these are apt words to describe an aspect of interpreting which is virtually unknown to the public at large.
Difficulties affect both comprehension and production, often through failure sequences as explained in chapter 7. When interpreters are aware of such problems, they tend to use a rather small set of tactics to limit their impact.
Coping tactics are a very fundamental practical skill in interpreting. Basically, they are taught within the framework of practical exercises. In most training programs, this is done by trial and correction, with trial on the student’s part and corrections from the instructor. Such corrections are gener­ally normative; instructors sometimes refer to the communication impact of the tactics in order to explain their preferences, but are not necessarily aware of other factors which influence them.
This chapter attempts to provide instructors with a list of basic coping tactics for a general view of the issue. It also presents a conceptual framework which spells out the advantages and drawbacks of each tactic, and discusses a few rules which may help explain what makes interpreters prefer one tactic over the other beyond their individual merits.

Tactics in simultaneous interpretation

2.1 Comprehension tactics

The following are the main tactics used when comprehension problems arise, and when they threaten to arise under time-related or processing capacity­related pressure.

a. Delaying the response
When a comprehension difficulty arises, interpreters may respond immedi­ately with one of the other tactics presented below. However, they may also delay their response for a while (a fraction of a second to a few seconds), so as to have some time for thought while they receive more information from the source-language speech. After a while, they may have solved the problem entirely, or else they may decide to resort to another tactic.
Because of its very nature, the Delay tactic involves an accumulation of information in short-term memory, and is associated with the risk of losing speech segments in a failure sequence as outlined in chapter 7.

b. Reconstructing the segment with the help of the context
When interpreters have not properly heard or understood a technical term, name, number, or other type of speech segment, they can try to reconstruct it in their mind using their knowledge of the language, the subject, and, the situation (their extralinguistic knowledge).
The reconstruction process is an integral part of speech comprehension in everyday situations as well. It is defined as a tactic in the present context when it becomes a conscious endeavor, as opposed to an ordinary, subconscious process.
If successful, reconstruction can result in full recovery of the information. However, it may entail some waiting until more information is available and require considerable time and processing capacity. Like the Delay tactic presented above, it is associated with a high risk of saturation and individual deficits. Reconstruction from the context can therefore not be considered a high-priority tactic.

c. Using the boothmate’s help
In simultaneous interpretation, there are theoretically at least two interpreters in the booth at all times. One is active (producing a target-language speech), while the other is passive (listening, but not speaking). The passive colleague, who can devote full attention to listening, has a better chance of understanding difficult speech segments than the active interpreter, whose processing capac­ity is being shared by the three Efforts. Moreover, on the production side, the passive interpreter can consult a glossary or another document, which takes up much time and processing capacity, and then give the information to the active colleague, generally in writing. The presence of a passive interpreter in the booth is therefore a major asset to the active interpreter.
The active interpreter can ask for the passive colleague’s help with a glance or a movement of the head. In teams that work well, the passive interpreter will sense a hesitation in the active colleague’s speech and under­stand there is a problem. He or she can also anticipate problems and write down names, numbers, technical terms, etc., without even being asked for help. When the problem is terminological, the boothmate will generally indi­cate to the active interpreter the target-language term if possible, so that it can be used for reformulation. When the problem lies with a single word, name, or number, the passive boothmate can also write it down in the source language for the benefit of the active interpreter who did not hear it correctly. It is much more difficult, however, to explain an idea efficiently, because the active interpreter does not have time to read a long explanation.
This tactic is a very good one because it does not cost much in time and processing capacity, and pooling the knowledge and intelligence of two per­sons, one of whom does not have to divide attention between listening and other tasks, provides a better chance of finding the information than using the resources of only one person.


However, in order for the tactic to work, the passive interpreter must be not only physically present in the booth, but also available and willing to make the effort and help the active colleague. This situation does not always occur:
• Because of the intense effort involved in interpreting, interpreters strongly feel the need for rest. In teams composed of two members per target language, when conditions are difficult, interpreters tend to leave the booth as soon as they have finished their active duty and only return when they are on again, or else they may stay in the booth but shut themselves out and rest.
• In conferences in which papers are to be read, documents are often given to the interpreters at the very last moment, and presentations are allocated individually to each member of the team. In such a case, all interpreters are busy reading their paper or interpreting, and no help is available to the active interpreter from other team members.
• For psychological and sociological reasons, including the awareness of one’s weaknesses and some associated frustration, interpreters may feel vulnerable and not want other colleagues to sit with them and listen while they are working.
It is important for teachers to point out the practical value of cooperation between interpreters, as well as its importance in the framework of profes­sional ethics aiming at offering clients better service. The practical aspects of such cooperation, involving in particular large and legible handwriting, should also be stressed.


d. Consulting documents in the booth When there is no passive colleague in the booth, interpreters can look for solutions in documents they have before them.
The efficiency of this tactic varies greatly: looking for a term in a com­mercial dictionary may require much time and processing capacity, but finding an important word in a document that was read and marked before the confer­ence can be very fast. This is why it is important to pay attention to both the preparation of documents and their management in the booth. Instructors should show students how to make important names and terms stand out for quick reference, using highlighters or other means. Writing important techni­cal terms and names on a sheet of paper in front of the interpreter (beside the glossary prepared for the conference) is another way of making them readily available. In particular, documents should be laid out in the booth, sorted, and marked in such a way as to minimize the time needed to access them and to recognize their identification numbers or titles, possibly with different stacks for each language, sorted by numerical sequence, type of document, etc.


2.2 Preventive tactics


The following tactics are used when time or processing capacity pressure is such that the interpreter believes a problem may arise or is about to occur. The idea is to limit the risks of failure.


a. Taking notes When the speech contains figures and names that interpreters feel they may forget and that they cannot reformulate right away for syntactic reasons, they may take them down in notes. While affording greater security as regards the items which are taken down, this tactic entails a high cost in time and process­ing capacity, which increases the risk of losing other items of information that come before or after those written down (this is an interference phenomenon, as explained in section 3). The risk is reduced significantly when it is the passive colleague who writes the information for the active colleague.

It is interesting to note that when translating in simultaneous from and into Japanese, some Japanese interpreters take down not only numbers and names, but also other information which Westerners generally do not write (in this case, it is often the passive interpreter who takes down the information for the active colleague). The reason given by them is that syntactic structures differ greatly between Japanese and other (mostly Western) languages, which leads to much waiting before the reformulation of any specific part of a sentence, hence a possible overload of short-term memory and an increased risk of losing information (see chapter 9).


b. Changing the Ear-Voice Span
By changing the Ear-Voice Span (EVS), that is the time lag between compre­hension and reformulation, interpreters can control to a certain extent the processing capacity requirements for individual Efforts. By shortening the lag, they decrease short-term memory requirements, but deprive themselves of anticipation potential and run the risk of misunderstanding a sentence and driving themselves into target-language sentences which will be difficult to complete. By lagging further behind, interpreters increase comprehension potential, but may overload short-term memory.
Teachers sometimes advise students to try to lengthen or shorten their EVS in specific cases, but there does not exist a clear-cut, consistent theory or set of operational rules on the subject. It seems that EVS regulation is learned with experience; I believe that this is the single largest benefit derived from practice in simultaneous interpretation during initial training.


c. Segmentation
When faced with potential overload of memory, as with a source language and a target language that are syntactically very different, with embedded structures in the source language, or with unclear sentence structures, interpreters may choose to reformulate speech segments earlier than they would normally do, sometimes before they have a full picture of what the speaker wants to say. In such cases, they may resort to neutral sentence beginnings or segments in the target language that do not commit them one way or another. For instance, in a source-language sentence expressing a causal relationship such as:


Because of the complex character of equation (2) as shown above, com­pounded by the difficulty of finding a unique solution to equations (3) and (4) which correspond to a steady state system

the interpreter can say in the target-language something like:


Equation (2) as shown above is complex. Equations (3) and (4) describe a steady system. It is difficult to find a unique solution to them.

While interpreting these segments, he or she will keep in mind the causal nature of the relationship, which will eventually be expressed by “Therefore ….” Segmentation can save short-term memory capacity requirements by unloading information from memory faster. On the other hand, the very formulation of several grammatically complete short sentences instead of one may involve higher processing capacity requirements in the Production Effort. Recommendations should be given on a case-by-case basis.


d. Changing the order of elements in an enumeration
Enumerations are high-density speech segments that impose a high load on short-term memory. One tactic often observed consists of reformulating the last elements first so as to free memory from the information, and then to move on to other elements. To my knowledge, no analysis has yet been performed as to why this should reduce Memory Effort load. One possible explanation is that by reformulating the last elements first, it is possible to pick them up before they have been processed in depth and integrated fully into the semantic network, thus saving processing capacity. This tactic may work best with names, which can be reproduced from echoic memory (memory of the sound), or with terms which are easily transcoded; it may not be very effective if such elements cannot be transcoded or reproduced phonetically and require more processing capacity anyway.

2.3 Reformulation tactics

Gile includes reformulation tactics as part of coping tactics. They are detailed here

When to start speaking in simultaneous

The following is a summary of a section of Roderick Jones’ fantastic book, Conference Interpreting Explained.

Conference Interpreting Explained. Roderick Jones. Paperback, 152 pages. Routledge

Don’t start speaking until you know you can complete a grammatical sentence…but you don’t have to complete the sentence you originally had in mind nor the same sentence the speaker finishes.

1. Don’t start speaking until you know you can complete a grammatical sentence. Any sentence, no matter how short, but  you must be able to finish a sentence. 

(Any grammatical sentence….but if the speaker stops mid way and changes tack it’s the interpreter who looks like a fool. One of the fundamental rules of learning to interpret is “finish you sentences!”).

2. But you don’t have to complete the sentence you originally had in mind. 

(The interpreter can change his/her mind while speaking and come up with a better sentence than the original idea, no harm in that but because there was always a complete sentence in mind the interpreter has a safety net.) 

3. nor the same sentence the speaker finishes. 

(The speaker may well launch himself into long complex sentence structures which he may well get tangled up in…the interpreter can create shorter sentences from that long one to gain clarity. Jones calls this the salami technique.) 

Jones’ example goes something like this….. 

Imagine the speaker begins as follows, 

“Despite the ruling of the European Court of Justice last month, the UK government has decided not to change its much criticised and controversial policy on the disposal of waste products from hospitals.” 

By the time the intepreter has heard the words “last month” he can form a grammatical sentence, for example, “The ECJ made a ruling last month.” This may seem simplistic but as we said above it is a safety net, and can be changed as we go along. What is crucial is that the interpreter start with a whole sentence in mind.

As the speaker continues the interpreter may for example aim to continue, 

“The ECJ made a ruling last month, despite which the UK government has not decided to change policy.” 

The interpreter may also leave the original sentence and start a new one.

“The ECJ made a ruling last month. Despite this the UK government has not decided to change policy.”

It his is a technique and as such it needs to be practised. Knowing this in theory will not help you. Making its application the goal of practice sessions over a number of days or weeks will. Initially it will seem to make interpreting more difficult because it is new to us and because it is a technique that is not natural – our natural reaction is to start too early, particularly when we are nervous – but once mastered you will find that this technique eliminates many of the common pitfalls that interpreters encounter. For example, correcting oneself, restarting sentences, forgetting the grammatical structure of the beginning of long sentences and therefore not matching the end to it correctly etc.

To read a fuller description of how this technique works in practice, buy Roderick Jones’ book!