This article was downloaded by: [UQ Library]On: 12 September 2013, At: 09:50Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Perspectives: Studies in TranslatologyPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rmps20

Theory and practice in the teaching of interpretingHanne Aarup aa Copenhagen Business SchoolPublished online: 28 Apr 2010.

To cite this article: Hanne Aarup (1993) Theory and practice in the teaching of interpreting, Perspectives: Studies inTranslatology, 1:2, 167-174, DOI: 10.1080/0907676X.1993.9961210

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.1993.9961210

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in thepublications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representationsor warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Anyopinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not theviews of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should beindependently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses,actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoevercaused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematicreproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in anyform to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

THEORY AND PRACTICE IN THE TEACHING OF INTERPRETING

Hanne Aarup, Copenhagen Business School

AbstractUsing Seleskovitch's three-phase model of the process of interpreting as its point of departure,

the article identifies component features which are important for the skill of interpreting, and dis-cusses the differences between translation and interpreting, the superficial differences betweenconsecutive and simultaneous interpreting. The article stresses the dangers in paying too muchattention to consecutive at the beginning of interpreter training programmes, since this may makestudents consider interpreting a type of translation which does not require analysis. The authordiscusses other component skills in interpreting and the ways they can be presented to studentsand concludes that it is pedagogically unsound to put off simultaneous interpreting until an ad-vanced stage: in interpreter training programmes for future conference interpreters, both consecu-tive and simultaneous interpreting should be taught from the very start. The article is roundedoff with a description of exercises meant for practising important component skills in interpreting.

IntroductionAll teachers of conference interpreting must occasionally ask themselves whe-

ther interpreting can be taught at all or whether those who are naturally giftedwould become interpreters even though they had not received any training.

This is largely a rhetorical question since training programmes obviously pro-vide interpreters with skills and knowledge that are invaluable in subsequent pro-fessional work. At the same time it is also necessary for every teacher to con-stantly reappraise the relevance and appropriateness of their teaching methods.

In this paper, I shall discuss components in interpreter training from the pointof view of theory, professional experience, and current teaching practices at theCopenhagen Business School's interpreting training course.

Seleskovitch's 'phases' in the process of interpretingIn 1968, one of the pioneers of simultaneous interpreting, the previous head

of The School of Interpreting at the Sorbonne, Danica Seleskovitch wrote L'inter-prete dans les conferences Internationales. After a quarter of a century, this workremains a major source of inspiration for the theory and practice of interpreting.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UQ

Lib

rary

] at

09:

50 1

2 Se

ptem

ber

2013

168 Perspectives: Studies in Translatology -1993: 2

Seleskovitch describes the process of both consecutive and simultaneous inter-preting as a three-phase process.

a. The first phase consists in listening to a linguistically meaningful signal. The linguisticsignal is perceived, and thanks to an analysis and an interpretation, it is understood intellec-tually.b. The linguistic signal is then deliberately forgotten. Only the mental image of the meaning("le signifie") remains.c. A new linguistic signal is created in another language.

This signal expresses the original meaning in its entirety and is adapted to thelistener.

It is not immediately apparent from Seleskovitch's description that the threephases in the process are synchronic: they take place simultaneously in such away that different messages are present in each phase of the process at the sametime. The whole process is characterised by being instantaneous as well as irrevo-cable.

MemoryIn the first phase, when the incoming message is being decoded, the interpre-

ter's memory is important. Two types of memory are in constant interaction:1) The long-term memory, the general knowledge repository from which inter-

preters are furnished with information for placing the incoming message in theproper perspective and for interpreting it.

2) The working memory that stores items of information right away until theyconnect with the surrounding context, fitting into the appropriate hierarchical pat-tern.

Simultaneous and consecutive interpretingProfessional level

It is obvious that the three phases occur at the same time in simultaneous in-terpreting. On the other hand it is legitimate to ask whether this also applies toconsecutive interpreting. At first glance, it seems as though consecutive interpre-ting offers good opportunities for analysis of the message before the rest of theprocess takes place:

1) Interpreters are under no obligation to formulate the final message while ta-king notes: the notes concern the utterance in source language and the analysisis confined to the source language. It would therefore seem as if the notes mightconcern only the source language.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UQ

Lib

rary

] at

09:

50 1

2 Se

ptem

ber

2013

Hanne Aarup: Theory and practice in the teaching of interpreting 169

2) It is possible for interpreters to correct their interpretation of the message inthe source language while taking notes: they have the general outline of the textwhich is the basis for the reformulation of the message in the target language.Speaking the target language freely and fluently, interpreters should thus be ableto solve the task satisfactorily.

In so far as they use language-bound notes at all, good professional interpre-ters will, in fact, take notes in the target language, for in this way they overcomemost hindrances to the realization of the notes at the earliest possible stage in theprocess. This will make for optimum results, that is, a fluent, natural and convin-cing rendering in the target language: it is essential that interpreters do their ut-most not to present the users with linguistic problems, be that problems in un-derstanding or difficulties of expression.

By and large, there is therefore no basic difference between the two types ofinterpreting in professional work.

TraineesHowever, with beginners, the phases do not coincide: the third phase (repro-

duction) normally occurs after the two others. Since it is a new skill which mustbe learnt, beginners usually have to trouble automatically to reach the pointwhere the message in the target language is simultaneous and irrevocable. Theacquisition of this skill is therefore a key element in the teaching of interpretingand instruction must focus on the three phases with a view to their eventual si-multaneity.

In what follows, I shall discuss various points which bear upon the principlesas well as practical pedagogics with such instruction. And let me add: in the pro-cess, I shall also implicitly question the assumption that there should be a kindof easily defined progression in the teaching of interpreting and its componentskills.

Consecutive interpreting and instructionTranslation and interpreting

Interpreting is often confused with written translation. The two specialties areby no means identical although they are related. Translators also know the threephases in Seleskovitch's description in their work, although they are not subjectto the demands of orality, immediacy, simultaneity and irrevocability. The main

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UQ

Lib

rary

] at

09:

50 1

2 Se

ptem

ber

2013

170 Perspectives: Studies in Translatology -1993: 2

difference between (written) translation and (oral) interpreting, is the time factor:it allows the translator the advantage of making a detailed, subtly shaded, and in-depth analysis of the source text

This difference in the time factor is crucial If exclusive attention is given toconsecutive interpreting at the beginning of a training programme, students tendto apply a process akin to translation to interpreting: it is natural to take notes inthe source language in order to make things easy. This implies that students onlylisten to the source message deterring the analysis until later or maybe omittingit altogether. This procedure of merely translating notes is exactly the oppositeof the essential character of simultaneous interpreting, the mastery of which isthe primary objective of the training in European study programmes which aregeared towards modern conference interpreting.

Analysis, notetaking and hierarchizationIn order to be admitted to interpreting study programmes, including the post-

graduate course at the Copenhagen Business School, the applicants must have1) an excellent knowledge of their second and third languages,2) a perfect command of their mother tongue, and3) broad general knowledge.Without these prerequisites it is hard to imagine a satisfactory command of

analysis of the type which Seleskovitch stressed. The analysis of a speech in thesource language involves an interpretation of the contents of the speech anddemands that this information is both mentally and concretely laid out in hi-erarchical order.

In consecutive interpreting this analysis should be reflected in the notes. In theanalysis of a source-language speech, the notes must reflect the information ofthe speech as well as a mental hierarchy. The result of the analysis must be ob-vious in the note-taking itself in consecutive interpreting, so that the notes mirrora hierarchal order of information which is being set up while the linguistic signsof the source text are decoded.

Note-taking occurs simultaneously with the process of hierarchization and thenotes must clearly reflect:

1. the interpreter's interpretation of the message.2. the order of priority given by the interpreter to the items of information inthe source text.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UQ

Lib

rary

] at

09:

50 1

2 Se

ptem

ber

2013

Hanne Aarup: Theory and practice in the teaching of interpreting 171

In terms of pedagogics, instruction should teach students a system wherebythey can read out of their notes the order of priority established by the analysis.

Ideally the students create their own systems for note-taking. More often thannot, however, they need help for condensing the result of the analytical process,in that they can benefit from the use of a limited amount of basic symbols for ex-pressing their hierarchization of the information received. Thus Rozan (1956) ar-gues that, by and large, interpreters can manage with approximately 20 symbols:

4 symbols indicating expression.3 symbols indicating movements.6 symbols indicating relationships, and

7 symbols indicating the concepts that recur most often.

Provided interpreters have at their disposal such a set of basic symbols (aswell as the other prerequisites for being trained as interpreters mentioned above),it is possible to make notes that are clear, logical and easily comprehended in vir-tually all consecutive interpreting.

DiscussionI argue, then, that beginners who are familiarised only with consecutive inter-

preting are often completely dependent on their notes, whereas at the end of theirtraining programme, interpreters should have reached a point where:

1) no notes are necessary in simultaneous interpreting.2) the importance of notes in consecutive interpreting is reduced considerably,

thus minimising the risk of literal translation and promoting the realization thatnotes are a means to an end and not an end in themselves.

3) ideas and messages are taken down at the expense of words; the processof transformation is already pretty much complete, so that the rendition in the tar-get language has the ease and spontaneity of the mother tongue. Ideally usersshould be unable to detect any trace of the source language, they should get noimpression whatsoever that another language was involved and hear only the in-terpreter's message. The ideal interpreting has removed all hindrances to thetransmission of the message early in the process.

Implications for teachingIt seems to me that the inescapable conclusion from the above is that the

teaching of both forms of interpreting should start at the same time. For the si-multaneous workings of decoding, analysis, memory, and reproduction must take

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UQ

Lib

rary

] at

09:

50 1

2 Se

ptem

ber

2013

172 Perspectives: Studies in Translatology -1993: 2

place at the same time.Analysis is the key component in both types of interpreting, and good inter-

preting is inconceivable without analysis. Hence analysis of the target languagespeech should be taught in both consecutive and simultaneous interpreting.

I have already mentioned that notes may be given undue emphasis if attentionfocusses exclusively on consecutive interpreting, so that beginners come to con-sider interpreting a type of translation. In addition, experience shows that studentswho postpone training simultaneous interpreting until late in their studies oftenfeel an unwarranted awe at the prospect of simultaneous interpreting which mayeven have acquired an air of mystique.

It is therefore pointless to spend time teaching consecutive interpreting beforeteaching simultaneous interpreting.

Theory and teaching programmesThis thinking has affected our postgraduate programme at the Copenhagen

Business School, where we practise both simultaneous and consecutive inter-preting from the very beginning of the course. As far as the teaching of skills isconcerned, we are inspired by some of the ideas of the Monterey school ofinterpreting.

Van Dam (1986) has discussed this system in detail: the Monterey school ofinterpreting regards simultaneous interpreting as a skill that can be taught likeother skills. Other skills require previous academic education: doctors are taughtsurgery and lawyers recognise the importance of specialisation in particular areasin professional practice.

In the instruction of skills, different components are identified and then taughtseparately. New components are added to those already learnt. In order to singleout components, artificial or controlled settings must be established and corre-sponding exercises practised until they are executed automatically. In order to beintegrated in the process, the exercises must be fully internalized. The exercisesfor teaching would-be interpreters to operate simultaneously at Seleskovitch'sthree levels recognise that analysis is one of the interconnecting elements. Theexercises are conducted with tape recordings, and in order to make for early suc-cesses in practice and consequent motivation, they are short and well-defined. Onthe other hand, the exercises (the source texts) are repeated until they have beenlearnt, an approach which is a departure from the principle upheld by European

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UQ

Lib

rary

] at

09:

50 1

2 Se

ptem

ber

2013

Hanne Aarup: Theory and practice in the teaching of interpreting 173

interpreting training schools that an exercise should be used for interpreting tasksonly once. The underlying principle is then that all components interact in theprocess of interpreting (van Dam: 1986).

In order to practise concentration, memory interaction and analytical methods,we use various kinds of exercises at the beginning of the Copenhagen BusinessSchool's conference interpreting training course:Excercises

1. Using texts whose conclusion is essential in the logical coherence. This text is presentedorally without the conclusion. The students complete the text with a suggestion for a con-clusion that takes into account concrete, literal and implied factors.2. Using texts from which words and expressions essential to the meaning have been omitted.The students must restore the missing items in accordance with coherence, style and idiom.3. Exercises in summarizing oral and written texts whose length and level of complexity isgradually increased. The contents must be divided into items of primary and secondary infor-mation, and be rendered in shortened as well as highly condensed versions.4. Texts of increasing lengths which are paraphrased at various stylistic levels to makestudents conscious of synonym usage. This is also part of the difficult process of verbalization,specifically the command of the mother tongue. (For a more detailed discussion of the studyprogramme, see Fluger, Zoega & Aarup: 1991).

It appears from their feedback that our students have found these exercises soimportant for the acquisition of interpreting skills that they have suggested thatwe use them throughout the entire course and not, as now, solely in the relativelybrief introduction period.

ConclusionIn this article, I have concentrated on the first and second phases of interpre-

ting (according to Seleskovitch's description) because they contain crucial peda-gogical challenges that a teacher must never cease to reevaluate.

The third phase which consists of formulation in the target language demandsfluent, precise, lucid and elegant language. Teachers of interpreting should payspecial attention to this phase, notably so, in countries where the spoken languageis held in low esteem. In Denmark, for instance, verbalisation does not rank highin the school system, not even at seats of higher learning where rhetorics isconsidered a discipline for the few.

My discussion of the process of interpreting and its components, however, hasled me and my colleagues to conclude, that in a European contexts, where inter-preters will primarily work with simultaneous conference interpreting, theyshould be taught consecutive and simultaneous interpreting from the very start.It may be that in societies where consecutive interpreting is practised more often

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UQ

Lib

rary

] at

09:

50 1

2 Se

ptem

ber

2013

174 Perspectives: Studies in Translatology -1993: 2

by professionals, the priorities in teaching may be different. On the other hand,there is, to my mind, no doubt that the separate teaching and training in variouscomponents of the interpreting process which are common to both consecutiveand simultaneous interpreting, can be used by all institutions catering for would-be interpreters.

Works Citedvan Dam, Ine. 1986. Strategies of Simultaneous Interpretation: A Methodology for the Trainingof Simultaneous Interpreters. Monterey 1986 [unpublished].Fluger, Lena, A. Zoëga & H. Aarup. 1991. Interpretation without tears. (= ARK 59).Copenhagen: Copenhagen Business School.Rozan, Jean-François. 1956. La prise de notes en interprétation consécutive. Librairie del'Université Georg: Genève.Seleskovitch, Danica. 1968. L'interprète dans les conférences internationales, problèmes delangage et de communication. Paris: Minard. Lettres modernes.

Vikingeskibshallen i Roskilde

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UQ

Lib

rary

] at

09:

50 1

2 Se

ptem

ber

2013