Degree | Type | Year | Semester |
---|---|---|---|
4316479 Conference Interpreting | OB | 1 | A |
None.
Contextualisation of the discipline
• To learn about the context of conference interpreting and its professional practice from a theoretical perspective.
• To receive an introduction to the main lines of research in conference interpreting.
• To obtain a theoretical basis for practical learning.
Interpreting techniques
• To receive an introduction to the main techniques necessary for conference interpreting.
• To acquire the basic techniques of interpreting.
• To acquire the strategies and skills specific to interpreting, beginning with practice in the mother tongue.
• To receive an introduction to the technique of note-taking in language A.
Contextualisation of the discipline
Interpreting techniques
analytical, concentrated and selective listening;
concept maps;
short-term memory;
discourse structure and analysis;
discourse cohesion;
contextualisation and anticipation;
reformulation;
summarising.
Directed activities
Lectures with student participation
Practical sessions in classrooms
Assessment and self-assessment activities
Supervised and autonomous activities
Assignments
Reading articles
Tutorials
Annotation: Within the schedule set by the centre or degree programme, 15 minutes of one class will be reserved for students to evaluate their lecturers and their courses or modules through questionnaires.
Title | Hours | ECTS | Learning Outcomes |
---|---|---|---|
Type: Directed | |||
Lectures with student participation | 22.75 | 0.91 | 15, 11, 10, 8, 9, 13 |
Practical sessions in classrooms | 42.55 | 1.7 | 2, 3, 6, 17, 18 |
Type: Supervised | |||
Reading articles | 30 | 1.2 | 15, 11, 10, 8, 9, 12, 4, 5, 13 |
Tutorials | 6 | 0.24 | 1, 12, 14, 4, 5, 16, 19 |
Type: Autonomous | |||
Autonomous work individual and in group | 110.7 | 4.43 | 1, 14, 4, 5, 16, 19 |
Students may retake or compensate for failed or missed assessment activities provided that those they have actually performed account for at least 66.6% (two thirds) of the final mark and that they have a weighted mark of 3.5 or over. Students may not retake assessment activities in which they are found to have engaged in misconduct (plagiarism, copying, personation, etc.).
When publishing final marks prior to recording them on transcripts, lecturers will inform students, in writing, of the procedure to follow to retake or compensate for assessment activities. Lecturers may set one assignment per failed or missed assessment activity or a single assignment to cover a number of such activities.
In the case of retaking or compensating for an activity, the highest final mark that can be obtained is 5. If the assessment activities a student has performed account for 25% or less of the subject's final mark, their work will be classified as "not assessable" on their transcript.
Students who engage in misconduct in an assessment activity will receive a mark of 0 for the activity in question. Misconduct in more than one assessment activity will result in a final mark of 0 for the module.
NB: All information on assessment, assessment activities and their weighting is merely a guide. The lecturer responsible for the module will provide full information when teaching begins.
Title | Weighting | Hours | ECTS | Learning Outcomes |
---|---|---|---|---|
Memory and synthesis exercise A-A | 30% | 2 | 0.08 | 2, 3, 6, 17, 18 |
Memory and synthesis exercise English-Spanish | 30% | 1 | 0.04 | 2, 3, 6, 17, 18 |
Reading of articles | 40% | 10 | 0.4 | 1, 15, 7, 11, 10, 8, 9, 12, 14, 4, 5, 13, 16, 19 |
Contextualisation of the discipline
Baigorri Jalón, J. 2000. La interpretación de conferencias: el nacimiento de una profesión. De París a Nuremberg. Comares, Granada.
Baigorri Jalón, J. 2015. "The history of the interpreting profession". En Mikkelson, H. & Jourdenais, R. (eds.) The Routledge Handbook of Interpreting. London/New York, Routledge. Cap. 1.
Gambier, Y.; Daniel Gile i Christopher Taylor (eds). 1997. Conference Interpreting:Current Trends in Research. Proceedings of the International Conference on Interpreting: What do we know and how? Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Gile, D. 1995. Regards sur la recherche en interprétation de conférence. Lille: Presses Universitaires de Lille.
Gile D. 1998. “Observational and experimental studies in the investigation of conference interpreting”, Target 10/1, pàgs. 69-93.
Gile, D. 2000. “The history of research into conference interpreting: a scientometric approach”. Target 10:1. 69-93.
Gile, Daniel. 2001. Consecutive vs. Simultaneous: Which is more accurate? Interpretation Studies (Japanese Assn. for Interpreting Studies) 1: 8–20. http://jaits.jpn.org/home/kaishi2001/pdf/03-danielgilefinal.pdf (Accessed July 24, 2015)
Gile, D. 2009. Basic Concepts and Models for Interpreter and Translator Training.Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Gile, D, Helle V. Dam, Friedel Dubslaff, Bodil Martinsen i Anne Schjoldager. 2001.Getting Started in Interpreting Research. Methodological reflections, personal accounts and advice for beginners. John Benjamins.
Gran, L. i Maurizio Viezzi. 1995. “Development of Research Work at SSLM,Trieste”. Target 7:1. 107-118.
Jones, R. 1998. Conference Interpreting Explained . Manchester, St. Jerome.
Kurz, I. 1996. Simultandolmetschen als Gegenstand der interdisziplinären
Forschung. Wien: WUV-Universitätsverlag.
Moser-Mercer, Barbara. 1997. Beyond curiosity: Can interpreting research meet the challenge?In Joseph H. Danks, Gregory M. Shreve, Stephen B. Fountain and Michael K. McBeath(eds.), Cognitive Processes in Translation and Interpretation, 176–195. London: Sage.
Nicodemus, B. i Laurie Swabey. 2011. Advances in interpreting research. JohnBenjamins.
Pöchhacker F. 1995. “Writings and research on interpreting: a bibliographicanalysis”. The Interpreters’ Newsletter 6, pàgs. 17-31.
Pöchhacker, Franz and Miriam Shlesinger (eds.). 2002. The Interpreting Studies Reader. London:Routledge.
Pöchhacker F. 2004. Introducing Interpreting Studies. Londond/New York, Routledge.
Pöchhacker, Franz. 2008. Interpreting as mediation. In Carmen Valero-Garcés and AnneMartin(eds.), Crossing Borders in Community Interpreting: Definitions and Dilemmas, 9–26.Amsterdam:John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/btl.76.02poc
Recursos electrònics:
http://aiic.net/page/341/interpreting-research/lang/1
The CIRIN Bulletin http://www.cirinandgile.com/
The AIIC Bibliography http://www.aiic.net/en/prof/research/default.htm
Interpreting techniques
Baddeley, Alan. 2004. (New Illustrated Edition). London: Carlton Your Memory: A User's Guide Books.Briz, Antonio (coord.): Saber hablar. Madrid, Instituto Cervantes, Aguilar,2008
Carnegie, Dale. 2005. . London: Penguin Books. Public Speaking for Success
Carston, Robyn. 2002. . Thoughts and Utterances: The Pragmatics of Explicit Communication Oxford: Blackwell. doi: 10.1002/9780470754603
Ilg, Gérard. 1988. La prise de notes en interprétation consécutive. Une orientation générale. 9: 9-13. Paralleles
Jones, Roderick. 1998/2002. . Manchester: St. Jerome. Conference Interpreting Explained
Kintsch, Walter. 1998. . Cambridge: Cambridge University Comprehension: A Paradigm for Cognition Press.
Kohn, Kurt and Sylvia Kalina. 1996. The strategic dimension of interpreting. 41 (1): 118-138. Meta doi: 10.7202/003333ar
Lucas, Stephen E. 2004. (8th Edition). New York: McGraw Hill. The Art of Public Speaking
Matyssek, Heinz. 1989/2006. . Handbuch der Notizentechnik: ein Weg zur sprachabhangigen Notation Tübingen: Julius Groos.
Mayberry, Marshall R., Matthew W. Crocker and Pia Knoeferle. 2009. Learning to attend: A connectionist model of situated language comprehension. 33: 449-496. Cognitive Science doi: 10.1111/j.1551-6709.2009.01019.x
Phelan, Mary: The Interpreter's Resource. Clevedon; Buffalo; Toronto; Sydney: Multilingual Matters, 2001
Rozan, Jean-François. 1956. . Geneva: Georg. La prise de notes en interpretation consecutive
Sachs, Jacqueline S. 1967. Recognition memory for syntactic and semantic aspects of connected discourse. Perception 2: 437-442. doi: 10.3758/BF03208784and Psychophysics
Seleskovitch, Danica. 1975. Langage, langues et memoire. Etude de la prise de notes en interpretation . Paris: Minard Lettres Modernes.consecutive
Seleskovitch, Danica. 1977. Take care of the sense and the sounds will take care of themselves or Why interpreting is not tantamount to translating languages. The Incorporated Linguist16: 27-33.
Taylor, Christopher. 1989. Textual memory and the teaching of consecutive interpretation. In
Laura Gran and John Dodds (eds.), , The Theoretical and Practical Aspects of Teaching Interpretation 177-184. Udine: Campanotto.
van Dijk, Teun and Walter Kintsch. 1983. . New York: Strategies of Discourse Comprehension Academic Press.
Yates, Frances A. 1966. . Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
LMS: Moodle
Text processor: Word (or similar)
Pdf reader: Acroboat Reader (or similar)
Browser: Chrome (or similar)
Audio editor: Audacity (or similar)
zoom platform (with interpreting function)
Notability: for notetaking with Ipads.