Notetaking

Effort models
Effort models (of translation) n. a group of analyses of the different types of
cognitive effort required in simultaneous interpreting, consecutive interpreting and
sight translation. In each case, multiple types of effort compete with each other for
cognitive processing capacity, and this competition can lead to frequent characteristic
errors in the performance of both inexperienced and expert interpreters. The first
account of these influential models was given in 1989 by the French conference
interpreter, researcher and theorist Daniel Gile. In simultaneous interpreting, a
Listening and Analysis Effort is needed to understand the incoming speech in the
source language; a Production Effort is required to generate and produce the
outgoing speech in the target language; and a (short-term) Memory Effort has to
manage the flow of information between the perception of the source language
utterances and the generation of the target language speech.
In sight translation, the initial Listening and Analysis Effort is replaced by a
Reading and Analysis Effort applied to the source text to be translated, but Gile
suggested that a short-term Memory Effort is not needed because the message
remains visibly available in the source text. Finally, the source text is translated into
an audible target language utterance, in the Production Effort.
In consecutive interpreting, two phases occur. In the first, the Listening and
Analysis Effort and the Memory Effort are the same as in simultaneous interpreting,
but a Note-taking Effort replaces the Production Effort. In the second phase, a (long-
term) Memory Effort combines with the Production Effort to generate the outgoing
target language speech.
The two stages of consecutive interpreting, according to Gile, can be described
below.
Stage one: Interpretation = L+N +M+C
L: Listening and analysis
N: Note-taking
M:Short term memory operation
C: Coordination

Stage two: Interpretation : Rem + Read + P

Rem:Remembering
Read:Note reading
P:Production (Gile, 1995a, p.179)
In consecutive interpreting, according to Gile (1995), note-taking is part of
phase one, that is, listening and note-taking. Interpreters, Gile maintains, do not only
produce a note, but also read the note to help them produce interpretation. Notes do

1
not reproduce speeches; they are only written indicators to help interpreters
remember (1995, p. 181).
In a modern cognitive approach, each of Gile’s Efforts would be seen to exploit
multiple components, but the professional effect of Gile’s modelling and relevant
work on cognitive processing by his contemporaries was to promote a growing
recognition of the highly complex psycholinguistic nature of translating in general
and simultaneous interpreting in particular.
Principles
Note-taking is commonly regarded as some kind of supporting technique,
developed by practitioners for practitioners to help them retrieve part of their source
text understanding from memory. In order to fulfil this function, note-taking aims at
keeping the processing effort as low as possible. Three basic principles can be
identified that are largely undisputed in specialist literature:
– Economy: to minimise the processing effort any notation should be as scarce
and brief as possible.
– Instantaneous seizability: the strain on the memory can be effectively
relieved only if the interpreter can read the notes at a glance.
– Individuality: note-taking is not governed by any obligatory rules or
regulations. Generally speaking, anything that supports its function or that is
subjectively felt to do so is admissible.
According to the literature, there is no strict convention in note-taking, as it is
basically considered as a very personal matter; thus, it lacks standards in instructions
(Taylor-Bouladon, 2007, p.68-69). However despite individual variations due to
personal aptitudes, there is a common basic approach in the modern note-taking
systems developed by scholars and practitioners. Thus, some principles are
important: the rules for abbreviation, the layout of the notes and other principles need
to be practised consistently to improve the quality of interpreting (Gentile et al.,
1996, p.27).
Jean-François Rozan, (http://interpreters.free.frlconsecnotes/rozan7principles)
proposed the following seven principles in note-taking in consecutive interpreting:
1. Noting the idea and not the word (however, interpreters should write down
non-contextual information, such as all proper names, figures, titles and quotes,
lists of things and terminologies;
2. The rules of abbreviation;
3. Links;
4. Negations;

2
 5. Adding emphasis;
6. Verticalitv:
7. Shift.
Valerie Tallor-Bouladon (2007, p.70) and Graham Turner (2009) also suggest
that interpreters should take notes on "who speaks, and about whom or what" and
the "tense of the action," e.g., present, past, future.
In a similar vein, researchers on interpreting, many of whom are also
practitioners, suggest some general principles in note-taking for interpreters. These
include:
1. Making logical analysis of what is said by the speaker when he is
speaking (Ginori & Scimone, 1995).
2. Using notebook pages as "bidimensional unit" (Ginori & Scimone, 1995)
3. Dividing pages based on conceptual segments (Ginori& Scimone, 1995).
4. Connecting every segment with conjunctions, such as because, if, then,
and therefore (Taylor-Bouladon, 2007).
5. Writing keywords to record main ideas of the speaker. Regarding this,
Al-Jarf (http//faculty.ksu.edu.sa/aljarf/teaching%20Guides/lnterpretingoh20-
%2}Note-taking.pdf) states that keywords carry essential information and thus
suggests the following ideas:
 Use keywords to shorten sentences; omit arlicles, exclamations,
unimportant prepositions, adjectives, and adverbs.
 Change word order.
 Use nouns and verbs (content words).
6. Using abbreviations and acronyms (Ginori & Scimone, 1995; Al-Jarf,
http://faculty.ksu.edu.sa/aljarf/teaching%20Guides/lnterpretingo/o20-%2ONote-
taking.pdf).
An interpreter is suggested to do the following:
 Omit endings, vowels and double letters (Govt, cnstrctn, cmprsn).
 Use only the first letter, or first two or three letters, of certain words.
 Use symbols to replace certain words or letters (see also Turner, 2009).
 Do not use the same abbreviation for two different things.
 Use acronyms (first letter of each word in a phrase). The interpreter can
also use general acronyms, such as w/: with, w/o: without, w/i: within, app.:
approximately, m/h: mile per hour, and ch: chapter, etc. It is also suggested the
interpreters use mathematical acronyms or mathematical symbols, especially those
which may come to mind easily. These mathematical symbols can also include + : in
addition to, +/- : more or less, >10 (the underscore represents 000) : over 10,000 (see
Al-Jarf, hftp://faculty.ksu.edr-r.sa/aljarflteaching%20Guides/lnterpreting%20-
3
%20Notetaking.pdf), or other signs such as: equal, not equal, greater than, less than,
plus, minus, question mark, and circle. (Taylor-Bouladon, 2007).
 Use the same symbol or abbreviation for all derivatives of the same word
and for all synonyms of a particular word. Some frequently used symbols in
interpreters' notes include, the following:

PHAM HONG Hanh (2006) also suggests that what is in the notes should also
be a primary consideration: Main ideas, the links between ideas, and non-contextual
information (numbers, proper names, lists of things and terminologies) are three
aspects to note in order to support interpreter's memory during interpretation.
Regarding this, Taylor-Bouladon explains that the less consecutive interpreters
note, the more they memorize and the better their rendering of the speech. Taylor-
Bouladon goes on to say that interpreters use indentations, such as those for new
paragraphs, to indicate new thoughts and also use a system of arrows and connecting
signs. To Taylor-Bouladon, by far the best symbols for substantive expressions are
just abbreviations of the corresponding words, such as those abbreviations used in
conference interpreting:. del for delegate, Ch for Chairman, mgt for meeting, Cttee
for Committee, Com for Commission, SG for Secretary General, Pres for President.
To quote Le Feal (1981), Taylor-Bouladon further states that rather than confining
oneself to a rigid system of note-taking learnt beforehand, it is preferable to remain
open to the inspiration of the moment (2007, p.69).
The pitfalls of note-taking
First and foremost the note-taking process is not entirely perfect. It can never
replace the oral presentation we have heard earlier. Nonetheless, much of what we
say is of little importance for the purpose of the conversation. The role of the
interpreter in this note-taking process is, therefore, to select what is being said and to
render only what will matter to the message recipients.
 This cannot be a mechanical process: the more mechanical the
interpreter’s notes, the lower the quality of the interpretation.
 Taking notes is not the same as taking dictation; it’s meant to jog the
memory of the interpreter when he/she has to render the interpretation.

4
  Notes are short-lived and can only be used within minutes after the
speech to be interpreted is delivered. When the speaker finishes the speech, it is still
fresh in the memory of the interpreter and the notes are there to jog his/her memory.
 Notes are personal; this is why they can only be used by the interpreter
who jotted them down and only for a specific period of time.
 The problem with too many notes is that we might pay too little attention
to the speaker’s words. Rendition may, therefore, end up being a superficial speech
with serious mistakes and easily avoidable contradictions.
 
What you should jot down
Always take notes of:
 The main ideas: secondary ideas will be remembered during the mental
interpreting process and rendition;
 Opinions and points of view: they are always perceptible and the
interpret might not be able to transpose them to his/her interpretation during
rendition;
 Numbers: they are very important for the speech, are the same in every
language and are easy and quick to note down (as opposed to dates that are more
difficult to understand);
 Proper names: because you don’t have to translate them. For proper
names difficult to understand, the interpreter should jot them down as they sound.
Also take note of geographical names, names of companies and organisations,
abbreviations and acronyms.
 Technical terms: they are less frequent and may sound uncanny to the
interpreter;
 Mnemonics: memory aids to help the interpreter jog his/her memory
during rendition;
 Connectors: they connect the memory and what the speaker has said.
They are important because they show the sequencing of ideas and also opposing
ideas;
 What happened and when (verb tenses): because they situate the
speech in time;
 The sentences said by the speaker that serve as introduction and
conclusion, as they help to understand the speech;
 Keywords: they are important not for their linguistic meaning, rather for
what they mean in the interpreter’s mind (the meaning they acquire for the speaker).
 How to take notes
 It all depends on the purpose of the speech to be interpreted: an
informative speech requires full note-taking, especially when it is about particularly
unusual facts; however, if the event is unusual, one word may be enough. A
5
descriptive speech also needs full note-taking, but based on detailed aspects that
perfectly describe what is meant to be conveyed. An argumentative speech is based
on much less information, especially connectors and some keywords.
 Notes should be taken in the language into which the interpretation will
be made (target language), because it allows the interpreter to dissociate the two
languages. The interpreter will, therefore, be less likely to use a literal translation in
the heat of the speech.
 If the interpreter doesn’t remember a word in the target language when
taking notes – and to avoid being stuck on that word and getting lost in the speaker’s
speech – he/she should note down the term in the source language and continue to
take notes. This will save lots of time until the right word comes to his/her mind.
 Some interpreters have developed a perfect system of symbols to help
them later on. Abbreviations, on the other hand, can be very useful when we’re
dealing with names of countries (DE for Germany, PT for Portugal), units of
measurement (km for kilometre or m for meter) or chemical elements (O for oxygen,
Pu for plutonium), among others.

 Writing too much/too little
 The interpreter should jot down as little as possible, as quickly as
possible to avoid getting stuck on words. The aim is to deliver a fluent and accurate
speech, yet based on the information he/she jotted down.

With respect to the size of notes, some writers suggest that interpreters make
notes as small as possible and write them clearly; the smaller they are, the smaller
(and therefore the quicker) the hand movements required (Taylor-Bouladon, 2007,
p.71). Conversely, some others suggest that interpreters write in large, clear letters,
characters or symbols (Lee & Buzo, 2009, p. 6).
In addition to what language notes should be made, the literature indicates that
interpreters can take notes in whatever language easiest for them: Ll,L2, or a third
language (Weber, 1984; see also Gentile etal,1996; Turner,2009 for similar points of
view regarding in which language notes should be taken). Wilhelm Weber argues:
It does not matter in which language the notes are taken, since notes are only
symbols that contain a message. Interpreters should retain ideas in their memory, not
words. Words are only retain (and made note of) if they are of extreme importance
and if they carry a message of their own (1984:36).
Other writers (see Taylor-Bouladon, 2007) suggest that an interpreter should
take notes in the target language. She points out:
Nowadays, when interpreters read them back in only one language, it is a
good idea to write them in the target language, and if there is anything you can't

6
think of as you write, then put the problems in the original language. By the time you
come to read it back, your brain will have worked out what it is without you realizing
it (2007, p. 7l).
This suggestion goes with a study reported by Dam (2004) that provides
evidence of target language dominance in notetaking. Based on his study, Dam
argues that "... the language recommended by most authors in the interpreting
community, i.e. the target language, is also the language preferred in actual
interpreting practice" (2004: 6). However, as Dam further states, this still need further
investigation.
Note-Taking – When not appropriate?
 In highly emotionally charged conversation where paralanguage cannot
be easily noted down
 When discourse in not logical and thoughts are disconnected
 When conversation is happening between more than two people and the
interpreter may need to switch to simultaneous mode
 When interpreter is standing for a long period of time; in a procedure
where interpreter has to wear gear for infection control; or doesn’t have access to
note-taking

Advice on note-taking
Here is a list of measures suggested by professional interpreters:
 Take notes quickly – above all, don’t wait for the “right” word because
this is not the time to do this;
 Jot down words that are easy to understand in order to jog your memory
when you have to render the speech;
 Avoid using loose pages or you’ll end up with disorganised sheets of
paper; instead, use 15 x 20 cm notepads;
 Write only on one side of the page;
 Use a pencil;
 Jot down readable notes so that when you’re stressed about rendering the
speech you won’t waste time searching for the ideas;
 During rendition, always maintain eye contact with the audience;
 Use a large letter size that can easily be read from afar;
 Avoid using ambiguous abbreviations – for example, “ind” should not
mean “independently” in some cases and “industrial” in others;
 Use existing symbols and never invent a symbol during the speech that is
not easily recognisable;
 Change the structure of the notes using your good judgement, always
respecting the cohesion of the speech and the speaker’s intention.

7
 Some final advice for interpreters on note-taking is worth a brief mention: "For
anything involving performance, whether a trade, a sport, or an art, no amount of
theoretical study will take the place of practice . . . the more the better" (Bowen &
Bowen, 1984, p. 30).
The rules for abbreviation, the lay out of the notes and other principles need to
be practised consistently to improve the quality of interpreting.