Article published in:
Interpreting
Vol. 23:2 (2021) ► pp. 222244
References

References

Abuín González, M.
(2012) The language of consecutive interpreters’ notes: Differences across levels of expertise. Interpreting 14 (1), 55–72. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ahrens, B.
(2001) Einige Überlegungen zur Didaktik der Notizentechnik. In A. F. Kelletat (Ed.), Dolmetschen. Beiträge aus Forschung, Lehre und Praxis. Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 227–241.Google Scholar
(2005) Rozan and Matyssek: Are they really that different? A comparative synopsis of two classic note-taking schools. Forum 3 (2), 1–15. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2015) Note-taking. In F. Pöchhacker (Ed.), Routledge encyclopedia of interpreting studies. London/New York: Routledge, 283–286.Google Scholar
Albl-Mikasa, M.
(2008) (Non-)Sense in note-taking for consecutive interpreting. Interpreting 10 (2), 197–231. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2019) Note-taking. In M. Baker & G. Saldanha (Eds.), Routledge encyclopedia of translation studies. London/New York: Routledge, 380–385. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Alexieva, B.
(1993) On teaching note-taking in consecutive interpreting. In C. Dollerup & A. Lindegaard (Eds.), Teaching translation and interpreting 2. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 199–206. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Allioni, S.
(1989) Towards a grammar of consecutive interpretation. In L. Gran & J. Dodds (Eds.), The theoretical and practical aspects of teaching conference interpretation. Udine: Campanotto, 191–197.Google Scholar
Andres, D.
(2002) Konsekutivdolmetschen und Notation. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Cardoen, H.
(2013) The effect of note-taking on target-text fluency. In G. González Núñez, Y. Khaled & T. Voinova (Eds.), Emerging research in translation studies: Selected papers of the CETRA Research Summer School 2012. Leuven: Leuven University Press.Google Scholar
Chen, S.
(2016) Note-taking in consecutive interpreting: A review with a special focus on Chinese and English literature. JoSTrans 26, 151–171.Google Scholar
(2017) Note-taking in consecutive interpreting: New data from pen recording. Translation & Interpreting 9 (1), 4–23. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2020) The process of note-taking in consecutive interpreting: A digital pen recording approach. Interpreting 22 (1), 117–139. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chmiel, A.
(2010) How effective is teaching note-taking to trainee interpreters? The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 4 (2), 233–250. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dam, H. V.
(2004a) Interpreters’ notes: On the choice of form and language. In G. Hansen, K. Malmkjær & D. Gile (Eds.), Claims, changes and challenges in translation studies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 251–261. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2004b) Interpreters’ notes. On the choice of language. Interpreting 6 (1), 3–17. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2007) What makes interpreters’ notes efficient? Features of (non-)efficiency in interpreters’ notes for consecutive. In Y. Gambier, M. Shlesinger & R. Stolze (Eds.), Doubts and directions in translation studies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 183–197. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2010) Consecutive interpreting. In Y. Gambier & L. van Doorslaer (Eds.), Handbook of translation studies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 75–79. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gile, D.
(1991) Prise de notes et attention en début d’apprentissage de l’interprétation consécutive: Une expérience. Démonstration de sensibilisation. Meta 36 (2/3), 431–439. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1995) Basic concepts and models for interpreter and translator training. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2009) Basic concepts and models for interpreter and translator training (Rev. ed.). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gillies, A.
(2017) Note-taking for consecutive interpreting. A short course (Rev. ed.). London/New York: Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gran, L.
(1990) Interaction between memory and note-taking in consecutive interpretation. In H. Salevsky (Ed.), Übersetzungswissenschaft und Sprachmittlerausbildung. Berlin: Humboldt Universität, 357–364.Google Scholar
Herbert, J.
(1952) Manuel de l’interprète: Comment on devient interprète de conférences. Genève: Université de Genève.Google Scholar
Ilg, G.
(1980) L’interprétation consécutive. Les fondements. Parallèles 3, 109–136.Google Scholar
(1982) L’interprétation consécutive. La pratique. Parallèles 5, 91–109.Google Scholar
(1988) La prise de notes en interprétation consécutive: Une orientation générale. Parallèles 9, 9–13.Google Scholar
Ilg, G. & Lambert, S.
(1996) Teaching consecutive interpreting. Interpreting 1 (1): 69–99. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jones, R.
(2002) Conference interpreting explained (Rev. ed.). Manchester, UK/Northampton, MA: St Jerome Publishing.Google Scholar
Kirchhoff, H.
(1979) Die Notationssprache als Hilfsmittel des Konferenzdolmetschers im Konsekutivvorgang. In W. Mair & E. Sallager (Eds.), Sprachtheorie und Sprachenpraxis. Tübingen: Gunter Narr, 121–133.Google Scholar
Matyssek, H.
(1989) Handbuch der Notizentechnik für Dolmetscher. Ein Weg zur Sprachunabhängigen Notation. Heidelberg: Julius Groos.Google Scholar
Mikkelson, H.
(1983) Consecutive interpretation. The Reflector 6: 5–9.Google Scholar
Orlando, M.
(2010) Digital pen technology and consecutive interpreting: Another dimension in note-taking training and assessment. The Interpreters’ Newsletter 15, 71–86.Google Scholar
Paneth, E.
(1957/2002) An investigation into conference interpreting. In F. Pöchhacker & M. Shlesinger (Eds.), The interpreting studies reader. London/New York: Routledge, 30–41.Google Scholar
(1984) Training in note-taking (for interpreting). In W. Wilss & G. Thome (Eds.), Die Theorie des Übersetzens und ihr Aufschlußwert für die Übersetzungs- und Dolmetschdidaktik/Translation theory and its implementation in the teaching of translating and interpreting. Tübingen: Gunter Narr, 326–332.Google Scholar
Pöchhacker, F.
(2011) Conference interpreting. In K. Malmkjær & K. Windle (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of translation studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 307–324.Google Scholar
Rozan, J. F.
(1956) La prise de notes en interprétation consécutive. Genève: Georg.Google Scholar
Russell, D. & Takeda, K.
(2015) Consecutive interpreting. In H. Mikkelson & R. Jourdenais (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of interpreting. London/New York: Routledge, 96–111.Google Scholar
Schweda-Nicholson, N.
(1993) An introduction to basic note-taking skills for consecutive interpretation. In E. Losa (Ed.), Keystones of communication: Proceedings of the 34th Annual Conference of the American Translators Association. Medford: Learned Information, 197–204.Google Scholar
Seleskovitch, D.
(1975) Langage, langue et mémoire. Étude de la prise de notes en interprétation consécutive. Paris: Minard Lettres Modernes.Google Scholar
Setton, R. & Dawrant, A.
(2016) Conference interpreting: A complete course. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Szabó, C.
(2006) Language choice in note-taking for consecutive interpreting: A topic revisited. Interpreting 8 (2), 129–147. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Thiéry, C.
(1981) L’enseignement de la prise de notes en interprétation consécutive: Un faux problème? In J. Delisle (Ed.), L’enseignement de la traduction et de l’interprétation. De la théorie à la pédagogie. Ottawa: Éditions de l’Université d’Ottawa, 99–112.Google Scholar
van Hoof, H.
(1962) Théorie et pratique de l’interprétation. München: Max Hueber.Google Scholar