Revisiting Consecutive Note-Taking: What, How, and in What Language?


  • Csilla Szabó BME Budapest



consecutive capacities, choice of form, choice of language, empirical research, note-taking


Note-taking is taught across the board at interpreter training institutions, but opinions as to ‘what’, ‘how’, and ‘in what language’ one should take notes often tend to be curiously mixed. This paper revisits the three main areas where there seems to be no strong consensus, namely: 1) What and how much should interpreters note down? 2) How should they take notes: by taking down full words, abbreviations or symbols? 3) In what language should they prepare their notes: in the source or target language, in A or B language or, irrespective of the direction, in an economical language such as English? This study explores these three questions by first revisiting prescriptive views put forward by practitioners over the past few decades; it then highlights some of the empirical studies conducted in these areas; and finally it proposes recommendations for trainers, based on the author’s experience as a trainer of consecutive interpreting.


Download data is not yet available.


Ahrens, Barbara. 2005. “Rozan and Matyssek: Are They Really That Different? A Comparative Synopsis of Two Classic Note-Taking Schools.” Forum 3 (2): 1–15.

—. 2015. “Note-Taking.” In Routledge Encyclopaedia of Interpreting Studies, edited by Franz Pochhacker, 283–86. London: Routledge.

AIIC. 2019. “Glossary: Note-Taking.”

—. 1994. Interpreter Training Workshop, Poznan, 8–10 April, 1994. Geneva.

Albl-Mikasa, Michaela. 2020. “Note-Taking.” In Routledge Encyclopaedia of Translation Studies, edited by Mona Baker and Gabriela Saldanha, 380–85. London: Routledge.

Alexieva, Bistra. 1994. “On Teaching Note-Taking in Consecutive Interpreting.” In Teaching Translation and Interpreting 2, edited by Cay Dollerup and Annette Lindegaard, 199–206. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Allioni, Sergio. 1989. “Towards a Grammar of Consecutive Interpretation.” In The Theoretical and Practical Aspects of Teaching Conference Interpretation, edited by John Dodds and Laura Gran, 191–97. Udine: Campanotto.

Andres, Dörte. 2002. Konsekutivdolmetschen und Notation. Frankfurt: P. Lang.

—. 2014. “Easy? Medium? Hard? The Importance of Text Selection in Interpreter Training.” In To Know How to Suggest… Approaches to Teaching Conference Interpreting, edited by Andres Dörte and Martina Behr, 103–24. Berlin: Frank & Timme.

Baselli, Valentina. 2012. “Which Language do Interpreters Use in Consecutive Interpreting?” In Proceedings in Advanced Research in Scientific Areas, December 3–7, 2012, 1252–56. Milan.

Becker, Wilhelm. 1972. Notizentechnik. Germersheim: BBK Gesellschaft für moderne Sprachen.

Besznyák, Rita. 2020. “Tolmácsolási gyakorlószövegek graduálása lexikai csapdák elemzésével.” In Iránytű a tolmácsolás oktatásához. A kompetenciafejlesztés új fókuszai [Compass to the Training of Interpreters: New Perspectives on Competence Development], edited by Csilla Szabó and Mária Bakti. Szeged: Juhász Gyula Felsőoktatási Kiadó.

Błaszczyk Piotr, and Dariusz Hanusiak. 2010. “The Choice of Language for Note-Taking for Consecutive Interpreting: A Polish Perspective.” MikaEL Kääntämisen ja tulkkauksen tutkimuksen symposiumin verkkojulkaisu – Electronic Proceedings of the KäTu Symposium on Translation and Interpreting Studies 4.

Bowen, David, and Margareta Bowen, eds. 1990. Interpreting: Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Cardoen, Hanne. 2013. The Effect of Note-Taking on Target-Text Fluency. Leuven: CETRA.

Chen, Silja. 2016. “Note-Taking in Consecutive Interpreting: A Review with Special Focus on Chinese and English Literature.” The Journal of Specialised Translation 26 (1): 151–71.

—. 2017a. “Note-Taking in Consecutive Interpreting: New Data from Pen Recording.” Translation & Interpreting 9 (1): 4–23.

—. 2017b. “The Construct of Cognitive Load in Interpreting and Its Measurement.” Perspectives 25 (4): 640–57.

Chuang, Li-ling. 2008. “Note-Taking Know-How: A Processing Perspective on Consecutive Interpreting.” Spectrum: Studies in Language, Literature, Translation, and Interpretation 2: 93–101.

CIRIN. 2021. “CIRIN Bibliography.”

Curcio Rossella. 2013. “Die Notationssprache beim Konsekutivdolmetschen aus dem Deutschen ins Italienische.” MA thesis, University of Vienna.

Dai, Weidong, and Haiming Xu. 2007. “An Empirical Study of the Features of Interpreters’ Notes in Chinese-English Consecutive Interpreting: The Examples of Professionally Trained and Unprofessional Interpreters.” Foreign Language Teaching and Research 39 (2): 136–44.

Dam, Helle V. 2004a. “Interpreters’ Notes: On the Choice of Form and Language.” In Claims, Changes and Challenges in Translation Studies, edited by Gyde Hansen, Kirsten Malmkjær, and Daniel Gile, 251–61. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

—. 2004b. “Interpreters’ Notes on the Choice of Language.” Interpreting 6 (1): 3–17.

—. 2010. “Consecutive Interpreting.” In Handbook of Translation Studies, edited by Yves Gambier and Luc van Doorslaer, 75–79. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Deng, Yangping. 1991. “Consecutive Notes: An Artist's Tool.” In Collected Essays on Translation, edited by Chih Long Liu, 284–92. Hong Kong: Commercial Press.

Dingfelder Stone, Maren. 2014. “The Theory and Practice of Teaching Note-Taking.” In To Know How to Suggest… Approaches to Teaching Conference Interpreting, edited by Andres Dörte and Martina Behr, 145–66. Berlin: Frank & Timme.

Drechsel, Alexander. 2017. The Tablet Interpreter.

EMCI. 2013–2021. “Welcome to the European Masters in Conference Interpreting!”

Frey, Shoko. 2007. “Konsekutivdolmetschen und Notation im Sprachenpaar Englisch-Japanisch. Eine empirische Untersuchung.” PhD diss., University of Vienna.

Garlaschelli, Maddalena. 2013. “Der Einfluss der Ausgangssprache auf die Wahl der Notationssprache beim Konsekutivdolmetschen.” MA thesis, University of Vienna.

Gile, Daniel. (1995) 2009. Basic Concepts and Models for Interpreter and Translator Training. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Gillies, Andrew. 2004. Conference Interpreting: A New Students' Companion. Vol. 7. Krakow: Tertium.

—. 2017. Note-Taking for Consecutive Interpreting: A Short Course. 2nd ed. London: Routledge.

Goldsmith, Joshua. 2017. “Tablet Interpreting: Consecutive Interpreting 2.0.” Translation and Interpreting Studies. The Journal of the American Translation and Interpreting Studies Association 13 (3): 342–65.

Goldsmith, Joshua, and Josephine C. Holley. 2015. “Consecutive Interpreting 2.0: The Tablet Interpreting Experience.” MA thesis, University of Geneva.

González, Marta Abúin. 2012. “The Language of Consecutive Interpreters’ Notes: Differences across Levels of Expertise.” Interpreting 14 (1): 55–72.

González, Roseann Dueñas, Victoria Félice Vásquez, and Holly Mikkelson. 1991. Fundamentals of Court Interpretation: Theory, Policy, and Practice. Durham: Carolina Academic Press.

Herbert, Jean 1952. The Interpreter's Handbook: How to Become a Conference Interpreter. Genève: Librairie de l'Université.

Hiraoka, Mari. 2010. “Erlernen von Konsekutivdolmetschen im Selbststudium. Eine qualitative Studie für das Sprachenpaar Japanisch-Deutsch.” MA Thesis, University of Vienna.

Ilg, Gérard. 1980. “L'interprétation consécutive: les fondements.” Parallèles 3: 109–36.

—. 1982. “L’interprétation consécutive: la pratique.” Parallèles 5: 91–109.

—. 1988. “La prise de notes en interprétation consécutive. Une orientation générale.” Parallèles 9: 9–13.

Ilg, Gérard, and Sylvie Lambert. 1996. “Teaching Consecutive Interpreting.” Interpreting 1 (1): 69–99.

Jones, Roderick. (1998) 2002. Conference Interpreting Explained. Manchester: St Jerome.

Kalina, Sylvia. 1998. Strategische Prozesse beim Dolmetschen: Theoretische Grundlagen, empirische Fallstudien, didaktische Konsequenzen. Tübingen: Günther Narr.

Kirchhoff, Hella. 1979. “Die Notationssprache als Hilfsmittel des Konferenzdolmetschers im Konsekutivvorgang.” In Sprachtheorie und Sprachpraxis, edited by Walter Mair and Edgar Sallager, 121–33. Tübingen: Günther Narr.

Lambert, Sylvie. 1989. “Information Processing among Conference Interpreters: A Test of the Depth-of-Processing Hypothesis.” In The Theoretical and Practical Aspects of Teaching Conference Interpretation, edited by John Dodds and Laura Gran, 83–91. Udine: Campanotto.

Láng, Zsuzsa. G. 2002. Tolmácsolás felsőfokon: A hivatásos tolmácsok képzéséről. [Advanced Interpreting: Training Professional Interpreters.] Budapest: Scholastica.

Liu, Jianjun. 2010. “Note-Taking Characteristics of English Majored Undergraduates in Chinese-English Consecutive Interpreting: An Empirical Study Based on Students' Consecutive Interpreting Notes.” Foreign Language World 2: 47–53.

Lung, Rachel. 2003. “Taking ‘Notes’ Seriously in the Interpretation Classroom.” In La evaluación de la calidad en interpretación: investigación, edited by Ángela Collados Aís, María Manuela Fernández Sánchez, Daniel Gile, and Julian Bourne, 199–205. Granada: Comares.

Matyssek, Heinz. 1989. Handbuch der Notizentechnik für Dolmetscher. Heidelberg: Groos.

Mead, Peter. 2011. “Co-Ordinating Delivery in Consecutive Interpreting.” Intralinea 13.

Minyar-Beloruchev, Rurik K. 1969. Posledovatelnyi perevod [Consecutive Interpreting]. Moscow: Voenizdat.

Nolan, James. 2005. Interpretation: Techniques and Exercises. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.

Olalla-Soler, Christian 2020. “Practices and Attitudes toward Replication in Empirical Translation and Interpreting Studies.” Target 32 (1): 3–36.

ORCIT. n.d. “Online resources for Conference Interpreter Training.”

Rozan, Jean-Francois. (1956) 2004. Note-Taking in Consecutive Interpreting. Cracow: Cracow Tertium Society for the Promotion of Language Studies.

Russell, Debra, and Kayoko Takeda. 2015. “Consecutive Interpreting.” In The Routledge Handbook of Interpreting, edited by Renée Jourdenais and Holly Mikkelson, 96–111. London: Routledge.

Sanchez, Maria T. 2018. “(Over) Note-Taking in Consecutive Interpreting.” International Journal of English Language & Translation Studies 6 (3): 150–56.

Sawyer, David. B. 2004. Fundamental Aspects of Interpreter Education: Curriculum and Assessment. Vol. 47. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Seleskovitch, Danica. (1975) 2002. “Language and Memory: A Study of Note-Taking in Consecutive Interpreting.” In The Interpreting Studies Reader, edited by Franz Pöchhacker and Miriam Shlesinger, 121–29. London: Routledge.

Seleskovitch, Danica, and Marianne Lederer. 1989. A Systematic Approach to Teaching Interpretation. Luxembourg: Pedagogie Raisonnee de l'interpretation.

—. 1995. A Systematic Approach to Teaching Interpretation. Silver Spring: Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf.

—. 1999. “The Teaching of Conference Interpretation in the Course of the Last 50 Years.” Interpreting 4 (1): 55–66.

Setton, Robin, and Andrew Dawrant. 2016a. Conference Interpreting: A Complete Course. Vol. 120. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

—. 2016b. Conference Interpreting: A Trainer’s Guide. Vol. 121. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Siantova, Gabriela, 2015. “Consecutive Interpretation and Note-Taking from the Perspective of Some Translatology Schools and Researchers.” International Journal of Scientific Research and Innovative Technology 2 (1): 44–51.

Stecher, Liesa, 2016. “Notes, Notation and Notizen. An Empirical Study on the Choice of Form and Language of Consecutive Notes within the French-German Language Pair.” MA Research Project, London Metropolitan University.

Szabó, Csilla. 2003. From Preparation to Performance: Recipes for Practitioners and Teachers. Budapest: British Council.

—. 2005. “Note-Taking Techniques and Strategies in Consecutive Interpreting: An Empirical Investigation of the Choice of Language, Choice of Form and Means of Compression.” PhD diss., University of Pécs.

—. 2006. “Language Choice in Note-Taking for Consecutive Interpreting.” Interpreting 8 (2): 129–47.

—. 2017. “Real-Life Scenarios and Field Trips in the Training of Interpreters.” In Interpreting Studies at the Crossroads of Disciplines, edited by Simon Zupan and Alexandra Nuč, 32–43. Frank & Timme: Berlin.

—. 2020. “Fejlesztő értékelési technikák a tolmácsolás oktatásában. [Formative Assessment Techniques in Interpreter Training].” In Iránytű a tolmácsolás oktatásához. A kompetenciafejlesztés új fókuszai. [Compass to the Training of Interpreters: New Perspectives on Competence Development.], edited by Csilla Szabó and Mária Bakti. Szeged: Juhász Gyula Felsőoktatási Kiadó.

Taylor-Bouladon, Valerie. 2007. Conference Interpreting: Principles and Practice. Charleston: BookSurge Publishing.

Thiéry, Christopher. 1981. “L’enseignement de la prise de notes en interprétation consécutive: un faux problème?” In L’Enseignement de la Traduction et de l’Interprétation. De la Théorie à la Pédagogie, edited by Jean Delisle, 99–112. Ottawa: Éditions de l’Université d’Ottawa.

Wang, Wei-Tsong, Dandan Zhao, and Ling Wang. 2010. “An Empirical Study of Note-Taking Characteristics and Output Quality in Interpreting.” Foreign Language World 4: 9–18.

Windiari, Luh Ni. 2012. “Note Taking and the Power of Mapping in Consecutive Interpreting.” Udayana University.

Yamada, Hiroko. 2018. “Validity of Note-taking for New Consecutive Interpreting Learners: An Empirical Study of University Interpretation Courses.” Theory and Practice in Language Studies 8 (11): 1387–96.




How to Cite

Szabó, C. (2021). Revisiting Consecutive Note-Taking: What, How, and in What Language?. ELOPE: English Language Overseas Perspectives and Enquiries, 18(1), 107–124.