Professional Discourse & Communication

Advanced search

Development of the symbol system in consecutive interpreting

Full Text:


The work is aimed at systematizing knowledge on brief note-taking in consecutive interpreting and the prospects of its development for interpreting optimization. The author proceeds from the definition of note-taking in consecutive interpreting as a system of auxiliary means, external memory incentives which support the process of interpreting, and qualifies it not as an objective by itself but as a helpful instrument for interpreters, which enables them to more effectively record and reconstruct the information incorporated in the original text and then communicate it observing the translation language norms. Alongside this, when interpreting, a professional develops new sense coding symbols to record the information in a graphical form. The symbols used by the interpreter testify to what key data the interpreter focuses on and how this information is interpreted. An overview is given of the history and principles of note-taking in consecutive interpreting (those of economy, visualization and universality).

The article makes the case that more active international contacts, broader areas of discussion call for further development of the system of note-taking in consecutive translation. As times are changing, new phenomena and concepts need new corresponding symbols for note-taking. For example, nowadays the spread of international terrorism is one of the greatest challenges for the global community. More and more attention is being paid to the methods of fighting terrorism and its origins, which is becoming a priority at many conferences and other international events with the issues of security and cooperation between different countries on the agenda. The article suggests a number of symbols to be used to interpret communication in the political and military spheres.

In conclusion the author summarises the reasons why she considers the development of the symbol system in consecutive translation a topical and promising process, both theoretically and practically.

About the Author

S. N. Kurbakova
Military University of the Russian Defence Ministry
Russian Federation


1. Aleksandrova, O.A. (2016). Osnovy perevodcheskoj skoropisi: uchebno-metodicheskoe posobie [Fundamentals of translation cursive: manual]. Velikiy Novgorod: Novgorod State University named for Yaroslav Wise (in Russian).

2. Alikina, E.V. (2006). Perevodcheskaya semantografiya. Zapis’ pri ustnom perevode [Translation semantography. Interpretation recording]. Moscow: AST: Vostok-Zapad (in Russian).

3. Burlyaj, S.A. (2001). Perevodcheskaya zapis’: uchebnoe posobie (dlya studentov IV kursaperevodcheskogo fakul ’teta) [Translation entry: study guide (for 4-year students of the faculty of translation)]. Moscow: R-Valent (in Russian).

4. Chuzhakin, A.P., & Spirina, S.G. (2007). Osnovy posledovatel’nogo perevoda i perevodcheskoj skoropisi [Basics of consecutive translation and cursive translation]. Moscow: Eksprimo (in Russian).

5. Gillies, A. (2005). Note-taking for consecutive interpreting - a short course. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing.

6. Hoof, H. van. (1962). Theorie etpratiique de I’interpretation. Munich.

7. Herbert, J. (1952). Manuel de l’interprete: comment on devient l’interprete de conferences. Geneve.

8. Komissarov, V.N. (1997). Teoreticheskie osnovy metodiki obucheniya perevodu [Theoretical foundations of translation learning techniques]. Moscow: Rema (in Russian).

9. Kucerova, H. (1990). Diplomatic interpreting in Czechoslovakia. In D. Bowen & M. Bowen (Eds.). Interpreting. Yesterday, today and tomorrow, Vol. 4 (pp. 34-39), John Benjamins Publishing Company.

10. Kurbakova, S.N. (2014). Basic mechanism of verbal interaction. SGEMconference on psychology & psychiatry, sociology & healthcare, education: proceedings, 3, 131-138.

11. Mattyssek, H. (1989). Handbuch der Notizentechnik fur Dolmetscher. 2 Teile. Teil 1. Ein Weg zur sprachunabhangigen Notation. Heidelberg.

12. Minyar-Beloruchev, R.K. (1969). Zapisi v posledovatel’nom perevode [Consecutive translation entries]. Moscow: Prospekt-AP (in Russian).

13. Minyar-Beloruchev, R.K. (1996). Teoriya i metody perevoda [Theory and translation methods]. Moscow: Moskovskij licej (in Russian).

14. Minyar-Beloruchev, R.K. (1999). Kak stat’ perevodchikom? [How to become a translator?]. Moscow: Gotika (in Russian).

15. Poslanie prezidenta Federal’nomu Sobraniyu. 01.03.18 [Message from the President to the Federal Assembly. 1 March, 2018]. Retrieved from (accessed: 15 April, 2019) (in Russian).

16. Seleskovich, D., & Ledder, M. (1996). Interpretirovat’, chtobyperevodit’ [To interpret to translate]. Didier erudition (in Russian).

17. Serova, T.S. (2005). Uprazhnenija v ustnom posledovatel’nom odnostoronnem perevode [Oral consecutive one-way interpretation exercises]. Teoriya i praktika perevoda i professional’noj podgotovki perevodchikov: materialy mezhdunarodnoj nauchno-prakticheskoj konferencii [Theory and practice of translation and professional training of translators: proceedings of the international scientific-practical conference], Perm: PGTU, 103-113.

18. Sidorov, E.V., & Shiryaev, A.F. (1991). Osnovy teorii yazyka i rechi [Fundamentals of the theory of language and speech]. Moscow: Military Red-Barrack Institute (in Russian).

19. Jacobson, R. (1985). Yazyk v otnoshenii k drugim sistemam kommunikacii. Izbrannye raboty [Language in relation to other communication systems. Selected writings]. Moscow: Progress (in Russian).


For citations:

Kurbakova S.N. Development of the symbol system in consecutive interpreting. Professional Discourse & Communication. 2019;1(3):50-71. (In Russ.)

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

ISSN 2687-0126 (Online)