First-time posters: please review the site's moderation policy

This is more a question for experienced conference interpreters…. How do you continuously monitor the quality of your work. Do you record yourself whilst working to check you are up to scratch? Do you rely on your colleagues to tell you? Or do you use any other technique ?

asked 18 Jul '13, 08:50

Marta%20Piera%20Marin's gravatar image

Marta Piera ...
2.7k182850


Hi Marta,

I periodically record and listen to about 20 minutes of my own work - usually it ends up being once a year or so. (And one has to be careful not to inadvertently record in meetings that are confidential). It's good to listen to what the client is listening to, sometimes a little humbling and I will very often find that I have developed little bad habits - so the process is quite useful. Most of the time I will only have my version recorded, and not the original as well. But there are meetings that are webstreamed and/or archived online where both the original and the interpreted version are available to pore over.

Feedback from colleagues is rare - barring the occasional "well done" after something hideously difficult that one has just about survived. And that's more reassurance than feedback so doesn't really count. I think we are all a bit too inhibited (at least in the EN booth) to point out technique flaws (as opposed to helping with some terminology or an explanation of a concept which is fairly common practice).

NB. The EU institutions offer written assessments as part of a regular assessment procedure. And the EU Commission has a points rating from 1-4 for quality.

permanent link

answered 18 Jul '13, 13:43

Andy's gravatar image

Andy
7.4k222839

edited 18 Jul '13, 14:56

When interpretation is webcast and the file stays on the client's public website, such as the ECB, I make sure to listen to what I have produced. It's always useful to try and get rid of bad habits.

permanent link

answered 26 Jul '13, 12:39

Danielle's gravatar image

Danielle
2.7k5712

As your skill is becoming better, you are shifting more from what you hear to what you say. The ultimate stage of the process is identification with the delegate ie some part of your consciousness during interpretation is constantly asking you: if I were a delegate and if I were in the room right now would I understand what the interpreter is saying? This habit becomes automatic and sometimes prevents the interpreter from saying nonsense he is about to say. This self monitoring integrates well into the flow of SI. I call it "sanity check." See my schematic at: https://app.box.com/s/inqh2kayl7w039p8scu2

CF

permanent link

answered 11 Sep '13, 01:08

Cyril%20Flerov's gravatar image

Cyril Flerov
576259

Your answer
toggle preview

Follow this question

By Email:

Once you sign in you will be able to subscribe for any updates here

By RSS:

Answers

Answers and Comments

Markdown Basics

  • *italic* or _italic_
  • **bold** or __bold__
  • link:[text](http://url.com/ "title")
  • image?![alt text](/path/img.jpg "title")
  • numbered list: 1. Foo 2. Bar
  • to add a line break simply add two spaces to where you would like the new line to be.
  • basic HTML tags are also supported

Question tags:

×501
×3
×2

question asked: 18 Jul '13, 08:50

question was seen: 3,194 times

last updated: 11 Sep '13, 01:08

interpreting.info is a community-driven website open to anyone with questions and/or answers about interpreting, i.e. spoken language translation

about | faq | terms of use | privacy policy | content policy | disclaimer | contact us

This collaborative website is sponsored and hosted by AIIC, the International Association of Conference Interpreters.