93194 - Theory And Practices Of Conference Interpretation

Course Unit Page


This teaching activity contributes to the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals of the UN 2030 Agenda.

Quality education Gender equality Reduced inequalities Peace, justice and strong institutions

Academic Year 2021/2022

Learning outcomes

The student knows the fundamental components (definitions, concepts) of Interpreting Theory. S/he is able to understand and critically assess the different theoretical and methodological approaches to the study of interpreting and is able to conceive, manage and evaluate comprehensive interpreting projects, with respect to both interpreting theory and practice, and the code of ethics.

Course contents

The course will be subdivided into three parts of 10 lessons each. They will all be held in the first term, during the first six weeks.

Part 1 (Introduction to Simultaneous Interpreting) taught by Prof. Gabriele Mack will include theoretical approaches but will mainly focus on practical aspects of simultaneous interpreting. It will include targeted activities to prepare students to carry out simultaneous interpreting. In particular, students will learn to better understand the complex nature of this cognitive and interlanguage activity, starting to practice it in a single language. They will learn how to manage listening while producing speech and will receive indications to develop the basic skills and routines which are necessary to carry out simultaneous interpreting in their respective language combinations.

Part 2 (Introduction to Consecutive Interpreting) will be taught by prof. Amalia Amato and will be devoted to the theoretical and practical aspects of consecutive interpreting, with specific exercises. In particular, students will learn about complex cognitive aspects and tasks that come into play during consecutive interpreting as well as individual/affective factors which may affect the interpreting performance. They will receive specific guidelines on how to develop their own note-taking system. Based on the above guidelines, students will be able to develop and consolidate their own note-taking codes, starting from simple syntagms and gradually moving to phrases and sentences and their links. Students will also learn how to take notes effectively and efficiently using a specific layout as well as signs and symbols for intra-textual references. Moreover, pragmatic aspects of speech will be dealt with and included in their note-taking systems (tone, register, intentions).

Part 3 (Introduction to Interpreting Studies) will be taught by prof. Mariachiara Russo who will present the main strands of studies on interpretation and address methodological issues useful for understanding the structure and results of research and for developing a reflection on personal interpretative practice, also with a view to writing the dissertation. The following topics will be covered: History of interpreting, professional settings and interpreting styles; Professional ethics; Research methodology; Aptitude; Quality; The cognitive and neurolinguistic paradigm; The sociolinguistic and pragmatic paradigm; Interpreting for the media; Corpus-based interpreting studies; New technologies for interpreting and remote interpreting.

Some lessons may be taught jointly with other teachers.


Essential readings

List of readings for the final assessment on Introduction to Simultaneous interpreting

Students will read and deliver a presentation (including a critical review) of one of the following papers during a 20-minute interview at the end of the course.

Papers in Spanish, French and German are included in the list for students who have not English in their language combination.

Amos, R. & Pickering, M. J. (2020) “A theory of prediction in simultaneous interpreting”, in Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 23, 706-715, https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728919000671.

Babcock, L. et al. (2017) “Short-term memory improvement after simultaneous interpretation training”, Journal of Cognitive Enhancement 1 (2), 254-267, https://doi.org/10.1007/s41465-017-0011-x.

Bendazzoli, C. (2019) “Discourse markers in English as a target language: the use of so by simultaneous interpreters”, Textus 32 (1), 183-202.

Collard, C., Przybyl, H., Defrancq, B. (2019) “Interpreting into an SOV Language: Memory and the position of the Verb. A Corpus-based Comparative Study of Interpreted and Non-mediated Speech“, Meta 63 (3), 695-716, https://www.erudit.org/en/journals/meta/2018-v63-n3-meta04634/1060169ar/.

Eyckmans, J. (2007) “Taking SLA research to interpreter-training: does knowledge of phrases foster fluency?”, in Boers, F., Darquennes, J., Temmerman, R. (eds), Multilingualism and Applied Comparative Linguistics: Pedagogical Perspectives, Newcastle, Cambridge Scholars, 89-104.

Fantinuoli, C. & Prandi, B. (2021) “Towards the evaluation of simultaneous speech translation from a communicative perspective”. https://arxiv.org/abs/2103.08364.

Gieshoff, A. C. (2017) “Audiovisual speech decreases the number of cognate translations in simultaneous interpreting”, in Hansen-Schirra, S.; Čulo, O., Hofmann, S., Meyer, B. (eds) Empirical modelling of translation and interpreting, Berlin, Language Science Press, 313-330, https://library.oapen.org/handle/20.500.12657/30853.

Korpal, P. & Stachowiak-Szymczak, K. (2020) „Combined problem triggers in simultaneous interpreting: exploring the effect of delivery rate on processing and rendering numbers“, in Perspectives 28:1, 126-143, DOI: 10.1080/0907676X.2019.1628285.

Kunz, K. & Stoll, C. & Klüber, E. (2021) „HeiCiC: A simultaneous interpreting corpus combining product and pre-process data“, in MoTra 2021. Proceedings of the First Workshop on Modelling Translation - Translatology in the Digital Age. 31 May, 2021, Saarland University, Saarbrücken, Germany, 8-13, https://ep.liu.se/ecp/179/ecp2021179.pdf#page=39.

Lamberger-Felber, H. (1997) “Zur Subjektivität der Evaluierung von Ausgangstexten beim Simultandolmetschen“ in Grbic, N., Wolf, M. (Hgg.) Text - Kultur - Kommunikation - Translation als Forschungsaufgabe, Tübingen, Stauffenburg Verlag, 231-247.

Lu, X. (2018) “Propositional information loss in English-to-Chinese simultaneous conference interpreting. A corpus-based study”, Babel 64 (5-6), 792-818, https://doi.org/10.1075/babel.00070.lu.

Mizuno, A. (2017) “Simultaneous interpreting and cognitive constraints”, Bulletin of the College of Literature, Aoyama Gakuin University 58, 1-28, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/315807693_Simultaneous_Interpreting_and_Cognitive_Constraints.

Plevoets, Koen & Defrancq, Bart (2020) “Imported load in simultaneous interpreting. An assessment”, in Muñoz Martin, Ricardo & Halverson, Sandra L. (eds). Multilingual Mediated Communication and Cognition. London: Routledge, 18-43.

Prandi, B. (2017) “Designing a Multimethod Study on the Use of CAI Tools during Simultaneous Interpreting”, in Translating and the Computer 39. Proceedings, 16-17 November 2017, London, AsLing, The International Association for Advancement in Language Technology, 76-88.

Seeber, K. G. (2005) “Temporale Aspekte der Antizipation beim Simultandolmetschen komplexer SOV-Strukturen aus dem Deutschen“, Bulletin Suisse de linguistique appliquée vals-asla 81, 123-140, https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/20649885.pdf.

List of readings for the final assessment on Introduction to Consecutive Interpreting

Papers in Spanish, French and German are included in the list for students who have not English in their language combination.

Abuarrah, Sufyan (2018) "A pragmatic framework to note-taking in consecutive interpretation" in Babel 64:3, 414-433, https//doi.org/10.1075/babel.00044.abu.

Abuín González, M. (2009) “La toma de notas: el desarrollo de la habilidad de aprendiz a intérprete, Hermeneus 11, 23-50.

Abuín González, M. (2012) “The language of consecutive interpreters' notes: Differences across levels of expertise”, Interpreting 14 (1), 055-72.

Albl-Mikasa, M. (2008) “(Non-)Sense in note-taking form consecutive interpreting”. Interpreting 10 (2), 197-231.

Allioni, S. (1989) “Towards a grammar of consecutive interpretation”, in Gran, L.; J. Dodds (eds) The Theoretical and Practical Aspects of Teaching Conference Interpretation, Udine, Campanotto Editore, 191-197.

Andres, D. (2001) “Notation: gute Zeichen - schlechte Zeichen. Empirische Untersuchung zur (Un-) Möglichkeit von Notizen, dargestellt am Sprachenpaar Französisch-Deutsch“, in Kelletat, A.F. Dolmetschen. Beiträge aus Forschung, Lehre und Praxis. FASK, Publikationen des Fachbereichs Angewandte Sprach- und Kulturwissenschaft der Johannes-Gutenberg-Universität Mainz in Germersheim, Reihe A, Frankfurt a.M., Peter Lang, 243-265.

Bohay, M., Blakely, D. P., Tamplin, A. K., Radvansky, G. A. (2011) “Note taking, review, memory, and comprehension”, The American Journal of Psychology 124, 63-73.

Carrier, C. et al. (1984) “The Effects of Facilitative and Debilitative Achievement Anxiety on Notetaking”, Journal of Educational Research 77 (3), 133-138.

Dam, H. V. (2004) “Interpreters' notes: On the choice of language”, Interpreting 6 (1), 3-17.

Dam, H. V. (2007) “What makes interpreters' notes efficient? Features of (non-)efficiency in interpreters' notes for consecutive”, in Gambier, Y., Shlesinger, M., Stolze, R. (eds), Doubts and directions in translation studies: Selected contributions from the EST Congress, Lisbon 2004, Amsterdam/Philadelphia, John Benjamins, 183-197.

Dam, Helle V. (2021) "From controversy to complexity", Interpreting published on line 14 June 2021 HTTPS://doi.org/10.1075/intp.00062.dam .

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.

Kohn, K., Albl-Mikasa M. (2002) “Note-taking in consecutive interpreting. On the reconstruction of an individualised language”, in Van Vaerenbergh, L. (ed.) Linguistics and Translation Studies. Translation Studies and Linguistics, 257-272.

Mueller, P.A., Oppenheimer, D.M. (2014) “The pen is mightier than the keyboard. Advantages of longhand over laptop note taking”, Psychological Science 25 (6), 1159-1168.

Piolat, A. et al. (2005) “Cognitive effort during note taking”, Applied Cognitive Psychology 19 (3), 291-312.

Rendong, C., Yaping D., Nan Z., Jiexuan L. (2015) “Factors contributing to individual differences in the development of consecutive interpreting competence for beginner student interpreters”, The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 9 (1), 104-120.

Roussey, J.-Y., Piolat, A. (2003) “Prendre des notes et apprendre. Effet du mode d'accès à l'information et de la méthode de prise de notes”, Arob@se 7 (1-2).

Szabó, C. (2006) “Language choice in note-taking for consecutive interpreting: A topic revisited”, Interpreting 08:2, 129-147.

List of readings for the final assessment on Introduction to Interpreting Studies

Angelelli, Claudia (2000) "Interpretation as a Communicative Event: A Look through Hymes' Lenses", Meta, 45: 4, 580-592. Disponibile su: http://www.erudit.org/revue/meta/2000/v45/n4/001891ar.pdf

Berk-Seligson, S. (1988/2002) “The impact of politeness in witness testimony: the influence of the court interpreter” in F. Pöchhacker and M. Shlesinger Miriam (eds) The Interpreting Studies Reader, London, Routledge, 278-292.

Collados Aís, A. (1998/2002) “Quality assessment in simultaneous interpreting: the importance of non verbal communication”, in F. Pöchhacker and M. Shlesinger (eds.) The Interpreting Studies Reader, London/New York, Routledge, 326-336

Collard, C., Defrancq, B. (2019) “Predictors of ear-voice span, a corpus-based study with special reference to sex”, Perspectives, 27:3, 431-454, DOI: 10.1080/0907676X.2018.1553199 [https://doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.2018.1553199]

Dimitrova, B. E., Tiselius, E. (2014) “Retrospection in Interpreting and Translation: Explaining The Process?” MonTI. Monografías de Traducción e Interpretación. Special Issue 1, 177-200. doi:10.6035/MonTI.2014.ne1.5

Errico, E., Morelli, M. (2015) “La palabra a los oyentes: los comentarios del público en un cuestionario sobre la percepción de la calidad de la interpretación consecutiva de estudiantes en prácticas” MonTI. Monografías de Traducción e Interpretación. Special Issue 2, 281-301. doi:10.6035/MonTI.2015.ne2.11

Kalina, S. (2015) “Ethical challenges in different interpreting settings”, MonTI. Monografías de Traducción e Interpretación, Special Issue 2, 63-86.

Kellett, C. J. (1999) “Aspetti storici dell'interpretazione”, in Falbo, C., Russo, M., Straniero Sergio, F. (eds) Interpretazione simultanea e consecutiva, Milano, Hoepli, 3-25.

Kurz, I. (1993/2002) “Conference interpretation: expectations of different user groups”, in F. Pöchhacker and M. Shlesinger (eds.) The Interpreting Studies Reader, London, Routledge, 312-325

Liu M. (2008) “How do experts interpret? Implications from research in Interpreting Studies and cognitive science”, in G. Hansen, A. Chesterman e H. Gerzymisch-Arbogast (a cura di), Efforts and Models in Interpreting and Translation Research: A tribute to Daniel Gile. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 159-178.

Macnamara, B. N., Moore, A. B., Kegl, J. A. and Conway, A. (2011) “Domain-general cognitive abilities and simultaneous interpreting skill”. Interpreting 13: 1 Special Issue Aptitude for Interpreting, 121-142.

Merlini, R. (2005) "Alla ricerca dell'interprete ritrovato", in Russo, M. e Mack G. (a cura di) Interpretazione di trattativa. La mediazione linguistico culturale nel contesto formativo e professionale, Milano, Hoepli, 19-40.

Poyatos, F. (1987/2002) “Non verbal communication in simultaneous and consecutive interpretation: a theoretical model and new perspectives”, in F. Pöchhacker and M. Shlesinger Miriam (eds.) The Interpreting Studies Reader, London, Routledge, 234-246.

Sandrelli, A. (2018) “Interpreter-Mediated Football Press Conferences: A Study on the Questioning and Answering strategies”, in Russo, M., Bendazzoli, C. e Defrancq, B. (eds) Making Way in Corpus-based Interpreting Studies, Singapore,Springer, 185-204.

Spinolo N. (2014), “La resa del linguaggio figurato in interpretazione simultanea: una sperimentazione didattica”, in D.R. Miller ed E. Monti (a cura di), Tradurre Figure / Translating Figurative Language. Bologna: AMS ACTA ALMA-DL, 123 – 135.

Straniero Sergio, F. (1999) “Verso una sociolinguistica interazionale dell’interpretazione”, in C. Falbo, M. Russo e F. Straniero Sergio (a cura di) Interpretazione simultanea e consecutiva, Milano, Hoepli, 103-139.

Toledano Buendía, C., Abril Martí, M. I., Pozo Triviño, M. Del, Aguilera Ávila, L. (2015) “Hacia una especialización en interpretación en el ámbito de la violencia de género: investigación, formación y profesionalización” MonTI. Monografías de Traducción e Interpretación. Special Issue 2: 139-160. doi:10.6035/MonTI.2015.ne2.5

Viezzi, M. (1999) “Aspetti della qualità nell'interpretazione”, in C. Falbo, M. Russo, F. Straniero Sergio (eds) Interpretazione simultanea e consecutiva. Problemi teorici e metodologie didattiche, Milano, Hoepli, 140-151.

Recommended readings

Part 1: Introduction to Simultaneous Interpreting

Downie, Jonathan (2020) Interpreters vs machines. Can interpreters survive in an AI-dominated World?, Abingdon/New York, Routledge.

Gillies, A. (2013) Conference interpreting. A student's practice book, London/New York, Routledge.

Niemann, A.J. (2012) Sprachstrukturelle Unterschiede und Strategien im Simultandolmetschen. Eine Untersuchung anhand der Sprachenpaare Französisch-Deutsch und Englisch-Deutsch, München, Martin Meidenbauer.

Setton, R., Dawrant, A. (2016) Conference Interpreting – A Complete Course, Amsterdam/Philadelphia, John Benjamins.

Part 2: Introduction to Consecutive Interpreting

Allioni, S. (1997) Elementi di grammatica per l’interpretazione consecutiva, Trieste, Scuola Superiore di Lingue Moderne per Interpreti e Traduttori Università degli studi di Trieste.

Amato, A. (2004) “L’interpretazione consecutiva in aula: da artificio a simulazione”, in Bersani Berselli, G., Mack, G. e Zorzi, D. (a cura di) Linguistica e interpretazione, Bologna, CLUEB, 193-210.

Falbo, C., Russo M., Straniero Sergio, F. (a cura di) (1999) Interpretazione simultanea e consecutiva. Problemi teorici e metodologie didattiche, Milano, Hoepli.

Gillies, A. (2019) Consecutive Interpreting. A Short Course, London/New York, Routledge.

Part 3: Introduction to Interpreting Studies

*Studies to be discussed during the lesson


Angelelli, C. V. (2004) Revisiting the interpreter’s role. A study of conference, court and medical interpreters in Canada, Mexico, and the United States. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Angelelli, C., Baer, B. J. (2015) Researching translation and interpreting, London, Routledge.

Bendazzoli C., Monacelli, C. (a cura di) (2016), Addressing methodological challenges in interpreting studies research. Newcastle Upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

Douflou, V. (2016) Be(com)ing a conference interpreter: an ethnography of conference interpreters as a professional community. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Falbo, C. (2004) La ricerca in interpretazione. Dagli esordi alla fine degli anni settanta, Milano, Franco Angeli.

*Gile, D. (2001) “Critical reading in (interpretation) research”, in Gile, D., Dam, H., Dubslaff, F., Martinsen, B., Schjoldager, A. (eds) Getting started in interpreting research, Amsterdam/Philadelphia, John Benjamins, 23-38.

Gile, D., Dam, H., Dubslaff, F., Martinsen, B., Schjoldager, A. (eds.) (2001) Getting Started in Interpreting Research, Amsterdam/Philadelphia, John Benjamins.

Hale, S., Napier, J. (2013). Research Methods in Interpreting, London, Bloomsbury.

Pöchhacker, F. (ed.) (2015) Routledge Encyclopedia of Interpreting Studies, London/New York, Routledge.

Pöchhacker, F. (2016) Introducing Interpreting Studies, London/New York, Routledge (2nd ed.).

Spinolo, N. e Russo, M. (2020) “Approcci e metodologie di ricerca in interpretazione di conferenze, Mediazioni, 29: 199-221. http://www.mediazioni.sitlec.unibo.it/index.php/no-29-special-issue-2020.html


Alonso Araguás, I. (2016) “Interpreting practices in the Age of Discoveries: the early stages of the Spanish empire of the Americas”, in Takeda K. e J. Baigorri Jalón (a cura di), New insights in the History of Interpreting. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins, 27-46.

Baigorri-Jalón, J. (2000) La interpretación de conferencias: el nacimiento de una profesión. De París a Nuremberg, Granada, Comares.

Baigorri-Jalón, J. (2004) Interpreters at the United Nations: A History, Ediciones Universidad de Salamanca, Salamanca.

Baigorri Jalón, J. (transl. by Mikkelson, H., Slaughter-Olsen, B.) (2014) From Paris to Nuremberg: the birth of conference interpreting, Amsterdam/Philadelphia, John Benjamins.

Baigorri Jalón, J. (2019) Lenguas entre dos fuegos: intérpretes en la Guerra civil española (1936-1939), Granada: Comares.

Delisle, J. & Woodsworth, J. (2014) “Interpreters and the making of history”, in Delisle, J., Woodsworth, J. (eds) Translators through history (revised edition), Amsterdam/Philadelphia, John Benjamins, 247-290.

Gaiba, F. (1998) The Origins of Simultaneous Interpretation. The Nuremberg Trial, Ottawa, University of Ottawa Press.

Gaiba, F. (1999) “Interpretation at the Nuremberg trial”, in Interpreting, 4:1, 9-22

*Herman, A. (1956) “Interpreting in Antiquity” in Pöchhacker and Shlesinger 2002 (eds.) The Interpreting Studies Reader, pp.15-22

Incerti, S. (2020) Interpreti e guerre – Il caso italiano durante la Seconda guerra mondiale, Tesi di laurea magistrale, Dipartimento di Interpretazione e Traduzione, Università di Bologna.

Payàs Puigarnau, G., Travieso Rodríguez, C. (eds.) (2018) Intérpretes y mediadores en la comunicación intercultural. Itinerarios en el espacio y en el tiempo, Comares: Granada.

Takeda, K., Baigorri Jalón, J. (eds.) (2016), New insights in the History of Interpreting. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins


Bell, T. (2010) “Personal Ethics and Language Services“, MultiLingual 21 (8), 41-43.

Dean, R. K., Pollard, R. Q. (2013) The Demand Control Schema: Interpreting as a Practice Profession, CreateSpace

*Gernot Hebenstreit, Alexandra Marics & Jim Hlavac (2017) “Professional Ethics and Professional Conduct.” 70 In Handbook for Interpreters in Asylum Procedures, edited by UNHCR Austria, 70-84.

Inghilleri, M. (2010) “'You Don’t Make War Without Knowing Why': The Decision to Interpret in Iraq”, in Inghilleri, M., Harding, S.-A. (eds) Translation and Violent Conflict, Special Issue of The Translator 16 (2), 175-196.

Kalina, S. (2015) “Ethical challenges in different interpreting settings”, MonTI Monografías de Traducción e Interpretación, Special Issue 2, 63-86.


Collados Aís, Á. (2016) ”Evaluación de la calidad y entonación del intérprete de simultánea: pautas evaluadoras”, MonTI Monografías de Traducción e Interpretación, Special Issue 3, 213-238.

Dal Fovo, E. (2013) “Quality as coherence maintenance. A corpus-based pilot study on topical coherence in simultaneous interpretation on television: the question/answer group”, in Garcia Becerra, O., Pradas Macía, E. M., Barranco-Droege, R. (eds) Quality in interpreting: widening the scope (vol. 1), Granada, Editorial Comares, 149-174.

Holub E. (2010) "Does Intonation Matter? The impact of monotony on listener comprehension", The Interpreters' Newsletter, 15 (2010), 117-126.

*Kalina, S. (2002)“Quality in interpreting and its prerequisites: a framework for a comprehensive view”, in Garzone e Viezzi (eds.), Interpreting in the 21st Century. Challenges and Opportunities, Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing, pp. 121-132.

Kalina, S. (2012) “Quality in interpreting”, in Gambier, Y.; Doorslaer L, van (eds) Handbook of translation studies 3, Amsterdam/Philadelphia, John Benjamins, 134-140

Kurz, I. (2003) “Quality from the User Perspective”, in Collados Aís, Á.la, Fernandez Sánchez, Ma M., Gile, D. (eds) Evaluación de la calidad en interpretación: investigación, Granada, Editorial Comares, 3-22.

Pöchhacker, F. (2002) “Researching interpreting quality”, in Viezzi, M. & Garzone, G. (eds) Interpreting in the 21st Century. Challenges and Opportunities, Amsterdam/Philadelphia, John Benjamins, 95-106.

Pöchhacker F. e Zwischenberger C. (2010) "Survey on quality and role: conference interpreters’ expectations and self-perceptions". aiic.net March 15, 2010. Accessed November 12, 2019. <http://aiic.net/p/3405>.

Shlesinger, M. (1994) “Quality in simultaneous interpreting” in Gambier, Y., Gile, D., Taylor, C. (eds), Conference Interpreting: Current Trends in Research, Amsterdam/Philadelphia, John Benjamins, 123-132.


Gerver, D., Longley, P., Long, J. and Lambert, S. 1989. Selection tests for trainee conference interpreters. Meta 34 (4), 724-735.

Moser-Mercer, B. (1994) “Aptitude Testing for Conference Interpreting: Why, When and How”, in Lambert, S., Moser-Mercer, B. (eds) Bridging the Gap: Empirical Research on Simultaneous Interpretation, Amsterdam/Philadelphia, John Benjamins, 57-68.

Pöchhacker, F. and M. Liu (eds.) (2014) Aptitude for Interpreting, Benjamins Current Topics Collection, Amsterdam/Philadelphia, John Benjamins

Russo, M. (2011) “Aptitude testing over the years”, Interpreting 13 (1), 5-30.

Timarová, Š., Ungoed-Thomas, H. (2008) “Admission testing for interpreting courses”, The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 2 (1), 29-46.

Cognitive and neurolinguistic paradigm

AA.VV. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition (2020) Interpreting: A window into bilingual processing. Volume 23 - Special Issue 4


Ahrens, B., Kalderon, E., Krick, C. M., W. Reith (2010) “fMRI for exploring simultaneous intepreting”, in Gile, D., Hansen, G., Pokorn, N. (eds.) Why Translation Studies Matters, Amsterdam/Philadelphia, John Benjamins, 237-247.

Babcock, L., Vallesi, A. (2017) “Are simultaneous interpreters expert bilinguals, unique bilinguals, or both?”, Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 20 (2), 403–417.

Chernov G.V. (1979/2002) “Semantic aspects of psycholinguistic research in simultaneous interpretation”, in F. Pöchhacker. e M. Shlesinger (a cura di), The Interpreting Studies Reader. Londra & New York: Routledge, 99-109.

Chmiel, A., Mazur, I. (2013) “Eye Tracking Sight Translation Performed by Trainee Interpreters” In Way C., Vandepitte S., Meylaerts R., Bartłomiejczyk M. (eds) Tracks and Treks in Translation Studies, Amsterdam/Philadelphia, John Benjamins, 189–205.

Fernández Bravo, E. (2019) “Metacognitive self-perception in interpreting”, Translation Cognition & Behavior 2 (2), 147-164.

Gile, D. (1997/2002) “Conference interpreting as a cognitive management problem” in F. Pöchhacker. e M. Shlesinger (a cura di), The Interpreting Studies Reader. Londra & New York: Routledge, 163-176.

Gile, D. (1999) “Testing the effort models’ tightrope hypothesis in simultaneous interpreting: A contribution”, Hermes 23, 153-172.

*Gran, L. (1999) “L’interpretazione simultanea: premesse di neurolinguistica”, in Falbo, C., Russo, M., Straniero Sergio, F. (eds) Interpretazione simultanea e consecutiva. Problemi teorici e metodologie didattiche, Milano, Hoepli, 207-227.

Hervais-Adelman, A., Moser-Mercer, B., Golestani, N. (2011) “Executive Control of Language in the Bilingual Brain: Integrating the Evidence from Neuroimaging to Neuropsychology”, Frontiers in Psychology 2:234 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00234 [http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00234]

*Krick, C., Reith W., Behrent, S., Franceschini, R. (2005) “Das gläserne Hirn des Dolmetschers.”, MDÜ Mitteilungen für Übersetzer und Dolmetscher, 51(6):6-9 (“Looking into the interpreter’s brain.” ITI bulletin May-June 2006: 8-11).

*Paradis, M. (1994) “Towards a neurolinguistic theory of simultaneous translation: the framework”, International Journal of Psycholinguistics. 10 (3) [29]: 319-335.

Seeber, K. G. (2011) “Cognitive load in simultaneous interpreting: Existing theories – new models”, Interpreting 13, 176-204.

Seeber, K. G., Kerzel. D. (2012) “Cognitive Load in Simultaneous Interpreting: Model Meets Data” International Journal of Bilingualism 16 (2), 228-242.

Setton, R. (2003) “Models of the Interpreting Process”, in Collados Aís, Á. & Sabio Panilla, J.A. Avances en la investigación sobre la interpretación, Granada, Editorial Comares, 29-91.

Sijia, C. (2018) “A Pen-Eye-Voice Approach Towards the Process of Note-Taking and Consecutive Interpreting: An Experimental Design”, International Journal of Comparative Literature and Translation Studies 6 (2), 1-8.

*Van de Putte, E., De Baene, W., Garcia Penton, L., Woumans, E., Dijkgraaf. A., Duyck. W. (2017) “Anatomical and functional changes in the brain after simultaneous interpreting training: A longitudinal study”, in Cortex. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/321489603_Anatomical_and_functional_changes_in_the_brain_after_simultaneous_interpreting_training_A_longitudinal_study [accessed Jul 24 2021].

Sociolinguistic and pragmatic paradigm

Bendazzoli, C. (2010) Testi e contesti dell’interpretazione di conferenza, Bologna, Alma@DL amsacta.unibo.it/2905/1/Testi_contesti_interpretazione.pdf

Bendazzoli C. (2016) “The ethnography of interpreter-mediated communication: Methodological challenges in fieldwork”, in Bendazzoli C. e C. Monacelli (a cura di), Addressing methodological challenges in interpreting studies research. Newcastle Upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

Cronin, M. (2002) “The Empire talks back. Orality, heteronomy and the cultural turn in interpreting studies”, in Pöchhacker, F., Shlesinger, M. (eds), The Interpreting Studies Reader, London, Routledge, 388-397.

Diriker, E. (2004) De-/Re-Contextualizing Conference Interpreting. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins.

Duflou, V. (2016) Be(com)ing a conference interpreter: an ethnography of EU interpreters as a professional community, Amsterdam/Philadelphia, John Benjamins.

*Pöchhacker, F. (2006): “Going social?“ On the pathways and paradigms in interpreting studies”, in: Pym, A. / Shlesinger, M. / Jettmarová, Z. (eds.), Sociocultural Aspects of Translating and Interpreting, Benjamin, p. 215– 232.

Russo, M. (1999) “La conferenza come evento comunicativo”, in Falbo C., Russo M., Straniero Sergio F. (eds) Interpretazione simultanea e consecutiva, Milano, Hoepli, 89-102.

Straniero Sergio, F. (1999) “The interpreter on the (talk) show: interaction and participation frameworks”, The Translator 5 (2), 303-326.

*Wadensjö, C. (2002) “The Double Role of Dialogue Interpreting”, in Pöchhacker F.; Shlesinger M. (eds), The Interpreting Studies Reader, London, Routledge, 354-370.

Wadensjö, C. (1998) Interpreting as Interaction. London/New York: Longman.


Dal Fovo, E. (2013) “The language of interpreters on television: characteristics, tendencies, and idiosyncrasies”, in Desoutter, C., Heller, D., Sala, M. (eds) Corpora in specialized communication. Korpora in der Fachkommunikation. Les corpus dans la communication spécialisée, Bergamo, CELSB, 411-434.

Gile, D. (2011) “Errors, omissions and infelicities in broadcast interpreting: Preliminary findings from a case study”, in Alvstad C., Hild A., Tiselius, E. (eds) Methods and Strategies of Process Research: Integrative Approaches in Translation Studies, Amsterdam/Philadelphia, John Benjamins, 201-218.

Katan, D., Straniero Sergio, F. (2001) “Look who’s talking. The ethics of entertainment and talkshow interpreting”, The Translator 7:2, 213-237.

Katan, D., Straniero Sergio, F. (2003) “Submerged ideologies in Media Interpreting”, in Calzada Pérez M. (ed.) Apropos of Ideology, Manchester, St. Jerome Publishers, 131-144.

Russo, M. (2005) “Simultaneous Film Interpreting and Users’ Feedback”, Interpreting 7 (1), 1-26.

Straniero Sergio, Francesco (2003): Norms and Quality in Media Interpreting: The case of Formula One Press-Conferences”, The Interpreters’ Newsletter, 12, 135-174, Trieste, EUT.

Straniero Sergio, F. (2007) Talkshow Interpreting. La mediazione linguistica nella conversazione.

*Straniero Sergio, F. (2012) “Using corpus evidence to discover style in interpreters’performance”, in F. Straniero Sergio, C. Falbo (eds) Breaking Ground in Corpus-Based Interpreting Studies, Bern, Peter Lang, 211-230.

Corpus studies

Aston, G. (2018) “Acquiring the Language of Interpreters: A corpus-based approach”, in Russo, M., Bendazzoli, C. e Defrancq, B. (eds) Making Way in Corpus-based Interpreting Studies, Singapore, Springer, 83-96.

Bendazzoli, C. (2010) Corpora e interpretazione simultanea, Bologn, Alma@DL amsacta.unibo.it/2897/3/corpora_interpretazione_simultanea.pdf

*Bendazzoli, C. (2018) “Corpus-based Interpreting Studies: Past, Present and Future Developments of a (Wired) Cottage Industry”, in Russo, M., Bendazzoli, C; Defrancq, B. (eds) Making Way in Corpus-based Interpreting Studies, Singapore, Springer, 1-20.

Bendazzoli, C., M. Russo and B. Defrancq (eds.) (2018) Special Issue: New Findings in Corpus-based Interpreting Studies, Intralinea (20) [http://www.intralinea.org/current]

Bernardini, S. e Russo, M. (2018) “Corpus Linguistics, Translation and Interpreting”, in Kirsten Malmkjær (ed.), Routledge Handbook of Translation Studies and Linguistics, London, Routledge, 342-356.

Russo, M., Bendazzoli, C., Sandrelli A., N. Spinolo (2012) “The European Parliament Interpreting Corpus (EPIC): implementation and developments”, in Straniero Sergio F., Falbo C. (eds) Breaking Ground in Corpus-Based Interpreting Studies, Bern, Peter Lang, 35-50.

Russo, M., Bendazzoli, C., Defrancq, B. (eds) (2018) Making Way in Corpus-based Interpreting Studies, Singapore, Springer.

Straniero Sergio, F., Falbo, C. (eds) (2012) Breaking Ground in Corpus-Based Interpreting Studies. Bern, Peter Lang.

Remote interpreting

Braun, S., Taylor, J. (2012) “Video-mediated interpreting: an overview of current practice and research”, in Braun, S., Taylor, J. (eds) Videoconference and Remote Interpreting in Legal Proceedings, Cambridge/Antwerp, Intersentia, 33-68.

Braun, S. (2013) “Keep your distance? Remote interpreting in legal proceedings: a critical assessment of a growing practice”, Interpreting 9 (1), 21-46.

Braun, S., Davitti, E., Slater, C. (2020) “‘It’s like being in bubbles’: affordances and challenges of virtual learning environments for collaborative learning in interpreter education”, The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 14 (3), 259-278.

*Davitti, E., Braun, S. (2020) “Analysing Interactional Phenomena in Video Remote Interpreting in Collaborative Settings: Implications for Interpreter Education, The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 14 (3), 279-302.

Fantinuoli, C. (ed.) (2018) Interpreting and technology, Berlin, Language Science Press.

*Fantinuoli, C. (2018) Computer-assisted interpreting: challenges and future perspectives”. In: Isabel Durán and Gloria Corpas (eds.), Trends in e-tools and resources for translators and interpreters. Leiden: Brill, 153-174.

Jiménez Serrano, Ó. (2019) “Foto fija de la interpretación simultánea remota al inicio del 2020”, Tradumàtica 17, 59-80.

Lee, J. (2007) “Telephone interpreting – seen from the interpreters’ perspective”, Interpreting 9 (2), 231-252.

*Mellinger, C. D. (2019) “Computer-Assisted Interpreting Technologies and Interpreter Cognition: A Product and Process- Oriented Perspective”, Revista Tradumàtica. Tecnologies de la Traducció 17, 33-44.

Moser-Mercer B. (2005) “Remote interpreting: The crucial role of presence”, Bulletin VALS-ASLA (Swiss association of applied linguistics) 81, 73-97.

Roziner, I., Shlesinger M. (2010) “Much ado about something remote”, Interpreting 12 (2), 214-247.

Russo, M., Iglesias Fernández, E., González Rodríguez, M.J. (eds) (2019) Telephone interpreting: the impact of technology on dialoogue interpreting / L’interpretazione telefonica: l’impatto della tecnologia sull’interpretazione dialogica, Bologna, Bononia University Press.

Seeber, K., Keller, L., Amos, R., Heng, S. (2019) “Expectations vs. experience. Attitudes towards video remote conference interpreting”, Interpreting 21 (2),270-304.

Teaching methods

Part 1 - Introduction to Simultaneous Interpreting:

This part of the course will be delivered in rooms with booths or remotely, as it requires extensive oral practice by all participants. Each lesson will comprise a theoretical part and some interactive components such as practical exercises. Students will be asked to record their exercises, which might then be discussed in group. The exercises will serve as a starting point and model for self-study before and after classes.

Part 2 - Introduction to Consecutive Interpreting:

This part will be delivered partly remotely and partly in the classroom. Each lesson will encourage the active participation of students. Besides theoretical lessons there will be practice-orientated sessions where students will start performing consecutive interpreting. Students will also be assigned specific exercises to develop their note-taking system.

Part 3 - Introduction to Interpreting Studies:

This part will be delivered entirely in the classroom. Each lecture will be conducted in such a way as to encourage the active participation of the students. At the beginning of the course, the calendar of the single-subject lessons will be provided with indications of the studies that will be presented. A specific thematic bibliography will also be provided for those who are interested in going deeper into the topics covered.

Assessment methods

At the end of the course students will sit a 20-minute interview.

For Part 1 Introduction to Simultaneous Interpreting candidates are required to read and critically discuss an article of your choice from the list provided (see section "Readings/Bibliography - Essential readings") according to the Critical Reading Instructions provided below.

For Part 2 Introduction to Consecutive Interpreting candidates are required to read and critically discuss one article from the list provided (see section "Readings/Bibliography - Essential readings") according to the Critical Reading Instructions provided below.

For Part 3 Introduction to Interpretation Research, candidates are required to read and critically discuss a paper of their choice from the list provided (see section "Readings/Bibliography - Essential readings") and will be asked questions relating to the topics covered during this sub-module.

In particular, the knowledge acquired in the fields of research addressed, the ability to analyse, synthesise and elaborate in relating theoretical concepts to one's own experience in learning to interpret will be assessed, as well as one's command of Italian and one's expository and argumentative capacity in relation to the content of the interview.

An examination which demonstrates a very broad, complete and thorough knowledge of the contents, a well-established ability to apply theoretical concepts and an excellent command of exposition, as well as an excellent ability to analyse, summarise and make interdisciplinary connections will be assessed as excellent (30-30L).

An examination which demonstrates precise and complete knowledge of the contents, an excellent ability to apply theoretical concepts, the ability to analyse and summarise, and a secure and correct presentation will be assessed as excellent (28-29).

An examination which demonstrates appropriate knowledge of the content, good ability to apply theoretical concepts, articulate presentation of the content will be assessed as good (25-27).

An examination which demonstrates appropriate but not in-depth knowledge of the content, a reasonable ability to apply only part of the theoretical concepts, and an acceptable presentation of the content will be assessed as fair (21-24).

An examination which demonstrates sufficient but general knowledge of the contents, simple and not always sure exposition, uncertainties in the application of theoretical concepts will be assessed as merely sufficient (18-20).

Any rejection of a mark must be communicated to the teachers within two days of the announcement of the result of an examination.


- Present the objectve/s of the author/s

(i.e.: the goal is to answer a specific question, to confirm/reject an assunption, etc.).

- Present the methodology

(i.e.. the author tried to ascertain whether taking notes reduces processing abilities and undermines listening and comprehension of interpreting students. Two groups of students attending the same course delivered one consecutive, one group with note-taking the other one without. Results were compared using proper names as indicators).

- Present results and conclusions

(i.e.: the number of correctly rendered proper names in consecutive without notes was higher compared to consecutive with note-taking. This confirms the assunption that note-taking requires a lot of cognitive resources to the detriment of listening and comprehension).

- Assessment of the structure of the paper

(i.e: the paper follows the conventional structure? i.e.: Introduction-Materials and Methods-Results-Discussion).

- Assessment of methodology

(i.e: the methodology is appropriate to reach the author's goal; validity and reliability of methodology, for instance: too many variables? appropriate research tools wre used? etc.).

- Assessment of the author's inferences

(i.e.: is the reesearch ratonal accurate? Every step in the study is a logical consequence fo the previous one? Conclusions are directly derived from results? Is any logical step missing?).

Teaching tools

Teaching tools include:

- online platforms: TEAMS and/or ZOOM (for distance learning) and Moodle (for communication and provision of any support materials)

- computer equipped with headset with microphone

- recording device (computer, mobile, I-pad,etc.)

- electronic documents (text, images, audio and video files).

In view of the type of activity and teaching methods adopted, attendance of this training activity requires the prior participation of all students in modules 1 and 2 of training on safety in the workplace, in e-learning mode: https://elearning-sicurezza.unibo.it/.

Office hours

See the website of Gabriele Dorothe Mack

See the website of Amalia Agata Maria Amato

See the website of Mariachiara Russo