Integrative Methodology of Teaching Translation and Interpreting

  • Elena V. Alikina
  • Lyudmila V. Kushnina
  • Anton Yu. Naugolnykh
  • Kirill I. FalkoEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 907)


The article is devoted to the development of professional translators’ education. The research considers two teaching models. One of them is based on the concept of translation space. The study demonstrates how teaching students to analyze various semantic fields of translation space promotes a gradual development of professional translator’s competencies. The second model represents the potential of using interpreter’s note-taking as a means of processing semantic information in the process of interpretation. The authors argue that teaching both translation and interpreting within a single curriculum is a common practice in the Russian universities. However, despite having common goals, these two professional activities each requires a certain set of professional competencies, as well as the application of different professional tools. According to the authors’ viewpoint, reconstructing a professional reality in the classroom may promote the improvement of professional skills in the most natural educational environment. In conclusion, the authors describe methodological solutions to integrate translation and interpreting teaching models into the educational process by means of project-based learning.


Translation Interpreting Teaching models Translation space Note-taking Integration 


  1. 1.
    Haken, H.: Synergetik in der Psychologie. Hogrefe, Göttingen (2010)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kushnina, L.: Les langues et les cultures dans l’espace traductif. Atelier de Traduction 21, 61–74 (2014)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Iliescu Gheorghiu, C.: Introduccion a la interpretacion. La modalidad consecutive. Universidad de Alicante, Alicante (2001)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bastin, G.: Les marqueurs de cohérence en interprétation consécutive. Interpret. Newsl. 2, 175–187 (2003)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Abuin Gonzales, M.: El proceso de interpretacion consecutiva: un estudio del binomio problema/estrategia. Interlingua, Editorial Comares Granada (2007)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Andres, D.: Konsekutivdolmetschen und Notation. Last accessed 17 Sept 2018
  7. 7.
    Szabó, C.: Language choice in note-taking for consecutive interpreting. Interpreting 8(2), 129–147 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dam, H.V.: 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: EST Congress 2004, pp. 183–198. John Benjamins, Amsterdam/Philadelphia (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    González Davies, M.: Multiple Voices in the Translation Classroom: Activities, Tasks and Projects. John Benjamins Publishing Company, Amsterdam/Philadelphia (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Perm National Research Polytechnic UniversityPermRussian Federation

Personalised recommendations