A number of readers may be annoyed that the above discussion of the basicprinciples of consecutive has been carried out to a large extent as if notes didnot exist. One may have gleaned the impression that the interpreter was to ana-lyze and memorize speeches of up to five minutes without any real assistancefrom notes. It is obvious that none but exceptional interpreters can be expectedto work in that way: our presentation in the previous chapter was merely de-signed to put note-taking in the right perspective. The essential part of a consecutive interpreter' s work is done in the activi-ties already described: understanding, analysis, re-expression. If these are notdone correctly, the best notes in the world will not make you a good inter-preter. Notes are no more than an aid to enhance the work done on the basis ofthese three key components. They are not an end in themselves, but a meansto an end.
The interpreter who invests too much in their notes is running a twofoldrisk. First, by trying to note as much as possible in a form as close as possible tothe original, their notes may become a form of shorthand, a mere transcriptionof the sequence of words used by the speaker. Such notes will influence theinterpreter when they are reproducing the speech, and their version will be toomuch a transliteration of the original, not a re-expression of its ideas.
Second, and more seriously, the interpreter who relies too much on theirnotes will have paid insufficient attention to genuine understanding and analy-sis while listening to the speech. They are therefore capable of being superficial,of making serious errors, even of contradicting themselves, insofar as the speechfor them is no longer a coherent whole but a series of sentences to be repro-duced automatically. They are, so to speak, flying blind.
Having sounded these warning notes about the attitude to take to notes, andthe risks involved in their abuse, what then is the purpose of taking notes?
The first
……