Available at

2.4.2 Proper names 
Seleskovitch (1962) stated that names require linguistic “transcoding” rather than 
interpreting. Gile highlights that proper names are potential problems for 
interpreters, particularly if the interpreter is not familiar with a specific proper name 
or its pronunciation in the target language (Gile, 1995). Proper names may also 
increase the efforts of the interpreter, and thus require some “coping tactics”. 
Proper names can be phonetically unfamiliar to the interpreter (Hanaoka, 2002).

---

Teaching simultaneous interpreting 
 
page 29 
In that case, interpreters have to store the names in their short-term memory and 
recode them in their target language. However, the lack of schemata (a schematic 
view of the knowledge of proper names) may affect their capacity to retain the 
name in their short-term memory (Rumelhart, 1980). Interpreters may also run the 
risk of mispronouncing the name if they do not know how the word is spelled 
beforehand (Quini, 1993) and may sometimes not realize that there is a 
conventional translation for a specific name in their target language. 
Hanaoka (2002) proposes a distinction between two types of strategies in order to 
render proper names more easily: decoding strategies and encoding strategies. 
The first strategies consist of being able to recognize a proper name and gaining 
knowledge about the referent. There are also two types of decoding strategies. 
First, it is possible to put proactive strategies into place if the interpreter can 
anticipate the topic of the text. An interpreter can for instance search for specific 
proper names that he/she can encounter if given the topic. Conference interpreters 
are usually informed of the topic of the conference in advance and can therefore 
do research on that topic. Then, reactive strategies are employed when the 
interpreter has encountered an unfamiliar name, and they include guessing from 
the context or the use of an online dictionary. However, in simultaneous 
interpreting, the resources may be significantly limited due to time constraints. 
As for encoding strategies, three factors need to be considered (Hanaoka, 2002): 
1) The culture-specificity of the name: the interpreter has to decide how 
familiar the name may be to the listener, so their assessment of the 
listener’s knowledge state is a crucial factor in their choice of strategy.
2) Relationship to macro/micro-structure: if the referent of a name is the 
topic of a speech, then it is part of the macro-structure of the speech and is 
essential. However, a name considered less important may be more 
susceptible to simplification strategies. 
3) Topical knowledge/figurative knowledge: when an interpreter faces an 
unfamiliar proper name due to a lack of cultural knowledge, the addition or 
explication of extratextual factual information is possible. In the case of a 

---

Teaching simultaneous interpreting 
 
page 30 
figurative use of a name, the explicitation of the figurative meaning is 
required.