Course Description

This course develops fourth-year students’ skills in simultaneous interpreting from Greek into French in the interpreting booth. It combines conceptual and terminological preparation; analysis of Greek discourse, speakers’ positions, and implied meanings; sentence planning, ready access to vocabulary, and prosody in French as a second active language; and accurate reconstruction of the message in French. Thirteen thematic units on politics, culture, and international cooperation, shared with the course in the reverse direction, provide contexts for learning. Public service interpreting is explored through group meetings and consideration of the limitations of simultaneous interpreting in sensitive situations. The course builds foundational skills through guided exercises, interpreting assignment scenarios, booth teamwork, and simulations of professional practice.

Learning Outcomes

Upon successful completion of the course, students will be able to:

• Recognize the specific demands of simultaneous interpreting into their second active language and justify their choice of interpreting mode for a given situation, particularly in public service settings.
• Analyze spoken Greek to identify the main position, the individuals and institutions involved, logical relationships, and expressions of certainty, possibility, or obligation. Convey the meaning in short French sentences with explicit subjects, clear references, and clear connections between ideas.
• Simultaneously interpret Greek speeches of four to six minutes into French following appropriate preparation, at a moderate delivery rate and with controlled information density. Preserve the speaker’s line of reasoning, positions, and commitments, along with essential information, using clear syntax and accurate names and designations.
• Divide speech into units of meaning and manage the time lag between listening and delivery (décalage). Accurately convey time references, negation, quantities, degrees of certainty or obligation, and who says or claims what. Reduce recurring errors that distort meaning and make brief corrections while continuing to follow the source speech.
• Reconstruct the message in intelligible, coherent, and grammatically correct French, using appropriate intonation, pauses that follow units of meaning, and wording suited to the audience. Restructure Greek sentences and clarify their references while avoiding literal transfers of Greek expressions and syntactic patterns, exaggeration, and unjustified additions or omissions.
• Preserve the force of the Greek-speaking speaker’s commitments and the degree of qualification expressed, and make brief corrections without changing the meaning. In the public service interpreting cases examined in the course, justify the choice of interpreting mode and identify the boundaries of their role and professional competence.
• Compile a preparation dossier for an interpreting assignment, documented Greek–French glossaries with established French collocations, and a collection of useful French names, designations, and formulations. Verify terms, equivalents, proper names, and numerical data against official sources, and use accurate paraphrases when they do not know or cannot recall the appropriate term.
• Check booth equipment, use a concise preparation sheet, support their booth partner, and hand over the microphone smoothly. Clearly report technical problems or request necessary adjustments to working conditions in accordance with internationally established conference interpreting procedures.
• Work independently and collaboratively, organizing their preparation for interpreting assignments in institutional settings and responding to the specific requirements of each assignment.
• Identify lexical, syntactic, and prosodic difficulties and document them with references to specific timestamps in their recordings. Compare their initial rendition, their repeated rendition, and their rendition of a new excerpt, and revise their individual practice plan for interpreting into French.
• Critically use approved digital environments for preparation and practice, checking the reliability of their outputs and complying with the course policy on artificial intelligence.

Weekly Course Content

Week 1 Multilingual Democracy and Citizen Participation

Skills: Familiarization with the interpreting booth and equipment, including channel selection, microphone operation, and temporary muting. Initial assessment of spoken French fluency through two separate activities: a short presentation in French and a simultaneous interpreting trial. Distinguishing comprehension of the Greek message from its formulation in French. Practice using short, familiar sentence structures, explicit subjects, and common verbs, with pauses that follow units of meaning. Reformulation of a Greek message in Greek and simultaneous interpreting of Greek excerpts lasting 45–60 seconds, emphasizing the difference between reformulating meaning and mechanically repeating words.

Week 2 European Institutions and Decision Making

Skills: Identifying speakers’ institutional roles and distinguishing the responsibilities of the bodies they represent, such as the European Commission, the European Parliament, the Council of the EU, the European Council, and the UN. Practice in readily recalling the French names of institutions, offices, and functions, with correct use of articles and prepositions. Making subjects explicit in French when they are omitted or appear later in the Greek sentence. Breaking long Greek sentences into shorter French sentences. Simultaneous interpreting of two institutional speeches, checking the accurate identification of the individuals and bodies referred to. Compilation of a documented glossary containing terms and their established abbreviated forms.

Week 3 Culture and Cultural Heritage in Dialogue between France and Greece

Skills: Practice using French expressions of welcome and forms of address, and preparation for pronouncing proper names and place names correctly in French. Distinguishing information essential to understanding the line of reasoning from secondary details. Rendering Greek cultural terms and references through established French equivalents, concise and accurate wording, or clear paraphrases, depending on the audience. Simultaneous interpreting of Greek excerpts, emphasizing the communication of cultural meaning and brief explanations where clarification is needed. Development of clear, intelligible pronunciation, without requiring a native-speaker accent.

Week 4 Education Research and Student Mobility

Skills: Preserving the structure of an argument—problem, cause, solution—and organizing it clearly in French through appropriate connectives and grammatically correct wording. Accurately distinguishing obligation, recommendation, possibility, and qualification. Practice with expressions used to make recommendations, tense use and sequence, the linking of main and subordinate clauses, and the grammatical patterns of common verbs. Simultaneous interpreting of Greek excerpts using short French sentences. Assessment of coherence based on the listener’s ability to reconstruct the arguments and the relationships between them.

Week 5 The Eurozone Economy Employment and Social Protection

Skills: Accurately conveying economic data from Greek into French while preserving units of measurement, reference periods, and their connection to the argument. Practice in producing numbers and dates promptly and correctly in French and using expressions of change and comparison. Distinguishing percentages from percentage points. Using simple sentence structures when conveying numerical information so that the quantity or indicator, reference period, and comparison remain clear without excessively slowing delivery. Initial practice in providing written support to the interpreter on microphone by the booth partner.

Week 6 Climate Agriculture and Food Security

Skills: Prioritizing information in denser Greek speech and conveying it in French through concise, syntactically simple sentences that preserve the source’s degree of certainty or qualification. Practice using established French collocations to describe risks, scenarios, probabilities, and measures. Comparing an accurate paraphrase with the use of a term whose correctness the interpreter cannot confidently establish. Application to a new excerpt, checking that cause-and-effect relationships, hypotheses, conditions, and scientific qualifications are preserved.

Week 7 Energy Infrastructure and Territorial Cohesion

Skills: Combining discourse analysis, subject preparation, sentence organization, and ready access to appropriate vocabulary to produce a continuous, intelligible rendition in French. Practice with formulations concerning projects, funding, and comparisons, avoiding complex syntactic choices that place additional demands on interpreting. Midterm assessment using two previously unheard Greek speeches, each three minutes long, on a topic prepared in advance. An assignment brief is provided, but the speech texts are not. This is followed by an ungraded feedback workshop to identify French formulations that led to loss of meaning and develop an improvement plan addressing at least two of the difficulties identified.

Week 8 Migration Asylum and Humanitarian Action

Skills: Accurate use of French terminology for legal classifications, protection statuses, and institutional mandates, while avoiding stigmatizing language. Correct use of reported speech in humanitarian settings and clear attribution of statements and claims. Preserving expressions of uncertainty and the force of statements without weakening or strengthening them, and without presenting claims or personal opinions as facts. Simulation of an information meeting for new arrivals and comparison with an individual interview to identify the limitations of simultaneous interpreting and justify the choice of an appropriate interpreting mode.

Week 9 Public Health and Access to Care

Skills: Conveying essential information in a Greek public health message, such as its target population and eligibility requirements for services, in French that is accessible to healthcare users and accurate in content. Particular attention to negation, quantities, time references, and risks. Adapting register to the audience without omitting qualifications or adding advice. Simultaneous interpreting of a Greek presentation and a group information session for French-speaking service users, with checks on audience comprehension. Discussion of situations in which simultaneous interpreting is not an appropriate option.

Week 10 Justice Equality and Access to Rights

Skills: Accurately conveying legal content, scope, and the force of statements in French without adding personal views or advocating for either side. Using appropriate sentence structures and documented terminology for rights, safeguards, and obligations, while avoiding apparently equivalent legal terms that differ in meaning. Conference simulation featuring a speech in Greek and a contribution from a user of interpreting services. Distinguishing language errors that do not affect meaning from wording that changes the legal meaning or scope of a statement. Justifying the choice of interpreting mode and clearly identifying the boundaries of the interpreter’s role and professional competence.

Week 11 Digital Government and Artificial Intelligence

Skills: Selective use of visual aids, such as slides and a sheet of useful French expressions, to maintain fluent delivery in French. Prioritizing listening to the Greek speech, particularly when the speaker departs from an available text, and avoiding reading out a prepared translation. Comparing interpreting with and without automatic transcription in terms of accuracy of meaning, continuity of delivery, and ease of finding appropriate words. Machine-translated text is not read out as a ready-made rendition.

Week 12 Diplomacy the United Nations and Collective Security

Skills: Accurately conveying diplomatic qualifications, appeals, and commitments through established French formulations. Preserving the message even when finding the appropriate wording is difficult. Simultaneous interpreting of Greek speeches and a short question in pairs, with organized support from the partner who is not on microphone and a smooth handover without interrupting the rendition. Simulation of a hybrid meeting, including sound checks, practice in promptly reporting technical problems, and suspension of interpreting when sound quality prevents reliable delivery of the message.

Week 13 Mediterranean Cooperation and Maritime Governance Conference Simulation

Skills: Applying the French language resources developed throughout the semester to a new subject area, maritime cooperation, following relevant preparation. Familiarization with the names of maritime areas and formulations used in cooperation, using them flexibly during interpreting rather than reproducing a memorized speech. Individual simultaneous interpreting into French of a five-minute Greek speech and a short question during a joint bilingual conference. Taking on the supporting role in the booth, including preparation, assistance to the booth partner, and a smooth microphone handover. Self-assessment, peer assessment, and an evidence-based review of progress, remaining difficulties, and next steps for improving interpreting into French.

Recommended Reading in Greek

Ioannidis, A. (2022). Θεωρία και πράξη της διερμηνείας [Theory and practice of interpreting]. Kallipos, Open Academic Editions. https://doi.org/10.57713/kallipos-93

Recommended Reading in Other Languages

Bartłomiejczyk, M. (2006). Strategies of simultaneous interpreting and directionality. Interpreting, 8(2), 149–174. https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.8.2.03bar

Chang, C.-c., & Wu, M. M.-c. (2025). Structured peer feedback in simultaneous interpreting training. INContext: Studies in Translation and Interculturalism, 5(2), 134–159. https://doi.org/10.54754/incontext.v5i2.124

European Masters Project Group. (2004). Teaching simultaneous interpretation into a B language: Preliminary findings. Interpreting, 6(2), 205–216. https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.6.2.06don

Fan, L., Xiong, L., Xiao, W., & Cheung, A. K. F. (2026). Students’ readiness for digital technology and perceptions of GenAI versus teacher feedback in interpreting training. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/1750399X.2026.2657807

Gile, D. (2009). Basic concepts and models for interpreter and translator training (Rev. ed.). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.8

Gillies, A. (2013). Conference interpreting: A student’s practice book. Routledge. https://www.routledge.com/Conference-Interpreting-A-Students-Practice-Book/Gillies/p/book/9780415532365

International Organization for Standardization. (2019). Interpreting services — Legal interpreting — Requirements (ISO Standard No. 20228:2019). https://www.iso.org/standard/67327.html

International Organization for Standardization. (2020). Interpreting services — Healthcare interpreting — Requirements and recommendations (ISO Standard No. 21998:2020). https://www.iso.org/standard/72344.html

International Organization for Standardization. (2022). Interpreting services — Conference interpreting — Requirements and recommendations (ISO Standard No. 23155:2022). https://www.iso.org/standard/74749.html

International Organization for Standardization. (2024). Interpreting services — Community interpreting — Requirements and recommendations (ISO Standard No. 13611:2024). https://www.iso.org/standard/82387.html

Jones, R. (2002). Conference interpreting explained (2nd ed.). St. Jerome Publishing.

Li, T., & Chmiel, A. (2024). Automatic subtitles increase accuracy and decrease cognitive load in simultaneous interpreting. Interpreting, 26(2), 253–281. https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.00111.li

Pöchhacker, F. (2022). Introducing interpreting studies (3rd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003186472

Seeber, K. G. (2011). Cognitive load in simultaneous interpreting: Existing theories — new models. Interpreting, 13(2), 176–204. https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.13.2.02see

Setton, R., & Dawrant, A. (2016a). Conference interpreting: A complete course. John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.120

Setton, R., & Dawrant, A. (2016b). Conference interpreting: A trainer’s guide. John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.121

Souza, I. E. T. de V., & Fragkou, E. (Eds.). (2020). Handbook of research on medical interpreting. IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-9308-9

Wadensjö, C. (1998). Interpreting as interaction. Longman.

Woo, K. (2025). Analysis of student interpreters’ self-assessment from the perspective of self-regulated learning. FORUM, 23(1), 85–106. https://doi.org/10.1075/forum.24006.woo

Relevant Scholarly Journals

• FORUM
• The Interpreter and Translator Trainer
• Interpreting
• Translation & Interpreting

The initial article “The” is disregarded when alphabetizing journal titles.

Sources for Teaching Materials and Terminological Documentation

• Assemblée nationale: https://videos.assemblee-nationale.fr/
• Council of the European Union Video: https://video.consilium.europa.eu/
• EUR-Lex: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/
• European Commission Audiovisual Service: https://audiovisual.ec.europa.eu/
• European Parliament Multimedia Centre: https://multimedia.europarl.europa.eu/
• gr (Greek public sector portal): https://www.gov.gr/
• Hellenic Ministry of Foreign Affairs: https://www.mfa.gr/
• Hellenic Parliament Television (Vouli Tileorasi): https://www.hellenicparliament.gr/Enimerosi/Vouli-Tileorasi/
• IATE: https://iate.europa.eu/
• Speech Repository: https://speech-repository.webcloud.ec.europa.eu/
• UN Web TV: https://webtv.un.org/

Teaching Methods

The course is taught in person in the interpreting laboratory, using booths or acoustically isolated workstations with separate channels for the source speech and the interpretation. Teaching combines short theoretical presentations, instructor demonstrations with commentary on interpreting decisions, individual practice, and work in groups of three.

Students rotate through the roles of interpreter, supporting booth partner, and listener. Each practice cycle includes an initial rendition, self-assessment with references to specific timestamps in the recording, feedback, repeated practice targeting the difficulties identified, and application to a new excerpt. Delivery rate, information density, stylistic complexity, and excerpt length increase gradually. Intralingual reformulation and sight translation are used as preparatory exercises for simultaneous interpreting.

Language support focuses on analyzing and understanding Greek speech and developing fluency in spoken French. Particular emphasis is placed on ready access to appropriate vocabulary, established collocations, sentence organization, and prosody. Regular feedback from a professional interpreter or collaborator with French as an A language is recommended. The French used in France serves as the reference variety for spoken production.

The course is coordinated with “Simultaneous Interpreting from French into Greek I.” The two courses follow a shared thematic schedule and conclude with a joint conference simulation, while 

Use of Information and Communication Technologies

Digital teaching materials and online speech repositories are used for interpreting practice.

The course eClass platform is used to post teaching materials, instructions, and deadlines; submit assignments and recordings; and provide feedback. Teaching draws on audiovisual sources, a projector, listening and recording equipment, official terminology databases, and parallel texts issued by institutional bodies.

Specialized digital work and practice environments (Workbenches), together with H5P-compatible tools, support interactive activities combining speech, audio, and images. They are used under the instructor’s close supervision and guidance.

Artificial intelligence (AI) is used within the following framework:

• Scope of use. AI use is permitted exclusively for the educational purposes described below and under the instructor’s strict supervision.
• Preparation and teaching. The instructor uses AI to create and adapt materials that develop advanced interpreting skills. These include multimodal exercises, memory exercises, activities with auditory and visual stimuli presented sequentially or simultaneously, exercises of progressively increasing difficulty, and multiple-choice questions. The instructor checks every activity before it is used in class with the available audiovisual equipment.
• Digital practice environments and H5P. AI supports the integration of specialized practice environments from AI platforms into eClass and the incorporation of H5P-compatible tools. These environments allow the creation of interactive exercises combining different stimuli, changes of speaker, and controlled increases in difficulty, for example in delivery rate or the frequency of speaker changes.
• Performance assessment. AI is not used to assess student performance except in specific cases where the instructor has clearly defined the parameters and criteria for its use. Any such application remains under the instructor’s control. Final assessment decisions and grading are the instructor’s sole responsibility.
• Assignments and preparatory research. AI may not be used to produce student assignments or complete reflective activities. Its use for research and preparation is limited to activities within the specialized practice environments or exploratory work accompanied by cross-checking information and verifying sources. This allowance does not remove the prohibition on using AI to produce submitted work.
• Specialized glossaries. AI may assist with the initial identification of terms and the search for specialized glossaries. Every term and its proposed target-language equivalent must be verified against official terminology databases, such as IATE, institutional sources in the relevant field, and official parallel texts. AI suggestions do not constitute supporting evidence and do not replace students’ own research and preparation of submitted work.
• Critical and responsible use. The course explores the capabilities and limitations of different tools. Their outputs are examined for accuracy, omissions, distortions, bias, and suitability for interpreting. Students also develop the ability to select tools on an informed basis, protect confidential material, and use technology responsibly.

Assessment

Diagnostic Assessment

An ungraded diagnostic assessment takes place in the first week. It includes a short oral presentation in French, a simultaneous interpreting trial, and a check of familiarity with the equipment. These three elements are considered separately. The results are used to identify two priorities for each student’s improvement in spoken French during interpreting.

Formative and Ongoing Assessment

Feedback is provided throughout the semester through weekly exercises, not all of which count toward the grade. Descriptive feedback addresses the rendition of meaning, linguistic formulation, and interpreting strategies separately. It is combined with self-assessment and peer assessment in groups of three, rotating through the roles of interpreter, booth partner, and listener, or through whole-class discussion.

Interpreting Assignment Preparation Projects

Students complete two interpreting assignment preparation projects, in Weeks 6 and 11. Each project includes a one-page assignment brief and a glossary of 30 entries selected from weekly research, including useful French collocations.

Each entry includes the source-language term, its target-language equivalent, a short definition, an example in context or an established collocation, a dated source, and an indication of its validation status.

Projects are assessed using the following criteria:

• Conceptual accuracy and source traceability: 50%.
• Practical usefulness of the material in the interpreting booth: 30%.
• Justification of choices: 20%.

Portfolio

The portfolio forms part of the overall assessment and contains five work samples from Weeks 3, 5, 8, 10, and 12.

Each sample includes the initial rendition, a new rendition of an excerpt following feedback, the interpretation of a new excerpt to demonstrate application of the skills developed, and a 250-word analysis in French.

The portfolio is assessed in two stages. The samples from Weeks 3 and 5 are assessed after Week 5. The samples from Weeks 8, 10, and 12 are assessed in Week 13, together with a final 500-word review.

The assessment criteria are:

• Evidence-based identification of strengths and difficulties: 35%.
• Use of feedback: 30%.
• Application of skills to new material and evidence of progress: 25%.
• Portfolio organization and traceability of the learning process: 10%.

Summative Assessment

Summative assessment comprises the midterm assessment, the conference simulation, and the final examination.

Midterm Assessment in Week 7

The midterm assessment consists of two previously unheard Greek speeches, each three minutes long and equally weighted. The speeches address a topic prepared in advance. Individual written feedback is provided before Week 9.

Conference Simulation in Week 13

The simulation recreates actual conference conditions and is assessed individually. Interpreting performance accounts for 60% of the simulation grade, using the course’s common assessment rubric. The remaining 40% covers specific, observable aspects of professional practice:

• Preparation that can be used effectively during interpreting: 15%.
• Support for the booth partner and a smooth microphone handover: 15%.
• Compliance with technical procedures and appropriate professional decision making: 10%.

Each student’s performance is assessed independently. Individual grades are not affected by the performance of booth partners.

Final Examination

The final examination is held in person and consists of simultaneous interpreting into French of two previously unheard Greek speeches on topics already covered in the course. The speeches are equally weighted: a five-minute structured presentation and a four-minute argumentative speech. The indicative delivery rate is 95–115 words per minute, with moderate information density.

An assignment brief specifying the topics and audience characteristics is posted 48 hours before the examination, without the speech texts. Students receive ten minutes of preparation time immediately before the examination.

Students may use a personal glossary containing documented and verified terms, along with the assignment brief. Real-time machine translation, external assistance, and automatic transcription are not permitted.

Oral renditions are assessed using a common five-criterion rubric worth a total of 100 points:

• Faithfulness and completeness of the message: 40 points.
• Accuracy and clarity of spoken French: 30 points.
• Intelligibility and prosody: 10 points.
• Accuracy of terminology and data: 10 points.
• Continuity of delivery and ability to reformulate: 10 points.

Each criterion is assigned a performance level from 0 to 4. Points are calculated as follows: criterion score = criterion weight × performance level / 4. Half-level increments are permitted when justified. The same error is not penalized twice.

Accurate paraphrasing is accepted. A native-speaker accent and advanced mastery of idiomatic expressions are not required.

Assessment criteria and the schedule are posted on eClass before the relevant graded assignments and assessments.