Wine Basics 1/19/2017

Initial gut reaction 1-Not at all   10-Yes, definitely

Did I convey presenter’s overall message? 7 I think I got most of the concepts, but missed some.

Did I deliver the interpretation with confidence? 7 There were parts when I thought she was speaking quickly so I missed some and my face probably showed that.  It was also the first time I've interpreted in a few weeks, so I felt a little intimidated at first. 

What is the presenter’s purpose?: She wants to educate the viewer about wine so they can be more confident choosing and drinking wine in the future. 

What is the presenter’s attitude toward the topic?: (emotive, excited, lethargic…) She was informed about the topic, but didn't seem overly excited.  At the beginning and end she showed the most emotion getting excited about her topic. 

What was the presenter’s language quality? (clear, redundant, evasive, tangents…) Her language was clear and sometimes redundant, but since she was trying to teach the audience that is normal. 

How was the audio/visual quality? During my interpretation my headphones stopped working so I had to pause the video and figure that out.  However, the audio and visual quality of the video was fine. 

How did the presenter structure the presentation? She structured it like a lesson.  She went through the topics she would present first.  Then she explained and expanded upon each topic.  Then at the end she reviewed just as a presenter would who was teaching something to their audience. 

Did the source text use any culturally bound information or topic-specific jargon?  It had topic-specific jargon including names of wine and the terms used to describe wine (acidity, tannins, etc)

Brief notes:  Sometimes I felt like I was repeating the same signs over and over.  Before my second take, I am interested to see how an experienced interpreter presented some of the details and facts.  I also feel that I will do better next time after practicing some of the words since this was a fingerspelling section.  

Recovery 1/19/2017

Initial gut reaction 1-Not at all   10-Yes, definitely

Did I convey presenter’s overall message? 6 Sometimes when I missed something, I focused on that and then missed the next idea too.  I needed to practice the Gish model and not focus so much on the details, but try to get the concepts first.  I feel I should've research CBT more and knowing not just philosopher's names, but their ideas would've been helpful. 

Did I deliver the interpretation with confidence? 7 I think it was okay, but I left a lot of details out.  I tried to wait until I understood the concept before giving the details, but then I think I lost some of the information because I got caught up on names.

What is the presenter’s purpose?: He wanted to educate people.

What is the presenter’s attitude toward the topic?: (emotive, excited, lethargic…) He is motivated and believes his topic is of great importance.  He was emotive discussing his experiencing and his reasons why he believes in CBT and studying philosophy.

What was the presenter’s language quality? (clear, redundant, evasive, tangents…) Sometimes he ran through his examples so it was difficult to include all of his knowledge, for example, about philosophers and their ideas.

How was the audio/visual quality? The video and audio quality was good. 

How did the presenter structure the presentation? He introduced himself and his backstory so we would know how he connected to the rest of his presentation.  He discussed his experiences with CBT and then discussed how it can be helpful to others.  He then connected the therapy technique to other philosophical ideas that could help change people's behaviors. 

Did the source text use any culturally bound information or topic-specific jargon? There was some topic-specific jargon such as CBT.  I found the names to be most difficult to keep up with. 

Brief notes:  I think when I lost a name, I often didn't hear their philosophy or the next idea because I became a little flustered.