Interpreters as Professionals

In this article, I shall examine how interpreting studies have so far accounted for different modes and types of interpreting, and suggest that the traditional subdivision into conference interpreting (CI) on the one hand and any other types of interpreting on the other should be given up. Those other types are generally referred to as “community interpreting”- a vague term which does not include such types as court or business interpreting, so that I will, for the purposes of this article, replace it by the term “non-conference interpreting”(NCI). This might help obtain a more finely tuned approach to the many different interpreting services that are being rendered today. I will then look more closely at what exactly distinguishes various types of interpreting from one another and what common elements they share. If interpreting as a whole is to be professionalised, we need clear definitions of interpreting quality and methods of quality assurance. On the basis of the commonalities found for the different types of interpreting, it should be possible to develop modules of training that are useful for all interpreting. Some of the common elements can be taught jointly, others need specific training. Some elements can be taught unilingually, others require the bilingual context. The training elements suggested are aimed at obtaining an accepted degree of professionality for NC interpreters whose contributions to interlingual communication are no less important than those of conference interpreters.