Search

This paper has people as its focus, namely 80 trainee interpreters and 80 practitioners, with the following questions: where they come from occupationally – what their current/previous occupations are; how much they (wish to) work; and why they wish to become/remain an interpreter. Data were collected from Australia-based informants who will or currently work in public service interpreting. Matching the current occupations of trainees and the previous occupations of practitioners according to a classification system of occupations, we see that substantial percentages of trainees currently work in the ‘community and personal workers’ and ‘professionals’ categories, while for practitioners, their previous work belonged to the ‘professionals’ and ‘clerical and administrative workers’ categories. Projected and reported levels of work are often not full-time with only some indication that this is related to the general level of demand for work in their languages. In relation to the feature of motivation, we employ Self-Determination Theory as a model to examine informants’ stated motivations and find that amongst trainees, this is extrinsic with a focus on community activism, while practitioners’ motivations are more intrinsic. By linking three key features in a cohesive way, this paper gives a comprehensive description of today and tomorrow’s interpreters.

This article provides an overview of the process by which potential translators and interpreters demonstrate minimum standards of performance to warrant official or professional recognition of their ability to translate or interpret and to practise professionally – commonly known as ‘certification’. Certification can be awarded by governmental or professional authorities on the basis of testing, completed training, presentation of previous relevant experience and/or recommendations from practising professionals. Certification can be awarded by a single authority for all types of translation and interpreting, or by authorities that specialise in a particular mode or type of inter-lingual transfer. This article compares certification procedures in 21 countries to present a cross-national perspective of how (and if) certification is awarded and which features and requirements are contained in it. Comparison reveals that the pragmatic, needs-based and socially focussed policies of translation and interpreting services in some New World countries such as Australia, Canada, US has led to the establishment of certification programs. In other, typically European and East Asian countries, a demonstration of minimum standards is provided through lengthy training, commonly as part of a university post-graduate degree where translation and interpreting performance is principally required for high-level political, business or literary interaction. In such countries, ‘certification’ may be a term reserved for a restricted type of performance, eg. court interpreting. Parallels are drawn between the procedures and conventions employed in various countries and how common elements may form a basis for greater cross-national equivalence and comparability.