Being a conference interpreter does not mean that I interpret only for “conferences”. Under the influence of wise teachers, I have always understood simultaneous and consecutive to be commensurable techniques for the practice of interpreting in general. After all interpreting is the key word, and whether I find myself in a conference hall booth, at a seminar table or before a banquet hall crowd, I think of myself simply as an interpreter.
Much of what the International Association of Conference Interpreters has accomplished over the years is profoundly relevant to interpreting in the broadest sense. Ethics offers a perfect example and the founders of our association were wise in placing professional secrecy at the heart of our rules.
I once had the opportunity to experience first hand the significance of this. I was approached by a law firm about an assignment, and after we agreed on the provisions of my contract, I was asked if I had any problem in signing a confidentiality agreement. “None at all,” I responded. “In fact, my professional association has a clause on secrecy in its code of ethics.” I could virtually hear the lawyer’s ears prick up as he asked me to fax him a copy. It wasn’t long before he called back to say that, having read the AIIC Code of Ethics, he did not consider it necessary for us to enter into any other agreement on confidentiality.
Internal regulation, with ethical tenets at the core, is a major component of professionalization in any field. Any erosion of essential ethical principles is thus a move toward deprofessionalization. As interpreters, we must maintain our fundamental precepts for the good of all, including our clients, and AIIC does well to emphasize that anyone applying for membership makes a commitment to abide by them just by signing the application form.
When I talk to students and others interested in becoming interpreters, I often hear that the desire to help others communicate is one of their principal motives. When I talk to colleagues, I commonly hear that among their most vivid memories are assignments in which they felt that the dream of being cultural intermediaries came true. I know that such memories take pride of place in my mental scrapbook.
Re-reading our code of ethics I find many elements that implicitly aim at assuring communication. Confidentiality fosters trust, so necessary to good communication. The integrity (and yes, even transparency) underlying the commitment not to accept work for which one is not qualified or more than one assignment for overlapping periods of time also engenders trustworthiness. Elements on collegiality help to weave the fabric of team work which is so essential to our trade and has helped make interpreting a very egalitarian profession in a world where hierarchy usually reigns.
Good communication is also dependent on the qualifications of the interpreter (thus the importance of professionalization). And it will be contingent upon the conditions in which competent interpreters work (thus the inclusion of a clause on working conditions in our code).
I believe that interpreters must work with the aim of assuring inclusive communication and that most of our employers ask us to do exactly that. As intermediaries, we stand between people to connect, not to separate, them. I would like to think that we will work in situations in which communication leading to greater understanding is possible, if in no other way than by the transmission of accurate, complete and un-coerced information.
At times we can broaden understanding by tossing aside qualifiers which seem to imply specialization but are often no more than sales gimmicks. A bilateral interpreter, for example, would seem to offer the advantage of working for both sides or between two languages – but what interpreter does not? Instantaneous interpretation would seem to be the latest advanced technique, but conference interpreters have been doing simultaneous interpretation ever since the Nuremburg trials. Accredited interpreters would seem to come with a guarantee (although “accredited for what?” would always be an appropriate question), but were they reviewed by peers with deep roots in the profession or just shined-up by a commercial entity intent on marketing them?
In the end interpreting and interpreter are the essential words, no matter what adjective may precede them, and I hope that they will always evoke an image of communication and communicator in those who hear them. Professional conference interpreters need no further adjectives to denote expertise. Professional consultant interpreters can help guide you to them and ensure you get the communication you need.
