Descriptions of interpreting and their ethical consequences

Uldis Ozolins

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    Abstract

    The current array of descriptions that are given of interpreting outside the conference room has bedeviled the field: from ‘community interpreting’ to ‘dialogue interpreting’ to ‘public service interpreting’ to ‘ad hoc interpreting’ to ‘non-professional interpreting’. Some descriptions avoid ‘interpreting’ altogether – ‘linguistic mediation’, ‘cultural mediation’ etc. Significantly, self-ascription by the practitioners themselves often does not match these imposed descriptions. Yet each description carries with it, implicitly or explicitly, a specific view of ethics, tied closely to perceived roles of interpreters, but often encompassing assumptions about tasks, personal or professional characteristics, or status. This messy terminological terrain is surveyed to reveal some altogether clear distinctions that can help our understanding of differentiating and common elements in interpreting. Building on that, the ethical implications of different descriptions are categorised to show that ethical responsibility in interpreting situations rests not with the interpreters alone, but with other players, particularly institutional players, in contracting language services.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)23-41
    Number of pages19
    JournalFITISPos International Journal
    Volume1
    Issue number1
    Publication statusPublished - 2014

    Keywords

    • ethics
    • terminology
    • translating and interpreting

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Descriptions of interpreting and their ethical consequences'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this