TRANSLATORS AND INTERPRETERS:
COMPARING COMPETENCES
MAARTJE KERMIS
2008
Translators and Interpreters: Comparing Competences
CONTENTS
PAGE NO
1. Introduction
1
2. The Concept of Competence
3
2.1 Explanation of the concept of competence
3
2.2 Application of competence in translation and interpreting
4
3. Translator Competence
5
3.1 Analysis of the competences required of professional translators
5
3.2 Discussion of educational strategies used to develop competences
11
4. Interpreter Competence
24
4.1 Analysis of the competences required of professional interpreters
24
4.2 Discussion of educational strategies used to develop competences
31
5. Comparison of Translator and Interpreter Competences
41
6. Conclusion
47
7. Bibliography
49
Translators and Interpreters: Comparing Competences
1. INTRODUCTION
This thesis will address the topic of competence in translation and interpreting. Competence
is a general concept which can be applied to any form of professional activity. It denotes
the collection of skills and aptitudes that professionals within a certain field need to
possess. In this study, the concept of competence is discussed in relation to the fields of
translation and interpreting. Translators and interpreters both work within the domain of
interlingual communication, and as a result have certain common abilities. For instance,
both groups of professionals require a high level of aptitude in their native and foreign
languages. However, translation is written interlingual communication, whereas
interpreting is spoken interlingual communication. Translators are expected to have
attained complete mastery of the writing standards of their native and foreign languages,
including spelling and punctuation. Interpreters are required to have the ability to transfer
a source message almost instantly, due to time limitations. Therefore, professional
translators and professional interpreters require both shared and distinct skills and
techniques to perform their task successfully.
Particularly during the last three decades, a great deal of research has been carried
out regarding competence in translation and interpreting. Within this type of scientific
research, two separate fields can be distinguished: translation studies/interpreting studies
and applied translation studies/applied interpreting studies. Translation and interpreting
studies as such investigate the professional standards in translating and interpreting,
mainly from a descriptive perspective. Many theorists, for instance, have composed lists of
translator and interpreter competences, based on requirements for the two professional
disciplines. Applied translation and interpreting studies are concerned with the structure
and content of translator and interpreter education. Scientists in this area have discussed
teaching strategies and intended learner outcomes to be used during translator and
interpreter training. Naturally, these two types of research are heavily intertwined: the
professional abilities as discussed by descriptive research are developed during translator
and interpreter training programmes designed by applied studies.
1
Translators and Interpreters: Comparing Competences
To begin with, this thesis will discuss the concept of competence in general and its
application in translation and interpreting in chapter two. This section is designed to
provide a theoretical basis for the following detailed examination of the distinct skills and
aptitudes required by professional translators and interpreters. The next two sections of
this paper are devoted to the separate competences of translators and interpreters, in
chapters three and four respectively. This analysis will be carried out using both
descriptive translation and interpreting research, as well as applied translation and
interpreting research. Lastly, a comparison of translator and interpreter competences will
be given in the final chapter, based on the two previous segments, providing an overview
of the similarities and differences between translator competence and interpreter
competence.
Due to the limitations of this thesis, only a specific amount of research in these
fields can be discussed. I have striven for a representative overview of the topics which are
addressed by researchers on translator and interpreter competence, but I acknowledge
that there are many issues and studies which cannot be attended to. In order to obtain the
most comprehensive study possible, several types of sources have been used for this
thesis. For example, publications by professional translator and interpreter organisations,
such as the American Translators Association have been used. Writings based on
international conferences are also discussed, particularly the series “Teaching Translation
and Interpreting”, which were composed after four separate Language International
Conferences. Many of the resources referred to, originate from the Benjamins Translation
Library, which “aims to stimulate research and training in translation and interpreting
studies” (Dollerup and Lindegaard, p. 1). In conclusion, I have used writings by translator
and interpreter trainers, translation and interpreting scientists, as well as professional
translators and interpreters to ensure a balanced discussion of the various issues in
translator and interpreter competence.
2
Translators and Interpreters: Comparing Competences
2. THE CONCEPT OF COMPETENCE
2.1 Explanation of the Concept of Competence
Every human being has his or her own specific collection of talents and abilities. These
aptitudes and skills are referred to as cognitive features, in other words; they are located in
the brain. These mental capacities are applied by individuals in the acquisition of
knowledge. Everyone does not have the same set of mental capacities, but typically,
people all possess the four domain-general cognitive skills which are essential for learning
of any kind to occur: concentration, perception, memory, and logical thinking. These four
basic capacities are the foundations for any other skills a person is able to develop.
However, these abilities are not equally distributed amongst people; some have trouble
concentrating, whilst others have poor short-term memory. Thus, levels of aptitudes in
various skills, as well as the combination of particular talents differ from individual to
individual. This compilation of aptitudes, or competences, acquired by an individual
depends on his or her inherent abilities and the purposeful cultivation of these abilities
(through education, for example). Moreover, domain-specific competences are what
employers look for in new staff members. The competences required by a certain
profession are usually determined by studying the behaviour and actions of the field’s
successful professionals. New applicants can then be tested to see if they possess the
necessary talents and skills to succeed in a particular field.
Competences are divided into sub-competences which interact and intertwine to
create the required performance. Professional competence is a concept that relates to every
successful act. As Schäffner and Adab put it: “[o]ptimal performance of any action, for
example, driving a car, is based on a global competence which relies on the interaction of
different subordinated competences, which are, of course, interrelated” (Schäffner and
Adab, p. viii). In the case of driving a car, the competences involved would include
physical abilities (for instance, turning the steering wheel) as well as mental abilities (such
as analysing different situations in traffic).
3
Translators and Interpreters: Comparing Competences
2.2 Application of Competence in Translation and Interpreting
Although proof of translation and interpreting and theories on translation and
interpreting date back to the Classical Period, the scientific fields of translation and
interpreting studies did not come into being until the second half of the twentieth century.
Within translation and interpreting studies, researchers have been and are examining a
wide range of aspects of translation and interpreting in a systematic manner. The issues
under scrutiny include topics such as the development of certain types of translation and
the use of different forms of interpreting. Since the increase in scientific interest for these
fields occurred, many attempts have been made to formulate a general theory of
translation and interpreting, a model for the ‘ideal’ translator or interpreter, or a theory of
what a ‘good’ translation is.
Models depicting the ‘ideal’ translator or ‘ideal’ interpreter are based on the various
skills and personality traits possessed by successful professionals in the fields of
translation and interpreting. The competences described in these models are in turn used
in translator and interpreter training. After all, educating new professionals is always
linked to the everyday practice of the field: students are taught how to function in the
professional arena. This practical approach is usually the only method used in vocational
schooling, but simply teaching trainees the practice of translation and interpreting is not
deemed sufficient for academic training programmes. In academia, a thorough knowledge
of the field’s theory and development is considered elementary. This is why university
programmes pay attention to the background and process of competences as well as the
existence and training of competences. University students of translation and interpreting
are stimulated to analyse various competences in order to fully understand their workings
and uses. Only when one truly comprehends a certain phenomenon, can one start to apply
this phenomenon in actual practice. Moreover, if one understands a competence, one can
also train that particular competence more productively. This strategy ensures that both
teachers and students benefit from the correlation between theoretical and practical
knowledge.
4
Translators and Interpreters: Comparing Competences
3. TRANSLATOR COMPETENCE
3.1 Competences Required of Professional Translators
“Translation practice requires a unique competence, perhaps a set of competences, that comprise, of
course, competence in the source and target languages. Translation involves variable tasks that make
specific demands on the cognitive system of the translator. What enables translators to cope with
these tasks is their translational competence.”
(Albrecht Neubert, p. 3)
This quote specifies the topic of this paragraph: the translator’s translational competence.
What is this competence? How does it work? What does it consist of? These questions will
be answered here using a variety of sources. Within translation studies, there is both
agreement and disagreement on elements of translation competence. Researchers have
accepted certain features of translational competence without argument, such as the
above-mentioned competence in source and target languages. However, the relevance and
even existence of other aspects of a translator’s competence are heavily discussed. The
ability to produce a translation in a team-setting, for instance, has only recently been given
attention and is still being debated as an essential part of a translator’s competence.
Moreover, not all researchers award different sub-competences the same importance;
some theorists put cultural competence in source and target language ahead of attitudinal
competence, whereas others emphasise the need for instrumental competence or
interpersonal competence1. There are competence lists comprising only three types of
translation competence and competence inventories consisting of as many as nine subcompetences required by a professional translator.
This section of the thesis will strive to provide the most balanced overview of
writings on translator competence possible by discussing a great variety of influential
1
The definitions of specific competences will be discussed in more detail below
5
Translators and Interpreters: Comparing Competences
theories and authors dealing with competences and sub-competences in professional
translation.
During the 1980s, the first group of translation researchers began publishing articles
on translation competence. In 1980, Jean Delisle compiled a list of four competences which
he considered to be essential for professional translators: linguistic competence, encyclopaedic
competence, comprehension competence, and re-expression competence (in Kelly, p. 28).
Linguistic competence refers to a translator’s language proficiency in both the source and
target languages. In this day and age, the rather specific term of encyclopaedic competence
should probably be replaced by the more generic term of “instrumental competence”, to
include the Internet and electronic translation tools, but the idea of this competence still
holds. Comprehension competence denotes the translator’s ability to correctly interpret
the original meaning of a certain text. This skill is essential for Delisle’s final competence:
re-expression. The term ‘re-expression’ signifies the correct transfer of a text’s original
qualities. After all, one can only translate a text if one is fully aware of its multiple layers
and the author’s intentions.
Roda Roberts composed an inventory of competences in 1982, which are of a
slightly different category than the ones mentioned above. Roberts states that a translator
should have five distinct competences, only one of which is identical to Delisle’s: linguistic
competence. Besides linguistic competence, Roberts also identifies translational,
methodological, disciplinary, and technical competence (in Kelly, p. 29). It can be argued that
Roberts’ translational competence is similar to Delisle’s re-expression competence. Also,
Roberts’ technical competence might be compared to Delisle’s encyclopaedic competence.
However, unlike Delisle, Roberts draws attention to the fact that translators need to be
aware of the procedures and systems they use during translation (methodological
competence) and the fact that translators require know-how in their respective fields of
translation, such as legal translation (disciplinary competence).
In 1988, Christiane Nord distinguished between seven, more specified, competences
a translator should possess: text reception, text analysis, research, transfer, text production,
translation quality assessment, and linguistic and cultural competence in the source and target
6
Translators and Interpreters: Comparing Competences
language (in Kelly, p. 29). Nord broke down the previously discussed competences into
distinct sub-competences. For instance, she divided Delisle’s comprehension competence
into two separate levels: text reception and text analysis. She also redefined Delisle’s
umbrella term of re-expression competence into three different types of competence
governing the process of translation: transfer, text production and translation quality
assessment competence. The fact that translators create new texts has often been ignored,
because a translation is rarely seen as a text in its own right. As such, a translator’s ability
to write a good text has been overlooked by many, but Nord was one of the first to include
this competence in her inventory. She is also the first author to mention the importance of
a translator’s ability to assess his or her own work (translation quality assessment
competence). Moreover, Nord is the one who introduces a translator’s need for cultural
know-how in both source and target language to ensure successful translation. Her list of
translator competences was therefore the most extensive and balanced inventory up to
date.
The second group of competence-oriented articles in the field of translation was
published in the 1990s. During this decade, authors no longer provided lists of
professional translation competences. Rather, they gave a more detailed overview of a
translator’s required knowledge, skills and aptitudes. Anthony Pym, for instance,
distinguished between general professional knowledge across a variety of fields and
specific translational competence in 1992. According to him, general knowledge contains
grammar, rhetoric, terminology, world knowledge, common sense and commercial strategies.
Translators, however, are also able to “generate a target-text series of more than one viable
term” and to “select only one target term from this series, quickly and with justified
confidence” (in Kelly, p. 29). Then, if we compare these definitions to the earlier terms for
competences, the only translation-specific competences required by translators according
to Pym, are linguistic and re-expression or transfer competence. He does not mention
(inter)cultural competence and professional competence at all.
In 1995, Daniel Gile offered his view on translation competence as a four-layered
aptitude: passive command of passive working languages, active command of active working
7
Translators and Interpreters: Comparing Competences
languages, sufficient knowledge of subject matter and knowing how to translate (in Kelly, p.
29). In short then, this means linguistic, subject area and transfer competence. Gile is the
first author to distinguish between different levels of aptitude in the source and target
languages. He acknowledged the fact that translators usually have a dominant active
language (the A-language, usually the native language) and other passive languages (the
B- and C-languages, usually the foreign languages). This situation has generated the
principle of B-to-A translation, on the basis that the command of one’s native language is
typically higher than the command of one’s foreign language(s). However, despite this
addition of Gile’s, his inventory is not comprehensive, because no attention is given to
cultural or research competence.
One year later, Amparo Hurtado distinguished between five sub-competences of
translation: linguistic competence (in two languages), extralinguistic competence, analysis
and synthesis, translational competence, and professional competence (in Kelly, p. 30). The
category referred to as extralinguistic skills is rather vague and can be adapted to include a
range of different aptitudes, depending on one’s personal perspective. For instance,
cultural, instrumental and research skills could all be grouped together as extralinguistic
competence. Analysis and synthesis, on the other hand, are more detailed terms for the
usual phrase of comprehension/textual competence, because they indicate what exactly is
referred to as textual skills. Although it seems incredible, Hurtado was actually the first
author to mention professional competence as a requirement for professional translators.
Hatim and Mason differentiated between only three abilities in 1997: source text
processing skills, transfer skills, and target text processing skills (in Kelly, p. 30). This
inventory does look nice and compact, but in order to achieve a comprehensive list of
translator competence, one needs to expand these three categories quite creatively. The
first ability, for instance, may be re-defined to include comprehension and analysis
competence. Transfer skills then, could be regarded as encompassing linguistic skills as
well as instrumental and (inter-)cultural competence. Also, the final aptitude might be
broadened to contain both linguistic as well as re-expression/production skills. Even with
the use of this extension-technique, Hatim and Mason’s list still does not cover all the
8
Translators and Interpreters: Comparing Competences
essential competences. Professional, interpersonal, and attitudinal competence, for
example, are still not able to be included in their account of translator competence.
In 1998, Stuart Campbell also compiled a list of only three competences: target
language textual competence, disposition, and monitoring competence. At first glance, this
inventory may seem rather remarkable, because it does not mention source language
textual competence, which – if we abide by the B-to-A principle – implies that the
translator does not require second language textual skills. However, this list was
published in his book ”Translation into the Second Language”, the title of which clarifies
that the target language as referred to by Campbell is not the translator’s native language,
but rather the translator’s foreign language. As such, since Campbell does not separately
mention source language textual skills, the conclusion can be drawn that he presumes first
language textual skills to be present in professional translators. Campbell is the first
author to refer to a personal, rather than cognitive competence: disposition. Moreover, he
is the only one besides Nord, who mentions self-assessment skills, which he calls
monitoring competence. The more attitudinal components of translator competence and
the importance of self-assessment only began to receive scholarly attention for translation
researchers during the 21st century, which means that Campbell was ahead of his time.
The new millennium has also seen articles on translation competence published.
Albrecht Neubert introduced a new set of five competences a professional translator
should possess in 2000: language, textual, subject area, cultural, and transfer competence
(Neubert, p. 7-10). This list contains most of the fundamental skills discussed in previous
paragraphs, but two important competences are missing: instrumental competence and
professional competence. However, Neubert believes that the components of translator
competence are interrelated and the overall competence is characterised by “complexity,
heterogeneity, approximation, open-endedness, creativity, situationality, and historicity”
(in Kelly, p. 30), which might indicate that he considers the instrumental and professional
competences to be part of other competences. For instance, he could regard instrumental
competence as an element of transfer competence, because transferring might be viewed
9
Translators and Interpreters: Comparing Competences
as carried out on the basis of research. It is nonetheless striking that he is one of the very
few authors who does not even mention instrumental or professional competence.
The PACTE group, which investigates “the acquisition of translation competence
and assessment”2, is lead by Amparo Hurtado, who now distinguishes six subcomponents of translation competence, three of which are new compared to this earlier list
of 1996: communicative competence in source and target language (new), extra-linguistic
competence (old), professional instrumental competence (old), psycho-physiological competence
(new), strategic competence (new), and transferial competence (old)3 (in Kelly, p. 20). The
category of communicative competence might be regarded as a different term for
linguistic competence, making the category itself not so much a new, but rather an
extended version of a previous skill. Hurtado is actually the first to use the term
communicative competence, where it is usually referred to as linguistic competence (even
by himself). The reason for this, is probably the underlying notion that communication is
not the same as language, because something extra is needed to turn mere language into
the more valuable act of communication. The importance of translation as a
communicative act is also emphasised by Janet Fraser, who states that “translation is
ultimately about communication” (in Schäffner and Adab, p. 60). Psycho-physiological
competence is also a new element, referring to the fact that professional translators need
certain attitudinal qualities beside their mental abilities. Strategic competence is a different
term for the skill which has also been known as methodological competence. Whereas
Hurtado glosses over (inter-)cultural competence, Heidrun Witte adds bicultural
competence, which she describes as “the ability to interpret and produce behaviour in a
culturally and situationally adequate way for the (interaction) purposes and needs of (at
least) two members of two different cultural communities” to Hurtado’s list (Witte, p. 73).
The highly specified description of this competence can be seen as a combination of the
already mentioned cultural competence and communicative competence.
2
3
http://www.fti.uab.es/departament/grups/pacte/index_en.htm: website of the research group PACTE
‘transferial competence’ is seen here as a redefined version of the previous term ‘translational competence’
10
Translators and Interpreters: Comparing Competences
Most recently, Dorothy Kelly (2007) distinguished between eight types of
competence a professional translator should possess: communicative and textual competence,
cultural and intercultural competence, subject area competence, professional and instrumental
competence, attitudinal or psycho-physiological competence, interpersonal competence, and
strategic competence (Kelly, p. 32-33). In fact, this list contains ten sub-competences, which
are grouped together in seven main categories based on their shared characteristics. It is
interesting to see that Kelly does not mention re-expression or transfer competence
separately, as many authors before her have done. On the other hand, she does introduce
the slightly new element of intercultural competence as opposed to the usual cultural
competence. The addition of ‘inter’ signifies that translators do not only need knowledge
of two cultures, but also of the way in which these two cultures interact with each other.
She is, however, one of the first to refer to interpersonal competence, a skill which she
describes as including the “ability to work with other professionals involved in translation
process”, “team work”, “negotiation skills” and “leadership skills” (p. 33). The current
practice of translation does include working in pairs or groups and translators are
increasingly coming together in joined agencies, so being able to collaborate with other
professional translators does seem to have become more and more important.
3.2 Educational Strategies Used to Develop Translation Competences
“A first priority […] is the need to define more clearly the different sub-competences involved in the
translation process, in order to try and identify a set of principles which could form the basis for a
solid foundation for training in translation. Only then will it be possible to work on the
interrelationship of these principles and finally to incorporate these into a programme designed to
enable translators to achieve an overall (desired) level of translation competence.”
(Schäffner and Adab, p. ix)
This quote describes the link between prescriptive and descriptive translation studies and
applied translation studies; translation competence first needs to be defined in order to be
11
Translators and Interpreters: Comparing Competences
taught. This paragraph will therefore address the issue of developing translator
competence during translator training programmes. In this section, several authors’ views
will be discussed to provide a general overview of the teaching techniques and tasks
employed to enhance specific skills and aptitudes.
Margherita Ulrych, for instance, states that “[a] training programme for translators
will ideally aim to develop a series of skills and competences that are relevant to both their
future profession and educational status” (Ulrych, p. 251). With this statement in mind, it
is clear to see why she has chosen to describe one of the most essential roles that
translation teaching needs to fulfil as follows:
“An important component of translation pedagogics is, to provide students with the metacognitive
skills that will enable them to assess what translation strategies and aids they will need to call upon
to carry out their task over and above the metatextual knowledge regarding the salient features that
characterize different fields of discourse in both the source and target cultures.”
(Margherita Ulrych, p. 255)
Dorothy Kelly does not only list a number of competences which need to be developed
during translator training, she also provides different exercises and teaching methods to
develop these skills (Kelly, p. 73-78). It should be noted that the list of competences Kelly
discusses in this section of her book, is not the same as her list of translator competences
mentioned in the previous paragraph. Her first issue is language competence (which could
be regarded as having replaced communicative and textual competence), a feature which
she feels should be assessed prior to the start of the training programme (p. 74). Teachers
need to be aware of the actual language levels of the students in order to set realistic
objectives the students should be able to reach. Kelly also points out that translation
classes are not to be used as language classes, since the trainees are already deemed to
have a high level of proficiency in both (or all three of) their working languages.
She then discusses cultural competence (probably encompassing her earlier
requirement of intercultural competence, since this term is no longer used here), stating
12
Translators and Interpreters: Comparing Competences
that immersion is often the best way to gain cultural competence, because it allows people
to distance themselves from their own culture. There are a large number of other authors
who have also underlined the importance of cultural competence for translators. Wolfram
Wilss has even claimed that “schooling in […] cultural studies is a prerequisite for any
effective translation pedagogy” (Wills, p. 91). Similarly, Margherita Ulrych states that
translation students “should always bear in mind that translation is essentially a
communicative activity that takes place within a socio-cultural context” (Ulrych, p. 253).
Moreover, Heidrun Witte has divided cultural learning in translation teaching in three
components: “areas of special translational interest/relevance”, “situations of special
translational interest/relevance”, and “social roles and functions of special translational
interest/relevance” (Witte, p. 77-78). She explains that these teaching methods serve four
separate teaching objectives: “to develop an awareness of culture-specific differences”, “to
reflect upon the students’ own culture-bound conditions of perception”, “to reflect upon
the other culture’s conditions of perception”, and “to reflect upon the clients’ conditions of
perception” (p. 78).
Kelly’s third type of aptitude translation students need to attain, is instrumental
competence. Communication and documentary research skills, for instance, as well as
translation tools have become essential for translators in the 21st century. This equipment
can be rather specialist however, which means that students need to be introduced to them
early on if they are to use these tools efficiently. This theme is discussed by many other
researchers who emphasise the importance of instrumental skills. Willi Sherf, for instance,
describes this task of translator training as “the challenge to provide students with both
the knowledge and the skills required by the new computerised multi-lingual document
processing work environment”, because a “computer assisted work environment can, if
properly designed and implemented, provide exactly that guidance and support and help
accumulate translation experience that would otherwise have to grow over a much longer
period of time” (Sherf, p. 153). The importance of correctly using the appropriate tools, is
also underlined by Stella Tagnin, who suggests that translator teaching should also
include a course called “Research for Translation” (Tagnin, p. 164). The progress that
13
Translators and Interpreters: Comparing Competences
translation students need to make in using the dictionary, for example, is discussed by
Janet Fraser. She claims that students “rely largely – perhaps excessively – on bilingual
(source- to target-language) dictionaries” and tend to use dictionaries “to establish
meaning”, whereas professional translators use them “to refine the meaning of sourcelanguage terms and/or to stimulate the search for target-language equivalents” (p. 247).
Kelly’s fourth practical issue for any type of trainee is professionalisation (mentioned
separately from instrumental competence here), a skill which she believes should be
developed by simulating the professional translation practice (p. 75-76). This means that
teaching and learning activities need to reflect professional environments, preferably by
role-play: one student is the client, another is the translator and a third is the ‘editor’, the
one who evaluates both the client’s request as well as the actual target text. Role-play is
also a teaching technique which is favoured by Zbigniew Nadstoga at the Poznan
University in Poland (Nadstoga, p. 112). He suggests that role-play should be carried out
in groups of three: an expert, a journalist and a translator. The resulting discussion is taperecorded, so the assignment can be reviewed by the whole group. This situation will help
students to evaluate their own and each other’s work more efficiently. Another way to
introduce students to the professional field is by contextualising: visits to translating
agencies, guest speakers and work placements. Ulrych also underlines the role of these
tasks, because she feels that “[t]he importance of incorporating real-world criteria within a
curriculum for translator training and education cannot be underestimated. Trainee
translators need to be prepared for the conditions they will find in the working world”
(Ulrych, p. 252-253).
The fifth type of skill which Kelly distinguishes is very much related to the
professionalisation of the students; interpersonal competence. She points out that translating
“is increasingly a team activity” (p. 76), but that the class room is usually focused on
individual assignments. Therefore, the academic setting needs to be adapted to
correspond to the actual professional situation the students will encounter after their
training. In order to achieve this situation, the most useful method according to Kelly, is to
assign team tasks to small groups of students. Not only do the students get the chance to
14
Translators and Interpreters: Comparing Competences
enhance their translation skills by sharing each other’s knowledge and experience, but
they are also learning how to work together, a valuable generic talent (idem).
Kelly’s next topic is subject area competence (a skill which has fallen three places
compared to her previous ranking), which she approaches from two opposite
perspectives. One the one hand, she values the specialised modules which are available in
postgraduate translation courses, but she is also aware of the fact that specialisation may
limit a student’s job opportunities. She acknowledges the potential of specialised training
programmes, but only if the course meets a few requirements: “the more specifically
designed the courses are for translators and the greater the comprehension of the
translating process teaching staff has, the more successful they are for the acquisition of
translation-relevant skills” (idem).
Kelly then goes on to address a more personal type of competence: attitudinal
competence (a skill which is no longer in the same set as psycho-physiological competence).
She feels that a translator’s self-concept, confidence, awareness, and socialisation are
influential factors for the actual success of a professional translator (p. 77). This element of
translator training has been addressed in experimental research as well. For instance,
professional translators have been shown to “demonstrate certain personality traits”, such
as “a high level of personal engagement with their task”, satisfaction in their work in
emotional terms”, and “a high degree of empathy with their translation users”, which are
exactly the qualities which translation students need to develop during training (p. 248249).
Closely connected to this more personal aptitude is Kelly’s final competence:
networking (a skill which she first mentions here). No translator is an island, and
professional translators will need to develop relations with other professionals from
various fields in order to succeed. To develop this skill during translator training, students
will have to be motivated by their instructors to look beyond the competitive element
which is embedded in most types of professional training and focus instead on the value
of building solid business relations.
15
Translators and Interpreters: Comparing Competences
To develop these competences, Kelly provides a range of teaching methods, because
the development of different skills requires different learning activities. Kelly suggests a
balanced learning situation in which specific types of assignments address particular sorts
of competence (p. 97-106). The first teaching technique she discusses is the traditional
lecture, during which the whole group of students listens to a prepared speech of the
instructor. However, Kelly recommends certain changes in this format to ensure the
continued attention of students. To begin with, the lecturer should try not to speak longer
than fifteen minutes at a time, after which period the students are invited to participate by
asking questions or making comments on the information they have just received. In order
to keep students involved, visual aids and/or hand-outs should be used to clarify and
support the lecture itself. Also, the teachers should make clear how the content of the
lecture relates to both prior input students have received and to learning objectives.
Student presentations are another well-known teaching method which Kelly deems
useful in translator training, if a few changes are made to the original set-up. For instance,
contrary to traditional teaching views, not all learning happens through repetition. Public
speaking is a good example: people will not enhance their presentation skills simply by
presenting often. Student presenters need feedback, both from their instructors and their
peers, to improve their public speaking qualities. Presentations need to be analysed in
order to evaluate an individual’s weaknesses, and weaknesses need to be determined in
order to ensure improvement. Pointing out a student’s strengths is also highly motivating,
because it stimulates students to try and reach a similar level of aptitude in other areas.
Apart from individual assignments, tasks carried out in small groups of no more
than five students should be used as well. Two heads know more than one, and
brainstorming sessions can often result in highly useful ideas. Kelly distinguishes five
types of small group work: buzz groups (group debate and following report to whole
class), cross-over groups (students break up and reform to distribute ideas throughout the
whole group), peer-tutoring (students teach and learn from each other), role-play
(simulating professional situations in varying roles), and the syndicate (group project and
report to whole class). The group work has several functions: it enhances interpersonal
16
Translators and Interpreters: Comparing Competences
skills (essential for employers), it adds to students’ social experience, and it has been
shown to improve cognitive skills such as problem-solving.
Kelly also includes out-of-class activities in her list of teaching methods, because she
believes that the purpose of training is to prepare students for the reality of professional
life. Working visits and excursions, for example, are excellent ways of introducing trainees
to their future work field. Wolfram Wilss is another researcher who underlines the
ultimate goal of translator training as preparation for the profession: “the student must be
able to assume the function of a qualified translator […] after a short initial period of
adjustment” (Wilss, p. 97). Niedzielski and Kummer describe the objective of translator
training as being threefold: “to enable trainees to form as rapidly as possible correct
structures in the transfer of written […] texts from one language to another”, making them
capable of “creating in the target audience’s mind the exact impression that the source text
writer intended to convey”, and teaching that it is “more important to transfer the precise
meaning of the source text than to reproduce faithfully the words, phrases or sentences in
the target text” (Niedzielski and Kummer, p. 133).
Note that Kelly has adapted her list of competences quite severely when they are to
be applied as intended learning outcomes. Not only has she moved around several terms
(instrumental and subject area competence), she has also altered the names of competences
(language competence to replace communication and textual competence) and, what is
most striking, she even leaves out a specific skill (strategic competence). Perhaps Kelly
feels that students in translator training programmes need a different set of competences,
than the skills and aptitudes required by professional translators. Or maybe she
acknowledged the practical limitations of translator training programmes and therefore
decided to address only the most vital competences during teaching. Nonetheless, one
should keep in mind that translator training is aimed specifically at developing
professional translators. Therefore, the applied science of translation should not be too
distant from the prescriptive and descriptive science of translation. In other words, the
skills and aptitudes discussed by translation theorists and professional translators are to
be used as guidelines by translation teachers and translator trainers.
17
Translators and Interpreters: Comparing Competences
Christiane Nord also underlines the realistic purpose of translator training (in
Naaijkens et al, p. 235-242). She created a model based on simulating the professional
translation practice. Her focus in translation teaching is on developing the professional
and transfer competences. Her functionalist model of text analysis is an example of her
more learner-centred approach. She provides a detailed schema of questions to be used
during translator training in the translation-relevant text analysis, which is based on an
extended version of the Lasswell formula (New Rhetorics), containing two detailed
questions: Who writes a text – with what purpose – to whom – via what medium – when –
where – why – with what function? About which topic does (s)he say what (and what not)
– in what order – using which non-verbal elements – in what kind of words – in what kind
of sentences – in what tone – with what effect? (idem). This functional approach to text
analysis is based on the ‘skopos’ theory of Reiss and Vermeer (1984), which dictates that
“the overall frame of reference for the translator should not be the original and its
function, […] but the function (or set of functions) the target text is to achieve in the target
culture” (in Dollerup and Loddegaard, p. 39).
Kiraly is a good example of the researchers who feel that psycholinguistics should
be incorporated in the design of translator training programmes. He gives a central role in
his model of translator training to the attitudinal competence: the translator’s self-concept
(in Kelly, p. 13). For Kiraly, one of the most important objectives of successfully educating
a translator is fostering his or her self-concept. According to him, a translator can only be
successful if he or she is fully aware of his or her strengths and weaknesses. Kiraly also
underlines the relevance of the translator’s socialisation into the professional community of
translators, which is an element of the professional competence. “Learning is best
accomplished through meaningful interactions with peers and full members of the
community to which the students seek entry” (p. 16). He believes this socialisation can be
achieved through “authentic translation practice” and states that translator trainers need
to “start each pedagogical event with a highly realistic, genuine, translation project”
(idem). Like Nord and Kelly, Kiraly argues for the inclusion of realism in translation
teaching.
18
Translators and Interpreters: Comparing Competences
Wolfram Wilss states that translation teaching needs to train students in breaking
down the structural elements of a translation problem by using an “operative system of
inventory”, which outlines the rules of composition (Wilss, p. 95). The operative system
incorporates two types of strategies which need to be trained: macro-structural strategy (to
determine strategies for the entire text depending on the source text author and the target
text reader) and micro-structural strategy (to select strategies for aspects of the source text
which are critical for translation). Wilss then, emphasises the development of strategic
competence in translator training.
González Davies was one of the first researchers to apply task-based learning
(initially designed for foreign language learning) to translator training in 2003 (in Kelly, p.
16). Davies states that translator trainers need to use “concrete and brief exercises that help
to practice specific points”, a method by which “[b]oth procedural (know-how) and
declarative (know-what) knowledge are practiced and explored” (idem). His emphasis on
these two types of knowledge can be viewed as emphasis on strategic and subject area
competence.
Another important element of translator training are the texts which are used as
translation assignments. Teachers can choose specific texts or text types for a variety of
reasons. Hurtado, for instance, has listed four criteria for text selection: linguistic interest,
extra-linguistic interest, text typological interest, and mechanisms of the translation
process (in Kelly, p. 117). Each type of interest provides information on a specific skill or
set of skills developed (or not yet developed) by translation students. Student translations
of texts which are chosen based on their linguistic interest mainly provide information on
contrastive objectives, such as near-native command of the second language (linguistic
competence). When a text which has extra-linguistic interest is assigned to students, the
results shed light on the complementary cognitive skills, such as cultural knowledge
(cultural competence). A text with a text-typological interest should be used at the end of the
primary stages of translator training, because it provides insight into the sort of texts that
students should be able to handle at a certain level (textual competence). Texts dealing
with the mechanisms of the translation process can be used in the earliest stages of training to
19
Translators and Interpreters: Comparing Competences
assess the various methodologies students apply while translating (strategic and/or
instrumental competence).
Connected to this categorisation of text selection criteria, is Nord’s list of four
translating difficulties students may encounter in texts (in Kelly, p. 118). Each difficulty
reveals a different type of students’ development during training. To begin with, certain
text-specific difficulties may indicate that the degree of comprehensibility is too high for a
particular student or group of students (referring to textual competence). The group of
translator-dependant difficulties refer to the level of every individual learner’s competence.
Another type of problem are the pragmatic difficulties, which are a sign that the trainee is
having trouble with the nature of a specific translation task (addressing transfer
competence). Technical difficulties finally, may show that a student has not (yet) acquired
the skills of research and documentation (dealing with research or technical competence).
Another type of competence which has recently been receiving a great deal of
scientific attention is the re-expression or text production competence, i.e. writing skills.
Composing a translation is essentially a written activity and as such, needs to meet certain
requirements of written texts. Ulrych, for instance, underlines “the importance of editing
skills”, because “a translation will be judged as a text in its own right and must therefore
conform to all the conventions of a finished product in the target culture” (Ulrych, p. 254).
Similarly, Arnt Jakobson points out that “[t]ranslation is a type of text production”
(Jakobson, p. 145). For this reason, he integrates writing assignments in translation
teaching which he describes as follows: “[w]riting tasks are specified with respect to
situation and purpose and based on a variety of textual material, including parallel texts”
(p. 146). He believes that introducing the students to writing assignments “will help them
develop greater critical awareness of acceptability norms and textual models in the target
language, both when they are translating into their native and into a foreign language”
(idem). Ingrid Meyer also suggests that there is a need for specific writing classes within
translation teaching (Meyer, p. 122). She feels that a professional translator is similar to a
professional writer and therefore requires similar skills. To this end, she provides three
types of exercises: error identification and correction tasks, composition projects, and
20
Translators and Interpreters: Comparing Competences
summarising exercises (p. 126-129). The error-related tasks are designed to teach students
how to detect errors in the source text, so they can avoid these mistakes while producing
the target text. The composition projects are used to train learners in the transference of
ideas to written text, thereby reducing the risk of interference from the source language,
and developing creative writing skills. The summarising exercises teach trainees how to
read a text analytically, how to recreate ideas correctly, and how to be concise. Niedzielski
and Kummer also support the view that writing skills need to be taught in translator
training, because beginning to write is as difficult for translators as it is for writers, and
because an uncontrolled writing style is a sign that the student has not yet fully mastered
the second language (Niedzielski and Kummer, p. 143). To develop good writing skills,
they suggest the use of paraphrasing and summarising exercises to help the students think
more freely and formulate their own ideas more clearly.
However, teaching and developing translator competence is not enough. The
(hopefully) acquired skills need to be evaluated in order to ascertain that they are
sufficient for actual translating. Assessment in translator programmes then, may centre
around a variety of issues. Traditional translator exams, for example, simply consist of a
translation. Students are provided with a source text, a specific translation task, and a
timeframe in which they need to complete their translations. Naturally, being able to
produce a good translation is the first priority for translation students, which would make
this particular method of assessment seem like a logical conclusion of any translation
training programme. Also, the exams are aimed to resemble actual translation practice,
with the obvious exception of the unrealistic deadlines. However, the problem is, that the
definition of a “good” translation is still being heavily debated within the field of
translation. As Viaggio points out:
“[M]uch profit is to be derived from observing good translators and studying good translations. But
how do we determine who and which they are, and what makes them so? Unless we postulate a
provisional concept of what a translation should be, there is no way we can determine how close or
how far from it any particular effort falls. […] What nearly all translators, from the best to the worst,
21
Translators and Interpreters: Comparing Competences
seem to have in common is precisely a lack of any coherent, systemised, weighted conceptual
framework behind their practice. Observing them allows to glean more dont’s than do’s.
(Segio Viaggio, p. 97-98)
This means that various translation teachers employ different standards during students’
assessment, resulting in a rather subjective and arbitrary evaluation method. Also, there is
no such thing as the ‘perfect’ translation to use as a referencing tool. Hasnah Ibrahim at the
Utara University in Malaysia, for instance, highlights the fact that there is “a spectrum of
possibilities” resulting in the fact that “a text can be translated in several defensible ways”,
which means that “the pedagogic branch of Translation Studies […] must be able to
distinguish the ‘possible’ from the ‘potential’ and the two from the ‘preposterous’”
(Ibrahim, p. 151-152). Moreover, one specific translation does not provide insight into the
strategies and methods employed by students. The analysis of a source text and the
implementation of a certain task can only be exposed by giving the students a chance to
defend their choices. This explanation can be given either orally, during a face-to-face
discussion afterwards between teacher and student, or on paper, by having students write
down their motives for specific translational choices as part of the exam. Only when
assessors are able to look beyond the translation itself, can they evaluate student’s skills
and competences.
Again, Kelly suggests an innovative element in translator training, namely
continuous assessment in the form of a translation portfolio (Kelly, p. 138). In this format,
the student’s performance is evaluated based on a variety of projects, assignments, and
translations carried out over a longer period of time to eliminate the risk of coincidence
(i.e. the source text happened to have been read in a magazine by two or three students
prior to the exam) or simply bad timing (i.e. students having an “off-day” or maybe just a
headache, thereby temporarily affecting their performance). The projects and assignments
can consist of source text analyses and peer-evaluations of other students’ translations.
Therefore, the portfolio contains a wealth of data on students’ translation strategies and
22
Translators and Interpreters: Comparing Competences
use of acquired skills. As such, the format of continuous assessment gives a more balanced
overview of the progress and development of students’ translation competences and skills,
because it provides the assessors with much more information than a traditional
translation exam will ever be able to.
23
Translators and Interpreters: Comparing Competences
4. INTERPRETER COMPETENCE
This chapter will discuss the unique set of skills required for interpreting, as well as the
methods which are used to develop these skills during interpreter training programmes.
In the same way that speech predates writing, interpreting predates translation. However,
scientific research dealing with the topic of interpreting has known a slower and much
later development than the study of translation. As a result, the body of research on
interpreting is smaller than that on translation. During the twentieth century though,
academic attention for the field of interpreting increased, which resulted in the founding
of the first university-level interpreter training programmes and the beginning of scientific
interpreting research.
The first paragraph will address a variety of authors who have discussed
interpreter competence in their writings. The second paragraph will attend to the topic of
developing these interpreting skills during specialised training programmes.
4.1 Competences Required of Professional Interpreters
Franz Pöchhacker is an influential author in the field of interpreting and he has provided a
compact overview of the writings concerned with interpreting competence (Pöchhacker, p.
166-168), a synopsis of which will be provided throughout this chapter. He states the
following concerning the importance of interpreting competence and the development of
this interpreting competence:
“For a practice or occupation to be acknowledged as a profession, it must be perceived to rest on a
complex body of knowledge and skills, mastery of which can only be acquired by specialised
training. Competence in interpreting can thus be defined as the congruence between task demands
(performance and standards) and qualifications, and an understanding of the latter is crucial to
professionalization in general and interpreter training in particular.”
(Franz Pöchhacker, p. 166)
24
Translators and Interpreters: Comparing Competences
Pöchhacker also provides a general overview of commonly accepted ideas within the
discussion of interpreter competence and notes that “the chief intellectual abilities
required of interpreters” are generally found to be “broad general education, proficiency in
working languages, cultural competence, analytic and memory skills” (p. 167). This set of
skills is “in line with the widely accepted competence profile of professional interpreters”,
which is predominantly made up of “knowledge (of languages and of the world),
cognitive skills (relating to analysis, attentions and memory) and personality traits
(including stress tolerance and intellectual curiosity)” (p. 180). The skill referred to as
‘knowledge of the world’ can be understood to include such issues as cultural knowledge
and competence, which are “generally considered […] indispensable, and indeed viewed
as closely interrelated with high-level language proficiency” (idem). Moreover, research
has been carried out which has provided other types of interpreter qualities, such as being
“people-oriented and ‘action-oriented’; that is, focusing on social interaction and getting
things done” (p. 167). However, not all issues within the field of interpreting competence
enjoy the status of general opinion or public agreement. The topic of writing skills, for
instance, has always been and still is debated heavily. As Pöchhacker points out: it has
been “rejected outright […] by some, defended by others, or questioned in hindsight” (p.
181). This difference of opinion is most likely linked to the fact that writing skills are not
equally essential in every genre of interpreting. For consecutive interpreting, note-taking
skills are deemed elementary, whereas simultaneous interpreters simply do not have the
time to write anything down. He also states that the importance of (the development of)
specific personality traits, such as text comprehension, public speaking, and interpersonal skills
are still contested amongst authors of different interpreting genres (p. 183). Public
speaking, for example, has been classified as essential for consecutive interpreters, whilst
simultaneous interpreting is more concerned with tempo than presentation. Furthermore,
the level of human contact in dialogue interpreting requires highly developed
interpersonal skills, whereas most conference interpreting is carried out in an area where
the interpreter is completely separated from the client(s), making interpersonal qualities
less significant.
25
Translators and Interpreters: Comparing Competences
Diana van Hoof (1962) has compiled an inventory of interpreter competences which
applies to virtually any type of interpretation (in Pöchhacker, p. 166). She states that
“physical qualities such as stamina and strong nerves, intellectual qualities, in particular
language proficiency and wide general knowledge, and mental qualities such as memory
skills, judgment, concentration and divided attention [are] personal prerequisites” which
are essential for professional interpreters (idem). It is remarkable to see that van Hoof
mentions physical factors before language skills, when most authors on interpreter
competences put this quality on the top of their lists. The skill referred to as ‘judgment’ can
be understood to be equivalent to the text analysis competence in translation: the
interpreter is required to analyse speech in order to select those elements which need to be
transferred to the target audience.
Kambiz Mahmoodzadeh at the University of Teheran also provides a general list of
interpreter competences, which reads as follows:
“A skilful interpreter is expected to have the following characteristics: thorough knowledge of both
source and target language, thorough knowledge of the culture of both source and target language,
to be familiar with the topic he is interpreting, to be quick-witted, to know short-hand writing, to
possess a comprehensive vocabulary, to have a powerful memory, to have a comprehensive general
knowledge, to be calm, to be acquainted with different accents of the source language”
(Kambiz Mahmoodzadeh, p. 133)
This inventory of interpreter qualities contains a number of interesting features. The
competence of being ‘quick-witted’, for instance, is rarely discussed as a specific skill for
interpreters, mainly because the profession is only accessible to highly educated
individuals, who are presumed to be intelligent. Jean Herbert has even suggested that an
“[i]nterpreter must possess intellectual qualifications that are equal or superior to those of
the speaker whom he interprets” (Mahmoodzadeh, p. 110). Also, ‘knowledge of different
accents’ is hardly ever mentioned as a separate skill, since it can be seen as just another
element of the omnipresent competence referred to as ‘thorough knowledge of source and
26
Translators and Interpreters: Comparing Competences
target languages’. Moreover, this list may be designed to be applicable to all types of
interpreting, but this can only be attained by the deletion of one skill, namely: “to know
short-hand writing”.
Due to the fact that the field of interpreting knows many sub-genres, most authors
have dealt with only a subset of competences required by a specific type of interpreter.
Since the field of conference interpreting has always been the most prominent genre of
interpreting, it has also received the majority of scientific interest. For instance, the first
published article discussing interpreter competences dealt with conference interpreting.
This list of competences was composed in 1931 by Jesús Sanz, who distinguished between
twelve different skills for conference interpreters, including cognitive skills, such as
“intelligence, intuition, memory”), moral qualities, and affective abilities, including “tact,
discretion, alertness, poise” (Pöchhacker, p. 166).. Over forty-five years later, one of the
major contributors to the field of interpreting studies, Wilhelm Keiser, also compiled an
inventory of conference interpreter competences in 1978, which “emphasizes ‘knowledge’
(mastery of languages and general background knowledge) and ‘personal qualities’, including
“the ability to intuit meaning”, adaptability, concentration, memory skills, a gift for public
speaking and a pleasant voice” (idem). The skill referred to as adaptability denotes the fact
that interpreters need to be flexible, because they deal with direct communication which
character, topic or tone can suddenly change. It is interesting to note that Keiser, unlike
many of his colleagues, does not mention any type of ethical or moral characteristics. In
the field of interpreting, and conference interpreting in particular, moral standards have
always been a highly valued quality. This is shown by the original RID Code of Ethics of
1965, which, according to Dennis Cokely, required interpreters to be “of high moral
character, honest, conscientious, trustworthy, and of emotional maturity” (idem). The
reason behind this emphasis on ethics is, most likely, the level of rather precarious subjects
which are discussed during international conferences and for which the interpreters
require a sense of integrity during interpreting. When dealing with peace negotiations, for
example, both parties need to be able to depend on their interpreters for the absolutely
flawless transfer of their own speech, but also the completely accurate conveyance of the
27
Translators and Interpreters: Comparing Competences
statements of the other party. Moreover, interpreters are expected to perform their task
without any bias or partiality.
Sylvia Kalina, at the University of Cologne in Germany, has also written about
competence in conference interpreting, stating that she aims to cover both simultaneous
and consecutive interpreting in one framework. She therefore provides an extensive list of
interpreter competences which she feels are necessary for a ‘good’ interpreter, whether in
simultaneous or consecutive interpreting:
“[I]nterpreters’ skills […] include: general physical and mental factors (such as stress tolerance and
concentration); linguistic and communicative skills; transfer competence between two languages;
subject knowledge and prior preparation; teamwork skills […] and professional ethics […] discourse
comprehension and production […] terminological knowledge and its application, intercultural
knowledge and, very important, proficiency in choosing appropriate interpreting strategies […]
speaking and listening at the same time […] knowing when to speak during a listening effort and
when to keep silent”
(Sylvia Kalina, p. 126)
Although Kalina’s inventory is sizeable, it does contain a number of rather general skills as
well, which are not specific to the field of interpreting. Qualities such as concentration and
teamwork skills can also be found in most other professions. However, she does list
several competences which have not been mentioned in such detail previously, including
discourse comprehension and discourse production, and speaking and listening simultaneously.
Discourse comprehension competence is comparable to text comprehension skills in
translation and concerning the interpreter’s skill of understanding speech. Discourse
production is the equivalent of the translator’s aptitude for text production, referring here
to an interpreter’s ability to produce speech which is good discourse in its own right. The
reason for the inclusion of these elements may be, that she is connected to the school of
applied sciences at her university, which indicates that her perspective on interpreter
competence is influenced not only by the teaching of interpreting, but also by the science
of interpreting.
28
Translators and Interpreters: Comparing Competences
Salvador Pippa (at the University of Triest) and Mariachiara Russo (at the
University of Bologna) are two academic interpreter trainers who teamed up to provide
their combined “profile of the professional interpreter”, which consists of the following list
of competences, which can be divided into eight different categories:
“[E]xcellent knowledge of A, B, C languages and cultures; ability to grasp rapidly and to convey the
essential meaning of discourse […]; a memory which recalls the links between logical sequences of
discourse; ability to convey information with confidence and pleasant delivery; broad general
knowledge and interest, a curiosity and willingness to acquire new information; ability to work as a
team member; ability to work under stress for long periods.”
(Pippa and Russo, p. 246)
Remarkably, Pippa and Rasso’s inventory of interpreter skills is one of the very few to
unambiguously assert (or perhaps demand?) the presence of a C-language, where most
authors merely mention a third language as optional alongside an interpreter’s A- en Blanguages. Also, they are one of the few authors within the field of interpreting to
explicitly list confidence as a required skill for interpreters. In comparison, the section
above dealing with translator competence, mentions three separate authors who list
confidence as a useful skill for translators. This is rather remarkable, since confidence is
arguably even more immediate for interpreters than translators, when one takes into
account that interpreting is frequently performed in the presence of clients, whereas
translating is usually a solitary task.
The field of liaison or community interpreting has been enjoying an increase in
academic attention since the 1980s, but the first essential catalogue of skills required for
this type of interpreting was not written until 1996, when one of the field’s leading
authors, Adolfo Gentile, suggested that “language skills, cultural competence, interpreting
techniques, memory skills and professional ethics” are to be considered the “main
components of an interpreter’s competence” (Pöchhacker, p.166). Due to the fact that
liaison interpreting takes place in a different arena than conference interpreting, its
requirements are also different. For instance, cultural competence is one of the major skills
for liaison interpreters (in Gentile’s inventory it is even the second type of competence,
29
Translators and Interpreters: Comparing Competences
after the universally accepted main competence of language skills), whereas conference
interpreters generally regard this quality as merely an element of their background
knowledge. The reason behind this distinction is the fact that liaison interpreting occurs in
a more personal realm than conference interpreting, requiring liaison interpreters to have
a more directly accessible sense of cultural awareness.
Helge Niska, at the University of Stockholm, has also discussed the skills required
for community interpreting, stating that social competence, perfect knowledge of (two)
languages, good knowledge of source and target culture, knowledge of terminology,
interpreting technique and knowledge about the target group’s special problems in the host
society are the qualities required (in Europe) for community interpreters (Niska, p. 137). It
is interesting to note that Niska mentions social competence as a first requirement, even
before language proficiency. This is a good example of the particular circumstances in
liaison interpreting and their influence on the field’s requirements, in comparison to the
competences needed for conference interpreting. Also, she is the only author who states
that the knowledge of a target group’s problems in the host society is not just to be seen as
part of the cultural knowledge, but an area which requires special attention.
Pöchhacker seemingly agrees with the various lists of interpreter skills discussed
above, because he himself merely considers one additional interpreter competence in some
detail: bilingual skills. He states that the ability to function in two separate languages is a
“crucial starting point for the development of interpreting proficiency” (Pöchhacker, p.
167). According to Pöchhacker – any many others with him – interpreting “experts rely on
richly integrated knowledge representations and elaborate mental models, and use
advanced reasoning processes in perceptual and problem-solving tasks” (idem). This
statement contains the reason why interpreters require near-bilingual skills and not simply
knowledge of two (or more) languages: the direct accessibility of their linguistic
knowledge is what their task depends upon.
Finally, what do the professional interpreters who work in the field think about
their own and their colleague interpreters’ competence? In another of Pöchhacker’s
writings, he cites several studies carried out amongst interpreters, posing the question
30
Translators and Interpreters: Comparing Competences
“What makes a good interpreter?”. The results of one survey in Australia showed that
“knowledge of both languages and of the migrant culture, objectivity, socio-communicative
skills, reliability, responsibility, honesty, politeness, and humility” were the most essential
required competences within the field of professional interpreting (in Garzone and Viezzi,
p. 99). A similar study was carried out in Germany and the following “prerequisites
emerged for a ‘good interpreter’”: linguistic and general knowledge, voice quality, good
health, endurance, psychosocial qualities such as appearance, poise, politeness and flexibility
(idem). The only common features of these two lists are the following three: linguistic
knowledge of (at least) the two working languages, social skills (either sociocommunicative or psychosocial), and politeness. Interestingly, the issue of politeness has
rarely been explicitly discussed in literature on interpreter competence, but it has been
addressed in literature using data elicited from professional interpreters. It seems that the
practical aspect of interpreting requires slightly different skills than the theoretic
discussion of interpreting generally argues.
4.2 Educational Strategies Used to Develop Interpreting Competences
“The fundamentals of interpreting training will consist in showing the relevance of the general
theory to individual cases. Having individual speeches interpreted and correcting the students’
inaccuracies or oversights would not be very profitable in the absence of methodological guidance.
[T]he instructor should have in mind the principles he wants to make clear and the corresponding
technique he wants his students to learn; the principles will then apply to and the technique will be
available for the interpreting of future speeches.”
(Danica Seleskovitch, p. 73)
This statement, made by the highly influential interpreter, interpreting instructor and
author Danica Seleskovitch, emphasises that applied interpreting studies need to be based
on prescriptive as well as descriptive interpreting studies in order to be effective. This idea
also applies to the issue of developing interpreter competence during teaching, since the
31
Translators and Interpreters: Comparing Competences
term ‘technique’ can be viewed here as a synonym for ‘skill’. As such, much has been
written about interpreter competences in general and the teaching of these competences
during interpreter training programmes. However, scientific study on the teaching of
interpreting only began to gain scientific interest since the second half of the twentieth
century. Up until that time, interpreter training was generally seen as an element of
translator training. The most influential events to stimulate the development of (applied)
interpreting studies were undoubtedly the aftermaths of the First and Second World Wars,
after which it became painfully clear that there simply were not enough trained
professionals in the field of interpreting. This realisation brought about an increase in
attention for interpreter training and even the founding of academic degrees in
interpreting. This development was a welcome one, because, although interpreter training
may share some common features with interpreter training, it also requires a separate set
of teaching objectives, techniques, assignments, and assessments. Translator training deals
with several issues which are addressed in interpreter training as well, such as cultural
competence and subject area competence, but it also includes courses on topics which are
of less importance to professional interpreters, such as writing skills and the use of
translation tools during translation. Moreover, translator training does not deal with
several issues which should be addressed in interpreter training. For instance, interpreters
need to be able to interpret a client’s intonation, body language and facial expressions,
whereas translators are concerned with the source author’s writing style and the target
culture’s writing conventions.
Interpreter training is provided by universities, but also by interpreter agencies or
organisations. Whereas academic interpreter training is scientific and broad, vocational
interpreter training tends to be short and highly specific. However, since both types of
training have their benefits, there is an ongoing discussion about how to balance
professional and academic course content in interpreter training programmes. The applied
science of interpreting is therefore always concerned with combining both theoretical and
practical elements.
32
Translators and Interpreters: Comparing Competences
Interpreting was taught by ‘apprenticeship’ until far into the second half of the
twentieth century, based on a “transfer of know-how and professional knowledge from
master to student”, which was “centred around spoken-language interpreting in
multilingual international settings” (Pöchhacker, p. 177). Fortunately, the 1980s were not
only a revolutionary decade for interpreting studies, but also for interpreter training. It
was the decade in which interpreter training was starting to be approached from a more
scientific point of view and from an interdisciplinary perspective. Attention was given to
issues such as “component skills, strategies, processing capacity management and
development of expertise” (p.178). Pöchhacker states that “systematic reflection on
curricular issues remained limited until the 1980s […] when the profession-based tradition
of conference interpreter training was complemented by scientific, process-oriented
approaches” (idem). Besides the fact that this quote shows the shift which occurred during
the 1980s, it also underlines the status-quo at the time, namely that research on conference
interpreting was more advanced and more extensive than research on other types of
interpretation. This prominence of conference interpreting has also resulted in more
research carried out on conference interpreter training than any other type of interpreter
training. However, the field did eventually broaden itself in the 1990s to address other
types of interpreting, such as community interpreting and sign language interpreting. This
progress of the 1980s and 1990s leaves us with only a few decades during which
interpreter training has been able to develop itself into a valued academic degree and
subsequently, scientific literature on interpreter training is relatively young.
During the twentieth century, the idea of learning interpreting by interpreting
finally had to give way to a more rounded teaching method, which included the
development of a range of interpreter competences, such as spontaneous speech
production and oral summarising skills. Also, the focus in interpreting training was no
longer restricted to conference interpreting, but began to expand to other fields, such as
community interpreting. Moreover, technological advancements have been providing new
teaching methods, such as the audio- and videotaping of students’ performances. These
tapings are not simply used for feedback from the teachers or other students, but more
33
Translators and Interpreters: Comparing Competences
importantly, for self-evaluation. However, before students can even achieve this stage of
interpreter training, they first need to be assessed in order to establish whether their initial
level is sufficient to enter a course on interpreting.
First and foremost, interpreter students need to possess a high level of competence
in their native and foreign languages. Interpreter training, after all, is not meant to
enhance students’ language aptitude itself: learning interpreting comes after learning
languages. As Danica Seleskovitch, for instance, clearly states: an interpreter “cannot learn
or improve his knowledge of a language while expressing the meaning of a message at 150
words per minute” (Seleskovitch, p. 65). Also, Wilhelm Weber has noted that “students
must be fluent in their languages before being admitted to the program”, because
interpreter training is an “academic program in the field of communication and NOT a
language program” (Weber, p. 14). A similar opinion is held by David Bowen at
Georgetown University, who states that “to begin interpreting studies […] means
interpreting classes from the very start, not language enhancement or beginning a new
language” (Bowen, p. 175). It is clear that interpreter trainees need to possess near-native
aptitude in their second (and third) language(s), before they are able to learn interpreting.
This linguistic competence includes a range of skills, not only speaking and listening in
both languages, but also paraphrasing and oral presentation in the A- and B- (and C-)
languages. For conference interpreters, a degree of bilingual or multilingual competence
should even be the “fundamental criterion for admission”, according to Pöchhacker (p.
180). For community interpreters this aptitude is apparently less important, a fact which
can be deduced from his statement that in the field of liaison interpreting, socio-cultural
identity and attitude are essential, as well as cognitive-linguistic skills, giving bilingual
competence secondary priority (idem).
Pöchhacker provides his own list of the entry requirements for interpreter students,
which is based on the “widely accepted“ competence profile of professional interpreters
consisting of several skills: “knowledge (of languages and of the world), cognitive skills
(relating to analysis, attention and memory) and personality traits (including stress
tolerance, intellectual curiosity)” (p. 180). To clarify, these are not simply the qualities
34
Translators and Interpreters: Comparing Competences
Pöchhacker expects from professional interpreters, they are qualities which are “expected
of candidates for interpreter training” (idem). Although Pöchhacker mainly provides an
overview of research carried out by other authors, he also gives his own views on
important matters within the field of interpreter training. Regarding consecutive
interpreting, he sets out by discussing the teaching of note-taking skills, then continues to
address the topic of memory, after which he attends to the issue of public speaking (p.
183). Concerning simultaneous interpreting, he deals with “the crucial task demand of
simultaneity”, “shadowing”, “simultaneous paraphrasing”, “cloze exercises”, and “sight
translation” (184-186). Lastly, he discusses training for dialogue interpreters in more
depth, focusing on “the dynamics of interpersonal interaction”, which can be taught by
“turn-taking” and “role performance”, and is aimed at “contextualized decision making”
(p. 186-187). Pöchhacker concludes this topic by stating that the instruction in the different
genres of interpreting may vary with regard to specifics, but they share “an appreciation
for expertise-building on tasks which approximate real-life conditions” (idem).
An absolute authority on the field of (court) interpreter training is Danica
Seleskovitch. Seleskovith founded the first ever PhD programme in interpreting, at the
University of Paris. She has written countless articles on interpreting and interpreter
training from the 1970s onwards. Her books have been standard material in any
interpreting training programme since they were published and her opinions on teaching
interpreting are still highly influential today. In one of her writings, she provides her view
on the importance of interpreting and interpreter training in only four sentences:
“The raison d’être of interpreting is to ensure successful communication among speakers discussing
topics of common concern in languages unknown to each other. To achieve this, interpreters should
have a full command of their native and foreign languages, a good knowledge of the matters under
discussion, and thorough training in the skills of interpreting. To acquire those skills, students
attending a training course in interpreting should possess breadth of information and culture,
excellent fluency in their native language, and good competence in one or more foreign languages.
The teaching they will receive aims at making them understand speeches delivered by speakers
35
Translators and Interpreters: Comparing Competences
belonging to other cultural backgrounds and at enabling them to render these speeches in a way that
will elicit adequate responses from listeners.”
(Danica Seleskovitch, p. 65)
Even without going into detail, Seleskovitch already provides a number of interpreting
skills which she deems elementary for interpreters: full command of (or: excellent fluency
in) native and full command of (or: good competence in one or more) foreign languages,
good knowledge of subject matter, breadth of information and culture (also referred to as
worldly and cultural knowledge). She also pinpoints the essential teaching objectives of
interpreter training: making students understand speeches and enabling students to
render these speeches adequately. In other words, interpreter training should be aimed at
speech comprehension and speech re-production. Seleskovitch continues by providing her six
major teaching goals. Firstly, she feels that students need to be taught how to identify the
speech background, which is made up of “knowledge of the author, of the audience, and of
the date and place of emission” (Seleskovitch, p. 66). Then, she discusses semantics
contextualized, indicating that “[s]peech meanings are influences by the presence of other
words” (idem). Thirdly, she addresses cognitive context, the idea that “phrases and
sentences of a speech […] are stripped of irrelevant language meanings as they combine
with knowledge derived from earlier sentences to produce sense” (p. 67). The following
aspect in interpreter training is the correct application of the student’s world knowledge, the
“baggage cognitive” (idem). Her next element is a dual one, namely rate of delivery and
length of stay in the memory span, two correlating aspects of one competence: memory skills.
Lastly, she discusses the development of sense, meaning the development of “the
awareness of the things meant by a speaker” (p. 68). Seleskovitch also provides a more
compact list of “basic techniques required for the implementation of the fundamental
principles of interpreting”, namely listening, note-taking, use of cognitive complements,
clear expression of ideas, and transcoding (p. 73). It is evident that one important element
of interpreting is hardly ever discussed by Seleskovitch: the socio-cultural aspect. This
36
Translators and Interpreters: Comparing Competences
seemingly unusual omission is easily explained by the fact that Seleskovitch has always
focused on court interpreting, which does not have the same strong link with sociocultural elements as other genres of interpreting.
Sergio Viaggio is another leading figure in the field of interpreting. He taught
interpreting worldwide for fifteen years and is currently Chief Interpreter with the UN at
Vienna. His writings do pay attention to the cultural aspect of interpreting and the
importance of developing cultural competence in interpreter training. For instance, he has
stated that “students […] do not take duly into account the social import of their job” and
that “a mediator is never a pellucid window pane” (Viaggio, p. 229). In order to resolve
this weakness, he feels that students need to be equipped with “a pragmatic compass solidly
inset in an assessment of optimal relevance in the specific virtual circumstances” (p. 230).
This compass is developed by teaching a model of communication which contains three
stages: on the speaker’s side, between the speaker and his addressees, on the addressees’
side (p. 231). The first stage includes defining the speaker’s motivation, the speaker’s
knowledge and the speaker’s pragmatic intentions. The mediation stage contains the
realisation that the speaker produces a stimulus which is linguistic, paralinguistic as well
as kinetic, and that the speech is meant to be understood by these particular addressees in
this particular situation only. The final stage incorporates the knowledge that the
addressee’s comprehension of a speech is sieved by his own motivations and interests and
that there is shared knowledge between the speaker and the addressee, reducing the need
for semantic explicitation.
Christopher John Garwood at the University of Bologna, has also written about
several teaching strategies to develop essential interpreting skills (Garwood, p. 275). For
instance, he suggests that the source speech should be given more attention as an
autonomous text, since this will improve discourse analysis, which in turn will increase
the adequacy of the interpretation. Seleskovitch has also emphasised this issue, by
introducing a particular type of exercise. She proposes to let students listen to well-known
stories (such as fairytales) in order to create interpretations “based on sense, not on
transcoded words” (Seleskovitch, p. 83). In line with this quality, is the competence of
37
Translators and Interpreters: Comparing Competences
speech cohesion, which can be taught amongst other things by discussing the importance of
conjunctives (such as ‘and’ as well as ‘so’). He also points out that interpreters themselves
need to be good speakers, a skill which could be developed by teaching students rhetoric.
Another aspect which should be incorporated into interpreter training according to
Garwood, is communication theory in order to increase speech coherence.
David Bowen, who was mentioned above concerning language learning prior to
interpreter training, has also provided a range of teaching techniques for the interpreting
classroom (Bowen, p. 179). He suggests – in line with Seleskovitch and Gile – that teachers
should focus on the more serious mistakes in the beginning of the course and then
gradually move on to criticising detailed errors. Simultaneously, students should be
applauded for any inventive solutions or display of specialised knowledge. The reason
behind this strategy is the fact that Bowen has always focused on a single skill in
interpreter training; he believes teachers should, above all, build up students’ confidence.
Also, he feels that mistakes should be commented on immediately, because a “post
mortem of the performance is not sufficient to avoid the ingraining of certain mistakes”
(idem). When this is not possible, students should be confronted with play-backs of their
recorded performance. He also provides a few specific assignments, such as having the
students read certain theoretical texts, having them present their conclusions in front on
the class, and them videotaping their speech for peer-review. This type of technique can be
used to improve students’ public speaking skills.
The final element in any type of training, is the assessment. For interpreter training
programmes, this issue is just as controversial as it is for translator training. Academic
interpreter courses have been using a great variety of modes of assessment, depending on
location, type of instruction, and learning goals. Obviously, all interpreter training has a
common objective: to produce highly skilled professionals in the field of interpreting.
However, not every party involved in this process adheres to the same set of principles
and standards. The community of professional interpreters, for instance, has often been
known to criticise the new arrivals as not possessing adequate skills for the job. Generally
speaking, experienced specialists have found the new interpreters to be more concerned
38
Translators and Interpreters: Comparing Competences
with textbook rules than with real-life situations. On the other hand, many academic
instructors in the field of interpreting believe that a solid theoretical foundation is needed
to develop the practical skills needed in the professional arena. As Pöchhacker states:
“Assessment in interpreter training is a highly complex subject, since it is not only linked to
curricular and didactic issues as covered so far but also closely interrelated with topics such as
‘professional standards’ […] and ‘competence’ […] as well as the multi-dimensional theme of
‘quality’.”
(Franz Pöchhacker, p. 187)
Pöchhacker provides a description of a traditional examination for conference interpreter
students. He states that the trainees are first “expected to give a consecutive rendition with
notes of a speech lasting up to ten minute, working both into their A- and B-languages”
after which they need to “perform simultaneous interpreting in the booth for up to twenty
minutes, working into the A-language and, though controversial, sometimes also into the
B-language” (p. 188). For dialogue or liaison interpreting, students are required to perform
both “sight translation and dialogue interpreting” (idem). As he notes, “there is little
systematic information on parameters such as the mode and context of source-text
delivery, text type, authenticity, level of technicality, or the time and resources allowed for
preparation”, which makes it difficult for those outside the programme to identify the
standards held by that particular institute. Two criteria are agreed upon however: “content
(i.e. source-target correspondence) and target-language presentation (i.e. expression and
delivery)”. Another traditional and hotly debated element of interpreter assessment is the
strategy of error counts. Although the idea of counting errors in a student’s speech may
seem quite natural, it does have some practical difficulties. As Pöchhacker points out, this
method of evaluation is problematic due to “the lexical variability of interpreters’ output
[…], the variable information value of individual text components, the variability of error
ratings between different assessors […] and the impact of norms and expectations” (idem).
Pöchhacker also gives an overview of the ideas of another interpreting author
regarding assessment during and at the final stage of training programmes. David Sawyer
39
Translators and Interpreters: Comparing Competences
distinguishes between “formative assessment by the instructor as part of the teaching and
learning process” and “summative assessment by one or more examiners at the end of a
program” (in Pöchhacker, p. 187). Sawyer has also suggested the use of “portfolio
assessment – that is, the systematic collection and evaluation of student products to
document progress and learning outcomes” (idem). This type of continuous assessment
has also been stimulated in the field of translation, because it minimises the risk of unfair
judgment. For instance, a student might not be as comfortable with a particular speech
genre or interpreting situation, which affects his or her performance, but if this is one
isolated presentation is all the examiner has to base his judgment on, then that student
may be evaluated below his or her usual level. Saywer also comments on the gap between
theorists and practitioners by arguing that training programmes need to consider
“professional judgment as necessary, but not sufficient” (p. 188). As Pöchhacker himself
states: “the professional judgment of experienced interpreters […] is no doubt vital for
evaluating the overall impression made by an interpreter in terms of professionalism,
credibility, poise, technical skill, and so on” (p.189). Sylvia Kalina at Heidelburg
University summarises this perspective most unambiguously, when she states that
interpreter “[t]eaching must […] prepare students to cope with all the problems and
difficulties of professional interpreting” (Kalina, p. 232).
40
Translators and Interpreters: Comparing Competences
5. COMPARISON OF TRANSLATOR AND INTERPRETER COMPETENCES
The final chapter of this thesis will firstly provide a compact discussion of the most
important translator competences and the most important interpreter competences, based
on the information presented in this paper. Due to the limitations of this thesis, only the
top ten competences for both groups of professionals will be addressed in this conclusion.
However, it should be noted that the authors referred to in this essay have discussed a
combined total of thirty-two competences. The examination will be carried out both in a
textual format and in two separate tables. Subsequently, a third table will be constructed
to clearly portray the similarities and differences between the most important translator
competences and the most important interpreter competences.
This section will start out by providing a brief overview of the ten most important
translator competences and interpreter competences. These inventories were created on
the basis of the skills referred to by the authors mentioned throughout this thesis. Each
competence was analysed for priority and frequency, after which each it received a
particular ranking. The tables also provide the three most common labels for a particular
competence (if applicable), as used by the authors discussed in this paper.
Firstly, an overview will be given of the ten most important competences for
professional translators. To begin with, linguistic competence is the most essential criterion
as discussed by the authors whose writings have been presented in this thesis. This skill
has been giving a number of different titles, such as ‘language competence’, ‘bilingual
competence’ and even ‘multilingual competence’. Closely following this skill, is
translational competence, also referred to as ‘transfer competence’ and ‘re-expression
competence’. The authors discussed above awarded third place to instrumental competence,
the skill denoted by titles such as ‘encyclopaedic competence’ and ‘research competence’.
The fourth most important skill for translators is text comprehension competence, which has
been known as either ‘text analysis competence’ or simply ‘textual competence’ as well.
Related to this skill is subject area competence (or ‘knowledge of topic’) which is found in
table 1 below at number five. Position six on this inventory of translator skills is taken up
41
Translators and Interpreters: Comparing Competences
by attitudinal competence, also represented by the designations ‘disposition’ as well as
‘psycho-physiological competence’. The seventh type of ability is cultural competence,
which has also been titled ‘intercultural competence’ and ‘bicultural competence’. Nearing
the end of the list, one can find communicative competence at number eight, the only skill
which has not been discussed under any other label. The aptitude which has received the
ninth place is text production competence, also referred to as ‘writing skills’. At the final
position in this inventory of the ten most important skills for professional translators is
translation quality assessment competence (or ‘monitoring competence’).
Table 1: The ten most important translator competences
THE TEN MOST IMPORTANT TRANSLATOR COMPETENCES
1.
Linguistic Competence – Language Competence – Bilingual Competence
2.
Translational Competence – Transfer Competence – Re-expression Competence
3.
Instrumental Competence – Encyclopaedic Competence – Research Competence
4.
Text Comprehension Competence – Text Analysis Competence – Textual Competence
5.
Subject Area Competence – Knowledge of Topic
6.
Attitudinal Competence – Disposition – Psycho-physiological Competence
7.
Cultural Competence – Intercultural Competence – Bicultural Competence
8.
Communicative Competence
9.
Text Production Competence – Writing Skills
10. Assessment Competence – Monitoring Skills
42
Translators and Interpreters: Comparing Competences
The following paragraph will provide an overview of the ten most important
competences for professional interpreters. This inventory was compiled using the strategy
outlined above. However, since there are many types of interpreting, this chart will only
illustrate those competences which are applicable to interpreting in general.
The first essential aptitude for interpreters was found to be linguistic competence,
also referred to as ‘language competence’ or ‘bilingual competence’. This skill was closely
followed by cultural competence, which has been titled both ‘intercultural competence’ and
‘bicultural competence’ as well. Note that cultural competence has only been ranked as
seventh most important skill for professional translators. The third position is taken up by
the competence which is described by the expressions general knowledge and ‘world
knowledge’. The fourth competence was mentioned as frequently as, but always after, the
previous competence, which is why it has been presented as being slightly less important
than general knowledge: memory skills. Subsequently, the skill of speech production
competence was awarded fifth place. Closely related to this aptitude, is speech analysis
competence, also referred to as ‘speech comprehension competence’ at number six. A skill
which most readers would immediately connect to the profession of interpreting can be
found at the seventh position in this table, namely public speaking, which has been referred
to as ‘presentation competence’ as well. The following skill is a different type of aptitude,
which has always been a topic of much discussion in the field of interpreting: moral
competence or ‘professional ethics’. Near the end of this inventory, an ability which has
received a surprisingly low ranking from the authors discussed above, being subject area
competence, also known as ‘knowledge of topic’ is found at number nine in table 2.
Interestingly, this competence received a fifth position in the inventory of translator
competence, whereas it has been given a second-to-last ranking as a skill required of
professional interpreters. The final aptitude which is crucial for professional interpreters is
stress tolerance. It is remarkable to note that this competence is only placed at the tenth
position, when interpreting is performed under strenuous circumstances and in a very
limited time span.
43
Translators and Interpreters: Comparing Competences
Table 2: The ten most important interpreter competences
THE TEN MOST IMPORTANT INTERPRETER COMPETENCES
1.
Linguistic Competence – Language Competence – Bilingual Competence
2.
Cultural Competence – Intercultural Competence – Bicultural Competence
3.
General Knowledge – World Knowledge
4.
Memory Skills
5.
Speech Production Competence
6.
Speech Analysis Competence – Speech Comprehension Competence
7.
Public Speaking – Presentation Competence
8.
Moral Competence – Professional Ethics
9.
Subject Area Competence – Knowledge of Topic
10.
Stress Tolerance
Now that the two separate inventories have been composed, they will be compared in
order to see both the similarities and differences between competences required by
professional translators and competences required by professional interpreters. Table 3
will represent all the competences discussed in tables 1 and 2. The total number of
competences in table 3 is not simply twenty, because several competences are shared by
both groups of professionals, eliminating any double categories (such as linguistic
competence and cultural competence). As a result, table 3 features fifteen competences.
Moreover, two sets of categories will be regarded as belonging to the same type, meaning
that text comprehension and speech comprehension will be seen as one group, and text
production and speech production will also be seen as a single category. The reason
behind this strategy, is that these competences are each other’s equivalents in the other
professional arena.
44
Translators and Interpreters: Comparing Competences
Table 3: Similarities and differences between the ten most important translator and interpreter competences
Translators
Interpreters
Competences
Professionals
1.
Linguistic Competence
√
√
2.
Comprehension Competence
√
√
3.
Production Competence
√
√
4.
Subject Area Competence
√
√
5.
Cultural Competence
√
√
6.
Translational Competence
√
-
7.
Instrumental Competence
√
-
8.
Attitudinal Competence
√
-
9.
Communicative Competence
√
-
10.
Assessment Competence
√
-
11.
General Knowledge
-
√
12.
Memory Skills
-
√
13.
Public Speaking
-
√
14.
Moral Competence
-
√
15.
Stress Tolerance
-
√
45
Translators and Interpreters: Comparing Competences
COMMON COMPETENCES FOR TRANSLATORS AND INTERPRETERS:

Linguistic Competence

Comprehension Competence

Production Competence

Subject Area Competence

Cultural Competence
SPECIFIC COMPETENCES FOR TRANSLATORS:
SPECIFIC COMPETENCES FOR INTERPRETERS:

Translational Competence

General Knowledge

Instrumental Competence

Memory Skills

Attitudinal Competence

Public Speaking

Communicative Competence

Moral Competence

Assessment Competence

Stress Tolerance
Figure 1: The common and specific competences for translating and interpreting
As this data shows, professional translators and interpreters share half of their ten most
important competences. Needless to say, these five common competences are among the
most general skills for acts of bi-directional communication. One firstly needs a certain
level of language proficiency to even enter into communication (linguistic competence),
after which it is vital that one can actually understand what it being said or written
(comprehension competence). This understanding is not only based on linguistic skills,
but also on the extent of knowledge about the topic at hand (subject area competence).
Subsequently, it is imperative to know how to create one’s own speech or text in order to
complete the communication (production competence). Moreover, one must be aware of
and able to adapt to the other individual’s social morals and habits of interaction in order
to ensure successful communication (cultural competence).
46
Translators and Interpreters: Comparing Competences
6. CONCLUSION
It is not surprising that translation and interpreting exhibit such a high number of
similarities, because they are – as said before – two sub-types of one phenomenon.
However, both genres of interlingual transfer also possess their distinct features, since
they take place in completely different arenas of communication. As a result, the two fields
have developed their own requirements and prerequisites in order to ensure success. The
final section of this conclusion will provide a brief synopsis of these distinct competences.
For translators, it goes without saying that the principal criterion is translational
competence. An expert needs to be able to go beyond the realm of mere word-transfer –
which anyone with high language proficiency in two languages is capable of doing – to
correctly convey the source text’s multiple layers and hidden meanings. However, skills in
transfer need to be supported by a high level of instrumental competence. The aptitude to
quickly and effectively research a certain topic and its terminology is important in order to
produce flawless translations, because a translator’s work is subject to detailed and
frequent evaluation. After all, a translation is usually published in one form or another –
either as a hard copy or in an electronic environment – which means that it is easily
accessible for a great audience over an extended period of time. Attitudinal skills are
another competence required by professional translators, since the act of translation
demands a set of personal characteristics, such as intellectual curiosity and the ability to
perform as a team-member. As translating takes place in the arena of interpersonal
communication, it is very important that translators are experts in the field of human
interaction. And lastly, the skill of self-evaluation is indispensable for a professional
translator, because the finished product is in essence a reflection of the translator’s own
abilities and views.
For interpreters, a well-rounded knowledge of the world is crucial, because they
might be asked to transfer a speech to their client, which encompasses all sorts of topics.
Since interpreters are not presented with a complete text in advance, they need to possess
wide general knowledge to be able to interpret a variety of discourse correctly. Secondly,
47
Translators and Interpreters: Comparing Competences
memory skills are indispensable in interpreting, because there is simply little or no time to
document a person’s speech or to look up a particular word. Whilst interpreting, one
needs to be able to rely on excellent memory skills to ensure correct transfer of a client’s
speech. As interpreters are so important for interlingual communication, they are very
often the focal point for two (groups of) people. Being able to speak confidently and
clearly in public is therefore a vital skill for professional interpreters. High ethical values
and professional morals are expected from any interpreter, because they frequently
perform their job in situations where sensitive topics are under discussion. Peace
negotiations or the forming of international laws are issues which need to be dealt with in
an appropriate way. Since interpreting is a direct form of transfer in which errors cannot
be easily corrected, professionals must be able to perform under pressure. Hence, the
ability to stay calm under stressful conditions is vital to successful interpreting.
In conclusion, this thesis set out to discuss the similarities and differences between
the competences required by professional translators and the competences required by
professional interpreters. This analysis was initiated by the explanation of the concept of
competence and the application of this concept to the fields of translation and interpreting.
In the following stage, a variety of writings from a multitude of authors in both disciplines
was considered in order to provide insight into the theories and perspectives on
competence in each profession. Also, the didactic strategies to develop competences in
translation and interpreting training programmes were studied to further define the
importance of the separate competences. Lastly, all this information was combined in
order to construct an overview of the shared competences between translators and
interpreters as well as the specialised competences of translators and interpreters. Due to
the limitations of this thesis, only the ten most important competences for both groups of
professionals were discussed in detail. The results showed that professionals in both fields
have five essential skills in common, aptitudes which are related to the fundamental
elements of communication. Besides their shared abilities, translators and interpreters also
possess five distinct competences, which are intertwined with the highly specialised
nature of their individual professions.
48
Translators and Interpreters: Comparing Competences
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Writings:
Bowen, D. “Teaching and learning styles”. In: Dollerup, C. and Lindegaard, A. Teaching
Translation and Interpreting. Training, Talent and Experience. Philadelphia: John
Benjamins Publishing Company, 1994, p. 175-182.
Campbell, S. Translation into the Second Language. London: Longman, 1998.
Chesterman, A. Memes of Translation. The Spread of Ideas in Translation Theory, Philadelphia:
John Benjamins Publishing Company, 1997.
Dollerup, C. and Appel, V. Teaching Translation and Interpreting 3: New Horizons,
Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 1996.
Dollerup, C. and Lindegaard, A. Teaching Translation and Interpreting 2: Insights, Aims and
Visions, Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 1994.
Dollerup, C. and Loddegaard, A. Teaching Translation and Interpreting 1: Training, Talent and
Experience, Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 1992.
Fraser, J. “Professional versus student behaviour”. In: Dollerup, C. and Appel, V. Teaching
Translation and Interpreting 3: New Horizons, Philadelphia: John Benjamins
Publishing Company, 1996, p. 243-250.
Fraser, J. “The broader view: How freelance translators define translation competence”. In:
Schäffner, C. and Adab, B. Developing Translation Competence, Philadelphia: John
Benjamins Publishing Company, 2000, p. 51-62.
Garwood, C. J. “Autonomy of the interpreted text”. In: Garzone, G. and Viezzi, M.
Interpreting in the 21st century, Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company,
2002, p. 267-276.
Garzone, G. and Viezzi, M. Interpreting in the 21st Century, Philadelphia: John Benjamins
Publishing Company, 2000.
Holmes, J.S. Translated! Papers on Literary Translation and Translation Studies, Amsterdam:
Rodopi, 1988.
Hung, E. Teaching Translation and Interpreting 4: Building Bridges, Philadelphia: John
Benjamins Publishing Company, 2002.
49
Translators and Interpreters: Comparing Competences
Ibrahim, H. “Translation assessment: a case for a spectral model”. In: Dollerup, C. and
Lindegaard, A. Teaching Translation and Interpreting. Training, Talent and Experience.
Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 1994, p. 151-156.
Jakobsen, A. L. “Starting from the (other) end: integrating translation and text
production”. In: Dollerup, C. and Lindegaard, A. Teaching Translation and
Interpreting. Training, Talent and Experience. Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing
Company, 1994, p. 143-150.
Kalina, S. “Analyzing interpreters’ performance: methods and problems”. In: Dollerup, C.
and Lindegaard, A. Teaching Translation and Interpreting. Training, Talent and
Experience. Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 1994, p. 225-232.
Kalina, S. “Quality in interpreting and its prerequisites: A framework for a comprehensive
view”. In: Garzone, G. and Viezzi, M. Interpreting in the 21st century, Philadelphia:
John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2002, p. 121-132.
Kelly, D. A Handbook for Translator Trainers, Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing, 2005.
Krawutschke, P.W. American Translators Association Series: Translator and Interpreter
Training and Foreign Language Policy, Binghamton: State University of New York,
1989, volume III.
Mahmoodzadeh, K. “Consecutive interpreting: its principles and techniques”. In:
Dollerup, C. and Loddegaard, A. Teaching Translation and Interpreting. Training,
Talent and Experience. Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 1992, p.
231-236.
Meyer, I. “A translation-specific writing program: Justification and description”. In:
Krawutschke, P.W. American Translators Association Series: Translator and Interpreter
Training and Foreign Language Policy, Binghamton: State University of New York,
1989, p. 119-131.
Naaijkens, T. et al. Denken over Vertalen: Tekstboek Vertaalwetenschap, Utrecht: Uitgeverij
Vantilt, 2004.
Nadstoga, Z. “Translator and interpreter training as part of teacher training at the Institute
of English, Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznan, Poland”. In: Krawutschke, P.W.
American Translators Association Series: Translator and Interpreter Training and Foreign
Language Policy, Binghamton: State University of New York, 1989, p. 109-118.
50
Translators and Interpreters: Comparing Competences
Neubert, A. “Competence in Language, languages and in translation”. In: Schäffner, C.
and Adab, B. Developing Translation Competence, Philadelphia: John Benjamins
Publishing Company, 2000, p. 3-18.
Niedzielski, H. and Kummer, M. “Learning translating and interpreting through
interlanguage”. In: Krawutschke, P.W. American Translators Association Series:
Translator and Interpreter Training and Foreign Language Policy, Binghamton: State
University of New York, 1989, p. 132-146..
Niska, H. “Community interpreter training: Past, present, future”. In: Garzone, G.
and Viezzi, M. Interpreting in the 21st century, Philadelphia: John Benjamins
Publishing Company, 2002, p. 133-144.
Nord, C. “Text analysis in translator training.” In: Dollerup, C. and Loddegaard, A.
Teaching Translation and Interpreting. Training, Talent and Experience. Philadelphia:
John Benjamins Publishing Company, 1992, p. 39-48.
Nord, C. “Tekstanalyse en de moeilijkheidsgraad van een vertaling”. In: Naaijkens, T. et
al. Denken over Vertalen: Tekstboek Vertaalwetenschap, Utrecht: Uitgeverij Vantilt, 2004,
p. 235-242.
Pöchhacker, F. Introducing Interpreting Studies, London: Routledge, 2004.
Pöchhacker, F. “Researching interpreting quality: Models and methods”. In: Garzone, G.
and Viezzi, M. Interpreting in the 21st century, Philadelphia: John Benjamins
Publishing Company, 2002, p. 95-106.
Pöchhacker, F. and Shlesinger, M. The Interpreting Studies Reader, London: Routledge
Language Readers, 2002.
Pippa, S. and Russo, M. “Aptitude for conference interpreting: A proposal for a testing
methodology based on paraphrase”. In: Garzone, G. and Viezzi, M. Interpreting in
the 21st century, Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2002, p. 245-256.
Schäffner, C. and Adab, Beverly. Developing Translation Competence, Philadelphia: John
Benjamins Publishing Company, 2000.
Scherf, W. “Training, talent and technology”. In: Dollerup, C. and Loddegaard, A.
Teaching Translation and Interpreting. Training, Talent and Experience. John Benjamins
Publishing Company, 1992, p. 153-160.
51
Translators and Interpreters: Comparing Competences
Seleskovitch, D. “Teaching conference interpreting”. In: Krawutschke, P.W. American
Translators Association Series: Translator and Interpreter Training and Foreign Language
Policy, Binghamton: State University of New York, 1989, p. 65-88.
Tagnin, S. “Students’ research for translation”. In: Dollerup, C. and Appel, V. Teaching
Translation and Interpreting 3: New Horizons, Philadelphia: John Benjamins
Publishing Company, 1996, p. 163-170.
Toury, G. Communication in Translated Texts. A Semiotic Approach, Tel Aviv: The Porter
Institute for Poetics and Semiotics, 1980.
Ulrych, M. “Real-world criteria in translation pedagogy”. In: Dollerup, C. and Appel, V.
Teaching Translation and Interpreting 3: New Horizons, Philadelphia: John Benjamins
Publishing Company, 1996, p. 251-262.
Van Leuven-Zwart, K. Vertaalwetenschap. Ontwikkelingen en Perspectieven, Muiderberg:
Coutinho, 1992.
Viaggio, S. “Theory and professional development: or admonishing translators to be
good”. In: Dollerup, C. and Lindegaard, A. Teaching Translation and Interpreting.
Training, Talent and Experience. Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company,
1994, p. 97-106.
Wills, W. “Topical issues in translator training at universities”. In: Krawutschke, P.W.
American Translators Association Series: Translator and Interpreter Training and Foreign
Language Policy, Binghamton: State University of New York, 1989, p. 89-99.
Witte, H. “Contrastive culture learning in translator training”. In: Dollerup, C. and Appel,
V. Teaching Translation and Interpreting 3: New Horizons, Philadelphia: John
Benjamins Publishing Company, 1996, p. 73-80.
Websites:
www.cilt.org.uk - website of the National Centre for Languages (CILT).
www.cuiti.org - website of the Conférence Internationale Permanente d’Institutes Universitaires
de Traducteurs et d’Interprètes (CUITI).
www.fti.uab.es/departament/grups/pacte - website of the research group Proceso de
Adquisición de la Competencia Traductora y Evaluación (PACTE).
52