Conference interpreting on the privatemarket: Employment and assignment-related variables

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.26881/bp.2020.4.05

Keywords:

conference interpreting, freelance, private markets, workload

Abstract

The benchmark for the study of conference interpreting tends to be the institutional market, in which employment conditions are secure and communicative situations, context and terminology will tend to recur. By contrast, conference interpreters working in the private sector face a range of ever-changing circumstances, negotiating each assignment not only in terms of remuneration but also in terms of all aspects relating to working conditions, thus requiring an increased capacity to adapt on many levels.

This article presents findings from a pilot study that aims to showcase what interpreters working in the private market actually do before their interpreting assignment, over and above the preparation work that all interpreters put in. After a brief contextualization based on both academic and professional literature, this article presents the responses to two questions posed in our study regarding additional tasks carried out before assignments. Our conclusions are relevant to practitioners, trainees and trainers, as they shed light on current professional practice.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Adams, Heather, David Bovy (forthcoming). “Conference interpreting on the private market: a survey”.

Baigorri-Jalón, Jesús, Críspulo Travieso Rodríguez (2017). “Interpreting at the United Nations: The impact of external variables. The Interpreters’ View”. CLINA 3/2: 53–72.

Baigorri-Jalón, Jesús (2014). From Paris to Nuremberg, The Birth of Conference Interpreting (translated by Holly Mikkelson and Barry Olsen). Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Bovy, David, Heather Adams (2019). “Características de la interpretación de conferencias en el sector privado”. E-Aesla 5: 343–350.

Chernov, Sergei (2016). “At the dawn of simultaneous interpreting in the USSR: Filling some gaps in history”. In: Kayoko Takeda, Jesús Baigorri-Jalón (eds.). New Insights in the History of Interpreting. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 136–166.

Diriker, Ebru (2015). “Conference interpreting”. In: Holly Mikkelson, Renée Jourdenais (eds.). The Routledge Handbook of Interpreting. London – New York: Routledge, 171–185.

Donovan, Clare (2017). “The place of the interpreter and interpreting in an institutional Setting”. CLINA 3/2: 91–113.

Gile, Daniel (2015). “Effort models”. In: Franz Pöchhacker (ed.). Routledge Encyclopedia of Interpreting Studies. London – New York: Routledge, 135–137.

Grbic, Nadia, Franz Pöchhacker (2015). “Working conditions”. In: Franz Pöchhacker (ed.). Routledge Encyclopedia of Interpreting Studies. London – New York: Routledge, 441–443.

Pöchhacker, Franz (2004). Introducing Interpreting Studies. London – New York: Routledge.

Setton, Robin, Andrew Dawrant (2016). Conference Interpreting – A Complete Course. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Shermet, Sheila (2012). “Communication, interpretation and ‘Oral Translation’. Contrastive analysis of freelancing vs. working for a large organization”. Presentation at Second UN Conference of MOU Universities, University of Mons, Belgium, May 2012, Annex 2, 125–144. Available at . Accessed 23.10.2020.

Downloads

Published

2020-09-29

How to Cite

Adams, H., & Bovy, D. (2020). Conference interpreting on the privatemarket: Employment and assignment-related variables . Beyond Philology An International Journal of Linguistics, Literary Studies and English Language Teaching, (17/4), 131–146. https://doi.org/10.26881/bp.2020.4.05

Issue

Section

Articles