What we learned as interpreters in 2013.

Dear Colleagues,

Now that 2013 is coming to an end and we are working towards a fruitful and meaningful 2014, we can look back and assess what we learned during the past 12 months.  As interpreters our career is a constant learning experience, and from talking with many of my colleagues 2013 was no exception. I personally grew up professionally and got to appreciate our profession even more. The year that ends gave me once again the opportunity to work with magnificent interpreters and many of my dearest colleagues.

Our profession had some positive developments this year:  IAPTI held its very successful first conference in London England, Asetrad had a magnificent anniversary event in Toledo Spain, from the evidence so far it looks like the new grading system for the U.S. federal court interpreter certification worked fine, there were many opportunities for professional development, some of them very good, including several webinars in different languages and on different topics; we had some important technological advancements that made our life easier, and contrary to the pessimists’ forecast, there was plenty of work and opportunities. Of course not everything was good.  Our colleagues in the U.K. continue to fight a war against mediocrity and misdirected greed, interpreters around the world faced attempts from special interest groups to erode our profession by lowering professional standards and creating questionable certification programs, and of course, we had the pseudo-interpreters trying to “take over” the market by charging laughable fees under shameful working conditions in exchange for miserable services.

During 2013 I worked with interpreters from many countries and diverse fields of expertise. I was able to learn from, and to share my knowledge and experience with many colleagues dear to me and with some new interpreters and translators.  This past year gave me the opportunity to learn many things at the professional conferences I attended, from the interpretation and translation books first published in 2013 that I read, and of course working in the booth, at the courthouse, the formal dinners, and the recording studio.

This year I had the honor to see how several of my students became federally certified court interpreters in the United States, and I had the fortune to present before conference audiences in different countries.  During the year that ends I traveled to many professional conferences and workshops, all good and beneficial.  Because of their content, and for the impact they had on me, I have to mention the National Association of Judiciary Interpreters and Translators’ (NAJIT) Annual Conference in St. Louis, Missouri, the Spanish Association of Translators, Proof-readers and Interpreters’ (ASETRAD) Conference in Toledo, Spain, the International Association of Professional Translators and Interpreters’ (IAPTI) Annual Conference in London, England, and the Mexican Translators Organization’s (OMT) conference in Guadalajara Mexico where I had the pleasure to attend the magnificent International Book Fair.  My only regret was that for professional obligations I had to cancel my trip to San Antonio Texas to attend the American Translators Association’s (ATA) Annual Conference.  This year that is about to end was filled with professional experiences acquired all over the world as I constantly traveled throughout the year, meeting new colleagues and catching up with good friends. Now, as I sit before my computer reminiscing and re-living all of these life-enriching experiences, I ask you to share some of your most significant professional moments during this past year.

Lo que aprendimos como intérpretes en 2013.

Queridos colegas:

Ahora que 2013 ya casi pasó a la historia y nos encontramos trabajando hacia un 2014 lleno de logros profesionales, podemos analizar lo que aprendimos durante el año que está por concluir.  Como intérpretes, nuestra carrera es una experiencia de aprendizaje constante y después de platicar con muchos de mis colegas me doy cuenta que el 2013 no fue la excepción.  Yo en lo personal crecí profesionalmente y aprendí a valorar más nuestra profesión.  Este año que termina me dio nuevamente la oportunidad de trabajar con intérpretes magníficos y colegas entrañables.

En 2013 nuestra profesión se benefició de algunos cambios positivos:  La IAPTI celebró con gran éxito su primer congreso en Londres Inglaterra, la Asetrad festejó su aniversario a lo grande con un evento fabuloso en Toledo España, por lo que se ha visto hasta este momento parece que el nuevo sistema para calificar los exámenes para la certificación judicial federal en los Estados Unidos funcionó bien; asimismo se ofrecieron muchas oportunidades para el desarrollo profesional académico, algunas de ellas muy buenas, incluyendo varios seminarios web sobre temas diversos y en diferentes idiomas.  Se dieron avances importantes en el mundo de la tecnología que nos facilitaron nuestro trabajo, y a pesar de lo que decían los pesimistas, hubo mucho trabajo y oportunidades. Por supuesto que no todo fue positivo.  Nuestros colegas en el Reino Unido continúan su lucha contra la mediocridad y la ambición malentendida, en muchos lugares del planeta los intérpretes enfrentan las acciones de los grupos con intereses especiales que erosionan nuestra profesión al reducir los estándares profesionales y creando programas de certificación bastante cuestionables; y por supuesto, tuvimos a los supuestos intérpretes intentando “apoderarse” del mercado con su estrategia de cobrar honorarios irrisorios en condiciones de trabajo vergonzosas a cambio de la prestación de un servicio de ínfima calidad.

Durante el 2013 trabajé con intérpretes de muchos países y de diversas disciplinas.  Pude aprender de ellos y también compartir mi experiencia y conocimientos con colegas muy queridos y con nuevos intérpretes y traductores;  El año que termina me dio la oportunidad de aprender nuevas cosas en las conferencias profesionales a las que asistí, en los libros sobre nuestra disciplina que se publicaron este año, y desde luego en la cabina, el juzgado, el banquete y el estudio.

Este año me dio la satisfacción de ver como varios de mis estudiantes obtuvieron su certificación de intérprete judicial federal en los Estados Unidos  y de presentar como ponente en varios países. En 2013 viajé a muchas conferencias profesionales entre las que destacan por su contenido y el impacto que tuvieron en mi persona la conferencia anual de la Asociación Nacional de Intérpretes y Traductores Judiciales de los Estados Unidos (NAJIT) en San Luis, Missouri; la conferencia de la Asociación Española de Traductores, Correctores e Intérpretes (ASETRAD) en Toledo, España; la conferencia anual de la Asociación Internacional de Traductores e Intérpretes Profesionales (IAPTI) en Londres, Inglaterra, y la conferencia anual de la Organización Mexicana de Traductores (OMT) en Guadalajara México que  me permitió deleitarme en la maravillosa Feria Internacional del Libro.  Sólo lamento que por razones de tipo profesional tuve que cancelar mi participación en la Conferencia Anual de la Asociación Americana de Traductores (ATA) en San Antonio Texas.   Este año que termina estuvo colmado de experiencias a nivel profesional que fueron adquiridas en todo el mundo mientras viajaba constantemente durante todo el año, conociendo a nuevos colegas, observando su trabajo y reencontrando a buenos amigos. Ahora, mientras me encuentro frente a mi computadora recordando, y por tanto viviendo nuevamente todas esas experiencias enriquecedoras, les pido a ustedes que compartan con el resto de nosotros algunos de sus momentos más importantes a nivel profesional durante el año pasado.

When the speaker delivers rude remarks during an official event.

Dear colleagues:

We all know how difficult it is to interpret for a speaker during a government event, a corporate function or a diplomatic dinner.  Interpreters have to deal with situations like the speaker’s accent, idiomatic expressions, regional or political jokes, sports metaphors, and others that come with the territory.  All difficult but for the most part predictable once we know who we will be interpreting for.

The case I am about to tell you refers to a different situation that arose during an official dinner between top legislators from two countries.  I was retained to interpret for a conference between legislators from two countries and the agenda included a formal dinner on the night of the first day of activities.  The delegations had elected officials from all political parties represented in that legislative body.  One of the countries had representatives from two political parties. The other delegation had individuals representing different political tendencies and ideological persuasion. I teamed-up to work the event with an excellent and experienced colleague.

During dinner, each one of us sat down at opposite sides of this gigantic table, right behind the two main dignitaries, and interpreted the neighboring conversations by whispering what others said.  Then it was time for the speeches. For those who have not interpreted for these events, I have to tell you that these speeches are usually very friendly and cordial. People thank their host, say something good about the place where they are, and perhaps extend an invitation to their country as a way to reciprocate.  This is exactly what was happening during this dinner. The two most senior officials from the host country thanked their guests for attending the event and wished them success during the rest of the conference.  Next, the guest country speakers addressed the gathering in order of representation in their legislature. At the end, a legislator from what I was told was the most radical party to the left of the spectrum got up and began his remarks. Since I still have my notes I will quote him:

He said in Spanish: “Thank you for the invitation. The food was good; however, I want to tell you that you don’t scare me. I didn’t come over here to be brain-washed, and I want you to know that I am not afraid of you, or your huge country, or your billions of dollars.  You don’t scare me guys. If you think you are going to tell me what to do, then you are wasting your time. Look at me; I am not shaking in my boots. Nobody frightens me.”   (“Gracias por la invitación. La comida estuvo buena y todo, pero quiero decirles que no me asustan. No vine a que me lavaran el cerebro y quiero que sepan que no les tengo miedo ni a ustedes, ni a su paisote, ni a sus trillones de dólares. No me asustan señores. Si creen que me van a decir lo que tengo que hacer están perdiendo su tiempo. Véanme, no estoy temblando del miedo. A mí no me amedrenta nadie”.) He finished and sat down.

I raised my eyes from my notepad and looked directly at my colleague who was sitting at the opposite end of the table.  For a fraction of a second I pondered how to render the speech. I went through all the mental exercises and considerations we usually go through during an interpretation.  Should I omit anything? Should I soften the tone? What if all hell breaks loose?  Then It came to me: First: One half of those in attendance (the Spanish speakers) already know what was said. Second: Because of the relevance of the issues to be discussed, this conference will go on regardless. Third: The politician who just spoke represents a very small faction in his legislature. Fourth: All my research for this assignment described this legislator as controversial, irreverent, and loud.  I also remembered that, according to what I had read, he often said something and then voted in a more main-stream fashion. After this analysis that lasted a blink of an eye, I thought of professional wrestling: How these huge individuals scream at each other and then nothing ever happens. I immediately thought, this man is the professional wrestler of his country’s legislative politics. As I looked at my wide-eyed colleague, we were able to communicate through facial expressions and we seemed to be in agreement. I would interpret every single word and utterance; and so I did.

Obviously, the dining room turned very tense. The host officials were not expecting anything like this. The rest of the visiting delegation looked very embarrassed by their colleague’s conduct. Fortunately, dessert arrived and everyone’s attention turned to chocolate and ice cream.

Later that night I ran into this same legislator in the men’s restroom. He recognized me, and with a huge grin told me: “I did great didn’t I?” I did not answer.

A few days later a member of the host delegation approached me, and showing me a newspaper in Spanish told me: “…this is the newspaper from the legislator’s hometown. Look at the headlines…” The paper read on the front page:  “Legislator (his name) bravely sets the record straight with those powerful legislators…”  I then understood the exact reason why this man had done what he did: internal consumption. What created the worst moment of the conference, what embarrassed the members of his own delegation, was the same speech that made him a hero back home. I was glad I reacted the way I did and interpreted his words during that dinner.

I now ask you to please share an episode where you had to think fast and decide even faster about a rendition, even if it did not involve deciding what to interpret, like in court interpreting where the dilemma is nonexistent as you are required to interpret everything but other situations where the interpreter has to react quickly in the courtroom may occur.

Some judges foster the use of non-certified interpreters.

Dear colleagues:

Unfortunately this topic is not new to anyone. It seems like we have been listening to the same complaint for many years, but during the past few months I have heard and read enough disturbing stories to decide that it was my time to contribute my two cents to the defense of our colleagues:  the real professional court interpreters. Before I continue, I must clarify that this posting refers to Spanish language court interpreters.  I recognize that interpreters in other languages are in a different situation as they do not have a federal certification program in the United States.  That is an issue for a separate blog post.

I learned that there are federal district courts in the Southern and Midwestern States where the federal court interpreter certification is not “required” to interpret a hearing or even a trial.  I was told that there may be other federal courts elsewhere in the United States where they also follow this practice.  I have to confess that I have been very lucky to live and work in places where this has never been an issue. In fact, I live in a city where I have never even met non-certified court interpreters.  The Federal Court for the Northern District of Illinois provides federally certified court interpreters for all of its cases.

The most common complaints that I have heard from certified interpreters is that these courthouses have clerks, administrators, and judges who don’t see the need to hire federally certified interpreters because they think they are too expensive, it is too difficult to get them, or because they are happy with the services provided by non-certified individuals who have been providing their “services” to these judges.    There is a federal district courthouse in the Midwest that hires one certified and one non-certified interpreter to work their trials.  Fortunately, most certified interpreters refuse to work under these circumstances. Unfortunately, this courthouse then hires two non-certified individuals. Their argument is that it is cheaper and the non-certified individual has a state court interpreter certification.  Another courthouse in the South routinely hires non-certified interpreters under the explanation that their judges like these non-certified individuals who have been doing “a good job” for many years.  There is a federal district court judge who states on the record at the beginning of a hearing that the Spanish speaker is being assisted by a certified interpreter, without giving opportunity to the federally certified court interpreter to enter her appearance on the record by clearly stating that she is federally certified.  This way the judge, intentionally or unintentionally (we don’t know) makes it impossible for the certified interpreter to separate herself from the non-certified individual.  In fact, because of this maneuver, I heard that some attorneys that have appeared before this judge for many years are shocked when they learn out of court that the “other” individuals appearing in court are non-certified.

I would like to think that most of these situations arise from the lack of knowledge among judges and court staff.  Many of them do not know the difference between a federally certified court interpreter (the ones who can appear in court) a state certified court interpreter, and non-certified individuals who just happen to accept assignments knowing that they are not supposed to.

For the benefit of some of you who might be reading this article, and with the hope that some of my colleagues may share the following information with judges, clerks, attorneys and others, I will touch upon some of the basic differences between a federally certified court interpreter and a state certified interpreter.

According to the Court Interpreter Act, the Administrative Office of the United States Courts shall establish a program to facilitate the use of certified interpreters in judicial proceedings instituted by the United States (28 USC § 1827) To fulfill this mandate, the United States AOC has developed a certification program that all Spanish interpreter candidates must pass to be certified. The certification program is administered in two parts: a written exam to test the true bilingualism of the applicant who has to pass (with a minimum score of 80) each of the two sections: English and Spanish. Those who pass this first stage must wait for a full year and then take the oral exam that consists of difficult exercises to test the examinee’s interpretation skills, legal terminology and comprehension, and language proficiency.  To pass this test a candidate must score a minimum of 80 on each of its 5 sections: sight translations from English into Spanish and Spanish into English, two simultaneous interpretations at very high speeds: one a monologue and one a dialog, and a lengthy and complicated consecutive interpretation.  Passing rates for this very difficult exam are among the lowest in any professional field.

A person can become state certified after meeting the requirements of that particular state. The format and minimum scores vary depending on the state. Some require a written test, others do not. Some offer a written test on the basics of the legal process, others require prove of bilingualism.  The oral test can be the same in different states as they all use the services of the National Center for State Courts (NCSC) but the way the test is administered and graded is different from state to state. Some states let the applicant take the oral exam by parts (first the simultaneous exam and maybe months later the consecutive and sight)

Of the many differences between the federal certification program and the states’ programs, perhaps the most important are the content of the exam and the minimum scores required to pass it.  State exams have fewer sections than the federal test. They do not have a simultaneous interpretation dialogue, the simultaneous interpretation exercise is offered at a lower speed, the sight translation documents are not legal, but paralegal documents, and the subject matter of the exercises is based on topics that are under the jurisdiction of a state court.  The minimum score to pass a state certification exam is 70.  Some states allow that examinees retest only on those sections where they got a failing score.  The passing rate for the state court interpreter examination is far higher than the federal rate.  In fact, there are many state certified court interpreters who have repeatedly failed the written and oral federal certification examination.  As you can see, there is a significant difference between these certifications.  It is important to mention that for federal court purposes a state certified interpreter is a non-certified interpreter.

The federal court interpreter program exists because of a constitutional mandate. The VI Amendment of the United States Constitution states that: “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to… be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him… and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense…”  (Amendment VI. 1791)

The Court Interpreter Act clearly states that: “…Only in a case in which no certified interpreter is reasonably available as provided in subsection (d) of this section, including a case in which certification of interpreters is not provided under paragraph (1) in a particular language, may the services of otherwise qualified interpreters be used…”  [28 USC § 1827(b)(2)]

Looking at the statute you can easily conclude that the courts are obligated to seek the services of federally certified interpreters.  There were certified interpreters ready and able to work in all the cases I have mentioned in this article.  It was the clerk or the judge who preferred to use the non-certified individuals.

Even smaller federal district courts now have access to federally certified court interpreters through the federal judiciary’s Telephone Interpreting Program (TIP)  The TIP, available nationwide, allows an interpreter at a remote location to deliver simultaneous interpretation of court proceedings for defendants and consecutive interpreting for the court record by means of a two-line telephone connection.  This program has been very successful and has kept the highest quality of interpretation in the courtroom.

It seems to me that after reading this posting, all federally certified court interpreters who are ignored or passed over by a courthouse, and later find out that a non-certified individual has been hired to “interpret,” should be able to explain the legal reasons not to do so.  Unfortunately, sometimes this may not be enough. All federal judicial districts are independent. They make their own decisions. All federal district court judges are appointed for life.    When an explanation is not enough to change a bad habit, there are other means to achieve the desired results.

When faced with the situation above, the interpreter should talk to the defense attorney and express his concerns about the defendant’s constitutional rights being violated. The V amendment indicates that: “No person shall… be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law…” (Amendment V. 1791) For a person to have due process there has to be legal representation. A defendant cannot participate in his defense unless he understands the charges against him and confronts his accusers. This is impossible if he cannot communicate with his attorney (See Amendment VI 1791 above)  It is important to make it clear to the defense attorney that because of this violation of the defendant’s constitutional right to a due process, there are grounds for a dismissal, or at the least for an appeal, even before the trial takes place.

As far as the non-certified individual who is working at the courthouse, even with the blessing of a judge, there are several things that can be done: When the individual states that he is certified, or when the judge states on the record that this person is certified and the “interpreter” does not correct the record, there can be consequences if this person has a state certification.  This should be brought to the attention of the state agency that oversees the performance of state certified interpreters. This lack of moral character could be grounds for a suspension or even a revocation of the state certification. Remember, state certified court interpreters are (state level) officers of the court.

There are also certain things to be done when the individual does not have a state certification. If at the beginning of the hearing, or at any time during the process, this person was placed under oath or affirmation and indicated that he was certified, or even if he remained silent when the judge or the clerk put him under oath as a certified interpreter, he may have committed perjury or at least misrepresentation and therefore he could be prosecuted for this crime.   This individual could also be subject to other sanctions depending on the state where the act was perpetrated.  Practicing a profession without a license or certification could be a misdemeanor in some states. The person may be subject to jail time or at the least to a fine.

Finally, the non-English speaker defendant or his dependants may be able to sue the “interpreter” for damages caused by him as an individual who provided a service without having the certification to do so, and perhaps committing fraud or inducing the error at the time of celebration of the professional services contract. If the non-English speaker thought that this individual was certified, there was no “meeting of the minds” and therefore the contract wasn’t valid; this means that he can sue the “interpreter” for damages and he may not have to pay him for what he did. This is a good remedy for those who appear in court pro-se.

There are many resources to right a wrong. The first step should be to try to educate the bench and bar. I encourage you to speak before the defense bar and the assistant U.S. attorneys. Make sure the court knows that all these resources exist; that they can use TIP.  Always remember: you need to make sure they are aware that you know what is required, and that they know that you are willing to campaign for the use of certified interpreters in your district.  Please share with the rest of us your experiences with non-certified interpreters and what you did to fix the situation in your federal district court.

Una asociación de intérpretes y traductores donde el español es la lengua principal.

Queridos colegas,

Recientemente asistí al Congreso X Aniversario de Asetrad en Toledo, España. Asetrad es la Asociación española de traductores, correctores e intérpretes en la que se aglutinan la inmensa mayoría de los profesionales de la lengua en España.  A pesar de llevar un par de años de ser miembro de esta organización, fue hasta ahora que me tocó que se celebrara un congreso de esta importancia; además tuve el honor de que se me incluyera como ponente, así que decidí ir.

Asetrad, para mis colegas y amigos en los Estados Unidos, tiene aproximadamente el mismo número de miembros que la Asociación Nacional de Intérpretes y Traductores Judiciales (NAJIT) y su congreso es el evento más importante desde el punto de vista profesional para todos los intérpretes, traductores y correctores de España, independientemente de su especialidad.

La conferencia se celebró en la inigualable ciudad de Toledo, patrimonio de la humanidad, y consistió en una combinación de ponencias generales y talleres especializados que se impartieron a lo largo de dos días (viernes y sábado) culminando las actividades de los miembros con la asamblea general que se llevó a cabo el domingo.  Además, el congreso incluyó eventos sociales y culturales, así como todos los alimentos durante la conferencia.  La organización fue impecable y las ponencias fueron bien interesantes y variadas.  En lo personal puedo decir que en todos los años que llevo asistiendo y participando en congresos profesionales en todo el mundo, esta fue la primera vez que nadie se quejó de nada. Así de bien organizado y variado estuvo el programa.

Desde luego, en mi opinión ningún congreso puede ser malo si comienza con una presentación de Alberto Gómez Font que como es su costumbre nos deleitó con sus anécdotas y nos iluminó con sus conocimientos.  Además de Alberto, el resto de los ponentes fue de primerísima categoría. Les sugiero que busquen otras crónicas de la conferencia para que se den una mejor idea de lo sucedido ya que el propósito de este artículo es diferente.  Magníficos colegas y excelentes ponentes como Gabriel Hormaechea, Carmen Montes, Pilar Ramírez Tello, Isabel Basterra, Maya Busqué, Javier Mallo, Laura Izquierdo, y mis queridísimos Ruth Gámez, Fernando Cuñado, Pablo Mugüerza, Diana Soliverdi, Luisa Calatayud, y Pilar de Luna y Jiménez de Parga elevaron la calidad del evento y deben ser considerados seriamente para presentar en congresos en los Estados Unidos (Pablo presentó en San Antonio durante la ATA)

El convivir con todos los antes mencionados, así como con otros colegas y amigos de primerísimo nivel (no se me olvidan mi querida Clara Guelbenzu, mi retratista Sarah Quijano, Idoia Echenique y Trinidad Clares, entre muchos otros) quienes utilizan el español como una de sus lenguas de trabajo me permitió ver algo que nos falta a los intérpretes y traductores en los Estados Unidos: Una asociación de intérpretes y traductores de español que celebre congresos en español.  Es cierto que organizaciones como ATA, NAJIT, la División de español de ATA y otras más a nivel regional, son de gran valor y utilidad para los profesionales de la lengua que viven en los Estados Unidos; eso no se niega, se respeta, se reconoce y no se olvida.  Les invito a que sigan formando parte de dichas organizaciones. Sin embargo, cuando pensamos en las asociaciones internacionales más grandes el español no es el idioma que primero viene a la mente.  Si pensamos en la ATA y sus magníficos congresos, lo primero que se nos ocurre es el inglés. La ATA es una organización donde el idioma fundamental es el inglés tanto en sus conferencias como en sus publicaciones, asambleas de socios y sesiones de la junta directiva. Si pensamos en FIT lo primero que se nos ocurre es el francés, o el inglés como otro idioma de trabajo. Sin embargo, ninguna de estas organizaciones nos indica español antes que cualquier otra lengua.

Queridos colegas, Asetrad es una asociación de primera línea donde los intérpretes, traductores y correctores hablan en español. Su congreso (que se celebra cada 5 años) es primordialmente en español, su publicación de altísima calidad: ‘La linterna del traductor’ es fundamentalmente en español, al igual que las asambleas de socios, orden del día y sesiones de la junta directiva.  Somos ya casi 500 millones de personas que utilizamos el español como medio de comunicación en todo el mundo y creo que ya es tiempo de que todos los intérpretes, traductores, correctores, transcripcionistas, artistas de doblaje, y otros que trabajamos en español tengamos una agrupación y un foro donde el español sea el protagonista y, dicho sin ánimo de ofender a nadie, no un plato de segunda mesa.

Invito a todos mis colegas y amigos que trabajan en español a que formen parte de Asetrad, vayan a sus congresos, lean sus publicaciones; especialmente todos los que vivimos en los Estados Unidos. Nos hace mucha falta practicar un español bien hablado y bien escrito. Tenemos que esforzarnos para no caer en ese estado peligrosísimo que nos permite aceptar como correctas las barbaridades que se dicen y se escriben en los medios de comunicación en español norteamericanos, para rechazar las malas interpretaciones y pésimas traducciones de algunos individuos que no saben hacer este trabajo o desconocen el idioma. Ya es tiempo de decir no a las interpretaciones de algunos ‘colegas’ que dicen hablar español pero no pueden distinguir entre masculino o femenino, o no saben conjugar los verbos. Ya estuvo bien de interpretaciones en infinitivo por personas que aprendieron el español en un cursillo en Costa Rica o San Miguel Allende. El pertenecer a una organización cuyo protagonista es el español nos permitirá establecer relaciones profesionales y hasta sociales con colegas que, al igual que nosotros, manejan el idioma correctamente. Recuerden: Hay que cuidar el buen español porque de tanto trabajar con mediocres se puede perder.  También pienso que los colegas y amigos de España pueden beneficiarse de las cosas buenas que tenemos en las asociaciones profesionales estadounidenses como nuestra organización, creatividad y tamaño. Por ello, durante mi último viaje a España he invitado a varios de estos magníficos ponentes y docentes a que postulen sus talleres para conferencias en los Estados Unidos. El esfuerzo y el trabajo deben ser bidireccionales. Ya es hora de que la segunda lengua más popular en el mundo tenga una asociación a nivel internacional donde el español sea prioridad.  Invito a mis colegas y amigos de ambos lados del océano a que compartan sus opiniones e ideas para lograr esta meta de tener una asociación donde el español sea el protagonista.