Be professional at work, or don’t do it!

April 30, 2018 § 10 Comments

Dear colleagues:

Interpreting is a profession with so many complexities we often overlook a very important factor: Professionalism no matter what. Let me explain.

Interpreting takes us to wonderful places both physically and figuratively, but sometimes it can take us to the very dark corners of the universe. As interpreters we let people borrow our voice and knowledge of a foreign culture and language to convey a message. Sometimes the venue is not the place we would spend our vacation at; the borrower is not somebody we would invite to dinner, or the message is not something we would cherish. These are the times when we must be professionals.

Fortunately for all of us, there are two ways to be professional as an interpreter: The first one is to evaluate the assignment, do a self-examination of our impartiality, level of tolerance, and physical endurance, and either take the job or turn it down if the auto-evaluation tells us that is the best way to go. Interpreters are human and humans have different reactions to specific situations. Some colleagues may feel that a venue, speaker or subject matter will keep them from doing a good job; others may feel uncomfortable, but will render a top-quality service regardless of the place where they work, the people they interpret for, or the issues discussed in the speech. The important thing is to be honest with ourselves and make the right decision.

For example, I know colleagues who will not interpret in court for a pedophile, a murderer or a rapist; some of my peers will not enter the booth in a venue where they will advocate for or against something they believe in, like gun rights, globalization, pro-life actions, pro-choice groups, and so on. Finally, some people, like myself, will professionally interpret for all of the above, but would never interpret in a hospital with all that smell of Clorox and other disinfectants. The key is to reject those assignments we cannot do without feeling incompetent or unprofessional.

The real problem is when interpreters take the assignment and then perform unprofessionally. The world is a complicated place and we live in it. Sometimes external circumstances physically put us in a place where there are now more things we disagree with than before. It is under these circumstances that we must be honest and turn down what we cannot do at the top of our game, or make the determination to do an assignment we do not like as if we loved it. We will be uncomfortable, but we must perform just like the emergency room physician who saves the like of a mass murderer, or the lawyer who defends the most despicable war criminal. That is professionalism.

For this reason I am disturbed when I hear how some colleagues step out of their interpreter role and do things we are not supposed to do. I am talking about those in the booth who change the register of what the speaker said to either favor or harm the message because they disagree with what was said from the podium; I am also talking about the unfortunate cases when court interpreters in immigration and federal court tone down legal terminology or try to assist the defendant or respondent just because they sympathize with his situation or disagree with the government’s policy or legislation.

Those appearing in immigration court or before a federal judge under an immigration charge have allegedly violated the law of the land. This should never impact our court interpreter’s work. If they were arrested (in federal court) or detained (in immigration court) it was under a legal precept violation or a lawfully issued order. It is irrelevant that we like it or not. Refusing to interpret once you already took the assignment, giving information to the respondent, telling them not to go to court, warning them of the presence of immigration agents, and even refusing to use the legal term “alien”[INA Section 101(3) The term “alien” means any person not a citizen or national of the United States…] choosing the more accepted, but legally incorrect term “immigrant”, are unprofessional acts. We should not take these assignments if we believe we cannot act professionally. As officers of the court, we must act as expected by the law even if we feel uncomfortable doing it.

As a court interpreter I have interpreted for murderers, rapists, pedophiles, and drug lords; as a conference interpreter I have interpreted for conservative and liberal groups; as a media interpreter I have interpreted both: Republican and Democratic National Conventions. Obviously, I do not agree with everything I interpret and I do not like everybody I have interpreted for, but I have always been professional conveying the message as intended by the speaker and with total loyalty to legal terminology and procedure when working in court. I know my limitations, I understand the circumstances that would keep me from being professional all the time, and you will never see me interpreting in a hospital setting. I now invite you to share your thoughts about those events we should turn down when we question our professionalism.

Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

§ 10 Responses to Be professional at work, or don’t do it!

  • Ttzol Lopez says:

    Mr. Rosado congratulations for this great article!

    I just want to say, I personally believe that one of the greatest assets of a professional interpreter is to know his limitations. When we recognize our limitations and accept them is when we do our best work.

    Thank you!

  • Handan Bao says:

    Well argued. Knowing your limitations is a good thing in general but especially crucial to professionals. Being honest with yourself takes not only wisdom but also courage.

    • And, being honest with one’s self is something that everyone, regardless of age or profession, should practice. Something we need to teach our children from the time they are … children.

  • Russell Santana says:

    Excellent article, good reminders. Professionalism and abiding by the corresponding codes of ethics not only is the the right thing to do, it also serves to protect the interpreter.

  • Alina Salvat says:

    Totally agree with you Tony. We must first do some “soul searching” and only after that should we proceed.

  • Margaret Wolfe-Roberts says:

    I work primarily in the legal field, and whenever someone is using harsh or biased language I do my best to preserve it in my rendition, knowing that the person I am interpreting for has a right to know exactly what’s being said and how it’s being said. If you soften the language you’re not doing them any favors. They need to know the reality of the situation they’re in.

  • André Csihás, FCCI says:

    Our OBLIGATION as court interpreters, is to FAITHFULLY repeat what we’re hearing during the trial.

    We’re NOT EXPRESSING OUR OPINION, we’re simply REPEATING what someone else has said.

    If any interpreter doesn’t feel that they can repeat what has been said because it offends their personal beliefs or their etiquette, they SHOULD NOT be court interpreters.

    This is not MISS MANNERS or EMILY POST; this is REAL LIFE, and you’ll just have to put up with it.

    If you can’t do it because it attacks your moral standing, may I suggest that you find a more gentle occupation suited to your liking.

  • Coby Ingram says:

    Often times “loyal to legal terminology” means faithfully regurgitating Spanglish calques of the words or phrases without any point of reference in Hispanic legal or popular culture. To the LEP client, we are speaking a foreign language. A lawyer told me once, “If I find an interpreter who is interpreting word-for-word and literally, without concern for whether the client is understanding, I will not use that interpreter.” That, too, is professionalism.

    Having said that, you are very right that sometimes the best and only way we can change the situation is not to insert ourselves in it, but simply transmit the raw existential reality of it in both directions.

    • Dear Coby, thank you for your comment. Interpreting word-for-word is not interpreting. It is the attorney’s job and responsibility to explain concepts and process to the client. Interpreters cannot practice law.

    • Maria Matamoros says:

      You take direction from a lawyer who’s clearly clueless on the role not to mention the standards and ethics of our profession? Would it ever occur to you to instruct a lawyer on how to practice law?

      Interpreters concerning themselves with whether the attorney’s client understands in a legal setting (which is the sole responsibility of the attorney) are NOT displaying professionalism. To the contrary, it betrays the interpreter’s ignorance of the very foundational principles of their profession: To be as true to the source as possible i.e. complete and accurate which includes NOT changing register EVER. If attorneys wish to adjust the register in order to accommodate their clients, that’s their prerogative – not the interpreter’s.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

What’s this?

You are currently reading Be professional at work, or don’t do it! at The Professional Interpreter.

meta

%d bloggers like this: