The professional status of conference interpreters in the Republic of Ireland: An exploratory study

Abstract

Although the country has a long history of language contact, conference interpreting in the Republic of Ireland is a relatively new field of activity and has largely evolved in response to the recognition of Irish as the 23rd official language of the European Union in 2007. Building on previous studies undertaken in other EU translation and interpreting markets, it was decided to evaluate the professional status of conference interpreters in the Republic of Ireland through applying a professionalization model. The research findings were based on a series of six interviews with qualified conference interpreters active on the Irish market. Through the analysis of practitioners' views regarding professional identity, recognition, and the unique role of the Irish language, an exploratory overview of the domestic conference interpreting profession was provided.

Haken conference interpreters in Japan: Exploring status through the sociology of work and of professions

“…Similarly, the informants did not attach particular status value to accreditations. Previous studies suggest that interpreters favour them as a mark of difference between professionals and amateurs (Gentile, 2014; Hoyte-West, 2020), but the dominance of the agency model in Japan limits incentives to join professional organisations for gaining status recognition.…”

“…The interpreting literature contains a wealth of empirical contributions that apply the sociology of professions to assess which elements signal status among interpreters and stakeholders (Dam & Zethsen, 2013; Gentile, 2014; Hoyte-West, 2020). Scholars agree that interpreting does not fully meet all of the criteria, so the formation of interpreters’ professional status is still incomplete (Sela-Sheffy, 2016).…”

“…It is also a key trait of status by which professions affirm their role in the market, by promoting relevant education at the tertiary and vocational level, by screening members’ entry to the profession, by setting standards of performance, and by creating boundaries between qualified and unqualified (Larson, 1977). Valuing training and accreditations for distinguishing interpreters as educated experts, Mikkelson (2013) and Hoyte-West (2020) acknowledge their benefits in creating a credentialing process that allows interpreters to claim authority, excluding those with substandard performance levels. However, the availability of training alone cannot signal status.…”