This paper will illustrate how the method of oral history, based on life-story interviews, can be employed to inquire into translational habitus. It will argue that oral testimony, as an alternative form of looking at history, is a valid method in the study of habitus, because life-story interviews allow us to approach the issue of agency and subjectivity in interpreting, by enabling us to explore the habitus of interpreters from within through their own narratives. The paper will firs examine the link between the concept of habitus and (auto)biographical data elicited from life-story interviews, review some of the methodological issues, and finally attempt to seek the potential of oral history as a method to identify the interpreting habitus. The methodological question of oral history will be discussed in terms of its validity, reliability and representativeness. For instance, some cast doubt on the truthfulness and correctness of narratives as evidence, and others maintain that oral history lacks consistency, a prerequisite for reliability. In addition, there are technical problems pertinent to oral data, such as interviewing techniques, transcribing processes, and the final analysis and interpreting of the data. Despite some possibly inherent weaknesses of the method; however, using oral data of life stories can be an effective tool in delving into habitus, a set of dispositions, attitudes, values, habits and skills. Since habitus is the product of individual history as well as the whole collective history of family and class, interpreter’s own voices should offer us a rich source for understanding their habitus.