This paper considers the nature of what has been called “community interpreting” and “cultural interpreting” and the implications of those terms, and suggests the need for a better way to define the activity of interpreting in health, legal, social service and educational settings. The author proposes that a model be developed which better conceptualizes the common and distinct elements of different types of interpreting. Finally, the author identifies five characteristics that distinguish community interpreting from conference interpreting, which might prove useful in the development of standards, training, evaluation and support for interpreters who practise in community settings.