Translator status: Helpers and opponents in the ongoing battle of an emerging profession

Helle V. Dam and Karen Korning Zethsen
Aarhus School of Business, Aarhus University

Abstract

The present article is part of a larger project which investigates the occupational status of professional translators. The studies conducted so far within the framework of the project have been based on questionnaires and mainly been of a quantitative nature. The present article reports on a qualitative analysis of the wealth of comments which the translators who participated in the questionnaire studies wrote in response to an open invitation to comment on anything in relation to the study and its subject. In order to structure the translators’ comments, we have relied on Algirdas-Julien Greimas’ actantial model. Themes identified as important facilitators of or barriers to status included translator training, recognition of translators’ expertise, authorization, level of professionalization and income.

Keywords
Table of contents

Translator status has received very little attention in Translation Studies as a subject in its own right. Although the literature contains numerous references to translation as a low-status profession (e.g. Chamberlain 1988/2000; Chesterman and Wagner 2002; Hermans and Lambert 1998; Koskinen 2000; Lefevere 1995; Risku 2004; Schäffner (ed.) 2004; Venuti 1995), it is only recently that the topic has begun to emerge as an object of empirical research (for an overview of the literature on translator status, see Dam and Zethsen 2008). An example that deserves separate mention is the large-scale research project on strategies of image-making and status advancement of translators and interpreters in Israel that is currently [ p. 195 ]being conducted by Rakefet Sela-Sheffy and Miriam Shlesinger (e.g. Sela-Sheffy and Shlesinger 2008)—a project much is to be expected of, but which is still in progress. In the framework of this project, Sela-Sheffy and Shlesinger convened an international workshop entitled Profession, identity and status: Translators and interpreters as an occupational group in Tel Aviv in March 2009. The workshop has subsequently been documented in two special issues of the journal Translation and Interpreting Studies (Sela-Sheffy and Shlesinger (eds) 2009 and 2010), which contain several articles that touch upon translators’ status in society (e.g. Chan 2009; Katan 2009b; Monzó 2009; Meylaerts 2010). Some of the articles in a thematic section of a recent issue of the journal Hermes edited by the authors of the present article (Dam and Zethsen (eds) 2009) also address translators’ social status (e.g. Katan 2009a; Koskinen 2009). Thus, the topic is attracting an increasing amount of scholarly attention, but empirical documentation is to a large extent still pending.

Full-text access is restricted to subscribers. Log in to obtain additional credentials. For subscription information see Subscription & Price. Direct PDF access to this article can be purchased through our e-platform.

References

Chamberlain, Lori
1988/2000 “Gender and the metaphorics of translation”. Lawrence Venuti, ed. The Translation Studies Reader. London and New York: Routledge. 2000. 314–329.Google Scholar
Chan, Andy Lung Jan
2009 “Effectiveness of translator certification as a signalling device: Views from the translator recruiters”. Translation and Interpreting Studies 4:2. 155–171.   Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Chesterman, Andrew and Emma Wagner
2002Can theory help translators? A dialogue between the Ivory Tower and the Wordface. Manchester, UK/Northhampton, MA: St. Jerome.Google Scholar
Dam, Helle V. and Karen Korning Zethsen
2008 “Translator status—a study of Danish company translators”. The Translator 14:1. 71–96.   Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
2009a “Who Said Low Status? A study on factors affecting the perception of translator status”. Journal of Specialised Translation 12. 2–36.Google Scholar
2009b “Translator Status in Denmark”. Paper given at the conference “Profession, identity and status: Translators and interpreters as an occupational group” in Tel Aviv, Israel, March 2009.Google Scholar
forthcoming). “The status of professional business translators on the Danish market: A comparative study of company, agency and freelance translators”. To appear in Meta.
eds. 2009Translation Studies: Focus on the translator, thematic section of Hermes. Journal of Language and Communication Studies 42. 7–166.Google Scholar
Greimas, Algirdas-Julien
1966, translated version 1983. Structural Semantics. Lincoln and London: University of Nebraska Press. Translated from French byMcDowell, D; Ronald Schleifer and A. Velie.Google Scholar
Hermans, Johan and José Lambert
1998 “From Translation Markets to Language Management: The implications of translation services”. Target 10:1. 113–132.   Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Katan, David
2009a “Translation theory and professional practice: A global survey of the great divide”. Hermes 42. 111–153.Google Scholar
2009b “Occupation or profession: A survey of the translators’ world”. Translation and Interpreting Studies 4:2. 187–209.   Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Koskinen, Kaisa
2000 “Institutional Illusions. Translating in the EU Commission”. The Translator 6:1. 49–65.   Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
2009 “Going localised—getting recognised. The interplay of the institutional and the experienced status of translators in the European Commission”. Hermes 42. 93–110.Google Scholar
Lefevere, André
1995 “Translators and the reins of power”. Jean Delisle and Judith Woodsworth, eds. Translators through history. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 131–155.   Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Meylaerts, Reine
2010 “Habitus and self-image of native literary author-translators in diglossic societies”. Translation and Interpreting Studies 5:1. 1–19.   Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Monzó, Esther
2009 “Legal and translational occupations in Spain: Regulation and specialization in jurisdictional struggles”. Translation and Interpreting Studies 4:2. 135–154.   Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Risku, Hanna
2004 “Migrating from translation to technical communication and usability”. Gyde Hansen, Kirsten Malmkjær and Daniel Gile, eds. Claims, Changes and Challenges in Translation Studies. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 181–195.   Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Schäffner, Christina
ed. 2004Translation Research and Interpreting Research. Traditions, Gaps and Synergies. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Sela-Sheffy, Rakefet Miriam Shlesinger
2008 “Strategies of image-making and status advancement of translators and interpreters as a marginal occupational group. A research project in progress”. Anthony Pym, Miriam Shlesinger and Daniel simeoni, eds. Beyond descriptive Translation Studies. Investigations in homage to Gideon Toury. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 79–90.   Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
[ p. 210 ]
Sela-Sheffy, Rakefet and Miriam Shlesinger
eds. 2009Profession, identity and status: Translators and interpreters as an occupational group, special issue of Translation and Interpreting Studies 4:2.Google Scholar
Sela-Sheffy, Rakefet Miriam Shlesinger
eds. 2010Profession, identity and status: Translators and interpreters as an occupational group part II: Questions of role and identity, special issue of Translation and Interpreting Studies 5:1.Google Scholar
Simeoni, Daniel
1998 “The pivotal status of the translator’s habitus”. Target 10:1. 1–39.   Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Venuti, Lawrence
1995The Translator’s Invisibility. A history of translation. London and New York: Routledge.   Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Vilhjálmsdóttir, Gudbjörg and Torfi H. Tulinius
2009 “Tales of two subjects: Narratives of career counseling”. Journal of Vocational Behavior 75:3. 267–274.   Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Wang, Yong and Carl W. Roberts
2005 “Actantial analysis: Greimas’ structural approach to the analysis of self-narratives”. Narrative Inquiry 15:1. 51–74.   Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Weiss-Gal, Idit and Penelope Welbourne
2008The professionalisation of social work: a cross-national exploration. International Journal of Social Welfare 17. 281–290.   Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
White, Peter R.R.
2006 “Evaluative semantics and ideological positioning in journalistic discourse – a new framework for analysis”. Inger Lassen, ed. Mediating Ideology in Text and Image: Ten Critical Studies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 37–69.   Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
http://www.ugebreveta4.dk/200636/Baggrundoganalyse/Danskernesnyerangorden.aspx
accessed 23 June, 2010).
[ p. 211 ]