Yes, professional interpreters speak in the first person. This is a fundamental standard in the interpreting profession to ensure accurate, direct, and effective communication between parties.
The Standard Practice: First-Person Interpretation
When an interpreter facilitates communication, they serve as the voice of the speaker. This means they convey the message exactly as if the original speaker were saying it themselves, using "I" and "we" pronouns. For instance, if a client states, "I had a surgery in December," the interpreter will render the message using "I," maintaining the original speaker's perspective. The interpreter acts as a transparent conduit, allowing direct interaction without linguistic barriers.
This method is crucial for several reasons:
- Clarity and Immediacy: It removes ambiguity and creates a sense of direct dialogue, making the conversation feel natural and immediate for all participants.
- Accuracy: It ensures the nuance and intent of the original message are preserved without the interpreter interjecting their own presence or perspective.
- Trust and Connection: By speaking in the first person, the interpreter helps foster a direct connection between the communicating parties, building trust and rapport. The listener perceives the message as coming directly from the original speaker, not from a third party reporting on what was said.
Why Not Third Person?
Interpreting in the third person (e.g., "He said that he had a surgery...") is generally avoided in professional settings. This approach can introduce several problems:
- Distance and Disconnection: It creates a barrier between the parties, making the conversation sound like a report about someone rather than a direct exchange.
- Confusion: Listeners might become confused about who is speaking or the exact source of the information.
- Reduced Trust: The indirect nature can undermine the sense of immediate communication, potentially eroding trust and engagement.
- Professionalism: It deviates from the established professional standard of direct interpretation.
The table below illustrates the key differences between these two approaches:
| Feature / Aspect | First-Person Interpretation (Preferred) | Third-Person Interpretation (Avoided) |
|---|---|---|
| Example Phrase | "I had a surgery in December." (Interpreter speaks as the client) | "He said that he had a surgery in December." (Interpreter speaks about the client) |
| Communication Flow | Direct, immediate, and clear dialogue | Indirect, creates distance and reports on what was said |
| Perception of Interpreter | A transparent voice, the speaker's linguistic conduit | A narrator or reporter, potentially interjecting themselves |
| Impact on Interaction | Fosters direct connection, builds trust, enhances understanding | Can lead to confusion, reduce engagement, and break rapport |
| Professional Standard | Yes, the universally accepted standard for professional interpreting | No, generally considered unprofessional and less effective |
Ensuring Accuracy and Professionalism
The role of a professional interpreter is to facilitate communication flawlessly without becoming part of the message. By consistently using the first person, interpreters ensure that they remain impartial and invisible, allowing the original speakers' voices and intentions to come through directly. This adherence to the first-person standard is a cornerstone of effective and ethical interpreting practice, crucial for legal, medical, business, and other critical interactions.
