 Track this topic | Pages in topic: < [1 2] | | User | Thread poster: lizette britz Chartered Institute of Linguists or American Translators Association |
|---|
Tomás Cano Binder, CT 
Spain
Local time: 22:22
  Member (2005)
English to Spanish
+ ...
|
Tim Drayton wrote:
I acquired the IOL Diploma in Translation from Turkish into English some years ago, and subsequently became a member of the Institute. This is a language pair in which average rates are dismally low. Yet, I am able to command acceptable rates by Western European standards. I believe that this is thanks to having CIoL accreditation. |
|
So I assume this means that you are a CL (Chartered Linguist)? I wanted to ask you what that means in terms of official translations in the UK.
Are you entitled to do official translations in the UK (I mean translations for courts, legal matters, Government, etc.) if you are a CL? Is being a CL the equivalent to a "sworn translator" in other countries?
The IOL does not clarify this matter in their website.
| | | | Angela Dickson
United Kingdom
Local time: 21:22
Member
French to English
+ ...
|
Tomás Cano Binder, CT wrote:
Tim Drayton wrote:
I acquired the IOL Diploma in Translation from Turkish into English some years ago, and subsequently became a member of the Institute. This is a language pair in which average rates are dismally low. Yet, I am able to command acceptable rates by Western European standards. I believe that this is thanks to having CIoL accreditation. |
|
So I assume this means that you are a CL (Chartered Linguist)? I wanted to ask you what that means in terms of official translations in the UK.
Are you entitled to do official translations in the UK (I mean translations for courts, legal matters, Government, etc.) if you are a CL? Is being a CL the equivalent to a "sworn translator" in other countries?
The IOL does not clarify this matter in their website. |
|
From what Tim says I don't get the impression that he's a Chartered Linguist. Everyone who has the DipTrans and membership of the Institute can loosely be said to be CIoL accredited. I don't tend to say that myself (though I do have the DipTrans and am MCIL) as I find it causes confusion, precisely because there is still no equivalent here of the "sworn translator" in other countries.
There is a small but growing number of Chartered Linguists, and I think time will tell what kind of advantages this status will bring.
  | | | | Tim Drayton
Cyprus
Local time: 23:22
Turkish to English
+ ...
| | I am not a Chartered Linguist. | Oct 21 |
Angela Dickson wrote:
Tomás Cano Binder, CT wrote:
Tim Drayton wrote:
I acquired the IOL Diploma in Translation from Turkish into English some years ago, and subsequently became a member of the Institute. This is a language pair in which average rates are dismally low. Yet, I am able to command acceptable rates by Western European standards. I believe that this is thanks to having CIoL accreditation. |
|
So I assume this means that you are a CL (Chartered Linguist)? I wanted to ask you what that means in terms of official translations in the UK.
Are you entitled to do official translations in the UK (I mean translations for courts, legal matters, Government, etc.) if you are a CL? Is being a CL the equivalent to a "sworn translator" in other countries?
The IOL does not clarify this matter in their website. |
|
From what Tim says I don't get the impression that he's a Chartered Linguist. Everyone who has the DipTrans and membership of the Institute can loosely be said to be CIoL accredited. I don't tend to say that myself (though I do have the DipTrans and am MCIL) as I find it causes confusion, precisely because there is still no equivalent here of the "sworn translator" in other countries.
There is a small but growing number of Chartered Linguists, and I think time will tell what kind of advantages this status will bring. |
|
Correct, I am not.
| | | | Rudolf Vedo CT
United States
Local time: 15:22
Member (2008)
Croatian to English
+ ...
| | ATA certification is a valid evaluation criterion, among others | Oct 21 |
Stephen Franke wrote:
Greetings.
I reinforce and agree with Daniel's good comment about the dubious benefit of ATA certification in terms of a corollary return on investment (ROI) about your receiving more or better-paying translation jobs.
Conversely, may I suggest that you be wary of a translation firm which asks if you have ATA certification before the firm will consider you for engagement on a translation project, because there is NO correlation between a translator's proven ability and acquiring a "certification" via the translator's passing a "stand alone" series of examinations administered by the ATA. Such a request suggests an unsubstantiated "mental comfort zone" in the person representing the requesting agency, but overlooks that fact that such "certification" has **no** predictability or guarantee of the translator's competence. While passing the ATA test means that a translator is thereby certified to meet the ATA's criteria and purposes, that "certification" would not, and does not, intrinsically convey a significance or relevance to establish that the certified translator correspondingly meets the purposes of the global language services industry.
Rather than bedevil the ATA aspect of certification, you might well find that certification by a local chamber of commerce, judicial court system, administrative/immigration court, or state-level authority would be more beneficial to you as you grow your business practice and presence in the language services industry.
Hope this helps.
Regards,
Stephen H. Franke
San Pedro, California
[Edited at 2009-10-19 18:20 GMT] |
|
So... I would be curious to hear how the anti-certification voices would support their contention that passing the ATA exam is "no evidence of competence whatsoever". The implication (to borrow some concepts from set theory and formal logic) of that assertion would be that there are at least some ATA-certified translators who are not competent (in their certification pair). Considering that the ATA exam is taken under conditions that are far stricter than most of our normal working conditions, e.g., limited time, limited selection of topics, no on-line resources, until recently handwriting only, this is unlikely. On the contrary, it stands to reason that the average translator who could pass the exam would actually do even better without the imposed limitations. Then again, so would someone who couldn't pass the exam, but the one who can pass the exam has a higher starting point, so to speak.
Perhaps the naysayers are really trying to say that not all competent translators, or even extremely competent ones, are ATA-certified. While this is arguably true, it's not the same thing as saying that certification proves nothing. It's just one more objective criterion that a potential client can use to evaluate a translator, in the context of other qualifications such as education and experience, but hardly worthless.
@Lizette: FYI ATA exam sessions are always offered at the annual conference as well, so that might also be a good opportunity for you.
[Edited at 2009-10-21 15:58 GMT]
| | | | lizette britz
Spain
Local time: 22:22
Member (2008)
English to Spanish
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | | Thank you Rudolf =) | Oct 21 |
I am a little late for this year's annual conferenca, but will keep an eye on it.
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2] | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator | Chartered Institute of Linguists or American Translators Association |
