Professional Multilinguals:

Some exploratory considerations on language

and the identities of translators and interpreters
FLORIANA BADALOTTI
MONASH UNIVERSITY

The role played by language(s) in the formation and performance

of identities is well known and researched, but the affective aspects
of multilingualism (emotions, identity, attitudes, etc.) have received
marginal attention in the fields of sociolinguistics, literary studies,
and psychology. With multilingualism becoming a prominent feature
in communicative situations of all kinds, the professional figures of
translators and interpreters have become more and more conspicuous.
The nature of the profession means that language and multilingual
competence is one of its defining dimensions, leading translators
and interpreters to be located at the point of contact of two or more
cultures. Nevertheless, whereas translation is seen by laypeople as a
routine activity performed by multilingual users, professionals experiences and points of view as multilinguals are rarely considered. This
paper seeks to address, at least partially, this gap in research. Professionals written responses to an email interview regarding their relationship with language and their profession are analysed in view of
findings in neurolinguistics, social psychology and Translation Studies,
with the aim to offer some considerations on the applicability of traditional theories of language and identity to professional multilinguals.
Key Words: multilingualism, identity, translators, interpreters,
professional multilinguals

1. Introduction
Since the 1980s, multilingualism and related phenomena have gained a great deal of attention. With the
relative decline of some nation-states and the increasing flow of people, technology, media, and information
occurring between and across countries, multilingualism and multiculturalism have become an important
feature of communicative situations of all kinds. Consequently, translators and interpreters (hereafter: T/I)
have become more and more prominent. Publications and workshops on how to best work with T/I have been
released for various service providers, such as tribunals, hospitals, and government agencies (e.g. Queensland
Department of Premier and Cabinet 2004; SWAHS Health Care Interpreting Service 1998/2006; Victoria
Regional Information & Advocacy Council 1999; Tebble 1998).
A brief review of the past and current research in the field of multilingualism reveals an increasing number of
studies about the neuropsychological aspects of the multilingual brain and multilinguals language practices,
as well as issues of multilingual education and multiple languages in the classroom. Research about affective
issues (feelings, emotions, identity, attitudes) has also started to appear (e.g. Blackledge & Pavlenko 2004;
Pavlenko 2006), and it is relatively easy to find biographies, autobiographies and essays exploring lives in two
languages from a more narrative, literary point of view (e.g. Besemeres & Wierzbicka 2007; Kellman 2000;
Zournazi 1998). In this range of publications interpreters and translators are, more often than not, absent;
the sociological profiling of multilinguals does not seem to include them. Translation has been described as
an activity [which] is always doubly contextualized, since the text has a place in two cultures (Bassnett &
Lefevere 1990:11). If both the text and the translational activity are acknowledged to have multiple locations,
then by the same token the translator/interpreter - the archetype of a multilingual and multicultural individual

Copyright Monash University Linguistics Papers. ISSN 1327-9130. Volume Seven, Number One, May 2010, pp. 112.

Professional multilinguals

- could also be considered as doubly or multiply positioned. This raises the question of the consequences that
these multiple positions might have for the personal identifications of language professionals.
In an attempt to answer Pym's appeal for a sociology of ... mediators (2006:2), this paper seeks to address
some of the unexplored social, cultural and psychological aspects of translators and interpreters as multilingual
and multicultural professionals. The central thesis of this article is that many of the traditional views about
multilingualism and identity fail to accurately capture the unique reality of multilingual professionals, for
whom languages are the livelihood. The peculiarities of T/I as multilingual professionals will be argued for
through a review of current research about multilingualism, as well as through professionals own responses to
an email interview.

2. Current perspectives on multilingualism, translation and identity

2.1 Some characteristics of the multilingual brain
In his latest work, Grosjean (2008) sums up the main findings about multilinguals from more than two decades
of research. The 1990s were deemed the decade of the brain (Tokuhama-Espinosa 2007) due to the number
of studies that concerned themselves with cognitive processes and neurobiological functions such as language
learning and use, as well as the innovations in technology and research methods that allowed for non-invasive,
real time exploration of such processes.
Research in the field of multilingualism and multilingual individuals has recently undergone a change in
approaches and paradigms, rebelling against what Grosjean (2008) terms monolingual bias: a point of view
which does not acknowledge multilingualism as a phenomenon in its own right and that conceptualises it as
a marked category from the monolingual norm, thus applying monolingual standards and methods to explore
and categorise its various manifestations. This perspective has informed and pervaded research in language
learning, production and use from the very beginning (Auer & Li 2006), leading to unrealistic constructs such
as perfect bilingualism, semi-lingualism, balanced biculturalism/bilingualism, and so on. In fact, more recent
studies are moving away from this traditional perspective that saw multilinguals as monolinguals with doubled
functionality. Nowadays, due also to the development of in vivo brain imaging techniques such as fMRI (functional magnetic resonance imaging, which uses the levels of blood flow and blood oxygenation to individuate
active areas of the brain), there is consensus among researchers that linguistic configurations in the human
brain (such as hemispheric lateralization) are actually unique and patterns of area activation are specific to individuals: [j]ust as there are no identical faces, there are no identical brains (Tokuhama-Espinosa 2007:117).
Whilst a generic dominance of the left frontal and parietal lobes for linguistic behaviour has generally been
presumed, evidence is controversial for bilinguals, suggesting that they may have a different cerebral organisation. Specifically, the most common claim is that late bilinguals show the activation of different regions
of Brocas area when using their two languages, whereas early bilinguals activate the same regions for both
languages; and that bilinguals show a higher involvement of the right hemisphere for language processing than
monolinguals (e.g. Kim, Relkin, Lee & Hirsch 1997; Wuillemin, Richardson & Lynch 1994; Vaid & Lambert
1979).
However, the data used to substantiate these claims is the subject of discussion, mainly due to the differences
in methodology and the variety of factors that are acknowledged to have an impact on language acquisition
and use (e.g. age, gender, genetics, length of exposure, language varieties, etc; cf. Paradis 2003 for a critique of
these studies). Despite the lack of conclusive results regarding the pattern of precise brain circuits, TokuhamaEspinosa argues that recent studies point toward multilinguals as utilising greater areas of the brain compared
to monolinguals (shown by an enlargement of the corpus callosum; Tokuhama-Espinosa 2007:138; Riehl 2009).

MONASH UNIVERSITY LINGUISTICS PAPERS 2010

Professional multilinguals

The involvement and activation of different areas of the brain in language processing and use can be justified
by the variety of life experiences and situations touched on when acquiring language (for instance the processing of emotions in the amygdalae), therefore explaining the activation of multiple areas when language is
recalled, spoken, and/or read.
Grosjean (2008) also points out the specificity of language use and acquisition, arguing how the monolingual
bias has not allowed the full extent of multilingual behaviour to be investigated. The use of monolingual
standards has led to the study of different levels of fluency in different languages as an anomaly, on the basis
of which the bilingual or multilingual label was often rejected in favour of others such as alingual or semilingual. In fact, as previously mentioned, the notion that a person could be exactly as fluent in one language as
in the other is unrealistic; different levels of fluency in different languages are the norm rather than the exception. Grosjean explains this point with what he terms complementarity principle (2008:23; cf. also Grosjean
1982): a persons languages complement each other in the domains of knowledge that they cover, meaning
that each language is usually attached to a specific life domain (e.g. work, socialising, education, family, relationships) depending on how, when and why a language was learned. This builds on the widely held notion
that languages have different functions and serve different purposes in the life of a multilingual individual. For
example, it is common for somebody to know everything related to their job in a particular language, but to
use a different one when talking to friends and family or expressing feelings and emotions.
2.2 Multilinguals are not necessarily natural translators
On the basis of the complementarity principle, Grosjean argues that
regular bilinguals are often not very good translators and interpreters ... Unless they have
acquired their second language in a manner which involves learning translation equivalents ... many bilinguals will find themselves lacking vocabulary in certain domains covered
by the other language (2008:24)
Trilingual Michael Clyne echoes this consideration in reference to his daughter, raised bilingually through
the one parent-one language strategy. Because she grew up speaking German and English at the same time
(unlike Clyne), she had more chances for practising translation and he considers her to be a more competent
translator than he is (Clyne 2007:23-24).
It is a consequence of the monolingual bias that translation and interpreting are more often than not considered as a natural activity to speakers of two or more languages. Moreover, especially until the 1970s, translation played a chief role in the foreign language-learning classroom, with translating exercises widely employed
in order to consolidate grammatical structures encountered in class (the grammar-translation method; Munday 2001:7; Malmkjaer 1998). Nowadays this method has decreased in popularity in comparison to others, for
example CLT (Communicative Language Teaching, where the target language is used in real life, functional
communication in class). Despite the wavering support of language education specialists, translating is still
considered an important part of acquiring a second language by teachers as well as by students (cf. Liao 2006).
As such, it is easy to confuse classroom translation with translation carried out at a professional level.
Often being able to translate between languages is seen as a natural consequence of possessing a double/triple/multiple vocabulary, and confused with the readiness of these vocabulary sets in the mind of the speaker.
For example, I may know the meaning of the word bread in Italian; but that meaning refers to the word alone
and is contextless, taken out of any actual communication. On the other hand, the translation of the word
bread is never just of the word alone, but it is of the message that word is part of in a specific situation or
communicative context; one could call it a localised meaning. In other words, being able to translate means

VOLUME SEVEN, NUMBER ONE

Professional multilinguals

being able to localise1 the meaning of a word in another language to fulfil a lexical role and a communicative
purpose in that particular situation. The skills to do that belong to the professional. A more useful description
of the translation-like strategy adopted by language learners (and, to the same extent, multilingual speakers)
is [to] refer back to their native language(s) judiciously [] and make effective cross-lingual comparisons
(Naiman et al. 1978:14) or using the first language as a base for understanding and/or producing the second
language (Chamot 1987:77). Such definitions are more realistic than the use of the term translation in that
they point out the centrality of metalinguistic awareness (i.e. reflection, comparison and analysis) in language
acquisition and use, without giving the false impression that language learners and multilingual speakers are
automatically translators.
Grosjeans (2008) and Clynes (2007) comments, in a way, reiterate the monolingual bias in that they equate
owning several vocabulary sets (or translation equivalents) with translation skills. Their comments seem to
overlook the fact that translating and interpreting are learned skills that must be acquired through study and
practice and are not solely related to vocabulary readiness in the speakers mind. As a consequence of this
point of view it is still difficult to educate the public about the importance of using skilled, trained professionals for their language needs rather than using bilingual friends or relatives.
2.3 The myth of the mother tongue
According to lay or popular opinions, the assumption of the link between one's language(s) and one's identity
remains fundamentally unchallenged. The link between language and identity is a commonplace of Western
culture and has been since the age of Romanticism, when nationality, mother tongue and identity (also called
the nation/homeland/language model; Dei 2005) were assumed to be one and the same. The mother tongue,
as learned in one's country and from one's family, was pinpointed as a major unifying factor, which allowed
literature and press to circulate and contribute to the spread of ideologies.
The mother tongue has been acknowledged as playing an important role in the formation of identities by sociologists and developmental psychologists through socialization (Bruner 1966). Socialization is defined as the
process by which the individual becomes a functioning member of society, through the internalisation (learning and owning) of the laws, rules, customs, habits, and beliefs of that society. Primary socialization happens in
childhood and language plays necessarily a central role in it: it is part of the common knowledge to be learnt
but it is also the means by which this knowledge is handed down and perpetuated through oral and written
communication. However, since people and life circumstances are not static, but subject to change, socialization can also continue later in life (resocialization). A typical example is the experience of migrants learning to
comply with new social norms and social expectations that can be very different from their native country. In
this case a language acquired later in life is as important to the individuals self as their first language, because
it becomes part of their life through the same lengthy, emotional process of learning and internalising.
Psychoanalytic theory, which considered the self essentially finished within the first three years of life, has
certainly contributed to reinforcing the idea of the first language as central to the individuals personality.
Changes happening later in life are thus ignored and the myth of the mother tongue remains, with the native
language still considered (perhaps unconsciously) as playing a major role in the formation of the Self. Novelist Eva Sallis, in her significantly titled Foster Mother Tongue, speaks of language as the material to remake
myself, leading her to exclaim: How tied a self can be to its language! (Sallis 2007:153). Or, as Kellman puts
it in his reflection on translingual writers, There seems something not only painful but unnatural, almost
matricidal, about an author who abandons the Muttersprache (2000:3). If assuming that everything related to
childhood first memories, first attachments, first experiences is paramount in the formation of the Self, the
native language acquires a fundamental role as the main fabric which makes up these memories and relationships.
1

In T&I however, localise and localisation are terms used almost exclusively in reference to website and software translation.

MONASH UNIVERSITY LINGUISTICS PAPERS 2010

Professional multilinguals

This point of view has led to considering multilinguals as essentially torn individuals, for whom identity options were several and unclear. For these reasons, multilingualism has long been considered suspiciously in
Western countries, leading to the popular view of it as linguistic schizophrenia (cf. Pavlenko 2006). It seems
that, as argued by Auer and Li (2007), the monolingual bias pervades linguistic research to this day, often
constructing multilingualism as a problematic situation and deviation from the norm. As a consequence, the
idea of the bilingual/bicultural individual as having contrasting, somewhat troubled identity processes still remains. Grosjean for example argues that however rare it is for bilingual, bicultural people to identify with both
cultures, this should be the ultimate goal, as the other options (identifying only with one or the other culture
or rejecting both) are seen as undesirable and leading to feelings of dissatisfaction, uprootedness, marginality
and ambivalence (2008:219-220). Bishop and Hicks (2005:194) point out how this kind of monolingual bias
derives from the history of linguistic theory as it originated in Western countries, where multilingualism was
dismissed and fought in order to maintain the stability and unity of the nation. Despite the current efforts to
promote multilingualism, the bias is still difficult to counteract, especially in English-speaking countries. The
status of English worldwide is ever rising, making it one of the most sought-after commodities in the global
marketplace (Heller 2003).
For translators and interpreters this perspective has meant, in history, a general perception of distrust from the
public; figurations of the T/I as having a double head, or accusations of forked tongue, double allegiance, and
treason have been a recurring theme in the history of the T/I profession (cf. Kaufmann 2006). Moreover, during the 20th century, translation has become a widely used metaphor in various fields of cultural studies and
so has the figure of the translator, especially in relation to identity and belonging. The image of the translator
becomes a synonym of fragmented identity, marginalization and displacement (Strmper-Krobb 2007:253).
This perspective seems to be echoed in the literature: from reviews of fictional figures of translators and
interpreters (cf. Strmper-Krobb 2007), to self-translating bilingual (translingual) writers (Besemeres 2002;
Kellman 2000), and of course multilingual laypeoples accounts (cf. Burck 2004). Among the recurring themes
are the constant moving between languages, the interplay of the two in daily life (also described as the voice
within a voice; Federman 1996), a sense of conflict, the idea of disguising oneself, and doubleness as trope
(Burck 2004).
2.4 Bilingualism does not necessarily mean biculturalism
As argued by Grosjean (2008), bilingualism does not always overlap with biculturalism. The constructs of
dominance and balance are used to describe the various cultural identification modes of biculturals. Grosjean
suggests that participation in the life of both cultures, adaptation (to some extent) of attitudes and behaviours
depending on the context, and blending aspects of both cultures are the main features of biculturalism. From
this description, language is a necessary, but not sufficient, condition for biculturalism. Language and culture
are often conceived as overlapping fields. As shown by researchers in second language acquisition, immersion
in the second language cultural environment is instrumental towards the acquisition of the language (e.g.
Spolsky 1989; Norton Peirce 1995). However, the circumstance of physically sharing the L2 cultural environment does not mean that speakers will internalise L2 values, attitudes and practices in their private life,
especially if L2 is acquired for work/study reasons rather than for lifestyle reasons (Hoffmann 1989).
On the other hand, biculturalism in the sense discussed above is a defining feature of the T&I professional,
whose job entails the transfer of meaning between largely incommensurable codes. As argued by Gouadec,
(2007:5-6), the products or concepts being transferred across cultures must be acceptable or made acceptable within the context of the target culture [] Transfer is therefore cultural in nature first. To ensure that
this goal is reached, the T/I must necessarily have a full and complete understanding of the item to be transferred, and an insider-level knowledge and understanding of the target culture. For these reasons it can be argued that T&I professionals are not only multilingual, but also necessarily multicultural in the sense described.

VOLUME SEVEN, NUMBER ONE

Professional multilinguals

3. The study
The aim of this paper is to explore the relationship between being multilingual/multicultural and cultural
identity from the point of view of translators and interpreters, in their capacity as professional multilinguals.
The participants in this study2 are ten professional (NAATI-accredited) translators and interpreters currently
working in Australia. They were contacted by means of an invitation email sent to the AUSIT (T/I professional association) E-Bulletin, a listserv of which the researcher is a member. They are from both English-speaking
and non-English speaking backgrounds. They have been working in Australia for at least two years and speak
between three and four languages, although they usually dont regularly employ more than two working languages. In the quotes below, participants are indicated by their gender (F/M), whether they are translators (T),
interpreters (I) or both (T/I) and their known languages as they have indicated them (e.g. English/French/
Italian). My interventions are in square brackets.
The data collected revolves around T/Is own description of their cultural identifications, their relationship
with the languages they speak, their multilingualism and their professional role. It is my view that identity
processes are inextricable from the individual participating in them; thus, my interest lies in the informants'
own views about language, identity and culture, as they choose to present them. In accordance with this view,
this study used a semi-structured, open-ended
interview. These are considered the most suitable approach to access an individuals attitudes, perceptions
and thoughts as the way questions are formulated allows for individual and unique answers instead of predetermined ones such as questionnaires and surveys (Silverman 2006). Because of geographical distance and
the fact that most participants are freelancers (working very different hours), face-to-face interviews were
impracticable; using email interviews (rather than face-to-face interviews) provided participants with open
questions designed to stimulate reflection, which they could think about and elaborate in their own time.
3.1 Terminology
Identity, as explored in this study, refers first and foremost to what Giddens (1991:53) describes as the self
as reflexively understood by the person in terms of her or his biography. The position of this study is that,
coherently with post-structuralist, anti-essentialist philosophical stances (Hall 1996), identity as a universal,
discernible core of the self does not exist. It is seen rather as a process in which the individual participates as
agent and object at the same time; that is, a process where the knower (individual) is also the known object.
As a process, therefore, identity is always in the making and it is inherently unfixed. The only true description of it is the account that, at any given time, the agent/actor can give. Reflexivity, people's ability to think
about themselves and to have a concept of themselves, is one of the key features of identity (sentimento di
identit; Palmonari 1995). It is this capacity for self-knowledge that ensures the continuity of the self across
time and space.
Secondly, culture is understood as playing an essential role in this process of making and understanding the
self. Social psychologists have explored the construct of culture as a tool that people have at their disposal to
make sense of their environment. Culture offers people resources to understand and experience the world in
several ways (Mantovani 2004): It mediates the cognitive activity of the person, through language (as interaction, conversation, discourse, narration), social categorisation, and metaphor; it constructs maps of reality,
i.e. defines the boundaries within which experiences make sense; and it supplies moral models to make decisions. Culture is, in other words, a discursive device (Hall 1996:297), which creates representations and is a
representation at the same time. It is an axiom of Cultural Studies that culture Vworks like a language (Barker & Galasi!ski 2001:2) and as such it links signifiers (symbols) with signifieds (meanings) in peculiar, unique
ways. This process is actualised and allowed by language, the cultural practice par excellence.
2

Monash University SCERH approval number 2008000994.

MONASH UNIVERSITY LINGUISTICS PAPERS 2010

Professional multilinguals

Culture is compounded by all of these aspects: language, customs, traditions, moral rules. These ways of acting
in, and understanding the world are specific to a culture as belonging to a social group. Group membership
is a central feature of identity and the means by which culture is shared. The Social Identity Theory (SIT) as
formulated by Henri Tajfel (1981) views social identity as
the part of an individuals self-concept deriving from his knowledge of his membership of
a social group(s) together with the emotional significance attached to that membership
(Tajfel 1981:255)
Both reflexivity and group membership are acknowledged to be important aspects of ones self image. Paraphrasing Giddens and Tajfel and combining these two aspects, cultural identity in this study is intended as
a part of peoples self-concept deriving from their reflexive understanding of their membership of a cultural
group(s).

4. Findings
4.1 Translators and interpreters: Fragmented identities?
From a preliminary exploration of T/Is own ideas about their identifications and roles, a rebellion against the
stereotype of the misfit emerges. What T/I try to depict is a comfortable, inclusive relationship with languages,
and a complex identity that is not so much rooted in a particular language but in a constellation of them as
they have become a part of ones life through schooling, living abroad, relationships and work. Professionals are quick to affirm the necessity to treat languages as instruments for work, but at the same time they
acknowledge how these languages put them in a sort of privileged position, increasing their feelings of cosmopolitanism as well as expertness and competence. It is multilingualism itself, rather than being a speaker of X
that assumes the role of a central node in T/Is identifications, around which other dimensions are organised:
I have been exposed to multilingualism and multiculturalism most of my life. I feel it
defines my work and myself as an individual, it makes life interesting and exciting (F, T,
Portuguese-English,/Italian/Spanish)
Since I've moved here, I feel that being multilingual has become a stronger part of my
identity than being Irish, or even English-speaking. It allows me to feel European and
part of a wider world of ideas, politics, culture, etc. than I feel I would have access to as a
monolingual (F, T, English/French/German)
This kind of result is in line with socio-psychological theories of identity. As Hamers and Blanc argue (2000),
the link between language and identity cannot always be articulated in the same way for every individual.
Drawing from Tajfels Social Identity Theory (1981), which sees individuals seeking to maintain self-esteem
through association with social groups with desirable characteristics, they point out that language constitutes only one of the many dimensions of ones identity, which is continually constructed and re-constructed
around significant events and contexts in ones life. Identities are acknowledged to be plastic and performative, i.e. changeable and realised through actions; individuals are actively involved in re-elaborating them to
adapt to the changes on their life (Weedon 1987; Norton Peirce 1995). Therefore, the salience of a language
in defining ones identity is not defined once and for all, and depends on the context in which identity is
expressed (Hamers & Blanc 2000:203). Individuals are more likely to indicate language as one of the fundamental dimensions of their identity when they are in a situation of contact, and possibly conflict, with speakers of other languages. For example, one of the participants in the study mentioned how she feels much more

VOLUME SEVEN, NUMBER ONE

Professional multilinguals

European now that she is in Australia, and how this feeling justifies in a way the cultural differences that she
continues to experience here (despite coming from an English-speaking country). She admitted that when she
was living in Europe she didnt give much thought to what it meant to be European - whereas now it sets her
apart from other Australians.
The themes of doubleness and unease for people between cultures may be a legacy of the Western, monolingual and essentialist point of view that sees the relationship between language and identity as immutable and
static. The more recent research findings show, on the contrary, that such relationship is subject to a number
of individual factors and cannot be pinned down to a one-size-fits-all kind of model (Blackledge & Pavlenko
2004). What emerges from T/Is accounts is, on the other hand, the ease with which they see themselves
placed within more than one culture. Perhaps the result of education and professionalisation of the field, T/I
seem well aware of their privileged position within society (not so much in terms of financial standing, but in
terms of social and cultural status). They acknowledge the coexistence of different languages, cultures and
attitudes within themselves and their life stories (often dating back to their families), and they see this coexistence as fundamentally harmonious:
It did seem to me [] that the distinction between the mother tongue, and any subsequently acquired language may have been overstated (M, T, Croatian/English)
I don't identify particularly strongly with any other culture, least of all my native one, and
I've definitely adapted and blended my attitudes and behaviours based on my participation
of life in different cultures (F, T, English/French/German)
However, where T/I consider themselves well adapted and see their multilingualism and multiculturalism positively, negative perceptions are often experienced from monolingual speakers, often paired with the awareness
of the predominantly monolingual Australian culture:
I dont feel that bilingual/bicultural people fit very well within mainstream monolingual
culture in [Australia]. The experience is really very different and monolinguals just dont
even know or assimilatethat there is another cultural experience that could be valid apart
from theirs. One almost has to go about pretending this other part of you doesnt exist
because you cant talk about it or show it that can be very uncomfortable (F, T, English/
Spanish)
In line with the current approach aimed at promoting multilingualism and multiculturalism (seen as assets
rather than burdens) (Clyne 2008; Tokuhama-Espinosa 2007), a deeper understanding and acceptance of
multilinguals unique attitudes, behaviours, and experiences need to be also fostered and promoted in schools,
government services, and in the workplace, to better cater for multilinguals needs and to benefit from their
capabilities.
4.2 Professional identity of T/Is
The glaring absence of T/I informants in multilingualism research reveals that we are still far from acknowledging translation and interpreting as learnt skills, and not just as something that comes naturally to speakers
of more than one language. This is a notion that T/I in Australia are very aware of:
Australian society seems to think that if you were born overseas, T/I work comes naturally
and therefore doesnt deserve the acknowledgement/compensation that other professions
(or even trades) command (F, T, English/Italian)
Mostly [] were seen as 1. tradespeople, 2. immigrant workers to be paid low wages, 3. doing
a job any moderately bilingual person could do with no training (F, T, English/Spanish)

MONASH UNIVERSITY LINGUISTICS PAPERS 2010

Professional multilinguals

Some considerations might be made in this respect. Since almost all multilinguals have had some personal experience in interpreting or translating for others and that most language courses to some degree use translation
exercises in the curriculum, perhaps translation is seen by linguists as a mechanical activity of less interest than
the cognitive, behavioural or socio-cultural characteristics of multilingual people. Is it because within research
on multilingualism, T/I is seen as a facilitative resource rather than a tangible asset, as a peripheral rather than
central activity? If this is the case, further research into the specificities of translators and interpreters (social,
cultural, cognitive and affective) will only help foster education and knowledge of the general public regarding the translating and interpreting profession. Secondly, the prevalence of the monolingual bias has also led
to a mono-modal bias, where Sign Language and Sign Language interpreting have only recently started to be
given the due consideration. Particularly, as Turner (2006) notices, the presence of Deaf interpreters has been
constantly ignored by the wider, hearing community, arguing that this is a result of a mono-modal bias, which
wouldn't acknowledge Deaf Interpreting as a salient interpreting event; yet the emergence of such instances of
interpreting represents a chance for the profession to reconsider issues of power and definition.
On the same note, Translation and Interpreting has been awarded a professional status relatively recently.
Specialist courses at tertiary level have started to emerge all over the world in the last forty years, and many
countries have introduced a national accreditation system as well as professional associations. As the field is
still defining itself as a profession, professional belonging (rather than cultural belonging) may be a more salient aspect of T/Is identity. In this sense, the intercultural space, or intercultures in Pyms (1998, 2002) words,
may come to signify and represent the space where T/I belong a space that goes beyond one or the other culture, one which includes and blends aspects of both. In this elected space, the translator/interpreter has a different status altogether: he/she is limited by ethical considerations, professional duties and requirements that
are specific to the profession and thus separate from notions of 'nationality', 'citizenship' and mother tongue. In
other words, in this time of definition and consolidation, professional identification may be more
salient than ethnicity- or country-based identifications:
[being a T/I is] very important - defines my relationship with the deaf community; means
[I] can help bridge the gap between two communities who frequently misunderstand each
other (F, I, English/Auslan)
[being a T/I means] A lot. I would have to redefine myself, if I could not work as a translator any more(F, T, English/German)
Also, it is much more common today for people to change careers several times in the course of their life, and
therefore it cannot be assumed that professional loyalty would stay the same throughout ones life, defining a
person forever:
The realities of the job market have a much stronger influence on the identities of translators and interpreters than it gets credit forI think the changing nature of the workforce
[] combined with generational changes, all make 'being a translator' a very different
proposition to what it was say, 20 or even 15 years ago. People generally don't identify as
strongly with one particular job title as they used to (F, T, English/French/German)

5. Conclusion
In this paper, I have discussed the marginal role that translators and interpreters have in the landscape of
current research on multilingualism, particularly insofar as (cultural) identity and attitudes towards language
are concerned. As multilinguals by definition, and subject to specific professional conditions and constraints,
translators and interpreters represent a category deserving of attention and interest. I have argued that be-

VOLUME SEVEN, NUMBER ONE

Professional multilinguals

ing multilingual and/or multicultural does not equate with being a translator; that being multilingual (and
the language behaviour that comes with it) is an identity option on its own, without the individual having to
constantly choose between his or her linguistic identities; that, moreover, being multilingual is a complex
situation, yet it can be experienced and accepted serenely, without necessarily bring about internal conflicts or
divisions; and finally, that T/I have a unique professional and cultural status which puts them not only at the
intersection of, but above cultures. T/I need to be the first to trust such status in order to move beyond issues
of textual faithfulness. I have shown how the link between language, culture and identity is far from simple
and straightforward; nowadays the exceptions people moving across countries, people speaking more languages, people comfortably adapting to different environments have become the rule. Adaptability becomes
a key skill in todays job market; therefore, even speaking of loyalties for T/I and intending them as something
fixed, which the individual cannot change or act on, is revealed to be an inadequate view.
In order for language professionals to benefit from research conducted in the field of multilingualism, the overall approach needs to be informed by a more flexible, phenomenological perspective to account for the variety
of multilinguals' experiences. For these reasons we speak of cultural identities, to account for several available
options at different stages in life. On the other hand, because of their cultural position, T/Is various cultural
identities seem to merge together in an intercultural identity, where it is the constellation of languages they
have lived with, rather than a specific one or a nationality to determine their sense of belonging to a
cosmopolitan, adaptable group of multilingual experts.
Ultimately, a deeper insight into T/Is language attitudes and subsequent identification processes may assist in
further informing practice, as well as encouraging reflexivity. Reflexivity, as argued by Tymoczko (2007) is
central to empowering translators, making them more aware of who they are as individuals and as professionals. In terms of practice, the awareness of belonging to a specific intercultural space may lead T/I to better
trust their status and competence, moving the focus away from issues of 'faithfulness' to one language or the
other, and ultimately making T/I more visible (Venuti 1995).

References
Auer, P. & W. Li (eds) 2007. Handbook of multilingualism and multilingual communication. Berlin, New York:
Mouton de Gruyter.
Barker, C., & D. Galasinski 2001. Cultural studies and discourse analysis: A dialogue on language and identity.
London, Thousand Oaks (CA) & New Delhi: SAGE Publications.
Bassnett, S. & A. Lefevere (eds) 1990. Translation, history and culture. London, New York: Pinter.
Besemeres, M. 2002. Translating ones self: Language and selfhood in cross-cultural autobiography. Oxford, New
York: Peter Lang.
Besemeres, M. & A. Wierzbicka (eds) 2007. Translating lives: Living with two languages and cultures. St. Lucia,
QLD: University of Queensland Press.
Bishop, M. & S. Hicks 2005. Orange-eyes: Bimodal bilingualism in hearing adults from deaf parents.Sign Language Studies 5(2):188-230.
Blackledge, A. & A. Pavlenko (eds) 2004. Negotiation of identities in multilingual contexts. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Bruner, J. 1966. Studies in cognitive growth. New York: Wiley.
Burck, C. 2004. Multilingual living: explorations of language and subjectivity. Basingstoke, New York: PalgraveMacmillan.
Chamot, A.U. 1987. The learning strategies of ESL Students. In A. L. Wenden & J. Rubin (eds), Learner strategies in language learning. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. 71-83.
Clyne, M. 2007. From bilingual to linguist. In M. Besemeres & A. Wierzbicka (eds), Translating lives: living with
two languages and cultures. St. Lucia, QLD: University of Queensland Press. 12-25.

10

MONASH UNIVERSITY LINGUISTICS PAPERS 2010

Professional multilinguals

Clyne, M. 2008. Diverse language skills will open the world to Australians. The Age, 02/01/2008.
Dei, F. 2005. Language, culture, identity. In A. K. Isaacs (ed). Language and identitities in historical perspective.
Pisa, Italy: PLUS Edizioni. 1-12.
Federman, R. 1996. A voice within a voice: Federman translating/translating Federman. Available from: http://
www.federman.com/rfsrcr2.htm. Accessed on 01/02/2010.
Giddens, A. 1991. Modernity and self-identity. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Gouadec, D. 2007. Translation as a profession. Amsterdam, Philadelphia, John Benjamins.
Grosjean, F. 1982. Life with two languages: an introduction to bilingualism. Cambridge, Harvard University Press.
Grosjean, F. 2008. Studying bilinguals. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hall, S. (1996). The question of cultural identity. In S. Hall & P. Du Gay (eds). Modernity and its futures. London, Thousand Oaks, Sage. 274-316.
Hamers, J. & Blanc, M. 2000. Bilinguality and bilingualism. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press.
Heller, M. 2003. Globalization, the new economy, and the commodification of language and identity. Journal of
Sociolinguistics, 7(4):473-492.
Hoffmann, D. 1989. Language and culture acquisition among Iranians in the United States. Anthropology and
Education Quarterly 20:118-132.
Kaufman, F. 2006. L'interprte serviteur de plusieurs matres? In M. Wolf (ed), bersetzen translating traduire: Towards a social turn? Wien, Berlin: LIT. 187-197.
Kellman, S. 2000. The translingual imagination. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.
Kim, K., N. Relkin, K. Lee & J. Hirsch 1997. Distinct cortical areas associated with native and second languages. Nature 388:171174.
Liao, P. 2006. EFL Learners beliefs about and strategy use of translation in English. RELC Journal 37(2):191215.
Malmkjaer, K. (ed) 1998. Translation & language teaching: language teaching and translation. Manchester: St.
Jerome.
Mantovani, G. 2004. Intercultura: e' possibile evitare le guerre culturali? Bologna: Il Mulino.
Munday, J. 2001. Introducing translation studies: Theories and applications. London, New York: Routledge.
Naiman, N., H. Frohlich, H. H. Stern & A. Todesco 1978. The good language learner. Toronto: Ontario Institute for
Studies in Education.
Norton Peirce, B. 1995. Social identity, investment, and language learning. Tesol Quarterly 29 (1):9-31.
Palmonari, A. 1995. Processi Simbolici e Dinamiche Sociali. Bologna: Il Mulino.
Paradis, M. 2003. The bilingual Loch Ness monster raises its non-asymmetrical head again. Brain and Language
87 (3):441-448.
Pavlenko, A. (ed) 2006. Bilingual Minds: Emotional experience, expression and representation. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Pym, A. 1998. Method in translation history. Manchester: St Jerome.
Pym, A. 2002. Intercultures and the face of nationalist cultures [electronic version]. Available from http://www.
tinet.org/~apym/on-line/intercultures/intnation.pdf. Accessed on 01/02/2010.
Pym, A. 2006. On the social and the cultural in translation studies. In A. Pym, M. Shlesinger & Z. Jettmarov
(eds), Sociocultural aspects of translating and interpreting. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 1-26.
Queensland Department of Premier & Cabinet, 2004. How to work with interpreters. Available from: http://
www.multicultural.qld.gov.au/media/qis_how_to_work_with_interpreter_telephone.pdf Accessed on
01/02/2010.
Riehl, C. 2009. Why bilingualism makes a difference. Paper presented at the Language & Society Centre,
Monash University, 18 March 2009.
Sallis, E. 2007. Foster mother tongue. In M. Besemeres & A. Wierzbicka (eds), Translating lives: Living with two
languages and cultures. St. Lucia, QLD: University of Queensland Press. 150-159.
Silverman, D. (2006). Interpreting qualitative data. London: Sage.
Spolsky, B. 1989. Conditions for second language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

VOLUME SEVEN, NUMBER ONE

11

Motivational factors in the continuation of Japanese language study

Strmper-Krobb, S. 2007. Lost in translation: Fictional translator figures caught between cultures. In A. Pearson & A. Leahy (eds), Intercultural spaces: Language culture identity. Bern, Frankfurt, Berlin: Peter Lang.
245-255.
SWAHS Health Care Interpreting Service, 1998/2006. SWAHS HCIS Users Guide. Available from: http://
www.wsahs.nsw.gov.au/services/hcis/documents/HCIS_UG.pdf. Accessed on 01/02/2010.
Tajfel, H. 1981. Human groups and social categories: Studies in social psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Tebble, H. 1998. Medical interpreting: Improving communication with your patients [videorecording]. Geelong,
VIC, Deakin University Learning Resources Services.
Tokuhama-Espinosa, T. 2007. Living languages: Multilingualism across the lifespan. Westport, Conn.: Praeger
Publishers.
Tymoczko, M. 2007. Enlarging translations, empowering translators. Manchester, Kinderhook: St. Jerome Publishing.
Turner, G. 2006. Re-thinking the sociology of sign language interpreting and translation. In M. Wolf (ed),
bersetzen translating traduire: Towards a social turn? Wien, Berlin: LIT. 285-293.
Vaid, J. & W. E. Lambert 1979. Differential cerebral involvement in the cognitive functioning of bilinguals.
Brain and Language 8(1), 92-110.
Venuti, L. 1995. The translators invisibility: A history of translation. London, New York: Routledge.
Victoria Regional Information & Advocacy Council Inc., 1999. How to work with an interpreter. Available from:
http://www.riac.org.au/GVPCP/workwithinterpreter.php Accessed on 01/02/2010.
Weedon, C. 1987/1996. Feminist practice and poststructuralist theory. Oxford: Blackwell.
Wuillemin, D., B. Richardson, & J. Lynch 1994. Right-hemisphere involvement in processing later-learned languages in multilinguals. Brain and Language 46(4), 620-636.
Zournazi, M. 1998. Foreign dialogues: Memories, translations, conversations. Annandale, NSW: Pluto Press.
List of abbreviations
AUSIT
NAATI
SCERH
T/I
T&I

Australian Institute of Interpreters and Translators

National Accreditation Authority for Translators and Interpreters
Standing Committee on Ethics in Human Research, Monash University
Translators and/or Interpreters (practitioners)
Translating and interpreting (professional sector)

Floriana Badalotti is a freelance translator and a PhD candidate in the School of Languages, Cultures and Linguistics. She holds a Bachelor of Psychology from the University of Parma, Italy, and a Master of Translation Studies from
Monash University. Her research looks at the relationship between multilingualism and identity.
Email: Floriana.Badalotti@arts.monash.edu.au

12

MONASH UNIVERSITY LINGUISTICS PAPERS 2010