Ethics in Translator and Interpreter Training: from Intention to Freedom in the Digital Era

Abstract

This article attempts to present an alternative perspective to ethical approaches in translator and interpreter training by applying the principles of the 'Hacker Ethic' (Himanen 2001) to the activities undertaken by translators and interpreters in humanitarian-related events. The paper will begin by a discussion on Ethics in interpreter training, a topic which has long been addressed as a vertical transmission of a list of solutions to specific problems within the exercise of the profession (Pöchhacker, 2004: 164), without a conscious effort to accept that professional practice is influenced by the translator’s ideology, not to mention the speaker’s, or the interpreting lecturer’s (Hatim and Mason, 1990; Baker, 2006, among others). In this regard, a modern ethical challenge for a trainer could be to introduce a wider range of discourses in the interpreting lab, thus avoiding the exposure of trainees solely to traditional speeches and contexts where ideological stakes may arguably be downplayed.

To raise the students' awareness to a second level, trainers and lecturers may also choose to introduce them to the values of the Hacker Ethic, an alternative ethos for the information age considered to be closely related to the 'virtue ethics' of the writings of Plato or Aristotle, which differs from prescriptive deontological ethics and advocates open access to information and education, decentralisation of authority and the improvement of quality of life and work in the digital era (Levy, 1984; Stallman, 1999; Castells, 2001). I shall define the concepts of ‘volunteer interpreting for development’, and briefly explore the definitions of 'virtue theory', 'deontological ethics', 'ethos' and 'morality' from a critical perspective, as a prelude to defining the ethical values of the Open Learning Model (OLM), the didactic counterpart of the Hacker (work) Ethic. We will argue that these values are relevant to various occupations within our field, such as 'interpreter training as an activity', 'interpreting as a profession', or 'academia as the professional environment for translator and interpreter training', each providing countless examples of real-life ethical dilemmas that can be used in training. From the perspective of the actors or beneficiaries of the educational process, the main aim of this critical exercise is to explore existing frameworks, widely accepted in other professions, and to apply a novel Learning Model which could help democratise interpreter training and empower students to address ethical dilemmas from non-prescriptive viewpoints. The paper will conclude by exploring not only the possibilities, but also the limits of the OLM in the training of “interpreters for society”. In the words of Lévy (1997:91), the computer revolution and its offshoots, such as cyberspace, have the potential to democratise knowledge. But bridging the digital gap is still a requirement before more people are given the freedom to learn.