Chartered Institute of Linguists or American Translators Association

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.

Tomás Cano Binder, CT wrote:


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 wrote:



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.

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]