 Claudia Angioleli, it's a great pleasure to meet you here at the University of Arizona. So, thank you. On the 6th of December, 2012, so you know where we are. Claudia, what do you do in life, academic? I'm a professor in Hispanic linguistics at the University of San Diego State University, and I also teach during summers in Castellón de la Plana, yes, and Universidad Autónoma. Okay. Right. De Barcelona. De Barcelona. So, you're not in a Department of Translation then in San Diego, but you do a lot in translation. We have a program, a certificate program in translation and interpreting studies, which mostly addresses practice, and then I have graduate classes in areas that intersect with translation studies, from issues and theories in translation or interpreting to issues and theories in bilingualism, Spanish language and society, and then the research methods and the teaching methods where we have students that are interested in teaching language, Spanish as a second language, as a heritage language, or translation interpreting. Okay. So, you're really doing a lot. This is one of the things. Not as much as I would like to, but yes. On paper in the United States, actually, no, there are a lot of programs in translation, but even outside of the official programs in the United States, there's a lot of that translation activity going down there. Right. Yes. I think what's interesting in the United States, I believe if we compare it with Europe, is that in Europe, you have very well established schools of translation and interpreting. Over here, we have few programs that are at the PhD level. We have some more at the master level, but we have a lot of people who are coming from departments like linguistics, communication, applied linguistics, languages in general, psychology, cognitive that are working on very specific areas and have done great work. So, you have people who are known for their work in interpreting in the courts, for example, Susan Berkselixen coming from a department of linguistics and sociolinguistics. So you get people crossing borders, which makes it in educational linguistics. Educational. Educational linguistics. Because you did your PhD at Stanford. Stanford. Right, right, right. So it's not in a translation. No. No, no, no. It was in a department of education in educational linguistics focusing on language, literacy and culture. So I worked with people who are very, very well known in the field of bilingualism, translation and interpreting in the case of Guadalupe Vallés, Shirley Rice Heath for language and society, Fishman for language and identity. And my research was like bringing in the research, the paradigm from quantitative and qualitative. So working with anthropologists and sociologists was great in forming what I wanted to do. Okay. So you were constructing the interdisciplinary. Right. Right, right, right. Which is, I think, what we do as translators and interpreters, too. I was bridging in between and everything. Yeah. Probably it's being good at one thing, you know. Right, right. You're not American. No, Argentinian. I became American. It's like the Italian name. Right. My grandfather was Italian, who went to Argentina and never nationalized. And we spoke Italian, you know, at home. Really? Yeah. I studied my whole education through university up to my BA in Argentina. My BA was in legal translation. So I knew that I wanted to study a language. I went to an English school all my life. And by the time I got to university, I had to pick a third language. And I didn't want to study Italian because I thought I knew it all. I was a heritage speaker of Italian. I couldn't read or write. So I picked French. And so I graduated from university with a degree in legal translation. Okay. And then you came to the United States? No. And then I started teaching. See, Argentina works in many ways, like some areas in the United States, where you can teach from practice. And that's how we teach in universities over there. So I taught in three different universities. And then in 1990, I came to the United States to teach as a visiting professor at the Monterey Institute of International Studies. Right. Right. And from there... And from there, when I was there... Because there is no doctorate in Monterey. No, no, no, no, no. No. When I was... I know, yeah, I agree. When I was in Monterey, what I realized was that I was teaching out of experience, as we all do. And I was noticing that there were gaps I needed to address. And they have a very wonderful, solid program in educational linguistics and language teaching. So as I was faculty in translation and interpreting, I was a student in the graduate program in TESOL. So I graduated with an MA in teaching foreign language, Spanish, and then I did a graduate certificate in TESOL and one in language program administration. So I really wanted to do that because the language program administration... You're doing it in the education side. Well, my interest has always been... But your doctorate isn't that. No, but it does overlap. Because when I go for my doctorate, I knew that I needed a pedagogy in order to teach translation and interpreting. That's what I got at the Monterey Institute. When I was doing that, I realized that there were questions I couldn't answer. And it was the asking and answering questions that pushed me towards a PhD. And so I went to Stanford where you have no department on translation or translation studies. But as I said, working with a person who has worked on court interpreting specifically and on access on the part of linguistic minorities to services, I did my PhD focusing on the role of the interpreter. I really wanted to understand... So that's your book? I actually got two books out of that. I kind of split. I went into looking at the role and I wanted to do understanding what triggers the participation of the interpreter, like the interpreter becoming visible in the interaction through social factors. So for that, I did the study from Canada, US, and Mexico and published a book with John Benjamin. And then the results of that study indicated that the most visible one is the one in the hospital. So I conducted an ethnography on that and that's published with Cambridge. So you should add a footnote that visible for you doesn't mean like visible for me. No, no, no, no. Visible means feedback. No, no, no. Visible for me means really that the interpreter is addressed in talk, intervenes, and what triggers that intervention. Some interpreters feel the need that they have to explain things. Some interpreters think that patients don't understand and it's up to them to clarify. Some believe that the patients need access and it's through them that they will gain it. So interpreters do many, many things with their talk. And I was interested in understanding that. So that ethnography really looks at everything the interpreter does and focuses on the talk and through discourse analysis is looking at that visibility as strategies that interpreters are doing to make themselves more and more visible in interaction, intervening more and more. All the way from saying, you know, good morning and so and so I'm going to help you talk with a doctor all the way to replacing the interlocutor. Interpreters who have different careers and are medical doctors in their own countries and in Code of Ethics where people say, no, that's what I want to address because I'm a co-author of one of those Code of Ethics and it's easy to say, take off your hat and put the hat of the one in sociology. You know that that's not exactly. And so what we need to do is raise awareness on how do you do that and what are the consequences if you don't do that? And so all of those things to me are of great interest. Just as a general question, what sort of research do you think is needed in the United States with respect to translation and interpreting? Well, in any particular areas that we... I think that we need, I'm not sure it's different in the States from Europe, I should say, because I think that we need, we will always say we need more research, but we need research in the area, for example, of measurement and testing and assessment. We started doing that, but we definitely see gaps, measuring from measuring quality, measuring the abilities, capacity to measure... It's very difficult things to measure. No, they are actually not. I think that the problem so far has been that they have not been defined. So we look at translation and interpreting at this art or craft that we are good at it or we are not. But if we define them correctly and then we say, okay, this is the construct we want to look at and so how are we going to address it? And we come up with rubrics that can address written translation as well as they can address interpreting. It hasn't been done a lot, but we have made progress in that there's still a lot more to be done, especially adjusting that to industry as classroom and then research and how we translate research instruments, impacts, how we translate tests and we move students in high schools here or schools in general from one grade to the other through standard testing. If that is translated rather than adapted, has consequences and how do we measure the quality of that translation? We need to come up with serious measurements to do that. That's one area, but I think it's also valid for Europe. I think it's also the area of the sociology of translation and interpreting. All those social aspects that I was mentioning before are really worth pursuing, same thing as ethical dilemmas. I think we jump again too soon when we say, don't do this, do this, do that. And I really want to look at the interaction between code of ethics, theoretical principles and how they really permeate practice and if they hold in practice and if not, revisit the idea of having code of ethics coming from a description of empirically driven. You're much resistance. I mean, you're an academic entering the world of professional codes of ethics. No, because I- Are you welcome with open arms? Well, I have been working with, one of the things that I think I do too much of is working, you can never do too much of bridging theory and practice, but since I began my career I've always been taking part in professional associations so that I don't live in the ivory tower. And as I said, I co-authored the California Health Care Interpreting Association Code. And it was interesting to me because it was the first time that we open up as sown of gray areas and the interpreters can move from this extreme to that extreme and there's this range versus saying we can only do this. Because it's easy to rule it, as I said, in theory. But if we were to take the time to research and bring empirical information to those code of ethics, they would look a little different. At least we won't be able to say, take off this hat, put on that, if that's not possible in any other case. Final point, in addition to all the rest, you're now president of ATISA. That's right. Which is the American Translation and Interpreting Studies Association. Correct, correct. I'm amazed you managed to fit everything in. No, that's part of bridging academia in practice, too. Is ATISA, are you managing to stimulate research through that? I mean, is it? That was why, yeah, I think that was why ATISA, one of the goals of ATISA in trying to bring the communities of researchers together in the United States and further the study of translation and interpreting. And it has been successful. It needs time. It has grown. We have had a journal with John Benjamin for 10 years now. And I'm delighted because it gives all of us colleagues in the US a space that most of us, in some cases, are working in isolation or in pairs in different universities. We come to ATISA and we know every two years we have a forum where we can discuss our research. And it's a lot more exciting that sometimes going to other conferences, we have a small strand on translation, interpreting studies, and small audience. Claudia, thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you.