 |
| Pixabay image by Gerd Altmann |
An anecdote I often share relates to my personal experience with language proficiency and identity. As a heritage speaker, I sound like a native speaker of two languages, yet language transfers such as unnatural or awkward colocations and grammar can make me sound like a foreigner in both languages.
Early in my education, I made a deliberate effort to improve my linguistic competence and eliminate some of the telltale signs of Spanish heritage speakers, like divergent attainment of the subjunctive and the morphosyntax of agreement (Scontras et al., 2015). I felt I had achieved true bilingualism, and my Spanish AP Exam score of 5 and test exemption from all Spanish college courses validated my feelings.
Shortly after starting my college education, I had an opportunity to serve in the military, where additional testing proved that my mastery of the Spanish language exceeded the minimum requirements of Cryptologic Linguists. I had done it!
Fast forward a few years in my career, and as a successful interpreter and translator in educational and healthcare settings, I decided I wanted to pursue a graduate degree. Although I was able to pass the entry exam and requirements, it became very clear to me that I did not command either language to the level required for the program. Was it because I am a heritage speaker? Was I ever truly bilingual?
The answer: Not entirely.
The reason my linguistic skills were lacking was the level of linguistic command required for the settings the graduate program focused on, in addition to the topics and general knowledge required to decipher the concepts being presented. Finally, I understood why specialization was so important.
Let me step back and touch on language proficiency and how it relates to specialization.
Language Proficiency
Language proficiency is critical to interpreters. It is often said that competence in two languages is not sufficient to become an interpreter, but we often forget to acknowledge that is a crucial first step. Competence in two languages is key to accurately conveying the meaning of spoken language from one language to another. To effectively interpret, we must command both the source language (the language being spoken or signed) and the target language (the language being produced by the interpreter).
One organization that established language-level descriptors that are used primarily by the U.S. Federal Government is the Interagency Language Roundtable (ILR). The ILR scale is a five-level system that describes language proficiency in a number of different areas, including reading, listening, speaking, and writing.
At the highest level of the ILR scale, Level 5, language users are expected to have "native or near-native" proficiency in both the source and target languages. This means that they command the language at the level of a "highly articulate," "well educated" native speaker. At the lowest level, Level 0, language users have no practical or functional ability with the language.
More about the ILR at https://www.govtilr.org/index.htm.
In addition to the ILR scale, the American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL) has developed a system for evaluating language proficiency called the ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines. This system also consists of five levels, ranging from Novice (Level 1) to Distinguished (Level 5).
More about ACTFL at https://www.actfl.org/uploads/files/general/Resources-Publications/ACTFL_Proficiency_Guidelines_2024.pdf
Another widely used standard for language proficiency is the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR). Developed by the Council of Europe, the CEFR consists of six levels of language proficiency, ranging from A1 (beginner) to C2 (proficient).
More about the CEFR at https://www.coe.int/en/web/common-european-framework-reference-languages/table-1-cefr-3.3-common-reference-levels-global-scale.
It is important to note that interpreters should generally have a higher level of language proficiency than the setting requires. This is because interpreters are expected to not only accurately convey the meaning of the source language but also to do so in a way that is idiomatic and natural in the target language. In order to achieve this level of proficiency, interpreters often undergo extensive training and practice in both the source and target languages.
For example, for a setting that requires Limited Working Proficiency (or Advanced-low or medium on the ACTFL) the interpreter will be best prepared for the setting if their command is at the Limited Working Proficiency, Plus level (or Advanced-high on the ACTFL scale).
Navigating Language Competency as Heritage Speakers with Gabriela Siebach
Gabriela Siebach shares her inspiring story of growing up in Houston, Texas, and how she discovered her passion for language. She also discusses the challenges and importance of professionalizing the interpreting and translating industry, particularly in educational settings.
One of the highlights is when she emphasizes the need for clear standards and empirical data to support the experiences of those in the field. She provides valuable insights and recommendations for new language professionals entering the industry.
References
Scontras, G., Fuchs, Z., & Polinsky, M. (2015, September 24). Heritage language and linguistic theory. Frontiers. Retrieved December 20, 2022, from https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01545/full?utm_source=Email_to_ae_&utm_medium=Email&utm_content=T1_11.5e2_editor&utm_campaign=Email_publication&journalName=Frontiers_in_Psychology&id=165895
Interagency Language Roundtable (ILR). Skill Level Descriptions Revised. 2021, https://www.govtilr.org/.
Council of Europe. Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR). 2001, https://www.coe.int/en/web/common-european-framework-reference-languages/table-1-cefr-3.3-common-reference-levels-global-scale.
ACTFL. ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines. 2024, https://www.actfl.org/uploads/files/general/Resources-Publications/ACTFL_Proficiency_Guidelines_2024.pdf.
Comments
Post a Comment