Is spoken fluency enough to become a translator?

Question

Is spoken fluency enough to become a translator? Or does one also have to have written literacy?

For example: Can one who is only a fluent speaker of a Chinese and English become a translator for the 2008 Olympics? Can a person who can only speak Arabic call themselves qualified or 'fluent' in the language?

Are there different levels of fluency?

Answer 1

The word translator is double-edged. In one sense, it means conversion between languages. Among people who do such, translation typically means written, and interpreting means spoken. To be an interpreter, spoken ability is all that matters. When you ask about translating for the 2008 Olympics, then is clear to me (I have done this for several languages in multiple Olympics) than you almost surely mean interpreting. Spoken ability is adequate. What does fluency mean? It depends. Typically, it means the ability to understand and adequately interpret what you are liable to hear. I have interpreted in legal and judicial matters, where fluency requirement is extremely high, and I have interpreted in sporting events, where my work mainly consisted of "wait in line over here until the bus comes" or "how are you today", where the requirement for fluency was much lower. You won't know until you go to Beijing and look into it. Perhaps we will meet there.

I don't understand you question about Arabic.

Answer 2

That depends on your objective. If you want to be an interpreter for the FBI or the UN then spoken fluency should be sufficient. You may need to know how to translate industry specific terms, but those can be learned easily.

However, if you want to translate the complete works of Dante Aligeri into English, then you may want to know how to read and write fluently in both languages.

Answer 3

You need paper qualifications. Not just fluency.