2.1 The term translation typically means ‘human translation’. Since the invention of writing, texts were rendered from one language to another only by people. This would have made the adjective human redundant. However, in the past 20 years, computer technology has taken an increasing share of translation, giving rise to the retronym human translation. Computer aided or assisted translation (CAT), machine translation (MT), and human assisted machine translation (HAMT)/post-edited machine translation (PEMT) are all atypical forms. In fact, these three modes show different levels of typicality. CAT is more typical than HAMT, and HAMT in turn is more typical than MT, given the decreasing degrees of human intervention that they involve. Although a variety of software products and AI systems are now playing a key role in translation projects, the prototype is still human translation. When a journal paper or an encyclopaedia article discusses creative translation, translation profession, translation strategy, translation training, etc., it deals with inherently human phenomena. As neural machine translation is pervading everyday life with its output demonstrating impressive improvements, it has attracted a growing interest among scholars. This has made the overall comparison of human and machine translation a common research subject. At the same time, it is unlikely that the prototypical member of the category translation will ever be fully automated translation, because a high number of genres (advertising, humour, sacred texts, poetry, diplomacy, philosophy, etc.) will probably always require some sort of human intervention.

 

2.2 Likewise, interpreting typically refers to a human activity but information technology is rapidly gaining ground in this field, too. This has brought about both computer aided/assisted interpreting (CAI) and machine interpreting (MI) as two atypical forms of simultaneous interpreting. CAI is atypical in that it facilitates real-time delivery with auto-transcription, which can convert the conventional speech-to-speech process into text-to-speech, essentially sight translation (cf. 4.3). The term interpreting traditionally implied personal contact between the interpreter and the communicators. This is still typical but the advent of computer-mediated communication introduced the atypical remote interpreting. In fact, this mode first appeared in the 1970s in the form of experiments with telephone interpreting, especially for emergency and medical services, but its adoption exploded worldwide during the COVID lockdown. (Note that the term remote interpreting has resulted in the retronym on-site interpreting.)

 

2.3 Translation and interpreting typically mean ‘professional translation/interpreting’, performed by trained practitioners regularly for financial consideration. Since the second half of the 20th century, when both translation and interpreting became a profession, the majority of empirical and theoretical studies have been tacitly concerned with this variety. The category has at least three atypical members. The first one is ad hoc translation/interpreting, carried out primarily by language teachers, missionaries, receptionists, secretaries, and tour guides as an implicit job responsibility or as a favour for a friend, a co-worker, or a community member in need. The second one is volunteer translation/interpreting, fansubbing, fandubbing, crowdsourcing, which are hobbies done for free, usually by untrained but at times also by trained individuals. As a result, a professional can atypically engage in nonprofessional translation. The third mode is natural translation, “by bilinguals in everyday circumstances and without special training for it” (Harris 1977: 99). A similar concept is language brokering, by which children and young people translate between a family member and a dominant language speaker (McQuillan & Tse 1995).

 

2.4 Translation traditionally means ‘direct translation’, done into the translator’s “A” language. For centuries people predominantly required translation in order to read in their native language texts written in a foreign language. The oft-quoted earliest translation theorists in Western Europe, such as Horace, Cicero, and St. Jerome, invariably used the term translation in this sense. The initially atypical inverse translation (into the “B” language) arose as the demand for conveying messages in exotic languages exceeded the supply of native translators. This has been the case with Bible translation in the former colonies since the 19th century. Another example is interpreting in the EU since its biggest ever enlargement in 2004. That year marked the accession of ten member countries, each using an official language (Czech, Estonian, Maltese, etc.) that was apparently too exotic for a sufficient number of interpreters from all founding members to learn as a “B” language. Consequently, by derogation from the strict policy of translating and interpreting into the “A” language only, a number of language mediators from all ten new entrants were allowed to engage in what is called retour in the French jargon, subject to a specific exam. Even though inverse translation seems to be just as typical as direct translation worldwide, some widely spoken languages still reflect the ancient idea that it is atypical. “B” to “A” is called translatio in Latin, version in French, and traducción directa in Spanish, whereas “A” to “B” is called retroversio, thème, and traducción inversa, respectively.

 

2.5 The terms translation and interpreting typically mean ‘non-authorial translation,’ done by a person other than the source text writer/speaker. Under this notion, self-translation or auto-translation is atypical, e.g. Waiting for Godot, the English version of the French original En attendant Godot by the playwright Samuel Beckett. Aside from fiction, self-translation is prevalent among scholars who write academic papers in their native languages and then translate them into English or the other way round. Another type is self-interpreting in TV shows where the reporter or host asks questions in the local language, then interprets them together with the other person’s answers. This is different from a pre-flight safety briefing, where the cabin crew announces the rules in the local language and repeats them in English or vice versa. This is just the recital of an ST and a TT and not interpreting.

 

2.6 The term translation typically means ‘individual translation.’ The common concept is that translation is the endeavour of a single person, but it can take several atypical forms, too. One is team translation, used when a lengthy ST is split into multiple portions and each is assigned to a different practitioner. For example, the King James Bible was translated into English by a group of 47 scholars. However, length and time constraints are not the only reason for team translation. A snippet of poetry or lyrics inserted in a novel or a play is often rendered by a different translator, usually a poet or lyricist. The other atypical forms of translation are editing, proofreading, review, or revision, sometimes used interchangeably but all referring to the checking, correction, and improvement of a rough translation by a second person. Revision is standard practice at a large number of translation agencies and publishers, but it is sometimes overlooked by scholars when describing, analysing, and assessing a translation as if it were the product of only one individual.