Türkiye’de Sözlü Çeviri Alanında Güncel Sorunlar ve Gelişim Alanları: Çeviri İşletmeleri ve Meslek Örgütleri Temsilcilerinin Görüşleri

Abstract

Sözlü çeviri, çok dilli iletişim ortamlarında bireyler, kurumlar ve toplumlar arasında anlam aktarımını mümkün kılan temel iletişim edimlerinden biridir. Buna karşın sözlü çeviri alanı mesleki tanınma ve standartlaşma bakımından çeşitli yapısal sorunlarla karşılaşabilmektedir. Bu çalışma Türkiye bağlamında çeviri işletmeleri ve meslek örgütlerinin sözlü çeviri alanına ilişkin görüşlerini incelemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Araştırmanın çalışma grubunu beş çeviri işletmesi temsilcisi ile üç meslek örgütü temsilcisi oluşturmaktadır. Nitel araştırma yaklaşımıyla yürütülmüş araştırmada veriler yarı yapılandırılmış görüşme aracılığıyla toplanmıştır. Çalışmada, yarı yapılandırılmış görüşmelerin ardından gerçekleştirilen ve katılımcıların alanın sorunlarına dair serbest anlatılarını içeren informal bölümler analiz edilmiştir. Bu şekilde, önceden belirlenmiş soru kalıplarının ötesine geçilerek, paydaşların sözlü çeviri edimine ilişkin anlık ve kapsayıcı değerlendirmelerine ulaşılması hedeflenmiştir. Bulgular, sözlü çeviri alanında mesleki standartlar ve sertifikasyon ihtiyacı, akademi-sektör-meslek örgütü işbirliğinin güçlendirilmesi gereği, teknoloji ve yapay zekâya ilişkin fırsat ve kaygılar ile mesleki örgütlenme ihtiyacı temalarının öne çıktığını göstermektedir. Çalışma, sözlü çeviri alanında farklı paydaşların bakış açılarını görünür kılarak Türkiye’de sözlü çeviri alanın gelişimine katkı sağlamayı hedeflemektedir.

Keywords

• Sözlü Çeviri
• Akademi-Sektör-STK Işbirliği
• Çeviri Işletmeleri
• Meslek Örgütleri
• Mesleki Standartlar

Supporting Institution

Tübitak

Project Number

223K031

Ethical Statement

Çalışmanın tüm süreçlerinin araştırma ve yayın etiğine uygun olduğunu, etik kurallara ve bilimsel atıf gösterme ilkelerine uyduğumuzu beyan ederiz.

Thanks

Bu çalışma, Türkiye Bilimsel ve Teknolojik Araştırma Kurumu (TÜBİTAK) tarafından 223K031 Numaralı proje ile desteklenmiştir. Projeye verdiği destekten ötürü TÜBİTAK’a teşekkürlerimizi sunarız.

Current Issues and Areas for Development in the Field of Interpreting in Türkiye: Views of Representatives of Translation Companies and Professional Organizations

Abstract

Interpreting is one of the fundamental communication acts that enables the transfer of meaning between individuals, institutions, and societies in multilingual communication environments. However, the field of interpreting may encounter various structural problems in terms of professional recognition and standardization. This study aims to examine the views of translation companies and professional organizations in Türkiye regarding the field of interpreting. The study group consists of five representatives from translation companies and three representatives from professional organizations. By using qualitative research approach, the data were collected through semi-structured interviews in the study. In addition, the study analyzed informal sections conducted after the semi-structured interviews which included the participants' free narratives about the problems in the field of interpreting. In this way, the aim was to go beyond pre-determined question patterns and obtain stakeholders' immediate and comprehensive assessments of the practice of interpreting. The findings indicate that several key themes emerge prominently in the field of interpreting, which are: the need for professional standards and certification, the necessity of strengthening collaboration among academia, the industry, and professional organizations, the opportunities and concerns associated with technology and artificial intelligence, and the need for professional organization. Last but not least, the study aims to contribute to the development of the field of interpreting in Türkiye by making the perspectives of different stakeholders in the field of interpreting visible.

Keywords

• Interpreting
• Academy-Industry-NGO Collaboration
• Translation Agencies
• Professional Organizations
• Professional Standards

Supporting Institution

TUBİTAK

Project Number

223K031

Ethical Statement

We hereby declare that all processes of the study are in compliance with research and publication ethics, and that we have adhered to ethical guidelines and scientific citation principles.

Thanks

This study was supported by Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK) under the Grant Number 223K031. The authors thank to TUBITAK for their supports.

References

1. AKDAĞ, Ayşe Işık, Halil İbrahim Balkul, Emra Büyüknisan, Esat Tosun, Sözlü Çeviri Edimini Ölçme ve Değerlendirmeye Yönelik Bir Çerçeve Model (TÜBİTAK Projesi No. 223K031-Sonuç Raporu), Türkiye Bilimsel ve Teknolojik Araştırma Kurumu (TÜBİTAK), Ankara 2025.
2. ANGELELLI, Claudia V., Medical Interpreting and Cross-Cultural Communication, Cambridge University Press, 2004.
3. ANGELELLI, Claudia V., “Community/Public-Service Interpreting As A Communicative Event: A Call For Shifting Teaching And Learning Foci”, Translation and Translanguaging in Multilingual Contexts, 6/2, 2020, 114-130.
4. Association de l’industrie de la langue/Language Industry Association (AILIA.ca), “National Standard Guide for Community Interpreting Services. Healthcare Interpretation Network” ,https://www.imiaweb.org/uploads/docs/National_Standard_Guide_for_Community_Interpreting_Services.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 02.05.2026).
5. ATABEKOVA, Anastasia, Rimma Gorbatenko, Tatyana Shoustikova, Carmen Valero-Garcés, “Academia´s Thoughts and Graduates’ Opinions of Education at University Degree For Translators And Interpreters: Is There a Need for Revisiting Both Concept and Practice?”, XLinguae, 11/1, 2018, 269-283.
6. AWASHREH, Raed, Ahmed Aboeisheh, “The Collaborative Future of Translation Between Human-Ai Partnerships”, Role of AI in Translation and Interpretation, (Editör: Mohammed H. Al Aqad), IGI Global Scientific Publishing, 2025, 205-236.
7. BEST, Brett A., “Is It Time To Accredit Interpreting Agencies? Perspectives Of BSL-English Interpreters”, Journal of Interpretation, 27/1, 2019, Article 1.
8. BOURDIEU, Pierre, “The Forms of Capital”, Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education, (Editör: John G. Richardson), Greenwood Press, 1986, 241-258.

9. BRAUN, Virginia, Victoria Clarke, “BRAUN, Virginia, Victoria Clarke, “Reflecting on Reflexive Thematic Analysis”, Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 11/4, 2019, 589-597.
10. CHAN, Andy Lung Jan, “Signal Jamming in the Translation Market and the Complementary Roles of Certification and Diplomas in Developing Multilateral Signaling Mechanisms”, Translation & Interpreting, 5/1, 2013, 211-221.
11. CHO, Jinhyun, “Interpreters As Translation Machines: Telephone Interpreting Challenges As Awareness Problems”, Qualitative Health Research, 33/12, 2023, 1037-1048.
12. CRONIN, Michael, Translation in the Digital Age, Routledge, Oxon 2013.
13. JIMÉNEZ-CRESPO, Miguel A. “If Students Translate Like a Robot…” or How Research on Human-Centered AI and Intelligence Augmentation Can Help Realign Translation Education”, The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 19/3-4, 2025, 277-295.
14. DİRİKER, Ebru, “On the Evolution of the Interpreting Profession in Turkey: From the Drogomans to the 21st Century”, Tradition, Tension and Translation in Turkey, (Editörler: Şehnaz Tahir Gürçağlar, Saliha Paker, John Milton), John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2015, 89-106.
15. DRUGAN, Joanna, “Ethics And Social Responsibility In Practice: Interpreters And Translators Engaging With And Beyond The Professions”, The Translator, 23/2, 2017, 126-142.
16. DRUGAN, Joanna, Quality in Professional Translation: Assessment and Improvement, Bloomsbury, New York 2013. ETZKOWITZ, Henry, Loet Leydesdorff, “The Dynamics of Innovation: from National Systems and “Mode 2” to a Triple Helix of University–Industry–Government Relations”, Research Policy, 29/2, 2000, 109-123.
17. European Master’s in Translation (EMT), EMT Competence Framework 2022, European Commission, 2022. GILE, Daniel, Basic Concepts And Models For Interpreter And Translator Training (Rev. ed.), John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2009.
18. GONZALEZ, Erika “Professional Development as a Vehicle on The Road Towards Professionalism: The AUSIT Experience”, inTRAlinea, 21, 2019.
19. HALE, Sandra Beatriz, Community Interpreting, Palgrave Macmillan, 2007.
20. HANFT-ROBERT, Saskia, Christoph Breitsprecher, Mike Mösko, “Just Having Experience Is Not Enough”: Development And Evaluation Of A Training For Interpreters Working In Community Settings – A Mixed-Methods Study”, Frontiers in Education, 10, 2025, Article 1494454.
21. HLAVAC, Jim, “A Cross-National Overview of Translator and Interpreter Certification Procedures”, Translation&Interpreting: The International Journal of Translation and Interpreting Research, 5/1, 2013, 32-65.
22. HLAVAC, Jim, Shani Tobias, Lola Sundin, Simon Knowles, Alex Avella Archila, “Translators’ And Interpreters’ Engagement With Professional Development In Australia: An Analysis Of Key Factors”, Translation and Interpreting, 16/1, 2024, 142-165.
23. International Organization For Standardization (ISO), “ISO/IEC 2004. ISO/IEC Guide 2, Standardization and Related Activities-General Vocabulary” https://www.iso.org/standard/39976.html (Erişim Tarihi: 02.05.2026). International Organization for Standardization (ISO), “Interpreting Services-General Requirements and Recommodations” https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/en/#iso:std:iso:18841:ed-1:v1:en (Erişim Tarihi: 02.05.2026).
24. İKİZ, Fatih, Çeviride Meslekleşme: Çevirmenler ve Çeviri İşletme(Ci)Leri Açısından Çevirmen Ulusal Meslek Standardı ve Mesleki Yeterlilikler, İstanbul Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İstanbul 2023.
25. KALINA, Sylvia, “Quality Assurance For Interpreting Processes”, Meta: Translators’ Journal, 50/2, 2005, 768–784. KARAHAN, Selda, Selda Uca, Tanju Güdük, “Nitel Araştırmalarda Görüşme Türleri ve Görüşme Tekniklerinin Uygulanma Süreci”, Nitel Sosyal Bilimler, 4/1, 2022, 78-101.
26. KATAN, David, “Occupation Or Profession: A Survey Of The Translators’ World”, Translation And Interpreting Studies, 4/2, 2009, 187-209.
27. KATAN, David, “Translation Theory and Professional Practice: A Global Survey of the Great Divide”, HERMES-Journal of Language and Communication in Business, 42, 2009, 111-153.
28. KIRALY, Donald A Social Constructivist Approach to Translator Education: Empowerment from Theory to Practice, Routledge, London 2000.
29. KRYSTALLIDOU, Demi, Céline Van De Walle, Myriam Deveugele, Evangelia Dougali, Fien Mertens, Amélie Truwant, Ellen Van Praet, Peter Pype, “Training “Doctor-Minded” Interpreters And “Interpreter-Minded” Doctors: The Benefits Of Collaborative Practice In Interpreter Training”, Interpreting, 20/1, 2018, 126-144.
30. KURULTAY, Turgay, Alev Bulut, “Toplum Çevirmenliğine Yeniden Bakışta Afette Rehber Çevirmenlik”, IU Journal of Translation Studies, 3/6, 2014, 75-102.
31. LARSON, Magali Sarfatti, The Rise of Professionalism: A Sociological Analysis,University of California Press, United States of America 1977.
32. LOISEAU, Nathalie, Carmen Delgado Luchner, “A, B And C Decoded: Understanding Interpreters’ Language Combinations In Terms Of Language Proficiency”, The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 15/4, 2021, 468-489.
33. LOMMEL, Arle, “Augmented Translation: A New Approach to Combining Human and Machine Capabilities”, Proceedings of the 13th Conference of the Association for Machine Translation in the Americas 2: User Track). 2018.
34. MARCZAK, Mariusz, Oleksandr Bondarenko, “Translator Education in Poland and Ukraine: Does the Academia vs Industry Gap Persist?”, The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 16/1, 2022, 115-134.
35. MERRIAM, Sharan B., Nitel Araştırma: Desen ve Uygulama İçin Bir Rehber, çev. Selahattin Turan, Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık, 2018.
36. MESLEKİ YETERLİLİK KURUMU (MYK), Çevirmen (Seviye 6) Ulusal Meslek Standardı, 2020.
37. OBDRŽÁLKOVÁ, Vanda, “Interacción Y Cooperación Entre Asociaciones Profesionales y El Mundo Académico En La República Checa: El Caso De La Unión De Intérpretes y Traductores”, Mutatis Mutandis. Revista Latinoamericana de Traducción, 17/1, 2024, 71-88.
38. O’BRIEN, Sharon, “Translation as Human-Computer Interaction”, Translation Spaces, 1/1, 2012, 101-122.
39. OLALLA-SOLER, Christian, “Bridging The Gap Between Translation And Interpreting Students And Freelance Professionals: The Mentoring Programme Of The Professional Association Of Translators And Interpreters Of Catalonia”, The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 13/1, 2019, 64-85.
40. OLSON, Mancur, The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups, with a New Preface and Appendix, Harvard University Press, United States of America 1971.
41. ORAL, A. Zeynep, Şirin Okyayuz, “Türkiye’de İşaret Dili Çevirmenliği için Ulusal Standart ve Ulusal Yeterlilik Çalışmaları”, Turkish Studies, 15/3, 2020, 1379-1397.
42. OZOLINS, Uldis, “The Interpreter’s ‘Third Client’”, The Critical Link 4, (Editörler: Cecilia Wadensjö, Birgitta Englund Dimitrova, Anna-Lena Nilsson), John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2007, s. 121-131.
43. PÖCHHACKER, Franz, Introducing Interpreting Studies, Routledge, London 2004.
44. PYM, Anthony, “What Technology Does to Translating”, Translation & Interpreting: The International Journal of Translation and Interpreting Research, 3/1, 2011, 1-9.
45. RISKU, Hanna “Situated learning in translation research training: academic research as a reflection of practice”, The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 10/1, 2016, 12-28.
46. SAWYER, David B., Fundamental Aspects Of Interpreter Education: Curriculum And Assessment, John Benjamins, 2004.
47. SELA-SHEFFY, Rakefet, Miriam Shlesinger, Identity And Status In The Translational Professions. John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2011.
48. STERN, Ludmila, Xin Liu, “Interpreting Studies”, The Routledge Handbook of Translation and Education, (Editörler: Sara Laviosa, Maria Gonzales-Davies), Routledge, 2020, 226-244.
49. SULAIMAN, M. Zain, Haslina Haroon, Intan Safinaz Zainudin ve Siti Aisyah Shaharudin, “The Professionalisation Of Interpreting Practice: A Systematic Review Of The Literature”, Across Languages and Cultures, 26/1, 2025, 88-108.
50. T.C. Dışişleri Bakanlığı Avrupa Birliği Başkanlığı, “Kullanıcı Kılavuzu, 2005/36/T Sayılı Direktif” https://www.ab.gov.tr/files/EMPB/kullanici_kilavuzu_2005_36_ec_revize.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 03.05.2026).
51. UYSAL, Nazan Müge, “Çeviride Akademi-Sektör Bağlantısı ve Çevirmen Adaylarının İstihdam Edilebilirliği”, Söylem Filoloji Dergisi, 10/1, 2025, 452.
52. UYSAL, Nazan Müge, Ensa Filazi, “Çevirmen (Seviye 6) Ulusal Meslek Standardı’nın Mütercim ve Tercümanlık Bölümlerinin Öğretim Programlarındaki Yeri: Çevirmen Adaylarını Standart ile Tanıştırıyor Muyuz?”, IU Journal of Translation Studies, 21, 2024, 113-130.
53. UYSAL, Nazan Müge, “Türkiye’de Ulusal Yeterliliklere Dayalı Bir Çevirmen Sertifikasyon Sistemine Doğru: Süreç Nasıl İşliyor?”, Journal of International Social Research, 13/71, 2020, 146-161.
54. XU, Han, “Please Make Sure We Don’t Get This Interpreter Again”: Australian Legal Aid Lawyers’ Experience Of Working With Interpreters”, Translation and Interpreting Studies, 19/2, 2024, 257-276.
55. VURAL, Haldun, “Translation-Focused Technological Competence: Tradition And Innovation”, Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi Fen-Edebiyat Fakültesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 49/1, 2025, 85-95.
56. WANG, Huashu, Zhi Li, “Constructing a Competence Framework for Interpreting Technologies, and Related Educational Insights: An Empirical Study”, The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 16/3, 2022, 367-390. WENGER, Etienne, Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1998.
57. YILMAZ GÜMÜŞ, Volga, “Solidity and Professionalization of Translation: Turkey as a Case in Point”, Journal of Language and Communication in Business, 58, 2018, 43-63.