68: Year in Review 2021 Alex G: All right. Should we get Alex G: We get this show on the road? Alex D: I'll just do a fade in. We don't need an intro, Alex G: That's the intro. Jonathan: Welcome to the troublesome Terps Christmas-aganza, which is as organized as we are right now. Alex G: Fair enough. Happy holidays. Welcome to the holiday spirit. So we all have here. Jonathan: I am teetotal. Speaker2: Yeah, yeah, yeah. Said the guy with the beer in the glass. Alex D: You can see it, but we can, Speaker2: But we can. Jonathan: So so there's a running joke that whenever I go to an interpreting conference, I tell people I must go. It's when an empty total and people say to me, Do you exist? Alex D: Well, I think you do. I think we can all confirm that you do exist. Alex G: I heard the other day that Adele is now a teetotaler, which [00:01:00] is confusing because then two weeks later, I saw on a YouTube video discussing her new album about the song I Drink Wine Drinking Lots of wine. You can get Jonathan: Alcohol free wine. Speaker2: So I must yeah, I must negotiate. I must Alex G: Investigate this Sarah: Further. I saw a quote from Hemingway today that said the only regret I have in life is that I didn't drink more wine. Alex G: Oh, yeah. Well, that's Speaker2: Very also got this incredible. I always have this handy wrap on my laptop. As you can see, it's a quote by Lily Bollinger. I drink champagne when I'm happy and when I'm sad. Sometimes I drink it, when I'm alone, when I have company, I consider it obligatory. I trifle with it when I'm not hungry and drink it when I am otherwise. I never touch it unless I'm thirsty. Alex G: I love it. I love this Sarah: Great place to go on like gravestones. I think I would love the wine. Jonathan: And today's health advice is brought to you by the allies. Sarah: Are you wearing a jumper like a hoodie that says Interpreter? Alex G: Oh yeah, Speaker2: Wait, I got this like, [00:02:00] this Alex D: Is mandatory clothes for every recording it, says Interpreter. Because Bad Miracle Worker is not an official job title. Sarah: Nice. Alex G: Leonard Pitts bedroom says the chick with the with the poofy hat that says, Lovely, I'm very hipster of ideas, actually. Yeah, yeah. You look a little bit like a Where's Waldo? Sarah: Yeah, I have actually a striped T-shirt, just like with the red and white here. And then with my glasses, I look exactly like Waldo. Alex G: That is super cool. Jonathan: This is troublesome. Terps mystery theater Alex G: Radio. Speaker2: Can we fade in The X-Files? Sound the doo doo doo doo doo doo doo? Alex D: And what just do the whole show in a Speaker2: Creaky radio Alex G: Voice? Yes, I love it. Jonathan: So back in January 20, Alex D: 2021, this is the year in view episode. In case you didn't notice [00:03:00] Jonathan: And Casey hadn't realized back in January, I have lost no. We had the elf on the shelf, which was weird, because that should have been a Christmas episode of Being Elf on the Shelf. Alex D: It was the belated Christmas episode for the year before, maybe because it was probably recorded in mid-December or something like that. Yes, or maybe not. Who knows what is time anyway? Speaker2: Yeah, I feel like January 2021. When was that? Even five years ago? Who knows? Jonathan: And it was. It was the three. It was Alex, Alex and me talking about the Three Stooges. Alex G: See, pretty much. See, I Jonathan: Think we got Sarah to to help us be more Alex G: Normal. Hmm. Did we, though? I'm not sure Sarah: No one has ever said such insulting things Alex G: To be enjoying this fake Jonathan: Feeling that I got insulted there without being aware. Alex G: No, but we Jonathan: Had we had an incredible [00:04:00] breadth of guests this year, but we started off the year with a show that was just the three troublesome turps load. That doesn't even work Alex G: Out to me. Jonathan: And did we don't come to the conclusion that English as a lingua franca wasn't? As big a deal as it's made out to be, and actually certainly I've seen it seems like there's more interpreting assignments around nowadays than they used to be. I don't know if there's the same volume of interpreting in terms of errors, but certainly any fears that we would be replaced by everyone speaking Brussels English seems to or global seem to have been misplaced. Alex G: Yeah. Yeah. Alex D: Go ahead. Go ahead, Alex. Speaker2: No, Alex, you go ahead. Alex D: Oh, I cut this out. Alex G: You go ahead. Speaker2: Read this article yesterday saying that English is even going away as the global e-commerce language, because now it's all about localized and regionalized [00:05:00] content. So then in Europe, it's going to be like all the individual country languages that are going to be more important. And so who knows? But then also like it didn't really impact anything like all this time. And we've talked about English as a lingua franca a lot even since the beginning of the of the podcast. And I don't really feel like anything has changed. Well, neither one way or nor the other Sarah: Research at Nims shows, yeah, we looked into the buying behaviors of online consumers that nine out of 10 global users will ignore your product or service if it's not in the native language Speaker2: Scene. There you go. Sarah: That's a big figure. Speaker2: But does that influence our work? You know, like I agree to these trends, and it totally tracks with the article that I read yesterday. I mean, not that the article supersedes what you're doing because it's actual research, but I feel like does like whether I see Amazon in German or in English. Does it really influence the interpreting market too much? Sarah: Well, I think directly I would say no, but I think it indicates [00:06:00] the same trend or like a proof of, you know, the English is the lingua franca is. I mean, yeah, we all sort of speak English, but do we really speak English well enough? It indicates the same trend or for interpreting from. I've heard from a lot of people also. If you're at a conference and there's no interpreting well, then you don't really allow for a proper debate, right? It's usually the English native speakers, then, that are leading the debate because they can they feel confident they understand everything, and they also have the ability to express themselves properly in their language, whereas the other ones in the audience, they might understand what's going on, but they might not be as confident and expressing themselves or, you know, don't express themselves well. So then you end up with a very one sided debate. And so I think and what we've seen as well, especially in the last year or years now, I have to say almost since the pandemic is that there's so, so many more requests for interpreting from also [00:07:00] clients who never used interpreting services before and that have suddenly seen the value and also the need for interpreting services, which I find quite interesting. Jonathan: I think also we have kidded ourselves for so long. The interpreting is always about the fact that people needing it, going back to the research of a certain Jonathan Daily 2016 PhD thesis. One of the things I found in my PhD is that there are such a thing as symbolic interpreting when interpreting exists because of politics or because it's symbolically nice. And certainly I've done interpreting jobs and the not so recent past where it was obvious the interpreting wasn't really needed for language barriers. It was needed because that was the thing to have or because the regulations said such and such a meeting will be interpreted. And so I think in as much as there's such a thing as symbolic in their thinking, I think anyone who's done certainly confidence interpreting knows that there's such a thing as symbolic interpreting where we're [00:08:00] basically nice in a booth or know these nice pajamas at home for as long as that excess English as a lingua franca isn't an issue. And so I think it's we're having to gain a better understanding of the fact that interpreting isn't there for the same reason that every assignment some assignment is there because there's an actual language need. Sometimes it's there because it's politically astute. Sometimes it's there because of something else. Sarah: Now you said that until that's the way it's not an issue that English is the lingua franca. Well, my question to to you, Jonathan, is why would it even be an issue if it was, I think, Alex G: What, Frank? Jonathan: Well, so my point is that if symbolic interpreting didn't exist, then it would be easier to argue that English as a lingua franca is a threat to interpreting. Because if interpreting is all about language barriers and everyone speaks lingua franca English, on some level, there is no language barrier. But if interpreting is there sometimes because of language barriers, sometimes because [00:09:00] it looks nice or Regulation X as it has to be there, it doesn't matter if everyone speaks English. In fact, you may be in a meeting with everyone, does speak English and they are still interpreting it, certainly not unknown in the literature and not unknown in practice. And so I think we've often. Scene, I'm writing a paper at the moment where we've often seen in thing as always about language access. And the truth is, that's not always true. Sarah: Hmm, that's true. But at the same time, definitely from what I've come across, there's been. Like, maybe that's one trend, and on the other hand, there is a trend from the less traditional clients, the ones they haven't used before, who are realizing that language access is important and especially also accessibility and inclusivity as well. Inclusivity is that a word? Inclusiveness, inclusion, inclusion is nice. I like that one. Ok. Yeah. So in a way that see, I could use an interpreter right now, Speaker2: But [00:10:00] I've also found what Sarah was Sarah, where you were just saying. I've also found that during the pandemic, because all the teams were broken up and everybody was working in the Home Office, there were a lot more digital town halls or all hands meetings or whatever they are called. And we actually got brought on to a lot of those because the teams were international, because now they could be because you can hire people in Spain, you can hire people in wherever. And then obviously, in my case, they were mostly German companies. They held the meeting in German and then we interpret it into English, or they held the meeting in English to make sure that everybody heard the CEO speak. And then we interpreted it into German for the German audience. So I feel like it's it is about for me. What I saw in the pandemic so far was a lot about the the accessibility and not necessarily accessibility in the sense that people don't know what's going on because obviously the work at the company, but I think it's just to make them feel included. So inclusion? Speaker1: Yeah, yeah. Speaker4: Yeah, I think I think kind of the two on the gauge that I think you have both. [00:11:00] And I think on the in terms of English as a lingua franca, I think knowing that symbolic interpreting exists is enough to tell us that English is a lingua franca is not going to wipe out interpreting. But on the other hand, I think there's a real realization probably that lingua franca English isn't always enough for a meeting to work like what you said about, you know, if it's all in English, you're actually reducing the chance for people to have an input. And I think that that is a big deal. Speaker5: I actually I talked to an enterprise client or, well, not our client, but someone who buys interpreting services recently. They told me they used to always have like a few, like five or six on side events, you know, with their company in the different locations across the globe. But when the pandemic hit, you know, that wasn't possible. So then they tried RCI for the first time and decided to just make it one big online event. And of course, you know, it costs some money to do the RCI. But then they said it was really worth it for them because I they just [00:12:00] did one event instead of five, and then they got a lot more participation from some of the different regions in the world than ever before, because for the on site events, they had no interpreting and to them that they could really see the benefits. There's more people signed up than ever before, and there was a lot more actual engagement and debate happening because of interpreting. So they were overwhelmed with that, like positively overwhelmed. And yeah, they said, then they're going to keep it up even post-pandemic, of course, also to have some onsite events, but for the really large ones to do it virtually so that everyone can join and debate together. Speaker2: Yeah, I had a similar thing as well. Speaker4: Yeah, I was going to say it makes a big difference. And I know that interpreters have spent the last two years arguing over raising standards, and that's an important debate. But the reality is actually RSA has been a godsend not just for interpreters, but also for the sector itself. In [00:13:00] that, as the RSA people told us would happen, it has opened up new events. And so I think where we do need to be careful of standards, noise and stuff, we also need to realize that there's a whole new market for interpreting that didn't exist two years ago, and it would be silly to be groping when suddenly there's more interesting than it ever was before. Speaker2: Yeah, but you know, when you just said, like the RSI, people told us, let's take that with a grain of salt because they told us, Yeah, there's going to be so many jobs and you're going to be able to do all of those things. And while that's true, a it's. Not always the best interpreting work, and B, they've not only made more jobs happen, they've also taken old jobs that I have previously made them a lot shittier. So it's not all, you know, gold that glitters. But I just wanted to say one thing before we move on to to maybe the next episode, I don't know if anybody else wanted to say anything, but I just saw this video the other day about the new German foreign minister and how she got shamed [00:14:00] for her English. And I listen to the video and it sounded perfectly acceptable like it wasn't. If she was my interpreter, I wouldn't love it. But you know, for somebody speaking English, it was perfectly understandable she might have had a German accent, but then guess what? She you know, she's German. So I think when it comes to English as a lingua franca, what we should also do is stop language shaming or stop accent shaming because I think I feel like especially in Germany were really bad at this. But also I feel like in Europe in general, there's sort of like this accent thing. I don't really know what to call it. It's it's weird. So let's stop. Speaker5: I completely agree. I think sometimes because, well, in my experience as a German, also one of the three Germans on this podcast said, You know, you often get, well, the word. I think the world loves to make fun of our accent and says that our language sounds fucking ugly, which I disagree with. But so and I think we Germans have a tendency [00:15:00] to like, chime into that and go like, Yeah, you know, and then we're trying to have like the best possible accent in English, at least. So not get shamed more for our ugly German accent, you know? And yeah, I also think not just for the Germans now, but like for any language. Yeah, it's accent shaming people. Accents are wonderful, you know, they tell you where someone comes from and like so much about their culture in their own language and in another language. And also when someone has an accent, it shows you that they're very brave. Speaker2: Exactly because they speak a foreign language. What about you? Do you speak a foreign language? Do you? Speaker5: So probably most people are listening to this too, because they are interpreters. But yeah, Speaker1: Well, yeah. Yes, that is a fair point. Speaker4: Ok, guys, then you can make your own a bit. Speaker1: Yeah, yeah. Speaker2: Actually, on that note of accents in English as a lingua franca, we just kept it moving and went to the UK. So Jonathan, why don't you just take it from there? Speaker5: Sweet transition. Speaker1: Good segue, right? Great. Speaker4: That was like, say, Speaker1: Wait, did it? Speaker4: We didn't have an award this year for Segway of the year, [00:16:00] possibly because it ran out of battery. Speaker1: But, you know, Speaker4: To nominate your troublesome Segway of the year, feel free if you have that depth of knowledge of the whole year's worth of episodes. Fantastic. So the UK special, I thought we had Paul Appleyard and we had Kirstie Highmore Morgan on, and I think it was really good because the UK, apart from London, often isn't a traditional interpreting market. It can be a little bit of the Wild West at times and there's a lot of differences. But it was good to have an episode on the UK to help people understand. Actually, the UK probably isn't even one market. And actually, can I see something a bit crazy that seem might disagree with? I think the growth of remote interpreting is basically flattening out the idea of interpreting markets geographically anyway. Speaker1: So explain this Speaker4: Off in terms of remote, in terms of remote. Speaker1: Explain yourself. Speaker4: For example, in terms of remote [00:17:00] interpreting, my remote interpreting projects have all been within, quote unquote, the North America market. Speaker1: Mm hmm. Speaker4: It's just how it's happened. Where does you get something like COP26 in Glasgow, where I happen to know that I feel proportion of the interpreters weren't from the UK somewhere? Some weren't. And so I think because it's not the ideal where, you know, you can log on and get an interpreting assignment whenever you want. And but remote interpreting has flattened this idea of geographies, and I think it was Alex G on an earlier episode talked about, you know, remote interpreting and professional domiciles and the ongoing relevance. And I think while we're beginning to see in some places return to in-person or micro independent, I think we have to realize that interpreting is not what it was three or four years ago, and we might need new ways of thinking about the [00:18:00] idea of something like a professional domicile or a mark. I think for things like public service interpreting, yes, that are going to be national markets forever for business and confidence interpreting. Yeah, it's Speaker1: Debatable. Speaker5: What do you think that I disagree with that? It definitely 100 percent agree with that. And I think and this is probably also controversial. I sometimes don't understand why we need to have the domicile thing in interpreting because like, do other professions have this do in translators have this? I don't think so. Like why? What is the provenance Speaker2: Of the translators don't work on site. Speaker5: I know and I know it's the travel cost and all these things as well. I get that. But still, there can be other ways to work it out. No. Speaker2: I mean, there are other ways there were other ways before corona, right, like there were different pricing models, there were other ways of doing it. So it's that's not the only way of doing it, but I think it just kind of created a place where not everybody could just go all willy nilly and kind of dabble in all the individual markets in the country. So [00:19:00] just kind of like, no, Sarah. So, like the idea was right, if I live in Munich, I can't just work in Berlin and basically undercut the Berlin people because my domicile is in Munich. So according to the actual rules, I would have to charge travel from Munich to Berlin, which I get, which I also find fair that if I want to work in Berlin, which is not my market, then I should not work as a local and basically take a pay cut to pay for my own accommodation and pay for my own travel. That makes a lot of sense to me, because then what's the point of actually being a local? Speaker4: I think though, to be honest, within a national thing, within a country like Germany, I don't know how much price differentiation you'll get between cities. I can see it more. When you had the UK, which historically has underpaid conference interpreters in the UK and territories saying we will go and work in France and will charge UK rates that I can see the domicile thing. But I think the reality is I can see interrupting going towards and is the whole specialization [00:20:00] settings thing as well. I can see interpreting going towards interpreters, work with specific clients model. And in that case, the domicile is irrelevant because it's not like you're competing with our local. The client is working with you. And that's it. Speaker2: Yeah, but again, nothing is changed in that regard. That's always been the case. Like, if the client brings me to Berlin and pays for my stuff, that was never an issue ever before. Speaker5: Yeah, but in your example, yeah, exactly. I was going to say, though, technically, if you know, if you're in Berlin, in Munich and you want to work in Berlin, then technically you actually charge more because of the, of course, the travel and accommodation, right? Right. But if you don't do that, then the only one who's losing out is you. You're not undercutting people, you're just working in the same know you are Speaker2: Undercutting people in the sense that I'm taking a pay cut in order to pay for my accommodation and my travel. Speaker5: Yes, so you get paid effectively, Speaker2: Lowering my rate. So. Exactly. So I'm basically kind of, you know, ruining the market in that sense because of the client is still getting me without having to pay the premium of actually shipping me to the location. Speaker5: Yeah, but in the end, I mean, they Speaker2: Could be booking people for the same price that they could be booking me for in Berlin. Speaker5: Sure. But I [00:21:00] mean, you technically, you get paid the same rate as the ones in Berlin is just what you do with it after, right? Like for the client, they don't know it's the same rate. You're not lowering the Speaker2: Rate, it's the same rate. I'm not lowering the rate. But then if the client wants me from Munich to Berlin, the client should be paying more because it costs more for me to get to Berlin and whatever. Speaker5: But in my opinion, that's your problem and not the clients or the other interpreters problem, because no man pays the same amount to you or the person in Berlin, you know? Speaker1: Yes. Speaker2: Yeah, exactly. If they want me and I don't live in Berlin, they need to pay more. So it is the client's problem. Speaker5: Yeah, but if you don't charge them for travel, it's your choice that you pay that yourself. Speaker2: And that's the point about domicile, right? So if you don't work in your domicile, you should be charging for the travel. That's the whole Speaker5: Point. I think that should be up to you as a freelancer. You know, that's my point as well. It is up to you. Speaker1: Like, it's totally up. Speaker2: Yeah, it's just yeah, yeah, it's totally up to everyone, but it's just a discussion about the dumbest ideas that you should be charging it to make it fair for everybody else. Speaker5: Yeah, but I don't see how it's unfair in my opinion. It's still if I want to, in the end, get less out of it because, [00:22:00] you know, I'm not lowering the actual rate for the interpreting assignment when deciding to do is to not get the pay for the travel and the accommodation. And then that's your problem, you know, but you're not changing the rate for hour or day or whatever in the market, you know? Speaker2: Yeah, it's true. But then the client still gets more out of the euros they spend, basically. Speaker5: Not really. They just have a wider pool of interpreters to work with. That's all it is. They don't get more out of it. Speaker1: They do get more out of it, though, Speaker5: And they just have more interpreters to work with. They have. Speaker2: So I feel like it's so funny how Jonathan just has, like Jonathan. Just just speak. Don't even try to just go. Speaker4: I was going to say, can I? Can I throw another into an iron into the fire here? Is that as a consultant interrupter? One of my biggest annoyances is when I ask interpreters for the price and I know it in my emails. Can I get the total price? Because most clients I've come across don't really care that you're paying X for travel and X for this, it's just how much do we have to [00:23:00] rate? Do we have to pay in the final invoice and the number of interpreters that I write to as a consultant and say I need the total price? And so they say me, Well, it's desperate. It's desperate DM. It's not. It's like not. I don't care how you arrived at the price. Give me a figure. And I think for me, certainly in the UK market and for me when I do a consulting. We often we have these rules that may have been there for a good reason that make working with interpreters more awkward than it needs to be. So if a client says, can I get an oil in price, you give them a figure. Speaker4: And if they ask how you come to it, you then give them the breakdown. If a client says, I need an all in price and you start quoting. It's this plus there's times. No, no, no. Just give. Give them the figure. Tell them how much the invoice is going to be. And I think it's where RSI has helped in the in the majority of cases, it has made pricing models simpler. We could argue that it reduced prices and it may well have done. But [00:24:00] from my personal point of view as a consultant, interpreting was overdue a price model overhaul anyway to make working with interpreters more user friendly for buyers. So this is just my thing as a consultant. If someone asks you for a price for you interpreting and they're one thing in the oil price, give them one number, that's all they're asking for. You can give them breathing rate that if you need to, but they need that final number. They don't want to be sitting doing the math that you could have done and just give them a number. Speaker1: Sorry. Run over. Speaker2: I don't think anybody disagrees here. Speaker5: No, I agree. And for me, that was part of the point. You just said, you're right and it it shouldn't matter where you work, how much you get out of it. In the end, it's your problem then. You just, of course, you're come in as competition in the market, but just by being there, but you're not lowering rates as my point in that. Speaker4: So, yeah, and that was the UK episode, believe it or not, Speaker2: But that is not at all what we talked about in the UK episode, but it was still a really good episode. Yeah, with my dear friend Kirsty, [00:25:00] it was a really good episode Speaker4: That that's giving us a wonderful insight into how interpreters think. Speaker1: Nice, that was hilarious. Speaker2: Came later, though Speaker4: That was March, believe it or not. Speaker2: Oh, that is very true. Oh my God. Ok, that is definitely a contender for Segway. For it was my Speaker4: Last episode before I went on paternity leave, and that was Kelly in Speaker5: The last one I missed before coming back from maternity leave. Speaker1: Yeah. Speaker4: Time passing of the time. That was one where, if I remember correctly was Alex de Alex and me interviewing Kelly and Alex Katzmaier going kind of just taking it all in for a lot of the episodes. Speaker1: Oh yeah, for sure. Speaker3: I miss it. Which is probably mean it's one one of the best episodes of the year, I think. Or maybe even. Speaker1: Yeah, it definitely Speaker2: Has, like some of the highest numbers, for Speaker1: Sure. Speaker4: We've we've had a really research heavy year and yet we've had a pretty good year for for downloads. [00:26:00] So that says that everyone loves research. Speaker2: The correlation does not equal causation. Speaker1: Well done, Alex. Trust me in Speaker4: Interviews, but there's even a correlation is enough to get you celebrating. Speaker1: Yeah, that's very true. Yeah, I feel that. Speaker2: But it was a really good episode. And I mean, Kellyanne, you know, he's always a good time around to have around. But I think the episode, it was basically just like Battle of the Titans, just like you and him, and I was just very much in the background, just giggling every now and again and saying, Oh, I Speaker1: Love it, but Speaker3: Just just admiring what's going on. Speaker2: Yeah, I was like, Oh my God, what is this even? Speaker3: Yeah. What language are they speaking? Speaker4: That sounds like a that sounds like why I like to call a insult felt like a compliment. Speaker1: You know, not too far off, but clearly, clearly, it Speaker2: Was very accessible because it's one of the best episodes we've had in terms of download numbers. So, you know, Speaker4: I was joking with someone recently about there should be a competition for the world's best for compliments. [00:27:00] Speaker1: Oh, that will be fun. Speaker4: I would love that. Yes. I was once told I thought, You're much more interesting than I thought you would be. Speaker1: Wow. Speaker3: Talk about a couple insult. Speaker1: Backhanded compliment. Speaker2: A masterclass. Speaker4: Yeah, it's what I like to call it. That a compliment. So I missed the next, like four episodes, I think, Speaker2: Oh, the next one. The April one was actually one of my favorite ones. That was Speaker3: Really I wasn't even there, but that was Speaker1: One. Speaker2: I mean, I guess correlation causation, Speaker1: I don't know. Speaker2: Yeah, this was the I can show you the world of interpreting where we had people from. Oh, God, everywhere. Tons of tons of countries. Yeah, the whole world. Just sending us videos, sending us clips from every single country and just reporting a bit on the individual interpreting markets on, you know, how Covid's been. And I thought that was super fascinating because we [00:28:00] all know a lot about the markets that we dabble in. You know, obviously our home market and then kind of the markets that we work with. But I don't know, you know, Vietnam, Japan, African countries, South American countries, I have no idea about that. That was super interesting. I really liked that a lot. That was really cool. And thank you very much again to all the people who sent some stuff. Speaker5: Plus, we did some awesome Segway. Speaker2: We had some awesome Segways. Speaker3: Just us on this episode. I'm wondering how many people got the movie reference and the title? Speaker1: I don't know. We didn't. So, yeah, Speaker3: I didn't get a lot of Speaker1: Feedback. I didn't get that really. We talked about Speaker4: It. I get that reference because I was all delayed when that came out. And one thing to sing that does I want. Speaker5: I still don't get it Speaker1: Because the theme song from ever seen Aladdin, the Aladdin, Aladdin, it's it's called Speaker5: I'll show you the work. But when I watched Aladdin, I was a little kid, so I watched it in German In my [00:29:00] novel. Speaker1: Do I know this anymore, Speaker2: So I don't know. Yeah, but then also the new Aladdin came out and they did it again. Speaker3: I didn't watch the Will Smith one. Speaker1: Yeah, yeah, I know what. Speaker5: I will watch it and then I will sing with you. Speaker2: Yes. And then you'll be like, Oh my God, the episode title is so clever, really? Speaker1: Alex and Alex who came up with that? Speaker4: Yeah, you're on Spotify. Troublesome Turps the album. Speaker1: Yeah, yeah. Oh, we should do a Christmas Speaker5: Album next year, right? Speaker1: A whole new. And we're going to have to cut this. Yeah, yeah. I've been waiting to happen, but you can Speaker2: Do like a couple of episodes, a couple of seconds, I guess. I think like as long as it's under three seconds, it doesn't copyright infringement anyways. We don't. It's a good it's good to go watch the movie and then sing the song when you listen to our episode. Speaker3: Exactly. So I'll check out the soundtrack on Apple Music, Spotify, whatever you use for listening. Speaker2: Whatever you listen to trouble terms, you can probably also [00:30:00] listen to the Aladdin soundtrack, right? Speaker3: Well, also on Spotify. Speaker4: We should do a comedy like we all sing, but it's a charity project, so the more people donate, the less of our singing they actually have to hear. Speaker2: Well, but then it's kind of one of those things where people donate for us to stop singing. Speaker3: Right? Yeah, we don't want that. We could do an improv, Speaker1: An empowering Speaker5: People stop us to stop. Uh, pay us to stop doing improv. Speaker1: Yeah, people, we must be stopped. Donate now. Exactly. Speaker3: Speaking of singing, I think Kate Hamilton actually does a lot of singing and music in her work, and she was that. Speaker1: That was one of what I did there episodes. Speaker3: Yeah, she was our guest on the May hang on. Yeah, the May episode. Yes, multilingual is normal. That was all we talked about the Babbel babies. And yeah, there was lots of linguistic goodies Speaker5: There for you will be hitting my nerd spot Speaker3: And chilled like language acquisition in children, that kind of Speaker1: Thing. Tell us fantastic. She did sing. Yeah. Speaker2: Weren't they singing Norwegian kids songs? Speaker5: All sorts of songs, all sorts of songs [00:31:00] in different languages? And, you know, basically to surround kids with different languages from very early age and to just more make it fun and normal to hear and kind of sing, I guess, other languages. Yeah, I think that's Speaker3: A music is a good way to pick up a language. Speaker1: Yeah, yeah, definitely. That was funny. And also, I just loved her energy. She's she was. She was cool. Speaker3: Yeah. And it was not her last appearance. A bit of foreshadowing was Speaker2: Not spoiler Speaker1: Alert. Speaker4: You know, I'm just glad to hear the word normal related to troublesome therapists, because that's not something I hear a lot Speaker3: Of the first association you might have. Yeah, exactly. Speaker2: Who wants to be normal anyways? Speaker1: Yeah, exactly. Speaker4: And then we have the episode that I was really sad to miss, and that was talk about the clash of the Titans. Yes. Graham Turner and Henry Liu talking about whether I will take over. Can I nominate that? We have a redo. Speaker2: Didn't you even initiate that JD? Speaker4: I initiated [00:32:00] and I had to miss it because coming back after baby was extra hard. This time I I'm quite happy for a rematch so long as it's a Three-Way rematch, because one of the four of us wrote a book on that subject, and I can't remember which one of us that was. Speaker1: If you know, please send us an email. Speaker4: No, if you know by the book, I have five kids, please. Speaker1: By this link. Speaker3: By three books actually by three of them three books. And it wasn't really a collab because neither Graham nor Henry have a podcast, either. Maybe they should. I don't know. Maybe they should have a podcast Speaker2: Or like Henry would be Speaker1: Good. I totally got Speaker5: Schooled during that episode, especially by Graham. Yeah, yeah, totally. We had like a I think we had a very good discussion of like, I think this, yes, but I think this and I'm back and forth and it was really good. I learned a lot and I like a good debate like that. Speaker3: I probably got school, too. I just didn't. I didn't know that [00:33:00] Speaker5: At school in the best possible way. Like, literally, I learned something that was awesome. Speaker4: Just just imagine that happening about once a month for four years and you have my team because Graham was my senior PhD supervisor. But it means that when you get to your viva and you have your two examiners, Speaker1: You're going, you know, you Speaker5: Can imagine that. To be honest, it was. Speaker4: The problem is, is when someone supervises your PhD, you start becoming like them. And I find myself citing Graham on a regular basis. And yeah, Speaker5: I get that. I quote Renato all the time. He's my mentor. Speaker1: Everything shot at glory Speaker5: For, you know, as an editing my stuff. Speaker3: Yeah, exactly. Speaker4: And then there was interpreters, became superheroes. And you know, if we're going to confront the growth of AI, we have to assemble. Speaker2: Yeah, which is funny because I was also the second movie reference, the first Avengers reference this year. [00:34:00] Yes. But that was a cool episode, the one in July where we assembled the interpreters, where we had three interpreters and networks, we assembled a ton of people. So we assembled Louise Jarvis. We assembled, we assembled Monica OTT and we also assembled Sybil and Hal Bock from the Congress talking. And obviously, Monica is from from my network confidential matter Deutschland. So Calliope Conference Deutschland and Congress token meets the troublesome terms or met the troublesome terms. And we talked about why even bother doing interpreting networks, what's the what's the benefit, what's? What is it good for? Speaker3: Yeah, exactly, because we of course, we always do our research and preparation before every episode, but it was interesting for me to see how different they all were in the end, like how differently they're set up. And that was that was great to see. Speaker2: And it was also cool because everybody had a different intent behind it. You know, like, [00:35:00] why did you do a network? Everybody had a different answer. And yeah, Speaker3: And they all said they learned from each other, which is nice, if you know, I guess that is to benefit from an episode, not just the hosts and the listeners. Speaker2: You know, if only one person learned something, we've done our job here. Speaker1: Hmm. Speaker5: I already said I learned something. So we're done. Ok. Speaker1: Thanks, people. That's a wrap. Wrap it up for 21 twenty one Speaker4: Twenty one twenty one. Speaker1: Your television, right? Speaker4: It's just the dishwasher fire Speaker1: Alert because we're on dishwashers. Brace, brace. Speaker4: I think one of the things that I have learned this year is that you're only as good as the colleagues who you trust. I've had projects that went really well this year, and I've had a project that did not go as well, and you suddenly realize that an awful lot of it comes down to who's in the team. And if you get the right people [00:36:00] in the team, amazing things are possible if there are issues within the team. It seems like little things become hard. And so although I'm not in a formal interpreting network, I never realize that having contact of interpreters who can deliver when you need them to deliver is incredibly valuable. And perhaps one of the most valuable things that interpreters have is that address book. Speaker1: That is true. The Rolodex Speaker4: Or a semi organized Excel Speaker1: File? Yes. Speaker3: Yeah. No judgment there. Speaker4: Well, see I I did the presentation. I've done it three times now in three different places, and if anyone wants me to do it again, I will do it on the importance of your support network as an interpreter. And so I mentioned that one thing that I find is irreplaceable is a colleague that you can turn to when you need someone to pull you out of a hole. That's the person that you can trust [00:37:00] it. I need someone who can deliver the person who can be at the end of the phone. And also I also say every time you know how like at school, there might be something the teacher would never let you sit next to because you would get up to mischief. Speaker1: Yeah. Hmm. Speaker4: I always make the point that as an adult, you need people that you really shouldn't sit next to them because something's about to go crazy. Yeah. And so we have a podcast, so that's why we're having a podcast. Speaker3: So who's the teacher then? Speaker2: So I think we all know Speaker3: Moving right along to Speaker1: The August episode, Speaker3: Which was really just a quick summer update. But I have very distinct memories of that being a lot of fun to record because we had a long chat and then recorded a short little summer update, which we. Yes. Speaker2: So how long was it? Like five minutes. And I think it took us like almost an hour because we were chatting so much. Speaker1: Yeah, five minutes and 58 seconds. Eight seconds. So we're prepared. Yeah, yeah, [00:38:00] yeah. Speaker3: Yeah, that's what we're doing. Speaker2: Just the magic of the editing, right? Speaker1: Yeah, exactly. Speaker4: Thank you. Say the troublesome trips that most people never need to hear. Speaker3: That's a good thing. Yep. Speaker1: The dark side, the chemistry. Speaker4: The chemistry of this show comes from the fact that we actually enjoy chatting to each other. The difficulty for Alex editing the show comes from the fact that we all enjoy chatting with each other. Fair. Speaker1: Very fair. Yeah. Speaker3: Right. The number sixty five was another research episode. I think this was also your idea, Jonathan. Wasn't it one of your favorite researchers? Speaker4: One of my favorite research was a researcher who I learned a lot from the only researcher who I voluntarily went on a on a four eight hour return train journey to go and see for an hour because he was presenting in Manchester and that four hours there train was delayed for hours back. And yeah, she she is one of my favorite researchers and I think she did a really good job on the show. [00:39:00] It was one of these very smooth. Speaker3: I remember. I don't think we've mentioned Speaker4: That there was a really smooth, controlled recording from what I remember. And it was really, really good that it still got me thinking, I think and probably writing about that, about something to do with that at the moment because someone assumed the professional and everything always looks the same. And I'm like, No. Speaker1: So. Speaker4: And not what they assumed the interpreters are always do exactly what the textbooks say we do. Speaker3: The truth is we don't. That's not true. If you want to know more or listen to the Voice, Speaker4: Listen to the full episode, then you see why. I almost don't need to read the paper of your daily episode. If you listen to that episode, you can't write now. And then we had and we were all talking about this earlier. Three of us have an early Christmas present, which is rather deep and wide, and that is the wonderful book edited by its exhibit to solicit Mickey allowable Mikasa. Speaker1: Why else could it be? I'm still waiting for my copy. Speaker4: We [00:40:00] had. We had our very first troublesome times book club. Speaker1: Yes. That was a labor of love. A lot of you could say that again, yeah, a lot of sweat. A lot of tears. Speaker2: Yeah, not not evenly spread among the four troublesome terms. Speaker1: One of us Speaker2: Spread a lot of tears, Speaker1: Shed a lot of tears. Speaker3: And yet you pulled through Alex. Oh, sorry. Speaker1: It's fine. Speaker2: Yeah. I don't think this comes as a surprise to anyone. Speaker3: Academic publishing is not for the faint of heart. Speaker2: It is not for the faint of heart. Speaker1: It's not so fun. Speaker4: Tell me about it, but it's prestigious. Speaker1: Yeah. Speaker3: But Elizabeth and Mikayla did a great job, of course. Speaker2: They also did a great job. I mean, the book is pretty fantastic. I set my mama copy and she wanted to buy it. And then she saw the price tag and she was like, Maybe, maybe you just take a picture Speaker1: Of your name. And I was like, Yeah, I can. I can just just do that. It was that your mom? Speaker2: Yeah, my mom. I mean, she worries she works at a bookstore. I was like, Yeah, maybe you'll get a discount. But I [00:41:00] think it's a bit much for her, for her to just have on her shelf. And, you know, given that I just co-wrote one of the chapters. But my mom likes it, so that's good. Speaker5: It was posed with the book. Speaker1: Yes, exactly. Speaker3: And it's a nice cover, a framed picture. Speaker2: It is a very lovely cover. But what is it? Speaker3: Actually, I don't know. I just got a nice comment from a friend who said, I just love the cover. He has nothing to do with interpreting, but he really enjoys the cover. So there you go. That's good. Speaker4: This is giving me flashbacks to cover conversations, so I suddenly realized that I was an adult when I was writing my first book and I was having an in-depth email conversation with production on what the cover should look like. And suddenly I felt like a grown up. It's like I have design opinions. A man who struggles to draw stegman. Speaker2: Boy, this one's for the first book. Speaker4: My first book, which came out in twenty sixteen. The brief for both of my books was You must not let the book look like an academic book. Speaker2: Oh, the one with a fish jumping from Speaker4: The fish jumping. [00:42:00] That was, I think, design number five, and I also requested changes. There was a long conversation. There are a lot of designs for that book. The second one was a lot easier. But yeah, so yeah. But also, I mean, we should talk about the episode a lot more talking about the production process of a of a handbook. And look, this thing might actually said handbook rather than encyclopedia. Talking about the production process of a handbook is, I mean, it's incredible the amount of work that goes in and like, it's almost like every word on the page in each checked and double checked and every bit of need to check and double checked. And if you have a diagram or a picture Speaker3: That's more checking Speaker1: Yet, yes, Speaker4: You need a cup of tea. You need a lot of cups of tea if you have diagrams, but it's just that's what book production looks like, and I was really pleased. I saw an article recently that said book sales have gone up during the pandemic, so I was really pleased. Everyone wants physical books. [00:43:00] Speaker2: So what that means is go out and buy the books. Speaker1: Our books? Speaker2: Yes. Whichever book has our names attached to it. Speaker3: Anybody really just Speaker2: Buy anything, any book reading a book? Speaker4: And if you're a publisher with a far advance Speaker1: And get in touch with Jonathan, Speaker4: The November episode, I if I'm honest, I looked at the brief of the November episode of When. If this works, it will be incredible. But then I realized that we had the organizational skills of Alex and Alex behind that. Oh, and when incredibly smoothly and see it is insightful. Comments were brilliant and. It was it was really lovely to have so many podcasts that absolutely zero podcast rivalry. Speaker5: Yeah, it was really nice. I remember enjoying it. I don't remember making insightful comments, but that's very nice. Speaker4: I remember you make it making insightful comments and asking important questions. Speaker5: I say so many things. You know, I can [00:44:00] only remember half of them, Speaker1: But I mean, all of them are. I mean, it's. Speaker3: Truth be told, you do a lot more broadcasting than we do these days. Speaker1: Yeah, that's also true. Speaker4: Yeah, yeah. My New Year's resolution is to resurrect my YouTube channel next year. I'm actually working on a project for it, which will come out sometime in the new year. So, yeah, I've heard it here first. You know, you look on there and say the entire thing around January and on my website or in January, it's going to be a multimedia project that I'm currently working on. Speaker5: You should check out live streaming as well, Jonathan. Speaker1: It's fun Speaker4: When we if I can livestream with a baby Speaker1: Or you Speaker2: Can livestream from the booth, Speaker4: That's that would get you in serious. I wonder if there's a regulation about live streaming from the booth. But yeah, so the one a couple of things that struck me about that episode. One. There is zero podcast rivalry. Despite the fact we're all in the same nontraditional space space. Speaker1: Oh, actually, you interpreted [00:45:00] the Spurs. It's like the Speaker5: Metaverse. But specifically for Speaker1: It is the metaverse. Oh my god. Speaker3: Finally, somebody talks about the metaverse. Speaker1: Finally, I Speaker4: Was thinking Star Trek. I was thinking like Deep Space Nine this year. Speaker2: Did you buy the by the way? Did you hear that Bill Gates said today that or yesterday that in three years time, all meetings will be taking place in the Metaverse? So we'll also obviously be interpreting in the metaverse. Is that what that means? So what does that mean? Speaker4: The discussion is the most overhyped stuff, since machine interpreting is five to eight. It's probably going to look nothing Speaker1: Like bitcoin like it's Speaker4: All. The Metaverse has a use case, not it's better than bitcoin Speaker1: In that sense. We're going to get so much fed Speaker2: Bitcoin, but that's going to give us a lot of traffic. Dogecoin, what is it? The Crazy Monkey Yacht Party party? What was it? Speaker4: 2020 [00:46:00] is the launch of the troublesome turps. Speaker1: Coin 2020 Speaker3: Perturbs living in the past Speaker4: Crypto Speaker2: Theft. Yeah, man. January 2022 Speaker1: Troubled. Oh dude, you should Speaker3: Have that trademarked very soon. Speaker2: Very, very Speaker1: Now. Yeah. Speaker3: Get the domain, at least Speaker4: At some point in the past couple of years, I had someone email me trying to convince me that all interim things should be blockchain somehow. Yeah, right? I was like, Speaker2: Well, our brain is a blockchain. Nobody knows how it works. It's a huge black box. And somehow Speaker5: I feel like I can't criticize blockchain too much because I don't know enough about it to Speaker1: Really have not a reason to criticize Merkel Speaker5: For it, but certainly not enough to. Speaker1: Yeah, I Speaker2: Know it has a Merkle tree, and at every single conference that I interpreted about the blockchain, they always showed a picture of Angela Merkel, and then sometimes she [00:47:00] was a tree. Sometimes she was holding a tree. Sometimes she was in a tree. And then they were saying, and then it's about the Merkle tree. But I don't know what that actually mean. Speaker4: So, so can I just say blockchain has a lot in common with hiring an interpreter? It's supposed to be a super useful process, but it costs far too much energy. Hmm. Hmm. That's my kind of philosophical makeup. Speaker2: I'm confused about that analogy. Speaker4: And also, at some point, you need to prove that you've done some work. Speaker1: Oh yeah. Speaker4: So yeah, but so one thing that I would say that I've learned this year is interpreting has had its debates and we've had some Twitter discussions feuds. But on the other hand, that podcast of all club thing really taught me that when you get down to the bottom of it, the vast majority of interpreters are really nice people and really all want to help the profession. [00:48:00] And a lot of this I'm not a massive linguistics fan, but a lot of interpreters cross over into the linguistics world as well. And so it was really encouraging that a profession that is as old as interpreting probably the world's second oldest profession manages to adjust to no matter what's Speaker1: Happening there at all. Wait, wait, wait. Wait, wait, wait. Speaker5: Wait. Prostitution. Speaker1: There was. Oh, shoot, Speaker5: Wait, Hunter-Gatherer. And then interpret Speaker1: It. Yeah. Hunter gathering stories. They're not Speaker4: A profession because it's Speaker5: Subsistence selling what you hunt, Speaker1: Try or Speaker4: Gather. But then Speaker1: What? God, what is happening? Yeah, I gather. That's that's true. Are we on the hunt for some insight here? Oh my God. People, it's been a year. What we're trying Speaker2: To say here, it's been a year. It's been a long year. Speaker1: It's [00:49:00] been. Why do you think? Why do I feel like you said the same thing last year on the end of year? Speaker5: We have nothing good to say anymore. Speaker1: I mean, it's the same year. What else are we going to say? It feels like it has been named as 2021 Speaker5: Exactly like long, long year. Speaker3: Yeah, it's been 2020 all over again. Just slightly different. Yeah, yeah. Speaker5: It's like when people turn 30 and then for the rest of their life, they're like 29 something, you know, like it's like you think you're like 30 would be twenty nine, a thirty one, 29 nine B. Speaker1: I haven't got that one. Yeah. Speaker5: No, you don't. On the phone. This is what it's like. It's 2020 B. Now or a I guess. Speaker3: Yeah, I've heard people say I'm 35 with nine years experience or something like Speaker1: That's also charming. Speaker2: Yeah, but so then basically once we hit 20 30, then we can actually say, OK, now we're moving on into the real 2021. Speaker1: That's right. Yeah. Fair enough. We just skip it. Ok, like we just skip a decade. I mean, who cares? Speaker5: I hope it's not going to take a decade. Speaker1: Also, I heard on the radio [00:50:00] Speaker2: That somebody was actually referring it to as the 20s, and I was like, No, I mean, I obviously know this is what we're living in. We're living in the 20s, but it seemed so. Glamorous. Speaker1: Thank you. Speaker5: I like it, but I also wonder, doesn't the Roaring Twenties the original? Speaker2: That's what I'm thinking, you know, like soaring 20s, like cool fashion. Speaker5: We are the opposite of roaring 20s. We're like the Speaker1: Opposite of that. Yeah, we have not earned Speaker2: Being called Speaker5: The twain like the antidote to Speaker1: That one. Yeah. Speaker2: Yes. Something needs to happen. Speaker4: We're not the roaring 20s. We are the Speaker1: Largest Speaker4: Possible 20s. Yeah, the boring 20s. But yet? Thank you everyone for oh, we still recorded this year. Speaker1: Is this thing on? Speaker4: It has been a real pleasure to take you through this year, even though I've missed a portion of it as well. But I know that we got some feedback recently about someone who discovered the podcast for the first time this year. You [00:51:00] know, it's actually great fun to be able to do something that the international community obviously enjoys. And whatever project you do in life, you get to a point where you plateau and you think, is this thing still working? And then you get good feedback and you realize, yes, it is. So we we're going to keep doing good stuff. I hope we're going to keep doing good stuff. I think interpreting has been through a lot in the past two years, and it'd be good to talk about the future a bit more and to to be positive. I've been amazed that people's optimism we've all struggled this year. But you know, if we can make you laugh about it and help you see the funny side of things, then we've done a good job. Speaker5: Amen to that. Speaker2: Amen.