CIOL's CEO, John Worne, interviews Christophe Fricker (pictured left) after the University of Bristol’s MA in Translation was approved for Validated programme status.

To watch a short clip of the interview, you can scroll down to the bottom of this Q&A article for the link to the video.

Q&A

John Worne 

Could you tell me a little bit about Bristol, your role there and give some background as to what you're trying to achieve with the Masters in Translation. 

Christophe Fricker 

I’m the Programme Director for the MA in Translation at the University of Bristol. My own background is in translating from English into German. But I've also worked in pretty much every other capacity that someone doing translation could possibly work in: I've worked as an editor; I've worked quite extensively as a commissioner of translation, so I've also been on the client side; I have edited and published and proofread translations; and I have engaged in legal proceedings about translation! In other words, I have first-hand knowledge of quite a few stakeholder perspectives on language and multilingual work. 

In terms of my own translations. I have done almost everything from financial reports to opera. But I'm currently focusing on large non-fiction literature projects – book and book-length translation projects largely. I'm saying this because in a sense it's typical of the MA Translation staff. There is a balance between people with industry experience and also great researchers and people working on various developments within the language industries. 

This goes to the core of what we're trying to do on the Bristol MA programme, which is to equip people to be analytically adventurous practitioners across languages. We want people to have the research skills that you need not just in academia, but also as a practising translator, and the confidence to ‘put out there’ new techniques in language work that will make a difference to clients. This has traditionally been the focus of the programme, and it's something we're trying to constantly develop further in light of technological change – as well as changing business practices and communication patterns, which is something that we always have an eye on.  

John Worne 

And who do you feel the programme is for primarily? Given it's online it is potentially very international in its audience? 

Christophe Fricker 

We are very international in our student body. Bristol’s MA is a long-established online programme and was online well before pandemic times. I often quip that my life has changed very little during the pandemic because I was working in a programme that was online anyway. 

The student body is also unusually diverse. Of course we welcome anybody who applies to the programme with the right qualifications; however, it seems that it is particularly attractive to three groups:  

• One is recent graduates from language undergraduate programmes who want to continue to work with languages.  
• The second is people who already have a foothold in the language industry and want to ‘up their game’ where an MA is considered a massive piece of CPD. And we recognise that more and more employers nowadays, whether formally or informally, require an MA in Translation.  
• And the third group is people with a career in other sectors who have come to recognise that they love languages and would like to strengthen that aspect of their work, or even switch careers. 

So it's a diverse student body in terms of professional and disciplinary backgrounds, as well as in terms of location and socio-demographic factors. 

John Worne

That must be a huge strength for the cohort. Being from quite diverse backgrounds, there'll be so much they can learn from each other? 

Christophe Fricker 

That is absolutely the case, and it makes for really interesting discussions.  I can also genuinely say that the Translation Industry course, which I teach, really prepares people for a career in the industry, helping them to set up a professional presence. We ask students to carry out research into market segments, and have debates on the various perspectives and come together around key questions, like: “How do you present yourself to a potential client?” These sessions are intense, stimulating and fascinating because people's experiences are so different. Everybody can see how their specific background has a bearing on what we're all trying to do. 

John Worne

That’s so important because the markets are so diverse, and indeed the cultures that people are translating into. So, moving on, what was the challenge that you were facing or the opportunity that you saw that brought you in the direction of the Chartered Institute of Linguists? 

Christophe Fricker 

We're very aware of ClOL, as we are of other professional organisations in the UK and beyond. We recognise the work they do and the role they play in advocacy for language and in the training of linguists. And also in building bridges between stakeholders. This is something we recognise and greatly admire. CIOL is an established player for us.  

The reason why we were keen to engage around the RVC scheme is that it seems to be building a bridge that is attractive for our students. Our students are already getting their MA from a great university on a very good programme. But for them it also matters to be able to say that a professional organisation has come to the conclusion that the programme they have embarked on is a very good one. 

John Worne

I think this is very interesting. One of the things that we do a lot of at the Chartered Institute of Linguists is talk to different stakeholders and talk to different sectors. And one of the challenges is that different sectors and stakeholders don't always understand each other, or talk the same language.  For example when you're talking to serving members of the armed forces, they're working to different standards and different norms than you might find with diplomats or with businesses or with other sorts of language groups. I think that's one of the things that we can help with - a translation of standards between sectors - so that people can recognise and feel confident in their understanding of the standards of others. So, what about CIOL made you particularly pursue a partnership with us? 

Christophe Fricker 

There's always merit in working with organisations that have a similar clout, as it were. While it is obviously interesting to work with partners large and small and all kinds of entities, sometimes the essential partners are obvious. So I was very pleased to discover that the RVC scheme is now available. And I think a strength of the scheme is that it contributes to a bigger benchmarking exercise. It is important for these exercises to be carried out rigorously and systematically whilst preserving the necessary flexibility. It’s great that we have the RVC logo now and there’s a nice visual that we can share and a helpful assessment that you have delivered. But I also see it as a process of mutual engagement, and more of a starting point rather than an endpoint with a seal of approval and that's it. 

John Worne

Yes, engagement and harmonisation, in particular in academic life, always improves standards. Because the more you can tune into, compare and understand what other institutions are doing; the better everyone gets. Standards are a force for good, and a force for improvement. This is really important and something that we want RVC to contribute to. 

Christophe Fricker 

To make a slightly ‘nerdy’ point about that, from the perspective of our discipline: benchmarking and a conversation about standards is right at the heart of Translation Studies: we talk a lot about equivalence. What is the equivalent meaning of this or that, or what is the equivalent function of this or that? 

I think what a translation programme like ours can contribute to these conversations is, on the one hand, a great deal of optimism to say, yes, equivalence is in some ways possible and within reach and something we can work towards. But then, on the other hand, also adding a note of caution reminding everybody involved that differences matter too. The point of this exercise isn't to make differences disappear. It is to address different situations in ways that all partners involved can recognise what they have in common, and what is essentially and appropriately different. 

John Worne

Yes exactly. There are different contexts in which differences can be incredibly salient. We're not in the business of seeking homogeneity. We’re absolutely in the business of appropriately recognising different contexts with RVC. How did you how did you find the process of working with us, was it comparatively straightforward or a bit complicated?  

Christophe Fricker 

Let's take this very conversation as a case in point. I do appreciate the fact that you have made time for this; that you are asking me these questions. And this isn't the first of these. We've spoken and had exchanges over email several times already and I'm greatly encouraged by that. I think it speaks to a commitment to collaboration, and it's been done in a way that has given me a sense that there is real interest in and an openness to new ideas at CIOL.  

John Worne

I think this is really important. It gets to that point about mutual benefit. The whole reason that we have the RVC scheme, as we've said before, is to advance our core purpose: to increase the number of people who have and use professional level linguistic skills and to make a contribution to the standards which underpin the profession. I think that's an advantage for CIOL in being a not-for-profit and having a purpose as our main driver. That means it's comparatively easy for us to work with Universities because we have a similar ethos: we're in it for the mission as you are. 

Christophe Fricker 

I think that's probably why it’s so enjoyable to work with you; because we have a similar kind of worldview. 

John Worne

Was there anything that came up in the process that either surprised you or made you think of making any kind of changes, or would you say that we more or less reinforced your pre-existing views on your MA in Translation? 

Christophe Fricker 

What I learned in this exercise – and what often happens when you're faced with a long list of detailed questions – is that you can adopt a really comprehensive perspective on your own work. I'm constantly trying to have this anyway as Programme Director; and people in any kind of leadership position would naturally try to have this. But sometimes you get bogged down in certain issues or certain aspects of your own work, so to be able to zoom out and say: “What are all the different elements of this work”, to then flesh that out in detail and say: “Well, yes, those are the broad headings, but what does that actually look like in practice”, that was the exercise that was required on our part. 

I think that you always learn in an exercise like this as you are reminded of the fundamentals of your work and I think that is worthwhile in itself. It’s like an annual health check, as it were, to take stock of all the different elements of the programme and its overall health. The RVC review process gave us a very comprehensive and thorough report. There wasn’t any major change recommended, but you did make a couple of relatively minor suggestions which we will follow up on. But I think the benefit for us was more in what we're thinking about in the longer term for the programme. 

John Worne

So, is there anything else that you would want to say really about the process, about RVC or about your programme for that matter? 

Christophe Fricker 

Our focus is on people. That might sound banal, but I don't think it is in terms of translation, because sometimes there's a sense that interpreting is about people but translation is about texts. That is a misconception. Why do you do translation? You do translation for people; for others to be able to access and enjoy and act on a text that you have made accessible to them. And even if you do a translation only for yourself, even if the purpose is just for you to enjoy a problem of translation or a text that you have translated for your own aesthetic pleasure – translation is still for and about people. 

I'm saying that because looking ahead, at the third step in this scheme – the Certify level – I would be very glad if it was something that, building on the Validation stage of the scheme, could be something that really recognises the achievements of our students: as students, as people and as professionals. It would be great if it was something that puts an extra feather in their cap and gives them the confidence they need, either starting out or moving on to the next stage of their career. So if we can both continue to focus on people, I would be absolutely for that; and that would be very much in line with our current practice and focus in the programme. 

John Worne

Well I think that's a very good point to make because the heart of our organisation is, fundamentally, our membership; and the thing that we are ‘par excellence’ is a community and a network of language professionals - so we would definitely want to support you in a focus on people, your students and their achievements.

One of the things I have high hopes for in the future is the ability to network organisations who have joined the RVC scheme. What we're starting to have is an international network of like-minded organisations, all of whom are excellent in their own right. And the opportunity to network them and have some sharing of experiences, I think, would be a very exciting thing. We have RVC recognised programmes in China, in Europe, Asia and in Latin America. All of the people that we have worked with are running significant academic study or assessment programmes. So, that could be a really nice network to convene once in a while, because you all face very similar challenges. 

Christophe Fricker 

I'd love to. 

John Worne

It could be a wonderful thing – a United Nations of language programmes! 

Christophe Fricker 

Something to aim for; yes! 

Watch a short clip of this interview on our YouTube channel. Click the image below: