Certified madness – what is an official translation

 

[official stamp*]

In translation, one of those simple questions that requires a long answer is “can you provide a certified translation”? The reasons why no simple response is possible are that no single set of criteria apply to a certified translation or no uniform nomenclature exists. Having just profited from an excellent and well-organized ATA (American Translators Association) webinar by Robert Sette on certification in the US market as well as having immersed myself in the intricacies of the French system this summer at the SFT (Société française des traducteurs) conference and being familiar with the Hebrew-English market, I would like to present a short overview of the certification situation for the benefit of both translators and translation buyers. As I see it, the main cause of the confusion is the confusing use of the terms certified translation, certified translator, notarized translation and apostille.

When a person needs and requests a certified translation, the first and most important requirement is to ascertain the requirements of the demanding agency. In the United States, each court establishes its own regulations while, in Europe, national regulations set the criteria (as Gomer Pyle often said, “surprise, surprise”). Some embassies even insist that only their official translators do it for it to be official, including Austria (See Gomer Pyle above). Government agencies worldwide set their own rules and are not always very specific. Universities can be even less precise. On the other extreme, Israel, the land of administrative organized chaos, the issue is often rather vague except for financial matters such as wills and estates. So, it is necessary to confirm the actual requirements of the party requiring certification.

A far more complex issue is who exactly is a certified translator, or, in some jurisdictions, a sworn translator or other official title. This question is essentially a national issue. In the United States, it is person that has passed the specific ATA certification test and maintained his/her status or a person authorized by a court. Alas, the ATA does have not tests in many language combinations, including Hebrew-English, meaning that any person claiming fluency in those language combinations can certify the translation. In most parts of Europe, only translators that have been recognized by the State, usually through the regional courts, can claim that title. In Israel, the only official translation qualification is a certificate of Recognized Translator, issued by the ITA (Israel Translators Organization). Interestingly enough, the existing structures allow such translators to certify documents translated into their foreign language, i.e., they do not limit the direction of the certification. For example, certified court translators in Europe or the United States can certify a translation from English to Spanish even if they cannot actually produce a proper Spanish document because their native language is English.

As Mr. Sette explained, the key for a valid certification is the phrasing of the certifying document. The qualifications and actions of the translator must be accurate and clear. For example, it is only acceptable for a translator  to use the statement a certified translator translated the document if the person actually has such documentation and actually produced the document. It would be perjury to claim either if the person merely is fluent in both languages and/or only checked an existing translation.  On the other hand, it is possible to specify general language knowledge and state that the document is an accurate translation. The devil is the details here.

Notarized translation is a bit of misnomer. Public notaries in the United States merely confirm the accuracy of signatures. They can certify that the signature on the translator statement of accurateness is real, no more than that. Clearly, translators in the US cannot notarize their own signature. By contrast, notaries in Europe have much wider powers and roles. They can in some cases both translate and notarize translation, with the government so empowering them or even given them a monopoly in certain circumstances.

Apostilles are actually the simplest. Established by the Hague Convention (Convention de la Haye du 5 october 1961), it creates a manner for governments to recognize official documents issued by foreign governments. In practice, it is possible to submit any official document with a signature of a public figure to the entity and receive an apostille of its genuineness. To paraphrase that song by Lou BegoVO, “a little bureaucracy in my life”.

In summary, if a person needs a “certified translator”, the steps are to ascertain what the actual requirements are; identify a translator with the corresponding credentials; phrase the certifying statement in a precise and accurate method; and,  if required, have the signature of the statement of faithfulness notarized. Simple, isn't it?

* Picture captions help the blind fully access the Internet.

Picture credit