Telephone and Remote Interpreting

The method works in two basic forms. In telephone interpreting, where there is sound alone, the interpreter hears the parties but cannot see them; in remote video interpreting there is picture as well as sound. The distinction matters, because an interpreter’s work rests largely on context, and whether or not there is a picture has a direct bearing on how accurately the exchange is rendered.

When is it needed?

The method suits short or unplanned situations, and those in which having an interpreter on site is not practical. Brief telephone calls, customer service calls, short meetings with a party at a distance and language needs that arise unexpectedly are typical examples. Where arranging an on-site interpreter would be heavy in both time and cost, working remotely offers a quick solution.

For long, multi-party exchanges that demand a high degree of precision, on the other hand, the method is not always ideal. In audio-only calls, where context is thin and gesture and expression cannot be read, some nuances can be missed. On-site consecutive or simultaneous interpreting is safer in such cases; the method is chosen according to how sensitive the work is.

How the process works

Remote interpreting is set up more quickly and with less ceremony than a face-to-face meeting; the real difference is that technical preparation comes to the fore. The sequence below begins with defining the need, and places particular weight on the stability of the channel to be used, because in remote interpreting most problems originate in the connection or the sound. Even a brief pre-session briefing lets the interpreter prepare for the context and noticeably improves accuracy. Proceeding turn by turn during the exchange and confirming anything unclear are fixed rules of the process.

1. Stating the need. The language pair, the subject and whether the exchange will be audio or video are specified.
2. Choosing the channel. A telephone, a conference line or an online platform is agreed, and the connection is confirmed as stable.
3. Short briefing. Where possible, the purpose of the exchange and who is taking part are shared in advance; even a little context improves accuracy.
4. The session. The interpreter listens to the parties and renders turn by turn, seeking brief confirmation wherever anything is unclear.
5. Closing. If necessary, decisions are summarised and confirmed orally at the end of the session.

Points specific to this service

Sound quality is the decisive factor. In remote interpreting the interpreter’s only foothold is the sound; if the line is poor, if the parties talk over one another or if the room is noisy, accuracy falls. A quiet room, a good microphone and speakers taking turns therefore determine directly whether the method succeeds. Because it also shows body language, the video option is generally safer than an audio-only call.

The second point is accepting the limits of the method. Remote interpreting does not cover every function of an interpreter on site; physical attendance may be required, particularly for official procedures. On-site consecutive interpreting is more appropriate in those cases. If something conveyed orally during the session then needs a written, attested translation for use in an official procedure, that is handled separately, through the attested translation processes set out in our document guide.

Audio only, or video?

The most basic choice in remote interpreting is whether the session will be audio only or video, and it has a direct bearing on the quality of the rendering. In audio interpreting over the telephone the interpreter only hears the parties, with no access to gesture, expression or the visual cues in the room. That poses no problem in short, factual exchanges; but in sensitive exchanges, where feeling and reaction matter, some nuances can be missed.

Remote video interpreting closes most of that gap. The interpreter sees the parties, reads their body language and can follow a document or presentation on screen if there is one. For exchanges of high sensitivity, the video option is therefore generally safer than audio alone. Video does, however, require a stable connection and a decent camera and sound set-up; where the infrastructure is weak, the advantage quickly turns into a drawback. If a decision conveyed orally during the session will later need a written document for use in an official procedure, it is worth saying from the start that this is a separate piece of work, handled through the attested translation processes described on the document types page. Talking that distinction through in advance clarifies what is expected of the spoken session and prevents misunderstandings later; when method and expectation are aligned beforehand, the outcome is far more secure.

How is it priced?

Remote interpreting is mostly assessed on the length of the session, by the minute or by the session; the travel and installation items of on-site interpreting do not arise, which makes the method economical for short jobs. The determining factors are the length of the session, the language pair, how specialised the subject is, and whether it is audio or video. Very short, unplanned calls and long, pre-arranged sessions are assessed within different frameworks. No set per-minute or per-session rate is given on this page; the framework is built around the details of what is needed.

You can tell us what you need, the language pair and the format of the session through the quote form, or directly via our contact page. The languages we work in are listed on the language pages.

Situations that come up often

• Poor sound. A weak line or a noisy room; this is what damages accuracy most in remote interpreting.
• Talking over one another. The parties speaking at the same time; proceeding turn by turn is essential.
• Choosing it for the wrong job. Opting for audio-only remote interpreting for a long and sensitive exchange; on-site interpreting may be safer.
• Missing context. No information at all being given about the subject; even a short briefing improves accuracy.

This page is for general information; translation, approval and delivery requirements vary by document type. Before deciding, it is worth checking the institution’s own published information.