Ok folks, let me toot my own horn a little bit. The following email is about an article I submitted for (competitive!) publication two years ago. 🙂
Dear Stephanie,
I am happy to finally let you know that the Critical Link 4 proceedings have been okayed for publication in John Benjamin’s Translation Library series. At last it is time to prepare the final ms!
I enclose below a review comment, which is specifically on your paper. As you can see, it is very positive. Just thought I should let you know. The reviewer’s view is shared also by us, the Stockholm editors. Your contribution is perfect as it is!
Very best regards,
Cecilia
*********
Kent’s paper is, to my mind, along with Turner’s the most exciting paper in this volume: thought-provoking, stimulating, challenging and highly intelligent. She critically investigates the role of interpreters through clients’ criticism – a truly novel approach which leads to some very interesting findings indeed. The paper is well-constructed and well-written – to start off with she defines professionalization and links it to the concept of insitiutionalization, which provides a historical and sociological framework for the study. The paper is really though provoking and challenging – she asks questions which many take for granted (e.g. standardization) and shows how the process of professonalization is linked also to complex ideological and social factors governing its immediate socio-cultural environs – linguistic and educational policies for example. She shows how interpreters are sometimes caught between their professional role and their cultural identity. She makes a distinction between the macro- and micro level of professional establishment and interaction and discusses the professionalization of Sign Language. In short, she is breaking new ground all over the place – an excellent paper!