Live translation during meetings

Kevin Fulton wrote:

You rarely get a transcript unless you are translating a speech or presentation.
Here's a description of the various types of interpretation:
https://www.interprefy.com/resources/blog/types-of-interpretation-you-need-to-know

Based on my limited experience, interpretation requires a different set of skills than translating texts. Some people have the talent to do both. You should get a lot of practice before attempting to do it for pay.

Daryo wrote:

It's interpreting, not translating.
You will never get beforehand any "transcript" - a "transcript" can be done only AFTER an audio recording (of a speech, a whole meeting ..) was done, IOW only after the meeting is over.

You might get in advance the prepared speeches, or the documents that are going to be discussed (drafts of contracts, f.ex.) and other reference material. But if the speaker deviates from the prepared documents, only what is said counts.

As for https://www.interprefy.com/resources/blog/types-of-interpretation-you-need-to-know it does give you a rough idea. But it wasn't written by someone with actual experience of interpreting. Once you get the hang of it, simultaneous interpreting is in fact far easier than consecutive interpreting, not the other way round. Simultaneous interpreting is only possible if the right equipment is available (soundproof booths etc), most often it would be consecutive interpreting.

Interpreting is a world apart from translating. Certainly worth a try, especially if you prefer working with people instead of being alone with pen and paper (just a figure of speech, nowadays it's more like "staring at a screen all day long").

Rates vary enormously. What UN / EU interpreters are paid and what some small agency that added "oral translating" (sic) as an afterthought to their services thinks is "a good rate" bears no ressemblance.