Pick It Up, Pass It On: Reflecting on The Together Conference 2026

The final session may have ended, the recordings may have closed and the certificates may have been sent, but the conversations from The Together Conference 2026 are far from finished.

This year’s theme, Pick It Up, Pass It On, began with a simple idea. None of us becomes the professional we are alone. We learn from tutors, colleagues, Deaf communities, research, experience, mistakes, feedback and the people who have supported us along the way. We then pass those things on, sometimes intentionally and sometimes without even realising it.

Across two packed days, and through the additional extended conference programme, our presenters asked us to think carefully about what we have picked up during our professional lives as interpreters, translators, educators, researchers and other professionals working across our field. Which ideas continue to serve us well? Which habits need to be questioned? What knowledge, values and ways of working do we want to pass on to those coming after us?

Those questions connected a programme that moved across very different areas of sign language interpreting and translation practice.

Beginning with the professional

Day One began by looking inwards.

Kate Shearer’s opening keynote, From Sub-Personalities to Sign Production: The Inner Landscape of Interpreting, introduced psychosynthesis and the idea that different internal parts of ourselves can become active while we work. The helper, the fixer, the advocate, the perfectionist and the part that wants to avoid conflict may all influence our preparation, boundaries, decisions and responses to pressure.

Although Kate’s session focused specifically on interpreting practice, many of the questions she raised are also relevant to translators and other language professionals. Our internal reactions can affect the work we accept, how we respond to feedback, how we manage pressure and how we relate to the people around us.

Kate encouraged us to notice these parts rather than simply being directed by them. Her practical exercises in grounding, observation and sub-personality mapping set a thoughtful tone for the weekend. Before considering systems, technology or professional structures, we were asked to consider what we ourselves bring into the work.

Magnhild Røed Michalsen and Hilde Henrud then shared the story of The Interpreter’s Nook, an interpreter-led initiative in Norway that has developed podcasts, a newspaper and an online space for discussion and learning. Their session showed that professional development does not always need to begin with a large organisation or formal course. It can begin with practitioners recognising a gap and creating something useful together.

Their work also offered a strong example of the conference theme in action. When interpreters and translators share their everyday experiences, they can reduce professional isolation, support reflection and help colleagues approach new challenges with ideas gathered from others.

Meaning is rarely built through language alone

Dr Russell Aldersson’s session on community interpreting through the lens of translanguaging asked us to move beyond a narrow idea of interpreting as the transfer of words or signs between two languages.

In real interactions, meaning is built through language, gesture, objects, images, shared knowledge, positioning, timing and the environment around us. Russell encouraged interpreters to notice the full range of resources available during an interaction and to think carefully about how understanding is created, repaired and checked.

The session focused on interpreting, but the wider questions about language, meaning and context also matter to translators. Written, signed and recorded translations do not exist outside culture, audience, purpose and situation. Decisions about what information needs to be made explicit, what knowledge can be assumed and how meaning is carried across languages are central to both interpreting and translation.

This was particularly relevant to community, healthcare and social care work, where communication may be affected by stress, unfamiliar terminology, unequal power and limited shared knowledge.

Dr Ben Saunders continued the discussion about language and meaning by taking us into the field of artificial intelligence and sign language generation. He demonstrated what the technology can currently do, while also being clear about its limits.

Signed languages rely on movement, space, facial expression, role shift, simultaneity, rhythm and cultural knowledge. These are not optional additions to a signed message. They are part of the language itself, and they present major challenges for automated systems.

Ben’s session did not ask us to accept or reject AI outright. Instead, it invited interpreters and translators to understand it properly, question where it may be useful and recognise the areas where qualified human professionals remain essential. He was also clear that high-risk and emotionally complex settings, including medical diagnoses, police interviews and mental health appointments, are not appropriate places to replace human interpreters with automated translation.

Confidence, identity and belonging

After lunch, Nene Ekufu brought energy and honesty to a subject that clearly connected with many people in the conference chat: the gap between the skills a professional has and the confidence they feel.

Nene explored fear of failure, self-doubt, comparison, imposter feelings, procrastination and overwhelm. Her message was that freezing or hesitating does not necessarily mean that an interpreter lacks the required skills. Sometimes their professional identity has not yet caught up with what they are already capable of doing.

Although her examples were rooted in interpreting, similar experiences can arise for translators. A professional may have the language knowledge, research skills and qualifications required for a piece of work, while still doubting their decisions or comparing their output with that of colleagues.

Nene encouraged participants to identify the beliefs that may be holding them back and to build confidence through repeated action rather than waiting until they feel completely ready. The discussion that followed showed how widely these experiences are shared, across different roles and at different stages of professional life.

Layne James Whittaker then asked us to consider equality, diversity and inclusion as part of everyday professional practice, rather than as a separate subject that can be covered through a single training session.

Layne discussed lived experience, allyship, inclusive co-working, shared responsibility and the need to create professional spaces where people can enter, contribute and remain. One particularly important point was that responsibility for EDI cannot sit only with people from marginalised communities. Allies need to educate themselves, listen, challenge discrimination and share the work.

This linked closely to the conference theme. As interpreters and translators, we do not only pass on language choices and technical skills. We also pass on attitudes about who belongs, whose knowledge is respected and whose needs are treated as part of normal professional planning.

Day One closed with Professor Jemina Napier’s research into domestic violence, communication within Deaf and hearing families and the implications for sign language interpreters.

This was a difficult but necessary session. It brought together trauma-informed interpreting, safety, communication risk, family relationships and the emotional impact of working in high-risk settings. Jemina drew on research undertaken with Deaf women, survivors and specialist organisations, and discussed the importance of appropriate preparation, supervision, collaborative working and access to specialist resources.

The session reminded us that language work never happens outside people’s lives. Language is connected to family, power, safety, services, relationships and previous experiences. In some settings, decisions made by an interpreter or translator may have consequences well beyond the immediate piece of work.

Day Two: people, communities and systems

Dr Emma Ferguson-Coleman opened Day Two with What Did They Say? When It Is Okay Not to Know, focusing on communication with Deaf people living with dementia and their families.

Emma challenged the pressure interpreters may feel to provide a neat and fully formed interpretation when a person’s language or communication has changed. Sometimes the most accurate professional response is to explain what has been observed and acknowledge that a clear meaning cannot be constructed.

She also placed strong emphasis on rapport. A Deaf person with dementia may not remember an interpreter’s name or whether they have met before, but they may still respond to the sense of safety and connection created during the interaction.

The session encouraged interpreters to work with families, carers, healthcare professionals and Deaf relay interpreters where appropriate. It also highlighted the increased processing and emotional demands of this work and the need for proper debriefing and support.

Dr Joseph Musabyimana and Ibrahim Ndagijimana then took us to Rwanda, sharing how an interpreting profession can develop through community leadership, advocacy and collective effort.

Their presentation described the growth of organised sign language interpreting in Rwanda, including training, peer coaching, professional networks, tactile sign language development and partnership with Deaf, Deafblind and disability organisations.

Experienced practitioners support those with less experience, while professional identity, ethics and leadership are developed alongside practical language skills. Their session demonstrated what can happen when a community does not wait for a complete formal system to appear, but begins building the structures it needs through shared responsibility.

The body, the stage and the person doing the work

Adam Price and Jacqui Beckford’s presentation on performance interpreting explored embodiment, intention, identity and lived experience.

They asked whether access is built into a performance from the beginning or added at the end, and whether interpreters sometimes reproduce the same last-minute approach they criticise in arts organisations.

Their discussion went well beyond theatre. It asked professionals to consider how their bodies, identities, experiences and positionality affect their work. Choices about role allocation, character, movement and intention cannot be separated from the person making those choices.

The session also addressed preparation, psychological safety and sustainability, particularly for interpreters whose lived experiences may connect closely to the content they are asked to embody.

Jen Bird then moved the discussion from individual practice to the systems in which interpreting and translation take place.

Drawing on her international research, Jen examined community-led and cooperative interpreting models, asking who makes decisions, whose knowledge is valued and what happens when services are driven mainly by cost.

Her presentation reminded us that access is not achieved simply because an interpreter or translator has been booked. The design of the service matters. Procurement, relationships, working conditions, community involvement and accountability all affect the quality and sustainability of what is provided.

It was an important reminder that language professionals and Deaf communities are not separate from the systems around them. They should have a meaningful role in shaping those systems.

Questioning what we think we know

Dr Robyn Dean offered one of the weekend’s clearest examples of examining something that has been repeatedly passed through the profession.

Her session challenged the widely cited idea that interpreters must change every 20 minutes because performance will otherwise decline. Robyn returned to the research behind this claim and noted that the two studies commonly used to support it had only seven participants between them.

Her more recent research found no evidence of reduced processing speed, attention to detail or ability to respond to unexpected information after 20 minutes of interpreting. In some measures, participants undertaking the more difficult task performed better.

This does not mean that fatigue, rest or co-working no longer matter. It means that a familiar guideline should not automatically become a rigid rule. Decisions should consider task difficulty, physical demands, cognitive workload, the working environment and what the supporting interpreter is actually doing.

Catherine King, Donna Jewell and Katy Smillie-Wilcox followed with a very different kind of professional development story.

Their session, Three Interpreters Walk into the Fringe, described three interpreters working together across several comedy performances at the Edinburgh Festival Fringe.

There was no tutor, formal course or certificate. The learning came through shared preparation, performance, observation and long, honest debriefs afterwards.

Their experience demonstrated the value of non-hierarchical learning. Each person brought something different, and the work belonged to the team rather than one individual. Their conversations about jokes, choices and audience responses continued long after the performances had finished.

It was a useful reminder that some of our most important professional learning happens within real working relationships, when colleagues feel safe enough to discuss what worked, what did not and what they might try next time. This applies not only to interpreting teams, but also to translators reviewing one another’s work, working collaboratively on projects or discussing difficult translation decisions.

The live programme closed with Jeanette Nicholson, Liz McCluney and James Etheridge introducing the AMPED mentorship programme for novice interpreters.

Their six-month model combines guided learning, mentoring, practice, community involvement and work on ethical decision-making and professional confidence. It responded directly to a question that appeared throughout the weekend: what happens after formal training?

New interpreters and translators may leave a programme with qualifications, knowledge and motivation, but still need structured support as they meet the realities of professional work. Ending with mentorship brought the conference back to its central theme. Passing something on is not simply telling a newer colleague what we know. It means creating the conditions in which they can practise, question, reflect and gradually develop their own professional judgement.

The conversation continued

For enhanced ticket holders, the extended conference added four further sessions.

Anna Teitt and Dr Sharon Grigsby-Hill examined secondary traumatic stress, vicarious trauma and the often overlooked emotional experiences of interpreter educators. Their Teaching from an Emptied Cup metaphor asked what happens when educators are continually supporting students while having too little opportunity to process and replenish their own emotional resources.

Although their research focused on interpreter education, the questions raised are relevant across interpreting and translation training. Educators are not separate from the emotional demands of the work they teach. They may be supporting students through difficult material while also managing their own professional experiences and responsibilities.

Ayesha Gavin explored cultural competency through her own intersecting experiences and asked interpreters and translators to examine bias, cultural assumptions and the different stages between cultural destructiveness and genuine cultural proficiency.

Her examples showed how apparently neutral decisions can continue unequal systems and downgrade Deaf people’s language, knowledge or independence. This is relevant whether communication is happening live through an interpreter or through a prepared translation that will be viewed by a wider audience.

Tom Mould provided a practical introduction to artificial intelligence for interpreters and translators, explaining what large language models are, where they can be useful and why their output should never be mistaken for genuine understanding.

He also explored AI-generated sign language, privacy, flawed data, exaggerated claims and the danger of allowing poorly understood technology to influence access decisions. For translators in particular, the discussion raised important questions about using AI to draft, research or review work without giving away confidential information or trusting inaccurate output.

Mark Applin of Signly continued the AI discussion through accountability, consent, data ownership and governance. His session asked who is responsible when automated sign language is inaccurate, who controls the image and signing style used to build a model, and whether systems that have no registration or professional accountability should be trusted to provide access without proper oversight.

Together, the extended sessions added another layer to the conference. They asked not only what interpreters and translators can do with new knowledge and technology, but who carries the risk, who holds responsibility and whose wellbeing may be overlooked.

More than a programme of presentations

The Together Conference is never only the timetable.

The chat and interaction spaces brought together interpreters, translators, trainees, students, educators, assessors, researchers, Deaf professionals, service providers and professional bodies from different countries and language communities.

People shared resources, responded to presenters, asked difficult questions and connected ideas across sessions. The poster gallery gave space to early research, developing projects and practice-based reflection that may not yet fit into a full presentation.

Our competitions encouraged attendees to explore the conference space and think about future professional discussions. The winning phrase from Day One summed up the weekend particularly well: learning from others, sharing knowledge across global interpreting and translation communities.

We are grateful to everyone who made the conference possible. Thank you to every presenter and poster contributor, our interpreters and translators, the access team, technical and production teams, reviewers, volunteers and everyone working behind the scenes.

Thank you also to our headline conference partner, Convo, and our lead partners Asign Inc, Deaf Student Solutions, Heritage Interpreting and Signly, alongside all the organisations that supported the conference and shared their work through the Hub.

We were also proud to support Deaf Cancer Support as our nominated charity partner and to share more about its accessible information, emotional support and practical guidance for Deaf people affected by cancer and those close to them.

Most of all, thank you to everyone who attended, watched, reflected, contributed and continued the discussion afterwards. A conference only becomes a real professional space when people arrive with their questions, experiences and willingness to listen to one another.

What do we pass on now?

No single blog post can do justice to every presentation, example or conversation from the weekend.

Over the coming months, we will return to many of the individual sessions in more detail. We will look again at confidence, trauma-informed practice, AI, translanguaging, EDI, mentorship, professional systems, performance interpreting, dementia communication and the many other questions raised by our presenters.

Some sessions focused more closely on interpreting, while others raised questions that apply across interpreting, translation, education, research and service design. Together, they reminded us that our professions are connected, and that we have much to learn from looking beyond our own immediate roles.

For now, perhaps the most useful place to finish is with the question at the centre of the conference:

What have you picked up, and what will you choose to pass on?