Why human expertise is still important in the age of AI
FROM courtrooms to hospitals, interpreting demands far more than language fluency, yet experts warn artificial intelligence is changing how the profession is understood and valued.
As AI-powered translation tools become increasingly embedded across workplaces and online platforms, specialists in interpreting and translation say there is growing misunderstanding about what interpreters actually do, particularly in high-pressure settings such as courts, hospitals and police interviews.
“People keep asking what the future holds,” says Professor Ludmila Stern, an expert in translation from UNSW’s School of Humanities & Languages. “There is a lot of concern about AI, but I don’t believe the profession will disappear. What we need to be careful about is how these technologies are used.”
Prof. Stern, founder of UNSW’s Master of Interpreting and Translation program, says machine translation tools and large language models are now widely used throughout the industry, especially in written translation.
However, UNSW Professor Sandra Hale, a pioneer in legal interpreting research, says interpreting involves far more than simply replacing one word with another.
“A lot of people assume it’s just about knowing another language,” she says. “But interpreting involves analytical, cultural and ethical judgement. You’re making decisions constantly.”
Unlike written translation, interpreting takes place in real time, requiring practitioners to instantly process and deliver meaning while managing tone, context and nuance.
“You’re not just transferring words,” Prof. Hale says. “You’re interpreting meaning not just what is said but also how it is said – and you have to do that instantly.”
The pressure is intensifying as Australia’s linguistic diversity continues to expand. Courts alone may require interpreters across hundreds of languages, including migrant and Indigenous languages.
For Prof. Stern, the question is no longer whether AI will be used, but how in areas such as media subtitling and publishing, AI-assisted workflows are becoming standard, but always with human oversight. “The important thing is that there is always a human in charge of the final product,” she says. “That’s what guarantees accuracy and accountability.”
Interpreting, however, remains far less vulnerable to automation. Its reliance on real-time interaction, judgement and human presence makes it difficult to replicate. While AI tools can improve efficiency and help experienced translators manage large volumes of text, Prof. Hale says the technology cannot replace professional judgement.
Beyond accuracy concerns, experts also warn AI systems can reproduce biases embedded in language and create risks around confidentiality.
“We’ve made progress in addressing bias in language, but AI can reintroduce it,” Prof. Hale says. “It reflects what it’s been trained on.”
Despite the pace of change, both scholars remain optimistic about the future. While AI will continue to reshape workflows, they argue the profession’s core purpose enabling meaningful communication across languages remains unchanged. “At the end of the day, it’s about enabling people to understand each other,” Prof. Stern says. “That’s something that still relies on human judgement, empathy and responsibility.”
