Translation Studies has developed as a discipline focusing predominantly on the investigation of written translation. Though interpreting is often positioned as a central element of the field, dominant theoretical approaches to translation do not align well with the real-time, highly demanding, and irreversible nature of interpreting. This study argues that existing translation theories are limited in explaining the act of interpreting and have less functional value for interpreting than for written translation. In contrast to written translation, interpreting provides limited scope for making systematic theoretical choices, conducting comprehensive source-text analysis, or revisiting and revising translational decisions following the act of interpreting. Interpreters work under intense cognitive pressure. The act of interpreting is realized through professional experience, intuitive judgment, and the management of cognitive load rather than consciously applied theoretical frameworks.  It can be argued that observable and completed written translations have occupied a central role in the historical and methodological development of Translation Studies. Interpreting can only be explained to a limited extent through functional/product-oriented theories centred on written translation; therefore, it requires more comprehensive treatment through cognitive, process-oriented, and professional performance-based approaches. Based on a descriptive methodology, this paper questions the conceptual coherence of subsuming interpreting under Translation Studies and calls for a clearer epistemological distinction between written translation and interpreting. The study is expected to contribute to the relevant literature.