The Linguist

12 The Linguist Vol/61 No/5 thelinguist.uberflip.com FEATURES Jonathan Downie misses the connection with the congregation as he interprets in church without leaving the house I n November last year, something odd happened. While I had been interpreting in churches and at Christian events on and off since the age of 18, that had always meant volunteering and physically being in the church. Yet last year, I found myself being paid to interpret at a church service in the USA while still sitting at my desk in Edinburgh. Of course, remote interpreting has existed for decades, but church interpreting (like conference interpreting) did not adopt remote practices at any real scale until the pandemic. For church interpreting, this shift was part of a much bigger pattern which means that, for perhaps the first time ever, it is on the verge of becoming a viable professional specialism. Church interpreting in brief Church interpreting takes place whenever a church or Christian organisation wants to make parts of its meeting accessible to people who speak a different language. This could range from interpreting a sermon or prayer to working at a multi-day multilingual conference on the internal policies of an international group of churches. This makes church interpreting exceptionally diverse. Interpreters have to be able to work on stage next to the speaker, in an interpreting booth, whispering into someone's ears or doing dialogue interpreting during a technical conversation. They have to be able to handle topics ranging from theology and history to international development and cookery, and can find themselves interpreting for everyone from teenagers to elderly people. While most research on church interpreting has concentrated on sermons, the growth of remote has meant that it is not unusual to be asked to interpret songs, announcements, appeals, baptisms, prayers and more. At one point, I even found myself interpreting instructions for using an app that was being demonstrated during the church service. In general, the more important the interpreting is to the church, the more they want interpreters to emotionally engage with what is said. Research from countries such as the USA, 1 Turkey, 2 Gambia , 3 Finland, 4 and the UK and Germany 5 has repeatedly found that many churches expect the interpreter to be as engaged with the sermon as the preacher. In some cases, this has led to a requirement that the interpreters be Christians themselves. Working at a distance When I started doing church interpreting, I quickly learnt to rely on the atmosphere and reactions from the preacher and audience to guide how I interpreted. I could quickly adjust my register, tone or even body language according to what was working in the moment. Or at least, I could when I was in the room. Working remotely doesn't just mean that you are physically separate from the people for whom you are interpreting, but also that you can become emotionally separate too. That can pose a problem. The first time I did remote church interpreting, I found myself in oddly unfamiliar territory. Sure, I had all the right kit: a new laptop with the fastest processor and most RAM I could afford, a wired internet connection, a shiny monitor and a professional quality headset. What was strange was that I found myself launched into a church service where I didn't know anyone involved, couldn't see the audience, and had to judge for myself how well the interpreting was going. From the instant the lead singer welcomed people to church to the moment the preacher dismissed the service, the interpreting had to just happen. Yes, we received notes and the order of service ahead of time. Yes, the technical side of the platform worked almost flawlessly. But it was still a very different experience to being there. This was despite me bopping along to the music and trying to emotionally engage with the preaching. Now I am getting used to the weirdness of remote. My monitor and laptop screen have comfortably become my virtual booth. I have learnt how to undock the video from the remote interpreting platform and place it exactly where I want it. More importantly, I have managed to improve my own feeling of connection with what's going on. What is still missing is something that is probably unachievable with remote. When I was working in a booth at an event, I could easily chat to audience members or speakers between sessions. That gave me quick feedback and helped me prepare for what was coming. With remote, you log in, you work and you log out, without any way of chatting to the people who will use your work. Remote praise

• Cover