The Linguist is a languages magazine for professional linguists, translators, interpreters, language professionals, language teachers, trainers, students and academics with articles on translation, interpreting, business, government, technology
Issue link: https://thelinguist.uberflip.com/i/288462
Educating interpreters to work with the legal profession, and vice versa, is now compulsory in Australia, where all judges need to be trained on how to use an interpreter. I used to take my students at London Metropolitan University to the police training centre in Hendon, where new officers are trained to give evidence in court. We combined this with interpreting training, which highlighted some simple issues. Many officers did not even realise that there would be interpreters in court. As linguists and communicators, we offered advice on voice projection and posture, as we cannot interpret if we cannot hear or see the interlocutor properly. Both sides learned a lot from the experience. Due to budget cuts, this opportunity no longer exists, but it is easy to recreate scenarios where there is give and take on each side. For three years, I took students to Wandsworth prison to practise remote interpreting for the courts. We noticed that to benefit from 'normal' eye contact we had to sit right back in our chairs. The position of the camera otherwise meant that we lowered our eyes, which could be perceived as a lack of honesty. Taking students to observe interpreters at work can be rewarding, but if the interpreter acts unprofessionally it is very frustrating. Danielle D'Hayer, Associate Professor, London Metropolitan University Vol/53 No/2 2014 APRIL/MAY The Linguist 27 FEATURES be confident about legal terminology but, in court, they can be confronted with specialist words from any field. For example, there is no word for a builder's skip in Turkish, so if such a word is at the core of a case, it would be helpful for the interpreter to know beforehand, so that they can find an equivalent and maintain the flow seamlessly. Interpreters expect to be backed up by magistrates if other parties do not understand the work involved and talk too quickly, yet many magistrates expect accurate interpreting without any impediment to the flow. An interpreter should be confident and professional enough to ask for repetition when necessary, or request that interlocutors slow down in order to ensure accurate interpreting. If the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), a defence lawyer, witness, legal advisor or probation officer is not adjusting the speed of their speech, this could lead to injustice through misunderstandings, omissions and/or additions. Some legal professionals have a better understanding of the interpreter's role than others. According to Jeremy Lister JP, who I CROWN COURT Melbourne work with at West London LJA: 'It is important that the Court Chairman ensures all speakers use a pace and vocabulary that facilitates the interpreting process; occasional checking this with the interpreter during the case is highly recommended.' Complaints from both sides Under the current, much-disputed arrangements for interpreting in the UK courts, interpreters with a range of qualifications, skills and experience are used in the legal system. Not all are NRPSI-registered. As a Magistrate, I frequently observe interpreters abbreviating what has been said and answering on the defendant's behalf. This is frustrating, as I don't have the authority to intervene. Sometimes I observe an interpreter acting almost as an advisor or failing to keep their relationship with the defence advocate and defendant strictly professional. Once, I heard an interpreter interrupt the advocate saying: 'Darling, you are talking too fast.' Inappropriate familiarity does not belong in a court. 'While the overall standard is very good, and some interpreters are outstanding, there is a spectrum of competence and it is usually clear to magistrates when a full and correct interpretation is not being made, particularly as regards the legal terms,' asserts Lister. It is equally important that interpreters are properly looked after by the court. Once, I observed an interpreter, long after the defendant had been taken back to the cells, politely waiting in the dock for the door to be unlocked from the outside. Nobody took any notice until I alerted the Chair. After their assignment is finished, interpreters deserve to be 'released' too. From legal advisors to the CPS, users of the legal system may not be aware of the challenges faced by the interpreter. Jeremy Lister's comments show that some legal professionals do understand their work, but it is clear that this is not true of everyone working in the courts. Training and workshops in the use of interpreting services should be provided for everyone working with interpreters in a legal setting. It is essential that interpreters undertake similarly stringent training so that the link to the legal process is not broken. A tutor's view THINKSTOCK © ISTOCKPHOTO © ISTOCKPHOTO