The Linguist

The Linguist 53,5

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/393748

Contents of this Issue

Navigation

Page 10 of 35

Vol/53 No/5 2014 OCTOBER/NOVEMBER The Linguist 11 LANGUAGES AT WAR describe a landscape in their language to demonstrate their knowledge; if they passed, they could become interpreters. The goal was to have one interpreter for 30 workers, but this was never met. There was probably one or two interpreters for every 500 workers, which would make for a heavy workload. As such, interpreters were valuable. They facilitated communication between officers and workers, and they mediated conflicts. Some were multilingual, speaking both French and English as well as Chinese, and would sometimes serve as intermediaries between the French and British armies as well. Chinese Labour Corps interpreters were considered competent, valuable workers and were therefore granted certain privileges. They were allowed to visit the ports where their ship moored, in contrast to the unskilled workers, and they received a salary that was three to five times higher. Despite their status and the respect they earned from their British colleagues, they were still Chinese. Troops were strictly segregated, and Chinese interpreters were barred from the officer ranks. The segregation of military interpreters can still be seen today. In Afghanistan and Iraq, local interpreters were not allowed to live on the military bases, even though their own communities may no longer have been safe. Interpreters are often considered traitors by their compatriots, and are frequently threatened and sometimes killed. Interpreters working for the military and the UN have an ambiguous legal status. The UN currently circumvents an agreement to safeguard the neutrality and independence of interpreters in the field by calling them 'language assistants' and giving them additional intelligence tasks. Therefore, AIIC (the International Association of Conference Interpreters) is lobbying the UN and Council of Europe to improve working conditions and the legal status of interpreters in conflict zones, while the lobbying group Red T calls for a UN resolution that would offer them special legal status, akin to that of journalists. Conference: peace talks After the war, early pioneers laid the groundwork for conference interpreting at the Paris Peace Conference. The conference revolutionised interpreting and diplomacy, because it ended the hegemony of French as a diplomatic language. English and French were the official languages, with Italian as a working language, so most meetings involved an interpreter. Conference interpreting was not a profession at the time, so interpreters had to improvise. Most interpreting was consecutive, but there was no established note-taking system and interpreter training did not exist. Some interpreters worked sentence by sentence, but most gave the speaker about five minutes before interrupting for the interpretation. Most worked with notes, but some relied more on memory. One interpreter, Peter Wright, mentions knowing the debates by heart at the end of the day, while Paul Mantoux's notes were good enough to use for writing the minutes of the meeting. Working conditions at the Paris Peace Conference were problematic. People whispered among themselves, so there was a constant murmur while interpreters were trying to listen, and they had to speak louder when delivering the interpretation. They did not usually work in teams, so one interpreter worked all day and in both directions. The Paris Peace Conference interpreters worked hard and long, and they did their job admirably, which earned them praise from almost every participant. They laid the groundwork for the Nuremberg trials, the origins of simultaneous interpreting and the professionalisation of conference interpreting. The influence of the Paris Peace Conference on interpreting is very clear. Conference interpreters now work with simultaneous interpreting, which means they work in booths at the back of the room with headphones and a microphone. This means that they no longer stand in the middle, taking the floor, so they have become invisible in a way. At the same time, because they can now be trained in note-taking and simultaneous interpreting techniques, their skill is no longer considered extraordinary. Without training, interpreting was considered an incredible feat, with training, it is merely a profession. In the century since WWI, tremendous progress has been made in conference interpreting, while for humanitarian and military interpreters, time stood still until just a few years ago. Hopefully, current and new initiatives will enable interpreters involved in conflict situations and conflict resolution to gain the same professionalism and status as conference interpreters. This article is based on research for Sandrijn's MA in Interpreting at Antwerp University. A MULTILINGUAL CONFLICT At the Paris Peace Conference on 27 May 1919 (l-r): British Prime Minister David Lloyd George, Italian Premier Vittorio Orlando, French Premier Georges Clemenceau and US President Woodrow Wilson (left); and fighting in France (opposite) The UN currently circumvents an agreement to safeguard interpreters in the field

Articles in this issue

Archives of this issue

view archives of The Linguist - The Linguist 53,5