Transcript How does revision contribute to translation quality?

WHAT DO JUDGES NEED TO
LEARN ABOUT THE
PREMISES OF COURT
INTERPRETING?
Tina Paulsen Christensen
TRAFUT, Antwerp 2012
Aarhus University
Business and Social Sciences
Department of Business Communication
1
•
•
•
The aim of the project was to investigate Danish
judges’ expectations towards court interpreters and
lived experiences with practicing court interpreters.
A questionnaire was sent to 350 Danish judges
working at the 24 Danish district courts (byretter)
and 2 high courts (landsretter).
In total, 170 judges filled
in the online-questionnaire
(a response rate of 48.6 %).
Tina Paulsen Christensen
TRAFUT, Antwerp 2012
Aarhus University
Business and Social Sciences
Department of Business Communication
2
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Incorrect and inadequate interpreting
Off-record dialogues
Poor language skills
Interpreters who don’t observe impartiality
Role confusion
Interpreters who don’t possess the necessary
knowlege or educational background
Use of indirect forms of address
Quality
Formal requirements
Tina Paulsen Christensen
TRAFUT, Antwerp 2012
Aarhus University
Business and Social Sciences
Department of Business Communication
3
”The Danish court Administration agrees with the conclusions
of the research report of the researchers [Christensen and
Martinsen, red.] that there is a need for more and better
trained interpreters in a number of languages. The greatest
barrier to good courtroom interpreting is a shortage of
qualified interpreters. This means that the courts are
sometimes forced to rely on the service of people who do not
possess the necessary qualifications to act as interpreters.
The Administration also agrees with the researchers, that the
Administration needs to look into whether it is possible to
prepare judges better for the use of court interpreters.
Therefore, as from autumn 2012, the Administration will start
educating judges in the use of courtroom interpreting
services”.
(Danish Ministry of Justice16 April 2012, my translation)
Tina Paulsen Christensen
TRAFUT, Antwerp 2012
Aarhus University
Business and Social Sciences
Department of Business Communication
4
The aim of this paper
is to present conclusions
drawn from the onlinesurvey and to discuss
the possible implications
for judicial training and
education.
Tina Paulsen Christensen
TRAFUT, Antwerp 2012
Aarhus University
Business and Social Sciences
Department of Business Communication
5
According to the Danish National Police, by 11 November 2011
there were 1,984 active interpreters registered in the official
interpreter list managed by the Danish National Police,
covering approx.140 languages/dialects.
Of the interpreters working at the courts, 80% do not have any
interpreting qualification.
In May 2011, the number of state-authorised translators and
interpreters (beholders of an MA in interpreting and translation) was as follows: English (173), German (54), French
(41), Spanish (27), Italian (9), Turkish (5), Russian (4), Polish
(4), Portuguese (2), Norwegian (2), Arabic (1), Finnish (1),
Flemish (1), Greek (1), Dutch (1), Icelandic (1), Romanian (1)
and Slovakian (1).
Tina Paulsen Christensen
TRAFUT, Antwerp 2012
Aarhus University
Business and Social Sciences
Department of Business Communication
6
”The goal of the interpreter is to facilitate
communication between parties in court who do
not share a common language so that this
communication is as smooth as it would be if the
parties did have a common language. Successful
interpreting is achieved when the ongoing
interaction in court takes place (almost) as if no
interpreter was present”.
(Danish Court Administration 2003: 1; my translation)
Tina Paulsen Christensen
TRAFUT, Antwerp 2012
Aarhus University
Business and Social Sciences
Department of Business Communication
7
The Danish court interpreter shall
•
relay the content of the source text faithfully, i.e.
without changing, omitting or adding anything to
the source message,
•
observe impartiality,
•
if possible copy the style of the minoritylanguage speaker,
•
ask for repetition, if he/she believes that he/she
did not catch everything said correctly,
Tina Paulsen Christensen
TRAFUT, Antwerp 2012
Aarhus University
Business and Social Sciences
Department of Business Communication
8
•
•
•
•
ask for clarification, if there is something he/she
did not understand,
inform the court about possible
misunderstandings,
inform the court if cultural factors or implications
seem to influence the communication,
prepare him- or herself for the assignment, e.g.
by means of research on relevant terminology,
Tina Paulsen Christensen
TRAFUT, Antwerp 2012
Aarhus University
Business and Social Sciences
Department of Business Communication
9
•
•
choose an adequate mode of interpreting, and
use direct speech (first and second person
singular).
The Danish court interpreter shall not
•
provide interpreting for family members and
make statements about the case.
Tina Paulsen Christensen
TRAFUT, Antwerp 2012
Aarhus University
Business and Social Sciences
Department of Business Communication
10
Workplace:
•
•
district court 82.8 %
high court 17.2 %
Gender:
•
•
Female 55.9 %
Male 44.1 %
Age:
•
average 48.2 years
Number of years employed as a judge:
•
average 13.2 years
Tina Paulsen Christensen
TRAFUT, Antwerp 2012
Aarhus University
Business and Social Sciences
Department of Business Communication
11
•
•
•
Interpreting experience:
In 2009, the judges, on average, had participated in
interpreter-mediated court proceedings 12.5
times, however, with an individual range between 0
and 100
Knowledge of the guidelines:
50.3 % did not know the guidelines
Preferred form of address:
•
•
•
•
•
Tina Paulsen Christensen
TRAFUT, Antwerp 2012
79.6 % direct speech
13.4 % direct and indirect speech
1.9 % indirect speech
1.9 % do not address the minority-language
speaker
3.2 % were unable to answer the question
Aarhus University
Business and Social Sciences
Department of Business Communication
12
The use of indirect forms of address face
interpreters with a moral dilemma:


To be faithful to the original utterance and
interpret the user’s utterance in the same person
(e.g. ”where was he last night?”), even though the
interpreter knows it was addressed to him/her?
To simply relay the question to the minoritylanguage speaker in his/her own words, thereby
adopting direct speech?
Tina Paulsen Christensen
TRAFUT, Antwerp 2012
Aarhus University
Business and Social Sciences
Department of Business Communication
13
1
□
2
1.61
□
3
□
4
□
5
□
1: The interpreter should relay the content of the
original utterance without changing, omitting or
adding anything.
5: The interpreter is allowed to make reductions as
long as the interpreter is being faithful to the
meaning of the original utterance.
Tina Paulsen Christensen
TRAFUT, Antwerp 2012
Aarhus University
Business and Social Sciences
Department of Business Communication
14
“It is problematic when the interpreter is not
aware that he or she simply has to interpret
what is being said – not the interpreter’s
understanding of it.”
”Many interpreters are good, but there are also
many interpreters, who don’t seem to know that
they – roughly speaking – are supposed to act as
a ”translation machine” (which is, however, able
to deal with linguistic nuances)”.
Tina Paulsen Christensen
TRAFUT, Antwerp 2012
Aarhus University
Business and Social Sciences
Department of Business Communication
15
•
•
An interpreter provides a faithful rendition, if the
rendition maintains not only the semantic meaning
of the utterance, but also the intention behind it,
the style of the utterance and its intended effect.
This is typically referred to as a pragmatic
translation.
In order to maintain the pragmatic meaning of an
original utterance, the interpreter might need to
make decisions between alternatives, that is, to
make choices, and - if necessary - changes.
Tina Paulsen Christensen
TRAFUT, Antwerp 2012
Aarhus University
Business and Social Sciences
Department of Business Communication
16
Tina Paulsen Christensen
TRAFUT, Antwerp 2012
Aarhus University
Business and Social Sciences
Department of Business Communication
17
•
•
•
In court, language is used to achieve specific purposes, e.g.
to elicit information or to test the credibility, trustworthiness and intelligence of the defendant/witness.
People are judged not only on what they say, but how they
say it.
Research (Hale 2008) shows that interpreters rather than
replicating the speech style of the speaker, use their own
style, because they fear that if they maintain incoherent
speech, incomplete sentences or hesitation markers, they
are the ones who will be judged as incompetent.
Tina Paulsen Christensen
TRAFUT, Antwerp 2012
Aarhus University
Business and Social Sciences
Department of Business Communication
18
“E.g. Arabic/Kurdish and Somali interpreters.
Sometimes I have the suspicion that the interpreter
does not simply translate questions and answers, but
tries to produce meaningful and coherent renditions.
However, if the utterance of one of the primary
participants is rubbish, I still want the interpreter to
interpret the nonsense in order for me to be able to
take my own position on the statement. I want to be the
one who gives the explanations needed and further
instructions, which are then translated by the
interpreter”.
Tina Paulsen Christensen
TRAFUT, Antwerp 2012
Aarhus University
Business and Social Sciences
Department of Business Communication
19
Yes
No
Ask for clarification
87.6 %
12.4 %
Ask for repetition
100 %
0%
On their own initiative explain things to the
minority-language speaker
37.3 %
62.7 %
Inform the court of misunderstandings
97.4 %
2.6 %
Tina Paulsen Christensen
TRAFUT, Antwerp 2012
Aarhus University
Business and Social Sciences
Department of Business Communication
20
“Typically, the interpreter explains something
and argues on behalf of the accused/suspect
or discusses the answer before it is
interpreted into Danish”.
“Untrained interpreter (Somalian) who, without
any doubt, identified himself with the accused
person and obviously discussed with the
accused how to best answer the questions”.
Tina Paulsen Christensen
TRAFUT, Antwerp 2012
Aarhus University
Business and Social Sciences
Department of Business Communication
21
Judges need to learn that:


Meaning is dynamic
and must be negotiated
through interaction
Defendant, law,
court, judge, sentence, conviction,
witness, testemony, appeal,
pleading, accusation ……
faithfulness is a shared
responsibility!
Tina Paulsen Christensen
TRAFUT, Antwerp 2012
Aarhus University
Business and Social Sciences
Department of Business Communication
22