I had an experience tonight that compelled me to write about it. Our field has taken on a trend that has to stop.
I was working with students on an interpreting exercise in class tonight. The text was challenging, possibly more challenging than many things they will have to interpret out the world, but it had a purpose beyond being difficult. I noticed one student who has good skills for where they are in the program, was not giving their maximum effort. To be blunt, the student quit on the exercise. When I sat down to give feedback the student had many reasons for not following through on the practice. The specific complaints were not important, though they were relevant to an extent. The comment that caught me was this, "You guys call us baby interpreters and then you give us stuff like this. It doesn't make any sense."
I was dumbfounded. The student was right to an extent. The term "baby interpreters" or "baby terps" is one that I've heard more and more over the last few years. It's usually used to describe students on internships or recent graduates. I've heard students refer to themselves or their cohorts this way. I've heard students say that they have been called this by instructors, though I've never heard an instructor use it myself. I've never used the term. It's always bothered me, though not enough to feel a need to say anything about it. Then tonight it was used as part of a reason to not try. It was used as justification for giving up. And I couldn't blame the student.
What are we doing?
What are we doing to the minds of new interpreters when we infantilize them and then expect them to have the work ethic and dedication that we require of professional interpreters?
I took a millisecond to compose myself and hoped that the shock hadn't registered on my face. "I have never called you that." I replied. "I have told you from the beginning that you are seniors who are almost ready to graduate and who will be out there interpreting for real people in ten weeks. You are not a baby. You are an adult and I expect you to behave as an emerging professional."
Every cohort is different. Every student is different, but each cohort takes on a personality. Some want to be treated like traditional students where the teacher lectures and they absorb. Some want to be treated as professionals and left mostly on their own. Over the last few years I have noticed that many students feel that we as a field, not just within my department but overall, have very low opinions of them. Whether it's comments from professionals, or websites that tell them they will never be good enough, some of us are in fact treating them like children. Yet we expect them to walk into any situation and do great work. How?
Years ago a student told me, "You know, we have a reputation as being the hardest department on campus." The student said it as a complaint. The class was unhappy with how much work they had. They lamented that their Deaf friends felt like these student didn't have enough time to hang out. I was a little bit proud. We should be among the most challenging majors on campus, our graduates have one of the most demanding jobs. My answer was this, "It's fine that your friends want you to have time to hang out now, but what will they want in May when you show up to work at their job? They will expect you to know everything and to interpret perfectly. In that moment you will both be glad for the work you're doing now."
The point of this anecdote is that we can't expect students or new professionals to do the work we need them to do and call them "babies" at the same time. Babies get a pass. We accept less from babies because we don't expect them to be capable. Yet it's the opposite with novice interpreters. We tell them they're terrible and unworthy and then expect them to work hard at getting better. We haze them.
I say "we" as a representative of the field, I do not subscribe to this approach. Furthermore I think my department does a great job teaching interpreting. I don't know where the idea comes from that our department is sending this message because I don't see it from our faculty. I don't even see that sentiment from our faculty.
New interpreters, you are not babies. We will not treat you like babies because we do not expect you to behave like babies. You are emerging professionals. You are the future of our field. (Keep in mind that being treated like an adult can be a whole other shock but that's a topic for another time.)
So I am asking that if you use the term "baby interpreter," please stop. There are other terms we can use: novice, journeyman, apprentice, to suggest a few. These are adults who we expect to shoulder adult burdens and bear adult responsibility. If we can't show them that we support their journey and respect their path then why are we training interpreters?
Calling them babies doesn't help any of us. It doesn't help the new terps, it doesn't help their future consumers, it doesn't help their team interpreters. It doesn't help. It's inappropriate. Stop it.
Tuesday, October 20, 2015
Thursday, August 27, 2015
Research Chats
I am honored to have been selected for a a new project from the Center for the Advancement of Interpreting and Translation Research (CAITR). The center has created a new series titled Research Chats. The series contains
short video segments in which students and faculty from Gallaudet's Department of Interpretation share their research
questions and how they are investigating those questions.
Please check out the video below, and keep an eye out for future Research Chats at the DOI website, and on the CAITR Facebook page.
Please check out the video below, and keep an eye out for future Research Chats at the DOI website, and on the CAITR Facebook page.
Friday, July 31, 2015
Now Available Online
I was doing some looking around today and found this. It's an article comprised of three research squibs by doctoral students at Gallaudet. One of them happens to be me! This research was presented at CIT a few years ago. It covers a range of topics: VRS, Interpreter Personality, and Co-Speech Gesture. Please give it a click.
Research Studies in Interpretation from Gallaudet University Doctoral Students
Research Studies in Interpretation from Gallaudet University Doctoral Students
Friday, April 24, 2015
Creating the Signs of Rugby
This is actually an old project now but I wanted to share it.
In 2012 I made a documentary film about linguistic innovation around the first long lasting community of practice of Deaf rugby players.
Language innovation requires having enough language users engaged in a task over a long enough period of time for new vocabulary to be created, accepted, and disseminated through common use. Prior to 2009 there had been no critical mass of deaf people who had been involved with rugby long enough for standardized signs to be created. That changed when Mark Burke established a team at the Model Secondary School for the Deaf in Washington D.C. Over the next several years Deaf players and coaches created and codified terms for rugby specific vocabulary.
This documentary was the impetus for the creation of the Innovation in Interpreting Research award at Gallaudet University. This project was the first to receive the award.
The film has been screened at Gallaudet University, along with a presentation on language innovation and communities of practice. If you would like to book a workshop and screening please be in touch.
In 2012 I made a documentary film about linguistic innovation around the first long lasting community of practice of Deaf rugby players.
Language innovation requires having enough language users engaged in a task over a long enough period of time for new vocabulary to be created, accepted, and disseminated through common use. Prior to 2009 there had been no critical mass of deaf people who had been involved with rugby long enough for standardized signs to be created. That changed when Mark Burke established a team at the Model Secondary School for the Deaf in Washington D.C. Over the next several years Deaf players and coaches created and codified terms for rugby specific vocabulary.
This documentary was the impetus for the creation of the Innovation in Interpreting Research award at Gallaudet University. This project was the first to receive the award.
The film has been screened at Gallaudet University, along with a presentation on language innovation and communities of practice. If you would like to book a workshop and screening please be in touch.
Tuesday, April 21, 2015
Idioms Part II Due Out Fall 2015
Update: The book is now available to order and will hit shelves soon! Check it out here: Signed Language Interpretation and Translation Research
It's actually called Interpreter's Views on Idiom Use in ASL-to-English Interpreting (Santiago, Barrick & Jennings, 2015) but it is coming out this fall in the Symposium Selected Papers (Vol. 1) from Gallaudet University Press. The chapter is the follow up to the popular Handling and Incorporation of Idioms in Interpretation (Santiago and Barrick, 2007) study that we have presented at conferences and as a stand alone workshop.
The Symposium Selected Papers (Vol. 1) is a collection of papers that were presented at the 2014 International Symposium on Signed Language Interpretation and Translation Research.
It's been wonderful to find a home for the second part of our idiom study. Hopefully those of you who have read the first part, or who attended our workshops will give this second paper a read.
It's actually called Interpreter's Views on Idiom Use in ASL-to-English Interpreting (Santiago, Barrick & Jennings, 2015) but it is coming out this fall in the Symposium Selected Papers (Vol. 1) from Gallaudet University Press. The chapter is the follow up to the popular Handling and Incorporation of Idioms in Interpretation (Santiago and Barrick, 2007) study that we have presented at conferences and as a stand alone workshop.
The Symposium Selected Papers (Vol. 1) is a collection of papers that were presented at the 2014 International Symposium on Signed Language Interpretation and Translation Research.
It's been wonderful to find a home for the second part of our idiom study. Hopefully those of you who have read the first part, or who attended our workshops will give this second paper a read.
Monday, March 23, 2015
The ADA and You. Yes, You.
Hopefully this post can help businesses and non-profits understand their obligations in a no nonsense way. If you want all the exact legal stuff check the resources at the end. I also hope it can help interpreters and Deaf people talk to businesses about their ADA obligations.
It seems like more and more often these days I'm seeing articles about organizations pushing back against following ADA requirements. On a day-to-day level this isn't new. Anyone who has had a prolonged relationship with any disability community sees it constantly. For me it's usually doctors' offices telling Deaf people that the office isn't responsible for providing interpreters. (This is wrong by the way). Seriously, doctor's offices are the worst for this, and yet you can kind of understand how they wouldn't know. After all, they are usually small offices that specialize in being doctors, not in legal matters. While I'm sure they all have a lawyer they work with for the things you need to be a practicing doctor, they don't have anything that would approach being a legal department, and they probably contract out the business end. Basically, even though they're wrong and need to know that they are wrong, you hope that they'll listen to reason. (They often don't). What I can't abide are huge, huge institutions that don't seem to understand their responsibilities under the ADA. Seriously, it's disgusting.
Part of why this irks me is that it touches on the two courses I teach regularly, Business and Government Interpreting, and Medical Interpreting. I teach a units on HIPAA and on the ADA. So here's what I'm going to do, even though I do ADA consulting as a business, I'm going to give away some of the milk for free. I am going to give the quick and dirty on your responsibilities vis-a-vis the ADA. I will try to be brief, I will try to not be sarcastic. I will add the disclaimer that I am not a lawyer and that this blog entry should not be construed as legal advice. (I don't know why we always have to say that, but there, it's said, don't sue me.) I'm going to try to do this in plain language.
Quick Primer
The ADA has five titles.
Title I: Employment
This commonly misunderstood title requires accommodations in places of employment. This means that you must accommodate your employees and cannot discriminate against disabled people in hiring. The part of this title that is misunderstood is that it applies only to employers with 15 or more employees. This is done to protect small businesses. The problem is that many businesses totally misunderstand this and think that if they have less than 15 employees they don't have to accommodate customers. These people are wrong. (As we'll see later). Remember, Title I only applies to your employees, not your customers.
Title II: Non Discrimination in State and Local Government Services
The Feds are already unable to discriminate so this law was set up so everyone below the Feds have to play nice. It's a shame that we even need this kind of law. Basically, if you're a government you can't refuse service to people based on disability.
This is what makes stories like this one, in which a Deaf man was held in an Arlington, VA jail for six weeks without and interpreter so inexcusable, because by law it's totally avoidable. I'm no policing expert, but we do kind of tend to rely on the police and the corrections system to, at minimum, know the law. However, this quote from the sheriff's department lawyers shows that they're either complete jerks, or totally ignorant of the ADA:
In another instance I had a state university fight me on paying for interpreters for clubs and organizations. They're stance was that it was expensive and that if they had to pay for interpreters for all clubs they'd be ruined. They also claimed that their use of federal funds didn't mean they had to follow the ADA. They were wrong on both counts.
Title III: Nondiscrimination on the basis of disability by Public Accommodations and in Commercial Facilities
Here's
where all those businesses with less than 15 employees need to pay
attention. Regardless of how many employees you have, if you serve the
public, you have to provide accommodations. "Oh ho!" you say, "But
interpreting is expensive. I can claim this 'undue hardship' loophole
thing and then I won't have to pay." Yeah, you're out on that "cool life hack."
Right now. (Are you done yet?)
I can't stress this
enough, you can't get around this stuff. You think you can, but you
can't. I once worked for a company whose lawyers told them they could do
all kinds of things they were sure were totally OK according to
loopholes in federal law. They did this even though many of us employees
warned them they were breaking the law. They ignored us, the Feds hit
them with a $20M penalty and the company almost went under. Seriously,
don't mess around here, just go ahead and do what you're supposed to do.
Plan ahead. Understand that like taxes and insurance, ADA compliance is
part of your overhead. It's not extra, it's not a surprise, it's a
standard. Get used to it.
It seems like more and more often these days I'm seeing articles about organizations pushing back against following ADA requirements. On a day-to-day level this isn't new. Anyone who has had a prolonged relationship with any disability community sees it constantly. For me it's usually doctors' offices telling Deaf people that the office isn't responsible for providing interpreters. (This is wrong by the way). Seriously, doctor's offices are the worst for this, and yet you can kind of understand how they wouldn't know. After all, they are usually small offices that specialize in being doctors, not in legal matters. While I'm sure they all have a lawyer they work with for the things you need to be a practicing doctor, they don't have anything that would approach being a legal department, and they probably contract out the business end. Basically, even though they're wrong and need to know that they are wrong, you hope that they'll listen to reason. (They often don't). What I can't abide are huge, huge institutions that don't seem to understand their responsibilities under the ADA. Seriously, it's disgusting.
Part of why this irks me is that it touches on the two courses I teach regularly, Business and Government Interpreting, and Medical Interpreting. I teach a units on HIPAA and on the ADA. So here's what I'm going to do, even though I do ADA consulting as a business, I'm going to give away some of the milk for free. I am going to give the quick and dirty on your responsibilities vis-a-vis the ADA. I will try to be brief, I will try to not be sarcastic. I will add the disclaimer that I am not a lawyer and that this blog entry should not be construed as legal advice. (I don't know why we always have to say that, but there, it's said, don't sue me.) I'm going to try to do this in plain language.
Quick Primer
The ADA has five titles.
Title I: Employment
This commonly misunderstood title requires accommodations in places of employment. This means that you must accommodate your employees and cannot discriminate against disabled people in hiring. The part of this title that is misunderstood is that it applies only to employers with 15 or more employees. This is done to protect small businesses. The problem is that many businesses totally misunderstand this and think that if they have less than 15 employees they don't have to accommodate customers. These people are wrong. (As we'll see later). Remember, Title I only applies to your employees, not your customers.
Title II: Non Discrimination in State and Local Government Services
The Feds are already unable to discriminate so this law was set up so everyone below the Feds have to play nice. It's a shame that we even need this kind of law. Basically, if you're a government you can't refuse service to people based on disability.
This is what makes stories like this one, in which a Deaf man was held in an Arlington, VA jail for six weeks without and interpreter so inexcusable, because by law it's totally avoidable. I'm no policing expert, but we do kind of tend to rely on the police and the corrections system to, at minimum, know the law. However, this quote from the sheriff's department lawyers shows that they're either complete jerks, or totally ignorant of the ADA:
"even if the discrimination were intentional, the lawyers write that it would not violate federal law because there is a rational basis for the discrimination: "it takes extra resources and creates additional security considerations to bring in an ASL interpreter,''That's right, these lawyers think that federal law allows for discrimination on the rational basis that it's expensive, and requires more work. But hey, what's six weeks of totally unnecessary incarceration when there's a couple hundred bucks to be saved? The weirdest part of this story is that it happened in an area with the highest concentration of Deaf people in the country. So you'd think they'd know better. It's inexcusable and the tax payers of Arlington are about to be at least several hundreds of thousands of dollars lighter.
In another instance I had a state university fight me on paying for interpreters for clubs and organizations. They're stance was that it was expensive and that if they had to pay for interpreters for all clubs they'd be ruined. They also claimed that their use of federal funds didn't mean they had to follow the ADA. They were wrong on both counts.
Title III: Nondiscrimination on the basis of disability by Public Accommodations and in Commercial Facilities
Here's
where all those businesses with less than 15 employees need to pay
attention. Regardless of how many employees you have, if you serve the
public, you have to provide accommodations. "Oh ho!" you say, "But
interpreting is expensive. I can claim this 'undue hardship' loophole
thing and then I won't have to pay." Yeah, you're out on that "cool life hack."
The
cost of service is in no way contingent on or related to the price the
customer is paying. So let's say you charge $100 for a patient visit,
but an interpreter costs $130. Too bad. Seems unfair? Sorry, that's the
cost of doing business. But if you think of it the way the government
does it hurts less. You see, the undue hardship test is based on your
total annual operating budget. So, assuming you turn a profit of more
that $130, you have to pay for the interpreter. It might also interest
you to know that the last time I checked (2014) no organization had ever
won an undue hardship case. Ever. Never, ever. Ever. If you think
you're going to claim undue hardship to avoid accommodating a client, be
ready to pay way more in a law suit than you were going to pay for an interpreter.
"Ah," you say,
"but I'm a non-profit. Obviously I don't have to provide accommodations,
I have none of these profits you speak of." Sorry. The ADA doesn't
distinguish between for profit and non-profit. Again, the standard is
annual operating budget. You would be shocked (shocked!) to know
some of the enormous, well known, national non-profits that have
contacted me for volunteer interpreting. These are organizations that
are paying huge staffs of lawyers and marketers and web designers, and
writers, and have huge paid boards and management structures and so on. But
when they have to pay for accommodations, all of a sudden they're poor.
Sorry
non-profits, if you have any employees or pay for any services, you
should be paying something for accommodations. Do you call around for free
plumbers, or free electricity? Do you ask for student volunteer
accountants? Do you petition for free Internet service? No? Then why do
you think you should get your accommodations for free?
That said,
if you're a non-profit there are ways to get low cost or free
interpreting services, please contact me for a consultation.
I'm
kidding. If you have people who are already a part of your organization
who are qualified to provide accommodations, ask them. But make sure
they're qualified. Seriously. Not just someone who knows some signs. Or
ask for donated services, for which you will provide a donation receipt.
That way everyone understands that services aren't free, and that in
the event that no volunteer is available, you know how much you can
expect to pay for service.
I recently saw this story about a Deaf family suing a peewee football league for failing to comply with the ADA. I encountered this in a local league as well. A Deaf kid made an All Star team and the league had no plan as to how to provide an interpreter at the All Star show-case tournament. If you are a non-profit you must come up with an accommodation plan right now.
Right now. (Are you done yet?)
You have to put it in your
budget. You have to add it to your fundraising. Seriously, if you have
Deaf people in your realm or region at all you have to have a accommodation slush
fund. If you don't you're setting yourself up for trouble.
Oh, and for you medical providers, that means you have to provide services for immediate family members of the patient (parents, spouse, children).
Title IV: Telecommunications
Title V: Misc.
These probably don't apply to you, but you can look them up.
Conclusion
I can't stress this
enough, you can't get around this stuff. You think you can, but you
can't. I once worked for a company whose lawyers told them they could do
all kinds of things they were sure were totally OK according to
loopholes in federal law. They did this even though many of us employees
warned them they were breaking the law. They ignored us, the Feds hit
them with a $20M penalty and the company almost went under. Seriously,
don't mess around here, just go ahead and do what you're supposed to do.
Plan ahead. Understand that like taxes and insurance, ADA compliance is
part of your overhead. It's not extra, it's not a surprise, it's a
standard. Get used to it.
Really, I shouldn't have had to write
this. There's a million guides out there for you. The problem is, you're
ignoring them. So now there's one more. If you want more legalistic
resource they're out there. In fact, I'll even give you some resources
below.
Resources:
http://www.ada.gov/regs2010/smallbusiness/smallbusprimer2010.htm
https://www.ada.gov/effective-comm.htm
http://www.ada.gov/smbusgd.pdf
http://www.ada.gov/business.htm
http://www.cct.org/2015/09/renewing-the-commitment/
http://www.ada.gov/business.htm
http://www.cct.org/2015/09/renewing-the-commitment/
https://nonprofitrisk.org/tools/workplace-safety/nonprofit/c5/ADA.htm
http://www.adachecklist.org/about.html
Friday, March 20, 2015
Consecutive Interpreting: A Brief Review (2004)
This paper has
found new life in the BA Interpreting major at Gallaudet, where it has
become a favorite citation for a project on consecutive interpreting. It was
first published on my old blog back in 2004. I am bringing it here in
order to have everything in one place. This series of squibs were
written between 2002 and 2004. They can be read for CEUs at CEUs on the Go!
In its purest form, consecutive interpretation is a mode in which the interpreter begins their interpretation of a complete message after the speaker has stopped producing the source utterance. At the time that the interpretation is rendered the interpreter is the only person in the communication environment who is producing a message. In practice, a consecutive interpretation may be rendered when the interpreter does not have a text in its entirety, that is, the person delivering the source utterance may have more to say, but the interpreter has enough information to deliver a message that could stand alone if need be. It is important to note that although the person who originated the message has ceased their delivery of new information, this speaker has not necessarily given up the floor and, once the interpretation has been delivered, the speaker may resume delivery of their message.
In its purest form, consecutive interpretation is a mode in which the interpreter begins their interpretation of a complete message after the speaker has stopped producing the source utterance. At the time that the interpretation is rendered the interpreter is the only person in the communication environment who is producing a message. In practice, a consecutive interpretation may be rendered when the interpreter does not have a text in its entirety, that is, the person delivering the source utterance may have more to say, but the interpreter has enough information to deliver a message that could stand alone if need be. It is important to note that although the person who originated the message has ceased their delivery of new information, this speaker has not necessarily given up the floor and, once the interpretation has been delivered, the speaker may resume delivery of their message.
Though
most people may be more familiar with simultaneous interpretation, where the interpreter renders their interpretation
while still receiving the source utterance, consecutive interpretation has
distinct advantages in certain interpreting situations, not the least of which
is that consecutive interpretations render more accurate, equivalent[i],
and complete target texts. In
fact, the two modes, when performed successfully, employ the same cognitive
processing skills, with the only difference being the amount of time that
elapses between the delivery of the source utterance and the delivery of the
interpretation. This being the
case, mastery of techniques used in consecutive interpretation can enhance an
interpreter’s ability to work in the simultaneous mode.
The Interpreting Process
Before we continue
I would like to take a moment to explain the interpreting process in order to
explain how consecutive interpretations produce more accurate and equivalent
target texts. In order to
interpret a text the interpreter must be able to receive and understand the
incoming message and then express it’s meaning in the target
language. In order to accomplish
this task, the interpreter must go through an overlapping series of cognitive
processing activities. These
include: attending to the message, concentrating on the task at hand,
remembering the message, comprehending the meaning of the message, analyzing
the message for meaning, visualizing the message nonverbally, and finally
reformulating the message in the target language[ii]. Seleskovitch (1978) compresses these
tasks into three steps, noting that the second step includes the,
“Immediate and deliberate discarding of the wording and retention of the
mental representation of the message” (Seleskovitch, 8); interpreters
often refer to this as “dropping form.” By discarding the form (words, structure etc.) of the source
text the interpreter is free to concentrate on extracting and analyzing the
meaning of the text, and conceiving strategies for reformulating the message
into the target language.
Seleskovitch,
among others, points out that there is another practical reason for the
interpreter to discard the form of the source text, there is only so much that
a person can hold in their short-term memory. As the interpreter receives the source text the information
passes initially through their short-term memory. If the interpreter does not do anything with this
information it will soon disappear.
Smith (1985) notes that, “Short term memory...has a very limited
duration. We can remember...six or
seven items only as long as we give all of our attention to them” (Smith,
38). If an interpreter attempts to
retain the form of a source utterance their short-term memory will be quickly
filled with individual lexical items, which may not even compose a full
sentence. If the interpreter then attempts to find a
corresponding lexical item in the target language for each of the source
language forms in their short-term memory all of their attention will be wasted
on translating these six items rather than attending to the incoming message,
as Smith points out, “as long as pay attention to short-term memory we
cannot attend to anything else” (Smith, 38). In a consecutively interpreted situation this would result
in the interpreter stopping the speaker every six or seven words so that the
interpreter could clear their short-term memory and prepare to receive new
information. Cleary this is not a
preferable manner in which to communicate, and, as Seleskovitch points out, it
would require the interpreter to know every existing word in both languages.
It is because of
the limitations of short-term memory that interpreters are required to drop
form and concentrate on meaning.
Both Seleskovitch and Smith propose that meaningful segments of great
size can be placed into long-term memory and retrieved later. Of course a chunk
of information must be understood in order to be meaningful. To demonstrate this idea Seleskovitch
uses the example of a person who has just seen a movie, after viewing the film
the person will be able to relate the plot and many of the details of the of
the film. If the person continues
to discuss the film with others the details will remain fresh in their mind for
a longer period of time. In this
example the person is able to remember the film because they understood it, and
are, “conversant with the various themes found in films...the movie-goer
can easily and fully process the ‘information’ conveyed...and for
this reason he remembers” (Seleskovitch, 1979, 32). Smith adds, “it takes no longer
to put a rich and relevant chunk of meaning into long-term memory than it does
a useless letter or word” (Smith, 45), because of this the
moviegoer will probably be able to
relate the salient points of the film in a fraction of the time it took them to
receive the information. Since the
information was understood, its salient points can be reformulated into another
mode of communication. For
example, when the moviegoer discusses the plot of the film they do not recreate
its form, nor do they take two hours to render their
“interpretation.”
Due to the
greater ease of assimilating larger meaningful chunks of information it
behooves the interpreter to focus their attention on these larger chunks. A larger chunk of text will usually
contain a greater amount of meaning.
It is this relationship that aids the interpreter’s understanding
of the source text when working consecutively. As shown above, once a chunk of information is understood it
can be reformulated into another form.
As Seleskovitch (1978) points out, “In consecutive interpretation
the interpreter has the advantage of knowing line of the argument before he
interprets” (Seleskovitch, 28).
Interpreters are
not charged with merely understanding the message, they must also be able to
remember it, in order to deliver their interpretation. Seleskovitch notes that dropping form
aids the interpreter’s memory because they are not concentrating on
remembering the words, or even the structure of the source text. Instead, the interpreter understands
the message, connects it to long-term memory, and is then able to reformulate it
in much the same way the moviegoer can relate the points of a film. Of course the interpreter must provide
a more equivalent target text than the moviegoer. To this end interpreters working consecutively will often
make notes as they take in the source utterance. These notes help the interpreter retrieve the message from
their long-term memory and consist of, “symbols, arrows, and a key word
here or there” (Seleskovitch, 1991, 7). These few notes are effective because interpreters do not
produce their target texts based on the form used by the speaker but on what
they understood of the meaning of the source text. The “key words” may consist of words that will
remind the interpreter of the speaker’s point, or of specific information
“such as proper names, headings and certain numbers” (Seleskovitch,
1978, 36).
Seleskovitch also
points to the time afforded an interpreter working in the consecutive mode as
an asset in reformulating the message in the target language. Because the interpreter does not need
to split their attention between receiving the message, and monitoring their
output, as is required in simultaneous, they can devote more of their
processing to analysis and reformulation of the text thereby producing a more
accurate and equivalent interpretation.
Situations for Consecutive Interpreting
Even
though the interpreter’s goal is always to produce the most accurate and
equivalent target text possible consecutive interpretation is not always
possible. Situations where one
speaker maintains the floor, with little or no interaction with the audience
and situations where there is rapid turn taking between a group of
interlocutors
may require the interpreter to work
simultaneously. While Seleskovitch
notes that spoken language interpreters working at international conferences
may sometimes
interpret entire speeches
consecutively, the consecutive mode often requires some type of pause so that
the interpreter may render the message.
That
said, there are situations that lend themselves to consecutive interpretation,
I would like to discuss three such situations, one general, and two
specific. In general, consecutive
interpretation can be employed successfully in one-on-one interpreted
interactions. One-on-one
interactions often allow for more structured turn taking behavior than large
group situations. Interviews,
parent teacher meetings, and various type of individual consultations may be
interpreted consecutively with minimal disruption to the flow of communication
perceived by the participants.
Specifically,
there are two types of interpreted situations that, due to the consequences
involved, require consecutive interpretation rather than simultaneous. These are legal and medical interpreted
interactions. In these situations,
where a person’s life or freedom is at stake, accuracy and equivalence
are of the utmost priority; as we have seen, consecutive interpretation
provides greater accuracy and equivalence than simultaneous does. Palma (1995) points out that the
density and complexity of witness testimony requires the interpreter to work
consecutively, and to be aware of how long a chunk they can manage
effectively. Palma notes that,
especially during expert witness testimony, where the language used can be
highly technical and is more likely to use complex sentence constructions; a
segment of text that is short in duration may be extremely dense in terms of
the content and complexity of its ideas.
In this case the consecutive mode has the added advantage of allowing
the interpreter to ask speaker to pause so that the interpreter may deliver the
message. The interpreter may also
take advantage of the time in which they hold the floor to ask the speaker for
clarification. Use of the consecutive
mode is also helped by the fact that court officials (attorneys, judges etc.)
may e familiar with the norms of consecutive interpretation and by the fact
that turn taking between the witness and the attorney often proceeds with only
one the two speaking at any one time.
In
the case of medical interpreting accuracy and equivalence are also at a premium
due to the possible consequences of a misdiagnosis. Like expert witness testimony, doctor-patient interactions
may be filled with medical jargon or explanations of bodily systems that may be
particularly dense for the interpreter.
Again turn taking may be more structured in a one-on-one medical
environment especially if the patient is in full control of their
faculties. As in the legal
setting, the medical interpreter may take advantage of the structure of a
doctor-patient interaction in order to request for pauses and clarifications.
Generally,
the logistics of a consecutively interpreted interaction must be established
before the communication takes place.
In the case of a single speaker who will have little or no interaction
with the audience this means either the speaker will pause for the interpreter,
or the interpreter, and hopefully the audience, knows that the interpretation
will not be delivered until the speaker has finished. Establishing the logistics with all the parties involved,
before the interpreted interaction takes place, can help prevent the uneasiness that
participants often feel while waiting for the interpreter to begin.
Consecutive in Relation to
Simultaneous
As
mentioned above the primary difference between consecutive and simultaneous
interpreting is involves the time lapse between the delivery of the
speaker’s message and the beginning of the interpretation. While this is a significant difference,
one that provides more challenges for the interpreter, at their roots
consecutive and simultaneous interpreting modes stem from the same set of
cognitive processes. These
processes are described by many interpreting theorists, (Gish, 1986-1994;
Colonomos, 1989; Isham, 1986), while Seleskovitch (1978) establishes the
parallel between consecutive and simultaneous. According to Seleskovitch an interpreter working in the
simultaneous mode uses the same strategies, dropping form, analyzing the
message for meaning, and developing a linguistically equivalent reformulation,
as does the interpreter working consecutively. After all, the goal is the same for both interpreters; to
deliver an accurate and equivalent target text. The difference is that in the simultaneous mode the
interpreter continues to receive and process new information while rendering,
and monitoring the target for equivalence. Because interpreters working in the simultaneous mode are
still interpreting meaning rather than form they also allow for a lag between
themselves and the speaker. That
is, the interpreter waits until the speaker has begun to develop their point
before beginning to interpret. By
allowing for lag time, and the
interpreter ensures that they are
interpreting meaning, not just individual lexical items, which Seleskovitch
suggests would be an exercise in futility.
“Even
memorizing a half dozen words would distract the interpreter, whose attention
is already divided between listening to his own words, and those of the
speaker...His memory does not store the words of the sentence delivered by the speaker, but only the
meaning those words convey.”
(Seleskovitch, 1978, 30-31)
Seleskovitch
solidifies the correlation between the cognitive processes involved in each
mode when she states, “simultaneous interpretation can be learned quite
rapidly, assuming one has already learned the art of analysis in consecutive
interpretation” (Seleskovitch, 30).
This view has been adopted at interpreter training programs at both
California State University Northridge and Gallaudet University, both of whom
require classes teaching text analysis and consecutive interpreting skills
prior to those dealing with simultaneous interpreting.
Conclusion
Rather
than being two separate skills, mastery of consecutive interpretation is in
fact a building block for successful simultaneous interpretations. In fact, thanks to the time allowed for
comprehension and analysis of the source text consecutive interpretations offer
greater accuracy and equivalence than do simultaneous interpretations. There are situations that lend
themselves to consecutive interpretations (one-on-one interactions), and others
still which require use of the consecutive mode (legal, medical) due to the
consequences of a possible misinterpretation.
[i]
For
the purposes of this paper, “accuracy” relates to the content of
the text, while “equivalence” relates to the ability of the target
text to convey the register, affect, and style of the source text. An “accurate”
interpretation will provide the target language audience with all of the
information contained in the source text, while an equivalent interpretation
will provide the content, and also have the same effect on the target language
audience as it would on a source language audience. By there definitions an interpretation may be accurate,
without being totally equivalent, while an equivalent interpretation assumes
accuracy.
[ii]
List of cognitive processing skills taken from class notes in Risa Shaw’s
Gallaudet University class “ITP 724, Cognitive Processing Skills;
English” (2002)
The
essays "Translating Poetic Discourse,' "Tense in English and ASL:
Implications for Interpreters," and "Consecutive
Interpreting: a Brief Review" were orginally
written as one volume. As such they share one bibliography. Works
cited
in these three papers can be found below.
|
||
|
Thursday, March 19, 2015
Pronouns in ASL and English (2004)
This paper was first published on my old blog back in 2004, as such the information for this topic may be out of date. Still, it can be useful as a historical document. I am bringing it here in order to have everything in one place. This series of squibs were written between 2002 and 2004. They can be read for CEUs at CEUs on the Go!
1. ASL, like English is a complete and naturally occurring language. Both share features that linguists have described as endemic of all languages. First, language is infinitely variable; it can be used to discuss any and all concepts that humans can conceive. This means that language can be used to discuss things, events and concepts that are not immediately present. Both ASL and English have symbols to represent the concepts of time, place, conditional events and things that are entirely fictional. This infinite variability also allows the language to be used in order to analyze itself. It is clear that English possesses these qualities because without them it would not be able to write this paper.
1. ASL, like English is a complete and naturally occurring language. Both share features that linguists have described as endemic of all languages. First, language is infinitely variable; it can be used to discuss any and all concepts that humans can conceive. This means that language can be used to discuss things, events and concepts that are not immediately present. Both ASL and English have symbols to represent the concepts of time, place, conditional events and things that are entirely fictional. This infinite variability also allows the language to be used in order to analyze itself. It is clear that English possesses these qualities because without them it would not be able to write this paper.
Being infinitely
variable means that a language has ways of introducing new symbols to refer to
new concepts and things. Both ASL
and English have come up with symbols that refer to modern technology and concepts. Another feature that allows languages
to adapt is that single symbols may have more than one meaning. This polysemousness allows new meanings
to be introduced without the creation of new symbols.
Languages involve
sets of symbols that are used to encode meaning. An example of this in English is letters and words, in ASL
and example would be signs. These
symbols may be either arbitrary or iconic. That is, they can clearly represent their referent (iconic),
or the symbol may bear no relation to its referent (arbitrary). An English example of iconicity is
found in words that are onomatopoeic like “cock-a-doodle-doo” or
“bang”. An ASL common
ASL example of iconicity is the sign MILK in which the hand mimics the motion
of milking a cow. These symbols
are made up of discreet, meaningless parts called phonemes, which combine to
form meaningful parts called morphemes.
English phonemes are the different sounds that speakers make that are
part of the language. In ASL
phonemes consist of handshape, location, palm orientation, movement, and non-manual
markers. Morphemes in English are
words and other units that have meaning, for example the affix “-s”
that makes a singular noun into a plural.
In ASL morphemes are individual signs as well as other features such as numeral incorporation that can modify the meaning of a basic sign. These morphemes are then combined to form clauses, which combine to form sentences, which combine to form texts. Combinations at each level are governed by rules that vary from language to language. On the larger levels, these rules are referred to as “grammar”, the system of rules that governs how words are put together to make sentences, and “syntax” the rules that govern the order and relationships between words and other structural elements in sentences and larger texts. These rules establish a system in which language is used to communicate information, as well as relationships between chunks of information. The grammars of ASL and English are different. An example of this difference can be seen in how each language uses tense to refer to time. In English speakers use affixes and internal modification to show when an event took place. For example, walk (present tense) and walked (past tense). ASL does not use affixes to show tense; rather the signer will establish the time first and then give the action. For example, MAN WALK (present tense) and YESTERDAY MAN WALK (past tense).
In ASL morphemes are individual signs as well as other features such as numeral incorporation that can modify the meaning of a basic sign. These morphemes are then combined to form clauses, which combine to form sentences, which combine to form texts. Combinations at each level are governed by rules that vary from language to language. On the larger levels, these rules are referred to as “grammar”, the system of rules that governs how words are put together to make sentences, and “syntax” the rules that govern the order and relationships between words and other structural elements in sentences and larger texts. These rules establish a system in which language is used to communicate information, as well as relationships between chunks of information. The grammars of ASL and English are different. An example of this difference can be seen in how each language uses tense to refer to time. In English speakers use affixes and internal modification to show when an event took place. For example, walk (present tense) and walked (past tense). ASL does not use affixes to show tense; rather the signer will establish the time first and then give the action. For example, MAN WALK (present tense) and YESTERDAY MAN WALK (past tense).
For more on ASL as a language
and differences between ASL and English see Valli & Lucas (1992) and Klima
& Bellugi (1979)
2.
The
remainder of this text will discuss basic pronoun systems in ASL and
English. Pronouns are symbols in a
language that are used in place of nouns and function as simple noun phrases. Languages may use these parts of speech
in place of a noun that has already been established earlier in the text in
order to refer back to that noun.
Pronouns may also be used to describe referents that do not have an
antecedent. Pronouns fall into the
following categories:
-Personal: Generally refers to
people or animate nouns
-Possessive: Shows ownership
-Reflexive: Refers back to a noun
within the same sentence, often functions as an object
-Reciprocal: Shows a
“mutuality of action[1]”
-Relative: Refers to an antecedent
that was previously established.
Can initiate a relative clause.
-Interrogative: Can be used to
begin questions
-Demonstrative: Indicates
specificity
-Indefinite: Does not refer to a
specific referent
While
languages are constantly evolving, adding new words and meanings while others
fall into disuse, pronouns are considered a minor category. This means that the set of pronouns
within a language is fixed and that no new forms may be added to the lexical
category “pronouns”.
For more on the definition of
pronouns see Teschner & Evans (2000) and Valli & Lucas (1992)
3.
As
described in the definition above ASL pronouns refer to nouns that have already
been established earlier in the text.
ASL personal
pronouns can be used to refer to three classes of referent, the speaker (1st
person), the person being addressed (2nd person), and other nouns
that are not the speaker or the addressee (3rd person). The referent
in this case will be established somewhere in the signing space. For example #BOB IX-rt establishes
that, until the topic shifts, or a new referent is established, and
“Bob” is no longer a topic of conversation, the signers may use a
pronominal sign to point to that space when referring to
“Bob”. The sign is
generally produced using the
“1” handshape with the index finger pointing towards the
referent. According to Valli &
Lucas (1992), “The third person pronoun in ASL can also be produced with
the thumb” (pg. 102).
However the pronouns for these three referents have only two forms, 1st
person and not 1st person.
Which referent the signer is referring to depends on the context in
which it appears. Because sings
with a 3rd person referent are made in space consideration has been
given to the function of space in ASL pronoun use. The consensus is that the space “is articulatory – that is location is simply part of the
pronoun sign and it does not have independent morphological meaning”
(Valli & Lucas, 103[1]). This has been determined because the 3rd
person referent can be established anywhere in the signing space, therefore the
space itself does not have meaning, it merely holds a spot for the referent.
There are two sub
categories that indicate ownership, possessive determiners, which function
syntactically like other determiners, and possessive pronouns. Again ASL seems to only make
distinctions between 1st (MY, OUR) and non-1st person
[POSS-straight-line (singular), POSS-trace-path (plural)[2]]
forms. It is not clear whether or
not ASL uses possessive pronouns.
ASL has three
indefinite pronouns, these are glossed as SOMEONE, NOTHING, and NONEosc[3]. The form SOMEONE is also used to
represent the idea expressed in English as, “something”. As stated above these pronouns do not
have a specific referent. This is
emphasized by the fact that these are not pointing signs, that is, they do not
indicate any specific part of the signing space. Rather, they are produced in neutral space.
ASL has three
demonstrative pronouns, these are glossed as THAT, THAT-PRO, and
THAT’S-THE-ONE. As stated
earlier these pronouns indicate a degree of specificity. For example, “REMEMBER LAST-WEEK
SEE CAR BLUE? THAT.”
For more on pronouns in ASL see
Valli & Lucas (1992)
4.
English
pronouns stand in place of other nouns that have already been established in
the text. In English, sentences
must be constructed in such a way that it is clear which antecedent is being
referred to. Here are some
examples of personal pronouns in English[4].
In the English sentence, “Bob and Joe went to the park, and then he went
home.” it is not clear to whom “he” refers. On the other hand, in the sentence,
“Bob went for a run and then he had lunch.” it is clear the
“he” refers to “Bob”. Still, English pronouns do not always need to have an
antecedent in the text if the referent is clear form the context. For example, in the sentence,
“You don’t have any money” it is clear that the pronoun
“You” refers to the addressee. English also shows ownership by using possessive determiners
and possessive pronouns. These two
classes are distinguished in English “by the word final /s/ in all but
one instance[5]”, that
is, adding an –s to the possessive determiner form creates a possessive
pronoun for all forms except “my”, which becomes
“mine”.
English
reflexive pronouns are used as objects to refer back to subjects in the same
sentence. Thus, the subject and
object of the sentence have the same referent. For example in the sentence, “Moe hit himself with a
hammer”; “himself” refers back to Moe. Therefore, “Moe hit Moe with a
hammer.”
English
uses reflexive pronouns to show “mutuality of action: A does to B what B
does to A.[6]“
In these cases the reciprocal construction appears in the same clause as its
antecedents. For example
“Bob and Joe ran into each other” but never “Bob went into
town and Joe ran into each other.[7]”
English
uses demonstrative pronouns to show specificity. Note the difference between “Bob was gored by a
bull” and “Bob was gored by that bull.” In the first sentence any bull could have
been responsible, the image conjured up in the listener’s mind is that of
whatever a typical bull is to them.
The pronoun “that” in the second sentence has a specific
bull as its referent[8].
Indefinite
pronouns are the opposite of demonstrative pronouns in that they do not have a
specific referent. As such, they
do not always bear an antecedent.
In fact the only indefinite pronoun to bear an antecedent is “one;
in “That’s the one I saw yesterday”, “one” refers
to “that”. The other
indefinite pronouns are combinations of “any” or “some”
with “body”, “one”, “thing”, or
“where”. That they do
not need antecedents is proven by the sentence, “Someone stole my
car.” In this case the
speaker does not know who stole his or her car, therefore “someone”
does not have specific referent, thus no antecedent is possible.
Relative
pronouns in English tend to initiate relative clauses. These pronouns replace other nouns that
function as the subject of the relative clause. This subject is identical to that of the object in the first
clause as in “Bob hit himself with the hammer that was used to build the
barn.” Here we have two
clauses that could stand as sentences; “Bob hit himself with the
hammer” and “The hammer was used to build the barn.” The relative pronoun “that”
replaces “The hammer” in the second clause.
Finally,
English uses interrogative pronouns to begin questions. These are well known by journalists as
what, when, when, where, why, how and variations of who (whom/ whose). These can be use to begin questions
such as, “Whom did Bob hit with the hammer?”
For more on pronouns in English
see Teschner & Evans (2000)
5.
ASL
and English both use pronouns to perform similar functions. However they do not perform all of the
same functions, nor do the pronominal forms of each language encode the same
information.
Many personal
pronouns (including possessives) in English encode information regarding person
(1st, 2nd, 3rd), gender, (male, female) and
case (subject, object) in the form.
For example “I” (1st, subject), “you”
(2nd), “him” (masculine, 3rd, object), and
“she” (feminine, 3rd). Conversely, ASL shows only 1st and non-1st
person, and does not encode information regarding case or gender in the
form. Case information in ASL is
dependent on context and the order of signs in a sentence. There are also some
English forms that do not encode case or gender information, such as,
“you”.
Both ASL and English encode number
related meaning in their pronominal forms, but they do it in different
ways. Both languages have forms
that indicate plurality without indicating a specific number. For example, English has
“you”, “they” and “we”, while ASL has
YOU-ALL, THEY, and US among others.
ASL, unlike English, also has plural forms that show a specific number.
By using numeral incorporation ASL can encode specific numbers from one through
five. One example is the ASL sign
FOUR-OF-THEM produced palm up with a “4” handshape and an
oscillating movement.
As discussed,
reflexive pronouns in English are used as objects that are co-referential to
the subject of the same sentence.
English also uses reflexive forms that are not used to express reflexive
concepts but instead are used to express emphasis or exclusivity. For example, “The bull gored Bob
all by itself.” indicates that the bull did not receive any help in
goring Bob. ASL also has a sign
that appears to function in this manner.
The sign is glossed as SELF and is used in sentences like, “BOY
SELF LEARN++” meaning the boy learned without help. The one possible reflexive use of SELF
in ASL is the sign THINK-SELF, which means “think for ones
self”. In the sentence
“IMPORTANT THINK-SELF”, THINK-SELF means that the referent should
think for them self, thus the implied subject and is also acted upon by the
verb, thus the subject and object are co-referential. This idea has not been proven and is provided for discussion
purposes.
Finally both ASL
and English use demonstrative pronouns.
In English the demonstrative form also encodes information as to the
proximity of the referent. The
forms “this” (singular) and “these” (plural) indicate
referents with a closer proximity to the speaker than the forms
“that” and “those”. ASL demonstratives do not encode information regarding
proximity.
[1] Valli and
Lucas cite Liddell (1993, 1994, 1995)
[2] Liddell
power point handout 10/22/02
[3] Liddell,
power point handout 10/22/02
[4] For a list
of personal pronouns see the appendix.
[5] Teschner
& Evans pg. 181
[6] Teschner
& Evans pg. 183
[7] For a list
of reflexive pronouns in English see the appendix.
[8] For a list
of demonstrative pronouns in see the appendix.
Appendix
Personal
Pronouns:
English[1]:
Possessive Possessive
Subjects
Objects
Determiners
Determiners
I
we
me us
my
our
mine ours
you you you
you your your
yours yours
he they
him
them his
their
his theirs
she they her
them her
their
hers theirs
it they it
them its
their
its
theirs
ASL[2]:
1st
Person
Non-1st Person
N 1 PRO-1
PRO
U 2
WE-2
THEY-2
M 3 THREE-OF-US
THREE-OF-THEM
B 4
FOUR-OF-US
FOUR-OF-THEM
E 5
FIVE-OF-US
FIVE-OF-THEM
R Pl. WE
THEY
Possessive Determiners:
1st person
Non-1st person
singular: MY
POSS-straight-line
plural: OUR
POSS-trace-path
Reflexive
Pronouns:
English:
singular
plural
1st person
myself
ourselves
2nd person
yourself
yourselves
3rd person
masculine
himself
themselves
3rd person feminine
herself
themselves
3rd person neuter
itself
themselves
ASL:
SELF, this sign is generally not
used reflexively.
[1] English
charts from Teschner & Evans Chapter 5
[2] ASL charts
from Liddell power point handout 10/22/02
|
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)