Interpreting Practice

[Dan Parvaz]

Hi Ben,

> Aside from most interpreters not being trained to assess language, I
> wonder about the impact.

Perhaps "assess" is too strong a term. "Eyeball" may be better. Most of
us, I'm willing to wager, can listen to someone speaking and determine
whether or not they are speaking some language that we know (e.g.,
English). Furthermore, if it isn't that language, in quite a few
instances, we could probably tell what language is being spoken (say,
Spanish or "something Asian"). We would probably have some informal
notions about sociolinguistic variables, as well.

The situation with regards to signed languages is analogous, but perhaps
more problematic for a number of reasons: non-native interpreters, wide
diversity in SL acquisition, to say nothing of the relative lack of
familiarity that many US interpreters have with other sign languages.

The lack of training in assessment may not be an obstacle to thetask of
interpretin. The interpreter does not need to formally diagnose,
say, severe apraxia to know that s/he is probably in need of some
assistance.

> Does this help perpetuate the idea that ASL (which is a real language) is
> only on a par with the various codes used to try to represent English?

I don't think so, although I may be wrong. I believe it only states the
languages used by deaf people should all be respected, and that the best
possible services should be found for them.

> Do other countries have non-linguistic codes to represent the majority
> spoken languages?

I'm note sure what you mean by a "non-linguistic code". If you mean
something like Signed English which kinda/sorta represents English on a
morphemic level, or cued speech, which roughly does the same sort of thing
on the phonemic level, then yes. A number of spoken languages have cueing
systems devised (is there a CST in the house who can provide an exact
figure?). Some spoken languages also have a morphemically-based
representation (e.g., German) which is based on a native sign language.
Some of these systems are, AFAIK, largely independent of sign languages
used by the Deaf (e.g.: PGSS?).

Of course, many countries have a "non-linguistic [code] to represent the
majority spoken [language]." It's called "orthography." :-)

Cheers,

Dan.

____________
,,,
.. .   D A N  P A R V A Z  --  Geek-in-Residence
 U    University of New Mexico Linguistics Dept
 -    dparvaz@{unm.edu,lanl.gov}   505.480.9638