Interpreting at TISLR 8, Barcelona 2004

[Lorraine Leeson]

I couldn't agree more with Paddy. Further, I believe that as a hearing
researcher, I (we?) have a moral obligation to be able to use the
language/s we claim to be researching.but the bottom line here is that
we must be willing to take equal responsibility for providing
interpretation. As a community of linguists, we are probably aware by
now that interpretation works two ways - all language parties benefit
from the mediated exchange of information that arises as the result of
good interpretation (but it does no harm to reiterate this!!). To
suggest that Deaf participants are solely responsible for the provision
of quality interpretation is, from my viewpoint, totally unacceptable
when we claim that one of the outcomes of linguistic research is to
impact on the recognition of sign languages and consequently lead to
increased access in all areas for sign language users. Shouldn't we
practice what we preach? ..

Lorraine

Dr. Lorraine Leeson
Director
Centre for Deaf Studies
83 Waterloo Lane
Ballsbridge
Dublin 4
Ireland

-----Original Message-----
From: For the discussion of linguistics and signed languages.
[mailto:SLLING-L at ADMIN.HUMBERC.ON.CA] On Behalf Of Christopher Stone
Sent: 16 April 2003 15:02
To: SLLING-L at ADMIN.HUMBERC.ON.CA
Subject: Re: Interpreting at TISLR 8, Barcelona 2004

Dear Listers,

I have been asked to forward this by Dr Paddy Ladd:

--------------------------

Dear Group

I have kindly been sent a copy of you email re TISLR.

I respect the work you have put into this.

For myself - although from UK - I dont have especial demands for BSL
to be an official language of the conference, although I agree these
[ie asl vs bsl vs etc etc] are all still very tricky issues to decide
upon - because once we do so we will make a decision that will affect
the entire deaf world for ever, and from which there will be no going
back. If we are concerned abt USA colonialism, and consequent damage to
other sign languages, then we know that this decision is a tough one.
This issue is not my main focus here therefore.

HOWEVER, what is missing from the Amsterdam Statement, but was in fact
raised by me both on the streets and in the meeting, but forgotten by
the people who wrote the document is this..........

It should NOT be Deaf people's sole responsibility to spend
days/weeks/months of their lives trying to find interpreters [and
funding for them] for TISLR and other conferences.

If you are a hearing person and you cannot sign your own paper, then
you are DEFINITELY responsible for ensuring that your communication is
effective and successful. If you deny this responsibility then you are
saying that your only audience is those who can hear your language and
the rest of us must scramble around using time and energy for the
privilege of trying to understand you.

A similar principle applies for you understanding the signed papers by
Deaf [and other] people.

Actually, whether one can sign or not, we are ALL morally obliged to
help find [and fund] interpreters. This may or may not be reflected in
the cost of the conference fees - its up to you to think about this....


I would be grateful if you all could re-consider this item from the
last TILSR and begin to act on it.

Yours truly,


Dr Paddy Ladd

-------------------------------------

Christopher Stone
Ph.D Student
Centre for Deaf Studies
University of Bristol
8 Woodland Road
Bristol BS8 4PX
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/slling-l/attachments/20030416/08416e20/attachment.htm>