Description
Most legal interpreters (LIs) have to cope with a power imbalance in legal encounters as they do not necessarily master the specialised knowledge of legal professionals (LPs) on the same advanced level, possibly giving rise to terminological challenges and translation difficulties. Besides, LIs often face unfamiliar (e.g. technical, medical, etc.) terminology due to a lack or total absence of preparation material. Interestingly, terminology-oriented academic research in legal interpreting (LI) seems unprecedented, except for some isolated examples (e.g. Vigier-Moreno 2021). At best, ‘terminology’ is mentioned only as a subordinate aspect of interpreting quality. Also in the broader field of dialogue interpreting, terminology issues have been investigated marginally (Niska 1998; Valero-Garcés 2005; Pöllabauer 2017).More importantly, scholarly attention in LI has been mainly centered on (public) court hearings (see e.g. Monteoliva-Garcia 2018). Our research, however, focuses on interpreter-mediated interactions in pre-trial settings led by an investigating judge, which is still largely uncharted territory in LI. Ultimately, our aim is to fill two existing gaps, by combining (1) terminology challenges and needs in (2) interpreter-mediated pre-trial encounters. We compared data of how terminology challenges and needs are perceived by both LPs and LIs, with empirical research on solution strategies applied by LIs for translating terminology. Role-played encounters (in this case, simulated pre-trial scenarios) allow us to systematically develop and assess such solution strategies for translating terminology, while focusing on ‘preparation’ and ‘use of technology’ as influential variables.
The research questions addressed in this study, are threefold: 1) What are the terminology challenges and needs for legal interpreters during interpreter-mediated pre-trial hearings led by an investigating judge? 2) What are investigating judges’ perceptions towards legal interpreters as for meeting terminology needs in pre-trial settings and vice versa? 3) What are effective solution strategies for legal interpreters to enhance their terminological competence in pre-trial settings?
In our contribution, we want to present our mixed-methods research design, comprising semi-structured interviews with LPs and LIs as well as observations of interpreter-mediated pre-trial encounters. In 2023, we had the opportunity to interview six investigating judges and eight LIs, all of them having their professional activities in Belgium. From December 2023 until February 2024, twelve role-played interpreter-mediated pre-trial hearings (language combinations: Dutch-French and Dutch-Italian) were video-recorded and transcribed, based on prior observations of eleven authentic interpreter-mediated pre-trial hearings in Antwerp in late 2022 and early 2023.
At this moment, we are in the midst of analysing key data obtained from the interviews with LPs and LIs, and role-played encounters. Both components are equally essential for a comprehensive and in-depth analysis. As for the interviews, nearly all investigating judges acknowledged that legal interpreters generally do not receive any kind of preparatory information, while clearly underlining the importance of terminological accuracy and consistency. Legal interpreters, in turn, attested the current practice of not receiving prior pre-trial hearing information, occasionally leading to ad-hoc terminology challenges and thus potentially impacting interpreting quality – and all its implications on legal certainty.
However, conclusive findings resulting from all aforementioned research components (including the role-played encounters) will be formulated and discussed at the time of the conference. In conclusion, the main outcomes of this study will prove to offer valuable information for indicating existing shortcomings for meeting terminology needs in pre-trial settings – not only in the form of policy recommendations for the Belgian judiciary, but also for LI education purposes in general.
References
Monteoliva-Garcia, Eloisa. 2018. "The last ten years of legal interpreting research (2008-2017). A review of research in the field of legal interpreting". Language and Law / Linguagem e Direito 5, no. 1: 38-61.
Niska, Helge. 1998. "Explorations in Translational Creativity: Strategies for Interpreting Neologisms". Workshop paper (August 8, 1998), Stockholm University. http://www.oocities.org/~tolk/lic/kreeng2.htm (last viewed April 30, 2024).
Pöllabauer, Sonja. 2017. "Issues of terminology in public service interpreting. From affordability through psychotherapy to waiting lists". In Non-professional Interpreting and Translation, edited by Rachele Antonini, Letizia Cirillo, Linda Rossato & Ira Torresi: 131-155. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Valero-Garcés, Carmen. 2005. "Terminology and Ad hoc Interpreters in Public Services. An Empirical Study". JoSTrans 3. 75-96.
Vigier-Moreno, Francisco. 2021. "Creating research-based resources for court interpreters: an illustrative study on translation-oriented terminological records about Spanish criminal proceedings". Perspectives 29, no. 2: 217-230. doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.2020.1839522
| Period | 3 Oct 2024 |
|---|---|
| Event title | Legal Translation & Interpreting on the move |
| Event type | Conference |
| Location | Trieste, ItalyShow on map |
| Degree of Recognition | International |
Related content
-
Projects