The aim of this reflective note is to outline the issues raised in two reading materials around interpreting at court. Then provide a personal response on why the issue of interpreting at court is a complex and essential one.
In first article, Sandra Hale studies the complexities of the court interpreting process. It then highlights the importance of high level bilingual competence. Furthermore, it explains that the responsibility for the quality of court interpreting must lie with all participants in the process and urges systemic improvements. Some of the improvements would be in the area of extensive training and consistent practice, and improving the work condition and remuneration of the interpreters.
The second broadcast, Damien Carrick and his guests discusses the incident where a trial was aborted after a member of the jury noted to the judge that the interpreter was under performing. Then one of his guests outlined the result of an online survey showing that there was dissatisfaction from the interpreters and the judicial officers alike. They also discussed the need of introducing the sign language interpreter if a member of jury to perform his civic duty.
I think the task of interpreting in general is a complicated one since it requires an extensive knowledge of two languages on many levels (e.g. word meaning, context, seminal level), and it requires a certain level of understanding of the two cultures that using different languages. This task becomes even more difficult when it has to be conducted within the legal context and in the court room under uncomfortable work conditions and