Otras funciones de las tirfostinas 1. Tirfostinas como inhibidores de GC

In the most general sense, community interpreting refers to interpreting in institutional settings of a given society in which public service providers and

Quote 1.9 (Continued)

individual clients do not speak the same language    community interpreting facilitates communication within a social entity (society) that includes culturally different sub-groups. Hence, the qualifier ‘community’ refers to both the (main-stream) society as such as its constituent sub-community (ethnic or indigenous community, linguistic minority etc.)   

(Pöchhacker, 1999: 126-7)

The many different stages of development of the profession around the world make it difficult to find one detailed definition to suit all countries. In Australia, the term Community Interpreting has been used since the 1970s (Chesher, 1997) to refer to interpreting that takes place among members of that country’s community, as opposed to Conference Interpreting, which takes place between delegates from different coun-tries in a conference setting. It is worth noting, however, that the term is very rarely used by interpreters to refer to themselves. A recent discus-sion on the AUSIT⁵e-bulletin demonstrated a lack of consensus among practising interpreters. Interpreters generally simply refer to themselves as interpreters working in different contexts. The following example from Belgium presents us with a useful insight. In Belgium it was decided that separate descriptions of interpreting types would not be used, as this stig-matised Community Interpreting. Instead, they refer to the activity as

‘interpreting’ followed by the setting: interpreting in conferences, inter-preting in the courts, and so on (Miguélez, 2003).

This book will adopt ‘Community Interpreting’ as the overarching term for the type of interpreting that takes place within one country’s own community, and between residents of that country, as opposed to Conference Interpreting, which takes place between delegates who are residents of different countries, in the context of an international confer-ence or meeting. Although Community Interpreting is the blanket term, clear differences determined by the context will be highlighted. The two main specialisations that fall under the umbrella term Community Interpreting are medical interpreting and legal interpreting. The other types that take place under the name of Community Interpreting are too diverse to warrant specialised names. These include welfare, immig-ration, education, to name just a few. Sign Language and Aboriginal Language interpreting, although with specific particularities not shared by other languages, also fall under the umbrella term of Community Interpreting.

1.5 Differences between Conference and Community Interpreting

The main distinction in the field of interpreting has traditionally been between what is commonly known as Conference Interpreting and Community Interpreting. It is generally assumed that the main differ-ence between these two types lies in the mode, with Conferdiffer-ence preting conducted in the simultaneous mode and Community Inter-preting in the consecutive mode. Although it can be safely stated that most Conference Interpreting is conducted in the simultaneous mode with the aid of equipment, community interpreters must use all modes: consecutive, simultaneous and sight translation (Nicholls, 1992).

Gentile and colleagues cite the following factors as belonging to Liaison Interpreting and which distinguish it from Conference Interpreting:

the physical proximity of the interpreter and clients; an information gap between the clients; a likely status differential between the clients;

the necessity to interpret into both language directions; working as an individual and not as part of a team. (Gentile et al., 1996: 18)

Level of formality is another difference. The register normally used in Conference Interpreting settings is formal or semi-formal, whereas in Community Interpreting it varies according to participant and text type, ranging from the very formal (e.g. reading of a charge) to the very informal (e.g. a defendant using expletives).

Table 1.4 sets out the main differences between the two genres, although, as Alexieva states ‘the boundaries between these phenomena are likely to remain fluid and   we cannot expect to delineate clear-cut categories’ (1997: 156).

The most obvious differences between Conference and Community Interpreting have been discussed by others, and relate to mode of delivery, level of formality, status, participants and proxemics (see Gentile et al., 1996). Mikkelson (nd: 2) proposes that one major differ-ence between Conferdiffer-ence and Community Interpreting is the way each activity is perceived by the clients and interpreters themselves (see Hale, 2005 for a discussion on the relationship between perception and the construction of professional identity). One very important differ-ence that has not been discussed (to my knowledge) is the various consequences of the interpreting intervention. Without any intention to undermine the role of the conference interpreter, the significance of achieving the highest level of accuracy in Community Interpreting is

Table 1.4 The main differences between Conference Interpreting and form of idioms and jokes, are common Proxemics Generally isolated in a

booth, away from the speakers

Close proximity to speakers, which allows them to be more involved in the interaction

Participants Of the same professional status

Mostly of differing status Number of

interpreters

Two (working as a team) One (working alone)

much greater than in Conference Interpreting. Whereas in most confer-ences the interpreter’s purpose is to enable delegates to understand the content of papers presented by the speakers, if the interpreter misses or distorts a point, the papers will usually be published and confusing issues clarified. In political negotiations, the role of the interpreter is more crucial, where tone and affect are also important elements of the message. However, in such circumstances it is common for most delegates to speak a common language and use their mother tongue only as a political statement rather than as a necessity. It is also not uncommon for the major decisions to have been made already in the margins of the plenary meetings and in the absence of interpreters.

In Community Interpreting the participants’ need for the services of the interpreter is real, as they would simply not be able to communicate without them. The situations they are in – a police interview, a court

case or a medical consultation – require precision in the interpretation, since inaccuracy can have major ramifications on the outcome of a case or on the treatment of an illness. There is no other opportunity to read what the speakers have said or even to notice that an error or misunderstanding has occurred. The other difference between the two genres is the meaning of accuracy. While in Conference Interpreting the content is the most important aspect, regardless of form or manner (Shle-singer 2000:7), in Community Interpreting manner is just as important (Tebble, 1999; Berk-Seligson, 1990/2002; Hale, 2004). This suggests that the onus on the community interpreter to perform a high quality job is much greater than a conference interpreter because of what is at stake. Yet community interpreters, with much greater demands than conference interpreters, receive much lower pay and have little status as professionals.

Further reading

Carr, Roberts, Dufour and Steyn (1997). A selection of papers from the first inter-national conference on Community Interpreting which marked an historic event in the discipline. The papers present different perspectives, practices and research results from around the world.

Gentile, Ozolins and Vasilakakos (1996). This is one of the first manuals on Community Interpreting and provides a practical overview of the field in Australia.

Pöchhacker (2004). This book provides an excellent overview of the whole field of Interpreting Studies, with some specific references to Community or Public Service Interpreting.

2

Interdisciplinarity: Community