Legal interpreting - a qualitative investigation of the effects of directionality on multilingual court interpreters

Abstract

The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of directionality in multilingual court interpreters. It sought to investigate whether the quality of interpreting is compromised or not when interpreters interpret into their “B” and “C” languages, which are not their “A” languages. The objective of the study was to also investigate whether the amount of errors occurring as a result of directionality varies significantly between interpreters who have less court interpreting experience and those who have more experience. The study followed an ethnographic methodology, where subjects of the research were observed in their natural environment. Interpreting strategies used by multilingual court interpreters as a result of directionality were also examined by conducting court visits and observing interpreters interpreting during court proceedings. The proceedings were recorded and the interpreting was analysed. Extracts from questionnaires were also transcribed and analysed. In addition, structured and unstructured interviews were conducted. The study found that although working only into an interpreter’s “A” language may be the best practice for interpreters, this is not always possible in real life situations. Most interpreting assignments always require an interpreter to interpret in the retour mode. This is particularly the case in South African court rooms, moreover in Gauteng Province which is a melting pot of different languages and cultures. This is certainly the method of interpreting practiced in legal settings such as courts where the interpreter interprets between two parties involved in communication with each other. The analysis of the questionnaires revealed that in some instances, directionality does have an effect on the competency standard expected from court interpreters. Six out of eight case studies in the current study revealed evidence of incompetency in interpreting skills in terms of errors such as additions and omissions which can be attributed to the impact of directionality. The findings of the study also revealed that when interpreters interpreted into their “A” languages, they tended to have more additions in the interpreted version. It is envisaged that the research conducted in this study will contribute to the current directionality debate, by further shedding some light on the impact of directionality on the quality of interpreting amongst multilingual court interpreters. Additional research will contribute to the refinement, creation or refutation of concepts or theories related to the directionality debate.