Advances in Teaching Sign Language Interpreters

Cold Calling? Retraining Interpreters in the Art of Telephone Interpreting

K Y R A P O L L I T T A N D C L A I R E H A D D O N W I T H T H E I N T E R P R E T I N G T E A M O F T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F C E N T R A L L A N C A S H I R E , E N G L A N D , U . K . Cold Calling? Retraining Interpreters in the Art of Telephone Interpreting The telephone is an instrument of culture(s) based on sound and as such is foreign to Deaf communities. Interpreted telephone interaction , in which all three participants are not physically present and cannot see each other, is conducted through the medium of sound, a medium that is culturally comfortable for the participants who can hear, which usually includes the interpreter.1 This chapter describes training activities that challenge assumptions and practices that have developed around interpreted telephone interaction. It questions whether a fresh approach to this type of interpreting might be more politically liberating for Deaf people and more comfortable for all participants involved. Although not specifically designed for video-interpreted interaction , these thoughts and exercises are applicable to any instance in which the three participants, Deaf and hearing persons and an interpreter, do not share simultaneous visual contact. 187 1. Because this chapter describes telephone interpreting, the word interpreter will refer to hearing interpreters working between signed and spoken languages. Should any readers know of instances in which similar work is being undertaken by Deaf interpreters, the authors would be most grateful for further information. Rationale CAN YOU MAKE A PHONE CALL FOR ME? has long been a familiar refrain in Deaf/hearing circles. Telecommunications are a huge part of our postmodern, technological life experience, and although faxes, e-mail, text messaging (SMS), and the development of textphone relay services are all liberating forms of communication that enable Deaf and hearing people to interact directly, they do not yet reach into every corner of society and satisfy every telecommunicative purpose. At the same time, the use of the telephone for the provision of services is spreading; it is now possible to use the phone to arrange a mortgage, order flowers for a loved one, have a medical consultation, transfer money between bank accounts, and so on; the list is almost endless. For Deaf people it is still often the case that the most convenient and expedient way of accessing this world of remote services is via an interpreter. Thus interpreters increasingly find that telephone work focuses on what Cheepen (2000) terms transactional phone calls. For both caller and interpreter, these calls may involve negotiating switchboard operators, answering machines, mechanized option menus, and other complexities before the real business of talk even begins. To make matters worse, the fact that not all participants are faceto -face (even in videophone interpreting) has an enormous effect on the dynamics of the exchange. The nature of sign languages demands that the interpreter be either present or visible to the Deaf participant via a video screen. The other participant often has no visual access to either the interpreter or the Deaf person. Therefore, because the Deaf person can see the interpreter, these two will expect things to operate according to the usual norms of working together, and the third person, having only sound as a guide, will expect the norms of telephone interaction to apply. Thus crosscultural considerations and issues of power and representation assume heightened significance. In an interpreted telephone interaction, then, what do interpreters aim to do and how do they hope to do it? Without a clear 188 Kyra Pollitt and Claire Haddon ideological and practical framework, the interpreter often feels forced to choose sides; for example, in the awkward pause, does the interpreter fill in the gaps or focus on the Deaf person? Telephone interpreting is highly complex work, and one may have grounds for claiming that it is among the most complicated that any interpreter working between signed and spoken languages may face. Yet in the United Kingdom, telephone interpreting is a Cinderella among interpreting domains, rarely specifically taught in training courses. It is assumed that interpreters will simply apply what theories they have learned—after all, this is basically triadic interpreting...