Interpreting conflicts/problems/heated discussions

[joeylynnhaynes78]

You hit the nail on the head with your last comment...hearing people get conflict-resolution pretty quickly with easy communication access whereas many deaf have to wait until interpreters available for them-and usually 'terps don't get called on until a serious problem arises. Such a sticky situation. Who would you suggest tell the 'terp the meeting is for a problem? THe person setting up the appt? Perhaps the appt. person should take initiative & start asking if it's for conflict-resolution.

[cdbicdb]

I have a question...first, right now I am only interpreting church sermons, friends when around hearing friends etc...nothing legal. But, question...if you are interpreting, meeting, legal, medical, whatever, if the person uses vulgar language, or the deaf person uses vulgar signs, do you interpret that? I mean, my religion, I would not want to interpret the vulgar language or the vain names of God that can be used...how would you handle that situation?

[pvpa1]

As an interpreting student, I think an interpreter's role is to fully interpret another individual's expression of their thoughts and feelings. If the individual swears, then the interpreter is responsible to interpret that. Censorship is not one of the interpreter's responsibilities.

[hinabina]

good question! when you're an interpreter -- ie, a qualified, certified intepreter -- you don't have the luxury of cleaning or censuring what people (Deaf and hearing) because it's uncomfortable for you as a person. you're not there as your own person, you are there as an interpreter to provide communication access. you have to interpret it all -- and I'm sure very few interpreters would disagree with that, including those of faith.

[joeylynnhaynes78]

@cdbicdb Although I sympathize with your dilemma, if your job is to translate the feelings/words of another human being, it is His/Her God-given right to free will to be able to express these feelings/words and if your job is to be their voice (wether you agree w/ that voice), by refusing, you are taking away their free will, in a sense, and that is kind of "Playing God" to me. If you can manage to find a place where you only do church-sanctioned interpreting, then good. If not, then oh well...

[joeylynnhaynes78]

@cdbicdb Also! Here's a thought....I started to think that perhaps saying curse words with "God" in the title isn't exactly "taking the Lord's name in vain." So when I say God D*@(....I'm not really taking His NAME in vain. I think "Lord", "God", "Jesus Christ" are titles, not names. God has a name, and so does Jesus, and those names are the ones I'd be careful about throwing around. I think these are what was in mind when it was commanded not to take His name in vain....

[JessicaH256]

@cdbicdb Yes, as an interpreter you must interpret the exact message of the signer. Although you would be voicing the vulgarity, the vulgarity is not coming from you. You are not responcible (including religiously) for saying something that you do not mean. This is very similar to another situation: You are interpreting for someone who is explaining their passion for art. Although you are verbally interpreting "I have a passion for art" it is only assumed that the Deaf person is stating that.