I think that today’s post, written by Julie Brook, Esq. is likely to be of interest to many readers – whether lawyers, court reporters, or translators. For me, there are parallels to be drawn with whether translators should correct legal texts or not, and if so how such corrections should be done, and what types of texts may or may not be corrected. I look forward to hearing your comments!
I’m sure lawyers taking depositions from deponents speaking other languages, especially when travel to foreign countries is required, are fully aware of the logistic costs involved, and wish to get the best results from interpreters working with them. This post was originally written for journalists working with interpreters, but I felt strongly that it applied so well to the legal context that it was worth sharing with you all.
Of course one or two of the items would generally not apply in a deposition context, such as giving the deponent the option to speak a language other than their own (tip n° 10), but the vast majority of the points mentioned would improve things dramatically in my experience!
Perhaps the key thing to take away is that by making the efforts below you are not ‘making the interpreter’s job easier’ but making your communication more effective, and, ultimately, getting a better result.
See what you think…
Every interpreter who has worked on a deposition will be familiar with lawyers using interpretation as a way to bargain. However, I hadn’t thought about this in the context of written translations before.
I hope you will have lots of comments, because I think it’s a fascinating subject for discussion. I’ll be writing more about this in a couple of weeks.
I am delighted to introduce today’s fascinating guest post from Cheryll Kerr, a freelance court reporter from America who has taken depositions far and wide – from Europe to the Middle East, as well as in the States. This high-powered job requires incredible skills – I’ve seen them in action and I was amazed. Continue reading