Last week’s furore over the fake sign language interpreter at the memorial service for Nelson Mandela has been unfortunate on many levels; not least that it has diverted attention from the most important person in the whole event – Nelson Mandela himself.
However, this issue and associated media coverage has given us an opportunity to start the conversation about the importance of interpreter qualifications and getting the right person for the job.
Most people have never given any thought to interpreters and the vital job they do in society. They expect that during their lives they will get the information they need, when they need it, and in a language they can understand. But the reality of life for most deaf people is that they are the only person in the crowd who doesn’t have access to the emergency broadcast and therefore doesn’t know where the bushfires are likely to go next, or which parts of Brisbane have been restricted because of flooding.
Professional sign language interpreting of public information and events transforms deaf people from confused and frustrated, sometimes frightened ‘second class’ citizens into confident independent participants in society. The interpreting on TV emergency broadcasts during the 2011 Queensland floods and cyclone Yasi as well as recent NSW bushfires was enormously beneficial for deaf people. They didn’t have to wonder and worry; they were as well informed as their hearing neighbours and could confidently prepare alongside them.
I was saddened to see comments on social media last week from people who seemed to think the issue with the fake interpreter was not a big deal because they personally had not enjoyed the content of the speeches themselves. The point is, though, that hearing people have the opportunity to make a judgement about the things they hear and listen to as a matter of course every day, whereas deaf people rely on interpreters to give them the information they need to make choices about their lives. Even if that choice is to decide a public speech is interesting or boring.
Sign language interpreting is complex. Even a person who is fully fluent in a sign language is not automatically able to act as an interpreter. It is a highly skilled profession that requires training, accreditation, experience, and ethical standards.
Interpreters must be appropriately matched to particular interpreting assignments. Interpreting between one deaf person and one hearing person for an everyday bank transaction is very different from interpreting at a major event televised worldwide.
So what should have happened at Nelson Mandela’s memorial service? And what should happen at public events in general?
Firstly, I’d like to applaud the organisers, presumably the South African Government, for being aware that sign language interpreting was required. Deaf people often have to fight to have the same rights as everyone else to access public information and events. Here in Australia it is an ongoing battle for deaf people to convince governments that they should automatically provide Auslan interpreters on emergency broadcasts and at important events.
Organisers need to know how to book the right person for the job. Booking agencies have a responsibility to ensure that their interpreters are appropriately qualified and experienced and should match suitable interpreters with assignments. They should give advice about requirements, including the importance of providing briefing documents such as copies of speeches, lists of names and jargon that will be used.
Interpreters have a responsibility to ensure they only accept assignments for which they are qualified, experienced and where they have no conflicts of interest.
Interpreters often work as a team of two or three to prevent fatigue and support each other to ensure accuracy. For the Mandela memorial service, which lasted for around four hours, involved speeches by world leaders, and was televised, three interpreters working in a team would have been appropriate.
The fake interpreter, Mr Jantjie, has claimed that he experienced a schizophrenic episode. If this is true then we certainly should have some sympathy for him. A team of interpreters would have solved this issue. If Mr Jantjie were a genuine interpreter, his interpreting team mates would have recognised that things were going wrong and would have been able to take over.
If all of these conditions had been met – and it is not hard to do so – Nelson Mandela’s memorial service would have been the moving and respectful event it should have been for everyone including deaf people; not only deaf South Africans but to some extent deaf people around the world. It is such a shame that this debacle happened. Yet if it leads to improvements in sign language interpreting of public information and at public events, then deaf people will have reason to continue to thank Nelson Mandela long after his passing.
Karen Lloyd is Executive Officer of Deaf Australia, the peak national body representing the interests of deaf people who use Auslan. A deaf person herself, she is bilingual in English and Auslan and regularly works with sign language interpreters.
