Article published in:
Interpreting
Vol. 18:1 (2016) ► pp. 89–119

Ad-hoc interpreting in international educational settings

The problem of renditions

| Università di Modena e Reggio Emilia
This paper examines interactions during educational activities in international camps for children, with English used as a lingua franca. Data were collected mostly at different camps in Italy (2006–7), but also in Brazil and the USA (both in 2013). The study focuses on 11 extracts from transcribed video and audio recordings of occasions when Italian children experience difficulty understanding and speaking English. On such occasions, Italian educators acting as ad-hoc interpreters often provide renditions not fully consistent with what has been said in English: reduced, summarised or expanded renditions are frequent, with some turns not rendered and others added. In this way, what is purported to be interpreting is often more concerned with achieving preassigned educational tasks. Talk in English is thus reduced to normative explanations, and ad-hoc interpreting takes the form of gatekeeping, the effect of which is to limit children’s active participation in social interactions. This educationally oriented gatekeeping can be avoided by involving children in sequences of conversational exchanges, using Italian: they are thus enabled to express their perspectives, the gist of which can be formulated in English, ensuring a stronger dialogic component in communication and closer attention to the children’s contributions.
Keywords: ad-hoc interpreting, social interaction, education, renditions, children
Published online: 14 April 2016
https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.18.1.04bar
References
Angelelli, C.V
(2004) Medical interpreting and cross-cultural communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Baraldi, C
(2009) Forms of mediation: The case of interpreter-mediated interactions in medical systems. Language and Intercultural Communication 9 (2), 120–137. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2012) Interpreting as dialogic mediation: The relevance of expansions. In C. Baraldi & L. Gavioli (Eds.), Coordinating participation in dialogue interpreting. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 297–326. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Baraldi, C. & Gavioli, L
(2012) Understanding coordination in interpreter-mediated interaction. In C. Baraldi & L. Gavioli (Eds.), Coordinating participation in dialogue interpreting. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1–21. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bolden, G
(2000) Toward understanding practices of medical interpreting: Interpreters’ involvement in history taking. Discourse Studies 2 (4), 387–419. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bührig, K. & Meyer, B
(2004) Ad-hoc-interpreting and the achievement of communicative purposes in doctor-patient-communication. In J. House & J. Rehbein (Eds.), Multilingual communication. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 43–62. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Corsellis, A
(2009) Public service interpreting: The first steps. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
CISV
(2008) Building global friendship (http://​www​.cisv​.org).Google Scholar
Davidson, B
(2000) The interpreter as institutional gatekeeper: The social-linguistic role of interpreters in Spanish-English medical discourse. Journal of Sociolinguistics 4 (3), 379–405. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Davitti, E
(2013) Dialogue interpreting as intercultural mediation: Interpreters’ use of upgrading moves in parent-teachers meetings. Interpreting 15 (2), 168–199. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gavioli, L
(2012) Minimal responses in interpreter-mediated medical talk. In C. Baraldi & L. Gavioli (Eds.), Coordinating participation in dialogue interpreting. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 201–228. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gavioli, L. & Baraldi, C
(2011) Interpreter-mediated interactions in health and legal settings: Talk organization, context and the achievement of intercultural communication. Interpreting 13 (2), 205–233. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hale, S.B
(2007) Community interpreting. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Heritage, J
(1985) Analysing news interviews: Aspects of the production of talk for an overhearing audience. In T.A. van Dijk (Ed.), Handbook of discourse analysis, Vol. 3. Discourse and dialogue. London: Academic Press, 95–117.Google Scholar
Heritage, J. & Watson, R.D
(1979) Formulations as conversational objects. In G. Psathas (Ed.), Everyday language. New York: Irvington Press, 123–162.Google Scholar
(1980) Aspects of the properties of formulations in natural conversations: Some instances analysed. Semiotica 30 (3/4), 245–262. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hsieh, E
(2007) Interpreters as co-diagnosticians: Overlapping roles and services between providers and interpreters. Social Science & Medicine 641, 924–937. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kangaslathi, J. & Kangaslathi, A
(2003) The facilitator: Building constructive experiences for learning. Interspectives, 191, 17–19.Google Scholar
Kolb, D.A
(1984) Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Mason, I
(Ed.) (1999)  Dialogue interpreting . Special issue of The Translator 5 (2).Google Scholar
(2006) On mutual accessibility of contextual assumptions in dialogue interpreting. Journal of Pragmatics 8 (3), 359–373. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2009) Role, positioning and discourse in face-to-face interpreting. In R. de Pedro Ricoy, I. Perez & C. Wilson (Eds.), Interpreting and translation in public service settings: Policy, practice, pedagogy. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing, 52–73.Google Scholar
Meyer, B
(2012) Ad hoc interpreting for partially language-proficient patients: Participation in multilingual constellations. In C. Baraldi & L. Gavioli (Eds.), Coordinating Participation in Dialogue Interpreting. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 99–113. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Penn, C. & Watermeyer, J
(2012) Cultural brokerage and overcoming communication barriers: A case study for aphasia. In C. Baraldi & L. Gavioli (Eds.), Coordinating participation in dialogue interpreting. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 269–296. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pöchhacker, F
(2008) Interpreting as mediation. In C. Valero-Garcés & A. Martin (Eds.), Crossing borders in community interpreting: Definitions and dilemmas. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 9–26. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Van De Mieroop, D., Bevilacqua, G. & Van Have, L
(2012) Negotiating discursive notes: Differences across levels of expertise. Interpreting 14 (1), 23–54. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wadensjö, C
(1998) Interpreting as interaction. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Wadensjö, C., Englund Dimitrova, B. & Nilsson, A.-L
(Eds.) (2007) The Critical Link 4: Professionalisation of interpreting in the community. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Zhan, C
(2012) Mediation through personal pronouns shifts in dialogue interpreting of political meetings. Interpreting 14 (2), 192–216. CrossrefGoogle Scholar