Cover not available
Article published In:
Unpacking Sign Language Interpreting: Special issue of the Journal on Translation and Interpreting Studies 17:3 (2022)
Edited by Hilde Haualand, Maartje De Meulder and Jemina Napier
[Translation and Interpreting Studies 17:3] 2022
► pp. 406–428

Barrier-free and interpreter-free

Deaf signers and hearing sign language interpreters’ perspectives on an ideal world (Belgium, Flanders)

ORCID logo | Trinity College Dublin | University of Warwick

Globally, deaf associations and sign language interpreters’ organizations support the idea that interpreting services are equivalent to access and inclusion for deaf people. Researchers have challenged this assumption by pointing to ‘the illusion of inclusion’ (Russell 2007; Russell and Winston 2014; De Meulder and Haualand 2021), the ‘institution of access’ (Brunson 2011), and the fact that interpreters are needed but not wanted (Pöchhacker 2019; Sheneman 2020). This article explores whether sign language interpreting services are the ideal solution when providing access to communication, information, and services for deaf signers. It presents the perspectives of three deaf employees of the Flemish deaf association and four hearing Dutch–VGT (Flemish Sign Language) interpreters on what constitutes their ‘ideal’ world. By addressing this topic, interviewees considered whether in this ideal world sign language interpreting services would still exist and expressed their views on topics such as communication, access, (in)equity, and inclusion.

Keywords: sign language, interpreting, interpreting services, linguistic rights, inclusion, linguistic access
Article outline
  • Introduction
  • Researcher’s position
  • Participants, method, and analysis
  • Findings
    • An ideal world is free of barriers and of interpreters
    • Interpreters are needed
    • Communication through brainwaves
    • Communication as if there were no interpreter
  • Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 23 March 2023
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/tis.21025.hey
References
Attfield, Kate
2013 The Deaf Collective: Opposition, Organization and Difference. Ph.D. dissertation, Cardiff University.
Bauman, Dirksen
2015, March. On becoming hearing: lessons, limitations, loss, and respect. TEDx Gallaudet, Gallaudet University, Washington, DC. Available at [URL]
Brunson, Jeremy
2011 Video Relay Service Interpreting: The Intricacies of Sign Language Access. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2015 “A sociology of interpreting.” In Signed Language Interpretation and Translation Research, ed. by Brenda Nicodemus and Keith Cagle, 130–149. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cameron, Deborah, et al.
1992 “Introduction.” In Researching Language: Issues of Power and Method, ed. by Deborah Cameron et al., 1–28. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Caselli, Naomi K., Wyatte C. Hall, and Jonathan Henner
2020 “American Sign Language interpreters in public schools: An illusion of inclusion that perpetuates language deprivation.” Maternal and Child Health Journal 24(11): 1323–1329. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cokely, Dennis
1992 Interpretation: A Sociolinguistic Model. Burtonsville, MD: Linstok Press.Google Scholar
De Meulder, Maartje
2016 The Power of Language Policy. The Legal Recognition of Sign Languages and The Aspirations of Deaf Communities. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Jyväskylä.
De Meulder, Maartje, and Hilde Haualand
2021 “Sign language interpreting services: A quick fix for inclusion?” Translation and Interpreting Studies 16(1): 19–40. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Emery, Steve
2006 Citizenship and the Deaf Community. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Central Lancashire.Google Scholar
Esmark, Anders, and Peter Triantafillou
2009 “A macro level perspective on governance of the self and others.” In The Politics of Self-Governance, ed. by Eva Sorensen and Peter Triantafillou, 25–41. Surrey: Ashgate. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Etherington, Kim
2004 Becoming a Reflexive Researcher: Using Our Selves in Research. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.Google Scholar
Flynn, Peter
2010 “Ethnographic approaches.” In Handbook of Translation Studies, Vol. 1, ed. by Yves Gambier and Luc van Doorslaer, 116–119. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gile, Daniel
[1995] 2009 Basic Concepts and Models for Interpreter and Translator Training. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gile, Daniel, and Jemina Napier
2020 “Spoken language interpreters and signed language interpreters: towards cross-fertilization.” International Journal of Interpreter Education 12(1): 62–71.Google Scholar
Harris, Jennifer, and Clare Bamford
2001 “The uphill struggle: Services for deaf and hard of hearing people – issues of equality, participation and access.” Disability & Society 16(7): 969–979. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heyerick, Isabelle
2021 A Descriptive Study of Linguistic Interpreting Strategies in Dutch – Flemish Sign Language Interpreting. Exploring Interpreters’ Perspectives to Understand the What, How and Why. Ph.D. dissertation. KU Leuven.
Kusters, Annelies
2017 “Gesture-based customer interactions: Deaf and hearing Mumbaikars’ multimodal and metrolingual practices.” Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 14(3): 283–302. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kusters, Annelies, Maartje De Meulder, and Dai O’Brien
2017 “Innovations in Deaf Studies: Critically mapping the field.” In Innovations in Deaf Studies: The Role of Deaf Scholars, ed. by Annelies Kusters, Maartje De Meulder, and Dai O’Brien, 1–53. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kusters, Annelies, Maartje De Meulder, Michele Friedner, and Steve Emery
2015 “On ‘diversity’ and ‘inclusion’: Exploring paradigms for achieving sign language peoples’ rights.” MMG Working Paper 15–02. Max Planck Institute for the Study of Religious and Ethnic Diversity.
Moriarty Harrelson, Erin
2019 “Deaf people with “no language”: Mobility and flexible accumulation in languaging practices of deaf people in Cambodia.” Applied Linguistics Review 10(1): 55–72. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Napier, Jemina
2002a Sign Language Interpreting. Linguistic Coping Strategies. Coleford: Douglas McLean.Google Scholar
2002b “The D/deaf-H/hearing debate.” Sing Language Studies 2(2): 141–149. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Napier, Jemina, and Lorraine Leeson
2016 Sign Language in Action. London: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pöchhacker, Franz
1995 “Simultaneous interpreting: A functionalist perspective.” HERMES Journal of Language and Communication in Business 141: 31–53. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2004 Introducing Interpreting Studies. New York: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2019 “Reflective discussion panel.” InDialog 3: Interpreter Practice, Research and Training: The Impact of Context, Antwerp, Belgium, 21–22 November 2019.Google Scholar
Reagan, Timothy
2010 Language Policy and Planning for Sign Languages. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar
Roy, Cynthia B., Jeremy L. Brunson, and Christopher A. Stone
2018 The Academic Foundations of Interpreting Studies: An Introduction to its Theories. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Russell, Debra
2007 “Inclusion or the illusion of inclusion: A study of interpreters working with deaf students in inclusive education settings.” Critical Link 5: Interpreters in the Community Conference, Sydney, Australia, 12–14 April 2007.
Russell, Debra, and Betsy Winston
2014 “Tapping into the interpreting process: Using participant reports to inform the interpreting process in educational settings.” Translation & Interpreting 6(1): 102–121. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Setton, Robin
1999 Simultaneous Interpretation: A Cognitive-Pragmatic Analysis. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sheneman, Naomi
2020, May 9. Interpreters are the uninvited guests in deaf people’s private lives [Blog post]. Retrieved from [URL]
Solow, Sharon Neumann
1981 Sign Language Interpreting: A Basic Resource Book. Silver Spring, MD: National Association of the Deaf.Google Scholar
Subak, Leah
2016 “Becoming HEARING: Describing co-construction of expert ASL/English interpreter Deaf-World cultural competence.” International Journal of Interpreter Education 8(2): 5–19.Google Scholar
Tapio, Elena
2019 “The patterned ways of interlinking linguistic and multimodal elements in visually oriented communities.” Deafness and Education International 21(2–3): 133–150. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Turner, Graham, and Jemina Napier
2014 “On the importance of professional sign language interpretation to political participation.” In UNCRPD Implementation in Europe – A Deaf Perspective: Article 29: Participation in Political and Public Life, ed. by Annika Pabsch, 54–71. European Union of the Deaf.Google Scholar
Wilcox, Sherman, and Barbara Shaffer
2005 “Towards a cognitive model of interpreting.” In Topics in Signed Language Interpreting: Theory and Practice, ed. by Terry Janzen, 27–50. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
World Federation of the Deaf
2022 Statement on the right of deaf people to equal treatment in the context of the Global Covid-19 pandemic. Retrieved from [URL]
2019 WFD Charter on Sign Language Rights for All. Retrieved from [URL]
Young, Alys, Rosemary Oram, and Jemina Napier
2019 “Hearing people perceiving deaf people through sign language interpreters at work: on the loss of self through interpreted communication.” Journal of Applied Communication Research 47(1): 90–110. DOI logoGoogle Scholar