In:Coordinating Participation in Dialogue Interpreting
Edited by Claudio Baraldi and Laura Gavioli
[Benjamins Translation Library 102] 2012
► pp. 23–44
1. Interpreting or interfering?
Published online: 7 November 2012
https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.102.02teb
https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.102.02teb
There is an ever growing need for community or public service interpreting around the world yet there is great disparity between both the quality and availability of educational courses for community interpreters. This chapter focuses on the Australian context and assumes a community interpreter is qualified in interpreting with an undergraduate degree or postgraduate qualification in interpreting/translating, has national accreditation and is subject to the ethics of AUSIT. The AUSIT code of ethics is examined to reveal its operational code which allows the interpreter to coordinate the metalingual function of the interpreted dialogue, permission for which can emanate from the contract, a specific stage of the genre of the interpreted consultation. Empirical data from a major project in medical interpreting are discussed to show how this metalingual function is used to coordinate and repair talk or interpreting that has broken down due to human error and frailty. Such explicit coordination can work nearly as well as implicit coordination, the normal work of an interpreter. The two types of coordination are considered successful interpreting as distinct from intentional interference by the interpreter who would add or omit or attempt to coordinate beyond the specific professional role of the interpreter.
Cited by (29)
Cited by 29 other publications
Huang, Yujie, Andrew K F Cheung, Kanglong Liu & Han Xu
ÖZSÖZ, Burak
Crezee, Ineke & Shirley Jülich
2020. Exploring role expectations of healthcare interpreters in New
Zealand. In Interpreting in legal and healthcare settings [Benjamins Translation Library, 151], ► pp. 211 ff.
de Boe, Esther
2020. Remote interpreting in dialogic settings. In Linking up with Video [Benjamins Translation Library, 149], ► pp. 79 ff.
Havelka, Ivana
2020. Video-mediated remote interpreting in healthcare. Babel. Revue internationale de la traduction / International Journal of Translation 66:2 ► pp. 326 ff.
Hofer, Gertrud
Ko, Leong
Ng, Eva & Ineke Crezee
2020. Interpreting in legal and healthcare settings. In Interpreting in legal and healthcare settings [Benjamins Translation Library, 151], ► pp. 1 ff.
Xu, Han
2020. Turn-taking management in interpreted legal aid lawyer-client
interviews. In Interpreting in legal and healthcare settings [Benjamins Translation Library, 151], ► pp. 113 ff.
Xu, Han
Xu, Han
Xu, Han
Xu, Han
Xu, Han
2024. “Please make sure we don’t get this interpreter again”. Translation and Interpreting Studies 19:2 ► pp. 257 ff.
Hale, Sandra, Jane Goodman-Delahunty & Natalie Martschuk
Böser, Ursula & David LaRooy
2018. Interpreter-mediated investigative interviews with minors. Translation and Interpreting Studies 13:2 ► pp. 208 ff.
Cheung, Andrew K. F.
2018. Non-renditions and the court interpreter’s perceived impartiality. Interpreting. International Journal of Research and Practice in Interpreting 20:2 ► pp. 232 ff.
Hleihel, Rhéa
Lipson‐Smith, Ruby, Amelia Hyatt, Alexandra Murray, Phyllis Butow, Thomas F. Hack, Michael Jefford, Uldis Ozolins, Sandra Hale & Penelope Schofield
Pokorn, Nike K.
2017. “There is always some spatial limitation”. Translation and Interpreting Studies 12:3 ► pp. 383 ff.
Englund Dimitrova, Birgitta & Elisabet Tiselius
2016. Cognitive aspects of community interpreting. Toward a process model. In Reembedding Translation Process Research [Benjamins Translation Library, 128], ► pp. 195 ff.
Granhagen Jungner, Johanna, Elisabet Tiselius, Kim Lützén, Klas Blomgren & Pernilla Pergert
Baraldi, Claudio & Laura Gavioli
Baraldi, Claudio & Laura Gavioli
2017. Intercultural mediation and “(non)professional” interpreting in Italian healthcare institutions. In Non-professional Interpreting and Translation [Benjamins Translation Library, 129], ► pp. 83 ff.
Ozolins, Uldis
2014. Rewriting the AUSIT Code of Ethics – principles, practice, dispute. Babel. Revue internationale de la traduction / International Journal of Translation 60:3 ► pp. 347 ff.
Ozolins, Uldis
2016. The myth of the myth of invisibility?. Interpreting. International Journal of Research and Practice in Interpreting 18:2 ► pp. 273 ff.
Ozolins, Uldis
2018. Carmen Valero-Garcés and Rebecca Tipton (Eds.). Ideology, ethics and policy development in public service
interpreting and translation
. Interpreting. International Journal of Research and Practice in Interpreting 20:2 ► pp. 324 ff.
Penn, Claire & Jennifer Watermeyer
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 15 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
