Cover not available

In:Interpreting in Legal and Healthcare Settings: Perspectives on research and training
Edited by Eva N.S. Ng and Ineke H.M. Crezee
[Benjamins Translation Library 151] 2020
► pp. 83–111

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload Book PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload Book EPUB
authorization required

Chapter 4
Australian court interpreters’ preparation practices

A synthesis of findings from quantitative and qualitative survey data

ORCiD logo with link | The University of New South Wales
Published online: 3 June 2020
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.151.04won
Abstract
In a pioneering national survey of court interpreting in Australia, 84% of the surveyed interpreters responded that they did not receive any preparation materials prior to their court interpreting assignments. As part of a larger PhD project investigating the role of preparation using case-related materials in court interpreting, I conducted a national survey of Australian court interpreters’ preparation practices in 2016. This article highlights the survey results and presents a synthesis of findings from the quantitative and qualitative data collected in the survey.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Survey of court interpreters’ preparation practices
  • 3.Online survey distribution and survey respondents
    • 3.1Basic demographics
      • 3.1.1Gender
      • 3.1.2Age group
      • 3.1.3State/Territory
      • 3.1.4Working languages
    • 3.2Interpreting qualification
      • 3.2.1NAATI interpreting accreditation/recognition
      • 3.2.2Interpreting training
      • 3.2.3Specialised training in court interpreting
    • 3.3Court interpreting experience
      • 3.3.1Length of court interpreting experience and frequency of court work
      • 3.3.2Courts in which the respondents had worked
      • 3.3.3Types of legal cases interpreted
  • 4.Court interpreters’ preparation practices
    • 4.1Frequency of advance preparation
    • 4.2Preparation for assignments to interpret in proceedings like trials or hearings
    • 4.3Preparation time for assignments to interpret in shorter proceedings such as mentions
  • 5.Synthesis of findings: Court interpreters’ preparation practices
    • 5.1Possible reasons for the overall preparation pattern
    • 5.2The notion of ‘preparation’
  • 6.Verbal information and written materials
    • 6.1Verbal information
    • 6.2Types of verbal information received
      • 6.2.1Logistical information about the court interpreting assignment
      • 6.2.2Basic information about the legal case
    • 6.3Requesting verbal information
    • 6.4Written materials
    • 6.5Types of written materials received
    • 6.6Requesting written materials
  • 7.Synthesis of findings: Verbal information and written materials
  • 8.Attitudes towards preparation
    • 8.1Statements about attitudes towards preparation
    • 8.2Level of agreement
      • 8.2.1Statement (1): Adequate preparation for court interpreting assignments in advance is necessary
      • 8.2.2Statement 2: Without access to information/ material about the legal case, I would not be able to prepare adequately
      • 8.2.3Statement (3): Without access to information/material about the legal case for preparation, I would not be able to perform to my optimal capacity as a professional court interpreter
      • 8.2.4Statement (4): Advance preparation using information/ materials about the legal case would reduce the stress of court interpreting
    • 8.3Statistical testing
      • 8.3.1Statement (2): Without access to information/ material about the legal case, I would not be able to prepare adequately
      • 8.3.2Statement (3): Without access to information/ material about the legal case for preparation, I would not be able to perform to my optimal capacity as a professional court interpreter
  • 9.Synthesis of findings: Attitudes towards preparation
  • 10.Discussion and conclusion
  • Acknowledgments
  • Notes
  • References
References (22)
References
AUSIT. November 2012. AUSIT Code of Ethics and Code of Conduct.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Commonwealth Attorney General’s Department. 1991. Access to Interpreters in the Australian Legal System. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
De Vaus, D. A. 2002. Surveys in Social Research. 5th ed, Sydney: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Díaz-Galaz, Stephanie. 2011. “The Effect of Previous Preparation in Simultaneous Interpreting: Preliminary Results.” Across Languages and Cultures 12 (2): 173–191. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dillman, Don A. 1978. Mail and Telephone Surveys: The Total Design Method. New York, N.Y: Wiley-Interscience.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ericsson, K. Anders. 2006. “The Influence of Experience and Deliberate Practice on the Development of Superior Expert Performance.” In The Cambridge Handbook of Expertise and Expert Performance, edited by K. Anders Ericsson, Neil Charness, Paul Feltovich, and Robert R. Hoffman, 685–706. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Field, Anthony. 2013. Discovering Statistics Using IBM SPSS Statistics: And Sex and Drugs and Rock ‘n’ Roll. 4th ed, 720–759. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gentile, Adolf, Uldis Ozolins, and Mary Vasilakakos. 1996. Liaison Interpreting: A Handbook. Melbourne: Melbourne University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gile, Daniel. 2009. Basic Concepts and Models for Interpreter and Translator Training. Rev. ed, Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
González, Roseann Dueñas, Victoria F. Vásquez, and Holly Mikkelson. 2012. Fundamentals of Court Interpretation: Theory, Policy, and Practice. 2nd ed, Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hale, Sandra. 2001. “The Complexities of the Bilingual Courtroom.” Law Society Journal: The Official Journal of the Law Society of New South Wales 39 (6): 68–72.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2007a. Community Interpreting. Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2007b. “The Challenges of Court Interpreting: Intricacies, Responsibilities and Ramifications.” Alternative Law Journal 32 (4): 198–202. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2011a. Interpreter Policies, Practices and Protocols in Australian Courts and Tribunals. A National Survey. Melbourne: The Australasian Institute of Judicial Administration Incorporated (AIJA).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2011b. “The Need to Raise the Bar. Court Interpreters as Specialized Experts.” The Judicial Review 10: 237–258.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2013. “Helping Interpreters to Truly and Faithfully Interpret the Evidence: The Importance of Briefing and Preparation Materials.” Australian Bar Review 37: 1–14.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hale, Sandra, Uldis Ozolins, and Ludmila Stern (eds). 2009. The Critical Link 5: Quality Interpreting – A Shared Responsibility. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hale, Sandra and Ludmila Stern. 2011. “Interpreter Quality and Working Conditions: Comparing Australian and International Courts of Justice.” Judicial Officers’ Bulletin 23 (9): 75–78.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Judicial Council on Cultural Diversity. 2017. Recommended National Standards for Working with Interpreters in Courts and Tribunals. Australia Canberra: Judicial Council on Cultural Diversity.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Roberts-Smith, Len. 2009. “Forensic interpreting: Trial and Error.” In The Critical Link 5. Quality in Interpreting – a Shared Responsibility, edited by Sandra Hale, Uldis Ozolins, and Ludmila Stern, 13–35. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stern, Ludmila. 2012. “What can Domestic Courts Learn from International Courts and Tribunals about Good Practice in Interpreting?: From the Australian War Crimes Prosecutions to the International Criminal Court.” T & I Review 2: 7–30.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Orozco-Jutorán, Mariana
2023. Dealing with legal terminology in court interpreting. In Handbook of Terminology [Handbook of Terminology, 3], ► pp. 570 ff. DOI logo
Doherty, Stephen, Natalie Martschuk, Jane Goodman-Delahunty & Sandra Hale
2022. An Eye-Movement Analysis of Overt Visual Attention During Consecutive and Simultaneous Interpreting Modes in a Remotely Interpreted Investigative Interview. Frontiers in Psychology 13 DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 3 december 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.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue