Cover not available

Article published In: Translaboration: Exploring Collaboration in Translation and Translation in Collaboration
Edited by Alexa Alfer and Cornelia Zwischenberger
[Target 32:2] 2020
► pp. 307–326

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

Complex collaborations

Interpreting and translating for the UK police

ORCiD logo with link | University of East Anglia
Published online: 8 June 2020
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/target.20086.dru
Abstract
Interpreting and translation are increasingly provided in the public sector via large-scale outsourced framework contracts (Moorkens, Joss. 2017. “Under Pressure: Translation in Times of Austerity.” Perspectives: Studies in Translatology 25 (3): 1–14. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar). In the UK, one of the largest recent framework agreements for interpreting and translation was introduced between 2016 and 2017 in critical contexts for justice, including the Home Office, the Ministry of Justice and the police. These agreements involve new types of collaboration between new partners and agents in the delivery of interpreting and translation, who each have different aims, expectations, standards and working methods. This contribution examines these emerging complex collaborations, and is the result of a rare type of complex collaboration between academic researchers, framework contract-holders and managers, interpreters and translators, language service providers, professional associations, and users of translation and interpreting services, within the Transnational Organised Crime and Translation (TOCAT) project.
The article reports on original research conducted during the TOCAT project, and outlines and evaluates some novel, complex and ethically challenging ‘translaborations’ in police settings. The collaborations discussed are complex because of the range of parties and actors involved and because of the challenging content and settings in which the police rely on interpreting and translation. ‘Translaboration’ is used here to encompass multiple evolving collaborations between different providers and users of interpreting and translation, policy makers, trainers and researchers. Important questions of translation quality and ethics in the management of large-scale framework contexts for public service delivery are raised.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Are these complex collaborations ‘translaboration’?
  • 3.Methodology
  • 4.Analysis
    • 4.1Formal collaboration: The linguist as crime fighter
    • 4.2Informal collaboration: The linguist as informant
  • 5.Discussion
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
References (51)
References
APCI. 2010. APCI Code of Practice. Accessed May 12, 2020. [URL]
Berk-Seligson, Susan. 2000. “Interpreting for the Police: Issues in Pre-Trial Phases of the Judicial Process.” Forensic Linguistics 7 (2): 212–237.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Büthe, Tim, and Shahryar Minhas. 2015. “The Global Diffusion of Competition Law: A Spatial Analysis.” Paper presented at the 6th Meeting of the Research Partnership Platform on Competition and Consumer Protection, 10 July 2015. Accessed December 2, 2017. [URL]
Carter, Elisabeth. 2011. Analysing Police Interviews: Laughter, Confessions and the Tape. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
College of Policing. 2020. “What is Evidence-based Policing?” Accessed May 12, 2020. [URL]
Cordingley, Anthony, and Céline Frigau Manning, eds. 2017. Collaborative Translation from the Renaissance to the Digital Age. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Corsellis, Ann. 2005. “Training Interpreters to Work in the Public Services.” In Training for the New Millennium: Pedagogies for Translation and Interpreting, edited by Martha Tennent, 153–173. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Corsellis, Ann, Amanda Clement, and Yolanda Vanden Bosch. 2011. “Training for Members of the Legal Services Working through Legal Interpreters and Translators.” In Building Mutual Trust: A Framework Project for Implementing EU Common Standards in Legal Interpreting and Translation, edited by Brooke Townsley, 315–350. London: Middlesex University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Coulthard, Malcolm, and Alison Johnson. 2007. An Introduction to Forensic Linguistics: Language in Evidence. Abingdon: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Criminal Justice System. 2007. National Agreement on Arrangements for the Use of Interpreters, Translators and Language Service Professionals in Investigations and Proceedings within the Criminal Justice System. Accessed May 20, 2019. [URL][URL]
DeFillippi, Robert, and Jörg Sydow. 2016. “Project Networks: Governance Choices and Paradoxical Tensions.” Project Management Journal 47 (5): 6–17. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
De Pedro Ricoy, Raquel. 2010. “Training Public Service Interpreters in the UK: A Fine Balancing Act.” Journal of Specialised Translation 141: 100–120.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Drugan, Joanna. 2013. Quality in Professional Translation: Assessment and Improvement. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Drugan, Joanna, and Krzysztof Kredens. 2018. “Translation in Superdiverse Legal Contexts.” In The Routledge Handbook of Language and Superdiversity, edited by Angela Creese and Adrian Blackledge, 411–425. Abingdon: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Durban, C. 2014. Translation: Getting it Right: A Guide to Buying Translation. Milton Keynes: ITI. [URL]
Elias-Bursać, Ellen. 2015. Translating Evidence and Interpreting Testimony at a War Crimes Tribunal: Working in a Tug-of-War. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
ESPO. 2015. Framework 402: Interpretation, Translation and Transcription Services. Accessed August 14, 2016. [URL]
Fernández-Ocampo, Anxo, and Michaela Wolf. 2014. Framing the Interpreter: Towards a Visual Perspective. London: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fowler, Yvonne. 2003. “Taking an Interpreted Witness Statement at the Police Station: What Did the Witness Actually Say?” In The Critical Link 3: Interpreters in the Community, edited by Louise Brunette, Georges L. Bastin, Isabelle Hemlin, and Heather Clarke, 195–209. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fraser, Janet, and Michael Gold. 2001. “‘Portfolio Workers’: Autonomy and Control amongst Freelance Translators.” Work, Employment and Society 15 (4): 679–697.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gaballa, Viviana. 2012. “Exploring the Boundaries of Transcreation in Specialized Translation.” ESP Across Cultures 91: 95–113.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gallai, Fabrizio. 2012. “Legalising EU Legal Interpreters: A Case for the NRPSI.” The Interpreters’ Newsletter 171: 139–156.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goldschmidt, Deborah, and Johannes F. Schmieder. 2017. “The Rise of Domestic Outsourcing and the Evolution of the German Wage Structure.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 132 (3): 1165–1217. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gov.UK. 2000. Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000. Accessed August 14, 2016. [URL]
. 2016. Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2016. Accessed May 12, 2020. [URL]
Gray, Barbara. 1989. Collaborating: Finding Common Ground for Multiparty Problems. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grossman, Gene M., and Elhanan Helpman. 2005. “Outsourcing in a Global Economy.” The Review of Economic Studies 72 (1): 135–159. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Haynes, Laura, Owain Service, Ben Goldacre, and David Torgerson. 2012. Test, Learn, Adapt: Developing Public Policy with Randomised Controlled Trials. Accessed August 14, 2016. [URL]
Hodge, Margaret. 2016. Called to Account: How Corporate Bad Behaviour and Government Waste Combine to Cost Us Millions. London: Little, Brown.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Home Office. n.d. “About.” Accessed May 12, 2020. [URL]
. 2018. HM Government Transparency Report: Disruptive and Investigatory Powers. Accessed November 21, 2018. [URL]
House, Juliane. 1997. Translation Quality Assessment: A Model Revisited. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
House of Commons Justice Committee. 2013. Interpreting and Translation Services and the Applied Language Solutions Contract. Sixth Report of Session 2012–13, Volume 11. London: The Stationery Office Limited.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jacquemet, Marco. 2010. “The Registration Interview: Restricting Refugees’ Narrative Performances.” In Critical Readings in Translation Studies, edited by Mona Baker, 133–151. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jameel, Leila, and Sarah Bunn. 2015. “Body-Worn Video in UK Policing.” Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology POSTbrief 14, September 2015. Accessed November 21, 2018. [URL]
Loveday, Barry. 2015. “Police Management and Workforce Reform in a Period of Austerity.” In Police Services: Leadership and Management Perspectives, edited by Paresh Wankhade and David Weir, 115–127. Cham: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Martinsen, Bodil, and Kirsten Wølch-Rasmussen. 2003. “What Skills and Structures Should Be Required in Legal Interpreting and Translation to Meet the Needs?” In Aequalitas: Equal Access to Justice across Language and Culture in the EU, edited by Erik Hertog, 48–58. Antwerp: Lessins Hogenschool.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McFarlane, John. 2013. “Transnational Crime.” In Corruption and Anti-Corruption, edited by Peter Larmour and Nick Wolanin, 131–145. Canberra: ANU Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Moorkens, Joss. 2017. “Under Pressure: Translation in Times of Austerity.” Perspectives: Studies in Translatology 25 (3): 1–14. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mulayim, Sedat, and Miranda Lai. 2017. Ethics for Police Translators and Interpreters. Boca Raton: CRC Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Niranjana, Tejaswini. 1992. Siting Translation: History, Post-Structuralism and the Colonial Context. Berkeley: University of California Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Perez, Isabelle Anne, and Christine Walker Leckie. 2009. Translation, Interpreting and Communication Support: A Review of Provision in Public Services in Scotland. Edinburgh: Scottish Executive.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pöchhacker, Franz. 2016. Introducing Interpreting Studies. 2nd ed. Abingdon: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rock, Frances. 2001. “The Genesis of a Witness Statement.” International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law 8 (2): 44–72. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Suojanen, Tytti, Kaisa Koskinen, and Tiina Tuominen. 2014. User-Centered Translation. London: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Townsley, Brooke. 2007. “Interpreting in the UK Community: Some Reflections on Public Service Interpreting in the UK.” Language and Intercultural Communication 7 (2): 163–170. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vertovec, Steven. 2007. “Super-Diversity and its Implications.” Ethnic and Racial Studies 30 (6): 1024–1054. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wills, Jane. 2000. “Great Expectations: Three Years in the Life of a European Works Council.” European Journal of Industrial Relations 6 (1): 85–107. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wood, Donna, and Barbara Gray. 1991. “Toward a Comprehensive Theory of Collaboration.” Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 27 (2): 139–162. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (9)

Cited by nine other publications

Capus, Nadja & David Gilbert
2024. Intercept evidence from foreign language communications: Reliability and minimum standards in the interests of justice. The International Journal of Evidence & Proof 28:4 ► pp. 280 ff. DOI logo
Dai, Yun-fang
2024. Conflict in Translaboration: Contract, Ideology, and Translation Strategy. Translation Review 120:1 ► pp. 40 ff. DOI logo
García, Álvaro Marín
2024. Language mediation training and the foreign‑language effect in moral decision‑making*. Translation, Cognition & Behavior 7:1 ► pp. 140 ff. DOI logo
Innes, Alexandria
2024. Reflective and reflexive research participants: Growing the scope for engaging the expertise of frontline workers for policy change. Methodological Innovations 17:3 ► pp. 147 ff. DOI logo
Capus, Nadja & Cristina Grisot
2023. Ghostwriters of crime narratives: Constructing the story by referring to intercept interpreters’ contributions in criminal case files. Crime, Media, Culture: An International Journal 19:3 ► pp. 380 ff. DOI logo
Sarıgül, Semih
2023. Online Translaboration in Video Game Localisation. In Translaboration in Analogue and Digital Practice [Transkulturalität – Translation – Transfer, 57], ► pp. 53 ff. DOI logo
Xia, Jianlan & Xiaoyan Bao
2023. Progress, limitations and prospects of police interpreting professionalization in China. Cogent Social Sciences 9:2 DOI logo
Capus, Nadja & Ivana Havelka
2022. Interpreting Intercepted Communication: A Sui Generis Translational Activity. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique 35:5 ► pp. 1817 ff. DOI logo
Diao, Hong
2022. Homogenized literary co-translation: A Hero Born and A Bond Undone. Across Languages and Cultures 23:1 ► pp. 92 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 4 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