When an interpreter makes a statement on the record and is not speaking for the witness, but it is in the middle of an answer that she is translating for the witness, how do you reflect that in the transcript? Here's what I mean:

Q. Has any healthcare provider told you that you will need future treatment?
A. They've told me that I'm going to have other consequences that could be worse, that I could -- interpreter correction -- that could make it impossible for me to walk.

Or would I do it like this:

Q. Has any healthcare provider told you that you will need future treatment?
A. They've told me that I'm going to have other consequences that could be worse, that I could --
THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter correction.
A. -- that could make it impossible for me to walk.

Thanks for your help.

Views: 364

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I like your second example better.

Here in my area, we have more liberty in transcript formats, unlike, say, California, which, I think -- and I may be wrong -- that folks who work in California adhere to a standard transcript format style throughout the State of California.

When the Q and A is disrupted by colloquy, we usually do not jump back into the Q and A mode without the "BY" line. So I would transcribe your second example like this:

Q. Has any healthcare provider told you that you will need future treatment?
A. They've told me that I'm going to have other consequences that could be worse, that I could --
THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter correction.
THE WITNESS: -- that could make it impossible for me to walk.
BY MR. SMITH:
Q. When did you go to the doctor?

Anyway, that is how I handle jumping in and out of colloquy and Q and A.
Almost right.

California's minimum transcript standards dictate the minimum number of lines per page, amount of spaces for indentation, and the like.
And also the "by" line is dependent upon agency preference.

V.

Hi, Jennie,

Good to see you on here.  I've missed your comments.

Janiece

I've always done it like this:

Q. Has any healthcare provider told you that you will need future treatment?
A. They've told me that I'm going to have other consequences that could be worse, that I could --
THE INTERPRETER: "-- that could make it impossible for me to walk."

Although, I would just clean it up and make it correct. If the interpreter misspoke, I would clean up the correction. There is really no way to determine if the witness misspoke and the interpreter is accurately translating, or if the interpreter misspoke, unless the interpreter indicated somehow he/she was correcting him/herself. If that's the case, I would put:

THE INTERPRETER: "[what the witness said]."

That indicates a disruption in the flow of the answer and clarifies a little bit more that it was not translated exactly as said by the witness.

A little misspeak isn't a biggie. If the interpreter translates two different things because the interpreter misspoke, I would use the quotes and the interpreter "by" line. But you have to have a clear indication from the interpreter which situation it is, which is usually the interpreter will say something to the effect of:

THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter correction. "[what witness said as translated]."

I hope that makes sense. More importantly, I hope it is helpful. Maybe at this point I'm beating the horse.

...

I just re-read your post, and I noticed the interpreter did say "Interpreter correction," which I believe I did address. So you can just disregard the rest of my rambling. :-D

V.

I am doing an immigration hearing with an interpreter present and interpreting occasionally.  Do you use parentheticals when interpreting starts and what do you recommend?  Do you identify the interpreter(s) on the appearance page?

Thank you for any assistance.

I suggest the following, since it is occasionally:

A.  (Via interpreter.)  Or you could put A.  (Through the interpreter.) if you prefer.

Yes, you identify the interpreter on the appearance page.  The identification comes at the bottom of the page after the attorneys' appearances, and it should look something like this:

Also present:  Rosa Cruz, Spanish-language interpreter, Excellent Interpretation Service. 

Hope this helps.  And BTW, the reporter swears in the interpreter.

Great.  Thanks for your help.  I appreciate it. (and thanks for the reminder on the swearing in).

I would do your second example.  It's very clear.  Some of these other examples aren't.

I would do it like:

Q. Has any healthcare provider told you that you will need future treatment?
A. They've told me that I'm going to have other consequences that could be worse, that I could --
THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter correction.
THE WITNESS: -- that could make it impossible for me to walk.
BY MR. SMITH:
Q. When did you go to the doctor?

I like the clarification here.  Thanks, Kelli.

First, let me say how much I hate interpreter depos.  I'm a reporter turned scopist.  I'd cringe when I'd get a interpreter job when I was reporting, and I still cringe when I get one while scoping. For what it's worth, I'd do it the second way.  Cheryl

RSS

© 2020   Created by Kelli Combs (admin).   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service