INTERPRETING MACHINES
(BESIDES US)

May 1st, 2008 | Interpretation, NCTA Meetings, Reports | No Comments

The first NCTA meeting of 2008 took place on February 9 and featured—in addition to our election results and news of ongoing projects—longtime NCTA member Hany Farag’s presentation on new developments in machine translation.

BY SARAH LLEWELLYN

NCTA Secretary Stafford Hemmer, standing in for the absent Vice President Yves Avérous, began the meeting with a series of announcements, including details of upcoming NCTA workshops, a call for volunteers to present future NCTA workshops and also to contribute to Translorial, and a reminder about the monthly happy hours that take place the last Monday of every month in San Francisco and Oakland.

Alison Dent announced the results of the recent (uncontested) election, and welcomed each of the new board members, who will begin two-year terms effective immediately. Dagmar Dolatschko will take over from Song White as treasurer; Paula Dieli will take over Naomi Baer’s position as membership director; Norma Kaminsky will be responsible for continuing education in place of the outgoing Mateo Rutherford; and Diane Montgomery will take on a new role of director of marketing. Stafford Hemmer will continue in his capacity as secretary. Stafford thanked each of the departing members of the board for their valuable and often inspirational contributions during their tenure.

The Interpreter Machine

The meeting’s featured presentation was given by long-time NCTA member and former board member Hany Farag. Hany works in the fields of language and technology and is a translator and state-certified Arabic interpreter, as well as a technologist specialized in automation and control systems.

Hany’s presentation focused on recent efforts in the development of an automated, real-time speech-to-speech translation device—an “interpreter machine”— under the auspices of DARPA, the U.S. government’s Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency. While machine translation in various guises has been around for some 50 years, the development of such a system was hastened by an urgent need for Arabic-language interpreters in Iraq after the 2003 U.S. invasion of that country.

Iraq: Facts and Challenges

One of the challenges facing the ground forces in Iraq was how to rebuild a nation of 20 million people, while having virtually no knowledge of the native language, Arabic. The number of interpreters needed— more than 5,000, based on U.S. troop deployments—was an unrealistic target, particularly given that in the whole of California there were, at most, 500 Arabic-language interpreters. And using local interpreters posed a variety of problems, not least of which was the reliability of their information for intelligence purposes. In response, DARPA instigated a project entitled Global Autonomous Language Exploitation (GALE) to develop an interpreter machine that could communicate spontaneously in real time in tactical—that is, war or battle—situations.

Competing to Succeed

Three teams of researchers were hired to develop systems: IBM, The Stanford Research Institute (SRI) and Bolt Beranek & Newman (BBN). Each year, their progress would be evaluated, and the worst-performing team could be eliminated—or, the program could be shut down entirely. At any time, up to 200 people have been working around the clock on this initiative: the largest language project in existence.

Due to the fact that the only existing, related technology was machine translation for text, the interpreter machine had to be developed using a series of building blocks. The first was ASR (Automatic Speech Recognition). Machine translation was the second component, involving the creation of a corpora, or body, of words in context to improve the translation. The third building block involved text-to-speech synthesis (TTS), which was already of exceptionally good quality.

By late 2006, two machines were ready for deployment in Iraq: IBM’s MASTOR and SRI’s IRAQCOMM, each using a different technology, and each having an accuracy level for text estimated to be around 75%. R&D is still in progress, with the goal of reaching 95% accuracy—comparable to a human interpreter—by 2010.

Hany concluded his presentation by suggesting that no one can stop the progress of technology, and that we need to embrace innovation by understanding it and contributing to it if we can. Researchers, after all, are not practicing interpreters!

After a brief Q&A session, NCTA presented Hany with a box of Valentine’s Day Joseph Schmidt chocolates, to thank him for his presentation.

Careers in the Making

Sep 1st, 2007 | Interpretation, Mentoring, Translation | No Comments

By Christopher Paul Queen

Last April 23rd, in a one-evening back-to-back outreach effort, Jacki Noh offered her insights and advice on translation and interpretation to students at both San Jose State University (SJSU) and The National Hispanic University (NHU). Certificate, upper-division, and graduate students in attendance at both locations learned about the pitfalls of complacency and the need to constantly update their skills while actively pursuing networking contacts in order to become truly in-demand translators and interpreters. Many already had translation or interpretation experience on some level, while others were looking to find a way to break into the field.

The first session of the presentation packed the SJSU Clark Hall classroom with students eager to learn about translation and interpretation, and how they can use their foreign language skills to supplement their income while in school or as a career after graduation. The audience at the second session, at NHU, comprised members of the 2007 Translation Studies Certificate Program class.

Volunteering her experience in the form of personal anecdote, Jacki pointed out the need to be affiliated with as many translation organizations as possible, specifically ATA and NCTA. “I would attend all events I could go to in any combination of languages that included English, just to learn the principles of translation,” she stated. As Korean is Jacki’s source language—considered a “Least Commonly Taught Language“ that has few associated exams with which to demonstrate competency, no academic training program to learn the craft in the U.S., and scant translation and interpretation events in the Korean- English combination—Jacki inferred that translation skills aren’t always learned in a classroom. A lesson that translates to life, as well.

The Civilian Language Reserve Corps,
Part II

Sep 1st, 2007 | Essays, Interpretation, Translation | No Comments

By Stafford Hemmer

In the May issue of Translorial, we learned of the history and mission of the Civilian Language Reserve Corp., the U.S. government’s 2004 initiative to widen the scope of qualified volunteer language professionals in the wake of the September 11th attacks. In this concluding segment, we hear from representatives of the program and the president of ATA about this unusual effort to invigorate American foreign language abilities.

On May 8, 2007, the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Public Affairs) for the Department of Defense issued an official News Release: “DoD Announces Pilot Language Corps.” Initially proposed to Congress shortly after the devastation of September 11, 2001, the U.S. Department of Defense was one of several agencies working jointly to originate “a vital new approach to address the nation’s needs for professionals with language skills … an integral component of the Department of Defense’s language roadmap, and the President’s National Security Language Initiative.”

According to Gail McGinn, Deputy Undersecretary for Defense for Plans, “the department is confident that a successful Language Corps will not only address gaps in federal preparedness, but also serve to reinforce the importance of language skills in the American population and the U.S. education system.” Yet true to the Leviathan nature of the U.S. bureaucracy, organizing, funding, approving, revising, debating, and moving forward with the Corps has turned into a multi-year process. Even the name of the group—originally the “Civilian Linguists Reserve Corps”— has been changed several times and is now the “National Language Service Corps.,” according to Robert Slater, Director of the National Security Education Program.

Further, while the original charter stated that “the pilot Corps will include no fewer than 1,000 members drawn from all sectors of the U.S. population,” to date no volunteers have been recruited; enrollment is not likely to start until 2008.

According to DoD information, the newly christened NLSC, which “will be an entirely civilian organization managed by the DoD for the federal sector, composed of members who will voluntarily join and renew their membership,” begins with a pilot effort involving approximately 10 languages (see Part I). Although not able to indicate which languages have been identified for the pilot project, Mr. Slater confirmed that “the final list of languages is still in development, and will be announced in the fall.”

Organization and structure

The NLSC is basically divided into two groups of participants: the “national pool” and the “dedicated pool.” All volunteers will have their skills certified by the NLSC, and it is likely that renewal procedures will involve coursework or projects that hone or elevate current skill sets. But while the national pool of volunteers is intended for deployment in the event of “war, national emergency, or other national needs,” the dedicated pool will consist of a smaller number of participants, who will serve specific federal agencies on a contractual basis, and “agree to perform specific responsibilities and duties.”

According to Mr. Slater, “the major difference between the two pools is the nature of the contractual relationship involving the individual member. In the case of the national pool, members are not obligated to serve. They will be activated only depending upon their availability. In the case of dedicated members, they will actually enter into contractual relationships with specific federal agencies. They will be expected to be available up to the days specified in their contract.” Volunteers in both pools will be expected to travel, both within the U.S. and abroad.

When asked if volunteers in either pool will be involved in the interrogation of enemy combatants, or other individuals detained by what the U.S. government deems to be terrorist-related activities, Mr. Slater replied “we are not nearly at a point where this question can be answered.”

The ATA viewpoint

Back in July 2006, ATA President Marian Greenfield announced to the organization’s membership that the government would soon be enrolling volunteers in the CLRC. Since that message, Ms. Greenfield reports that “there was no measurable response from membership, other than members who were grateful to know about such translation/interpreting volunteer opportunities, particularly those that could potentially lead could lead to paying jobs.” Compensation for the “volunteer” work, in fact, is still intended under the NLSC. “Compensation plans are still under development, explained Mr. Slater. “The assumption at this point is that national pool members will be compensated only if they are activated. However, all members will derive other benefits from membership in the Corps.”

Ms. Greenfield remains optimistic about the prospects for the NLSC and interested linguists, although there is no official ATA position on the project. As Ms. Greenfield explains, “If the [NLSC] works as planned, it will be of tremendous value to those who need help during times of local and/or national emergencies. It has the potential to possibly create jobs for ATA members. And, once again, the important role that professional translators and interpreters play in bridging the languages, customs, and cultures of different communities will be highlighted.”

The Civilian Language Reserve Corps,
Part I

May 1st, 2007 | Essays, Interpretation, Translation | 1 Comment

By Stafford Hemmer

In an attempt to widen the scope of qualified volunteer language professionals in the wake of the September 11th attacks, the U.S. government in 2004 instituted the Civilian Language Reserve Corps. In this first of a two-part series, we examine the CLRC’s history and mission. In the concluding segment, in the September Translorial, we’ll hear from many parties involved in this unusual effort to invigorate America’s foreign language abilities.

History
The Corps is operated today under the auspices of the National Security Language Initiative, launched by the Bush Administration in 2004 as an endeavor to “dramatically increase the number of Americans learning critical-need foreign languages.” In this context, “critical need” refers to nine specific languages, including Arabic, Chinese, Russian, Hindu, Korean, Urdu, and Farsi. The NSLI is a department of the U.S. Departments of State, Defense, and Education, as well as the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. The initiative is comprised of: 1) programs to encourage the learning and teaching of foreign languages; 2) scholarships, exchanges, and projects to promote international learning and exposure; 3) the creation of “feeder programs” to educational institutions, from kindergarten through university level; and finally 4) “strategic partnerships” between the national government and U.S. universities to promote instruction in “critical languages.” The CLRC itself falls under this latter prong of NSLI agenda. In fiscal year 2007, the Bush administration requested $114 million from Congress to fund this program.

The National Guard model
On the face of it, and as reflected by Ms. Greenfield’s email, this battalion of linguists should operate like the National Guard, except that it will take command of language-related issues instead of public disorder during national crisis situations. Its genesis actually precedes the NSLI itself, in a proposal to Congress in 2001 by the National Security Education Program of the Department of Defense’s National Defense University. Following the government-funded initial feasibility study, NSEP’s Dr. Robert Slater, in his testimony of April 1, 2004, asked the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence to “consider how effective and beneficial it would have been for the nation if, on September 12, 2001, the Director of the FBI had been able to request an immediate call-up of a select number of Arabic specialists who were commissioned as part of a Civilian Linguist Reserve Corps.”

Dr. Slater’s words had their effect on Capitol Hill. When the feasibility study, operational plan, and implementation plan were completed, the time had come in mid-2006 to launch the CLRC’s pilot program. Over the next three years, the Corps’ goal is to assemble a list of no fewer than 1,000 linguists by the year 2010 in the nine critical-need languages. Enrolled language professionals would be matched to the requirements stipulated by the more than 80 federal government departments, bureaus, and agencies that need their service. Reservists have to be certified not only in terms of language acumen, but also in terms of their national loyalty, in order to garner the necessary U.S. Government security clearance. With that imprimatur, members of the Corps would be available to take on sensitive defense-related work. Skills will have to be maintained and certified on a consistent basis. In exchange for the demanding level of paperwork, background clearance, and ongoing skills maintenance, the candidates in the program would be treated as federal civilian employees, receiving pay, benefits, and other incentives when finally called into service.

Mobilizing the Corps
According to a press release during the feasibility stage, the Corps was touted as an opportunity for U.S. civilians to help out during national emergencies—hurricanes Katrina and Rita being recent examples of such situations. To be clear, the CLRC would not be a military reserve; its members would have the right to refuse deployment, but should they do so, they would be required to reimburse the government for their training and education. Despite the non-military nature of the Corps’ charter, however, there appears some evidence that the Department of Defense’s intentions for this program may include grooming these language specialists to work on more delicate security matters—such as, for example, interrogations of so-called “enemy combatants” in the war on terror. Whether this falls within the purview of a “volunteer” corps is a matter for further investigation. 3

An Interpreting Dilemma

Sep 1st, 2006 | Court Interpretation, Essays, Hebrew, Interpretation, Translation | No Comments

By Jonathan Goldberg

Given the choice of offering a literal, by-the-book interpretation that you are certain the recipient won’t understand and offering a less-than-exact equivalent of the original that you are confident he will understand, what would you do? It’s tempting to speculate that most of us would opt for the latter. But are there consequences to doing this? Especially when the setting is a legal one? Jonathan Goldberg dives in.

The verb “to interpret” has two common meanings, which in a sense are somewhat contradictory. The first relates to the act of interpreting written documents or oral statements, in the sense of giving one’s “take” on them. The use of the word in this sense suggests circumstances in which a fair degree of subjectivity is permitted.

The second sense, with which NCTA members are likely to make an association, relates to the art of oral translation, whose practitioners are expected to eschew subjectivity and to render the target language with an almost scientific precision.

Translations are often chiseled out of rough source language and fashioned in their final form with the aid of dictionaries, by consulting colleagues and, as a last resort, by asking the client for a clarification of the intended meaning. Interpretion assignments, such as the cross-examination of witnesses, allow no such luxury. Rather, the thrust and parry of these verbal brawls sometimes makes one yearn for the days when one knew only a single language and life seemed simpler on that account.

While driving back from one such assignment, a Hebrew-language deposition, I was mulling over one or two of the trickier terms that the deposing attorney had been pitching across the table at his victim. The deponent for whom I had been interpreting was a flower seller. The deposing lawyer, confident that he was about to establish a case of forgery, dramatically flourished the document he held and asked the deponent: “So does this purport to be your signature?” As the word “purport” comes up fairly often in legal settings (and being myself a retired lawyer), I knew the Hebrew equivalent. But I anticipated a familiar trap.

While I had no doubt that the flower vendor could, if called upon to do so, expound at length on the subtle differences between various types of chrysanthemums, I was equally confident that he had never heard the Hebrew equivalent of “purport.” If, therefore, I rendered a translation of that word so precise as to qualify me for a top grade in any Hebrew-language test, I knew that the deponent was highly likely to reply “I didn’t understand the question.”

This kind of situation is pregnant with danger for the interpreter. At best, furtive glances are likely to be thrown in the interpreter’s direction, with all present assuming that the correct rendition of the lawyer’s question had proven beyond the interpreter’s language skills. At worst, the deponent’s counsel, looking up from his newspaper, is likely to see in the deponent’s state of bamboozlement a golden opportunity to come to his client’s defense (which he may well not have done in any juridical sense), by stating for the record “We seem to be having a problem with the interpreter,” or some such gratuitous comment.

Determined not to become a victim of the blame game, I decided, on the spur of that fateful moment, to break all the rules of professional interpreting, and to take a little professional license, by lowering the register of the question. I therefore rendered, in Hebrew, the equivalent of “So are you claiming that this is your signature?” I held my breath as I waited to see whether my self-protective, unprofessional sleight-of-tongue would have the desired effect. Would it, I wondered, elicit an answer that would demonstrate that the deponent had understood the question and if he had not, would it be he or I who would take the rap? His reply, in Hebrew, was: “Not only do I claim that this is my signature, but it is in fact my signature.” I took one more small step, if not for humanity, then at least for the interpreting profession, and rendered the answer back into English as “Not only does it purport to be my signature, but it is in fact my signature.”

My gamble had paid off. The pair of distortions had cancelled each other out. I had demonstrated beyond all reasonable doubt that the deponent’s powers of comprehension extended far beyond the realm of chrysanthemums. I had allowed the deponent’s counsel to continue reading his newspaper without the need to sort out any bothersome misunderstandings. I had in fact performed a valuable service to all parties.

I am hoping that the parties who paid me to interpret for the flower vendor are not regular readers of Translorial, because they may not fully appreciate the interpreting resourcefulness that I displayed while on contract to them. But if this frank discovery of mine (in the legal sense of that word) should elicit a complaint, or a demand to stick to the straight and narrow
path of interpreting when carrying out future assignments, I intend to plead argumentum ab inconvenienti.

Interpreting Magic: Secrets Revealed!

May 1st, 2006 | Event Interpretation, Interpretation, Reports | No Comments

By Steven Goldstein

You are seated in a parlor—a small theater, of only 35 seats—for the singular purpose of witnessing a few curious and unusual things. A sleight-of-hand artist from abroad, renowned the world over, is about to astound and amaze you. Except for one thing: he speaks a language you don’t understand. How will you make sense of what is taking place? Meet two of the most well-known interpreters in the world of magic, Tina Lenert and Luis Iglesies.

The suave young gentleman takes the lady’s proffered ring, and places it on her open palm. “Concentrate on the happy memory that this ring evokes for you,” he says. “Think of that memory as a ray of white light.” In a moment, the ring moves, ever so slightly. “Keep your eyes on the ring,” he continues in a low, calming voice, “and enlarge this light in your mind; imagine that the light is spinning, growing, rising …” At that very moment, the ring floats off the woman’s palm, and hovers over it. Over gasps from the audience, the young man moves his hand all around the ring, now suspended miraculously in midair, and says softly to the woman, “Know that you can completely encircle this warm feeling, and at any moment grasp it”—he plucks the ring from the air—“and hold on to it for the rest of your life.” Amid cries of amazement and applause from the rest of the audience, the young man returns the ring to the astonished woman, who, with tears in her eyes, whispers into his ear, “Thank you.”

Whether a simple effect with a pack of cards or a social experiment involving a personal memento, the emotional power of a magic performance taps into the spirit of humanity that is in all of us, regardless of what culture we come from, or what language we speak. And yet clearly—except for those performances that are deliberately wordless—we need to understand what is said in order to be able to fully appreciate the effect. Enter the magic interpreter.

A fortuitous path

Tina Lenert came to the magic interpreting field along a decidedly non-traditional route. Indeed, she is the first to admit that she is not a professional interpreter. But her deep involvement with the magical arts over the years has led her—in addition to garnering fame and respect the world over as a performer in her own right—to be identified forever as the English-language voice of one of the most remarkable close-up magicians of all time, René Lavand of Argentina. (“Close-up” generally refers to sleight-of-hand magic performed for small audiences.)

Born to an American geologist working in Caracas, Venezuela, Tina grew up speaking Spanish, but largely abandoned it when her family returned to the United States when she was 12 years old. She didn’t pick it up again in earnest until the early ‘90s, when she was asked by her husband (also a magician) to interpret for a performance being given by Señor Lavand during one of his lecture tours in the U.S. “I was petrified at first,” Tina said, “but his combination of patience and artistry opened a new door for me.”

Poetry in motion

Part of the appeal for Tina was the way Señor Lavand used language. “There’s a poetry and elegance to the Spanish language,” said Tina, “and the way he puts together words is just so beautiful; they simply ring in my heart.” Interpreter Luis Iglesies echoes this sentiment about Señor Lavand: “There is no one else in the magic community who expresses himself better through poetry and refined language, full of sentiment”; a characteristic that both interpreters agree makes Tina’s task especially difficult.

On top of that, Señor Lavand’s words, notwithstanding their poetic resonance, have to be integrated into the performance of the magic itself, where the need for interpreting necessarily alters the environment. After all, as with any public entertainment, magic depends on directing an audience’s attention through the careful timing of words and action (and, sometimes, music). Isn’t this disrupted by the need to stop and wait for a phrase to be interpreted?

“Yes,” says Tina. “But it’s all about timing; about continuing a flow, almost between simultaneous and consecutive interpreting—even pausing, when it’s important to stop and not do anything. To the extent possible, it’s about becoming a part of the performance, and not a distraction. After a while, you go on instinct.” She felt that one of the best compliments she ever received for her work with Señor Lavand was from the well-known magician Harry Anderson, who said she “was like a bell ringing softly above him.”

In addition to interpreting for Señor Lavand, and translating some of his books into English, Tina has, on a more limited basis, interpreted for American magicians during their lectures in Spain. “It is a privilege to communicate these performances,” she says.

Schooled in the profession

An entirely different route to interpreting, and especially magic interpreting, was taken by Luis Iglesies. For Luis, while his interest in magic also blossomed early—as a youngster, he believed one of Spain’s most influential magicians, Juan Tamariz, had supernatural powers—his young adult life was all about language. Born and raised in Spain, he took language seriously while at school, eventually living and studying in the U.S. and Britain, and receiving a translation and interpretation degree from the Universidad de Salamanca (Spain), with French, German, and Italian on his resumé as well. While working for various financial institutions and as a management consultant, Luis began translating magic books in his spare time. This in turn led him to interpreting, and has culminated in his working for the crème de la crème of the worldwide magic community.

“I must know the tricks they will be performing,” Luis says of his preparation to interpret for a magician. “Essentially I want them to tell me their jokes and funny lines, and to define my range of movement and location on the stage. It’s like having a blueprint, or a roadmap, of the performance. Being a magician myself, I thus know where they are going, and how the routine is going to end, so I don’t feel ‘lost.’”

Being a magician oneself is obviously an imperative for anyone interpreting a magic performance or lecture. Not only for the obvious advantages of understanding the theatrics of performing, but also, again, in preparation. “Preparation also encompasses keeping up to date with magic’s most recent tricks, books, and performers, so you know what to expect. If there’s something I’ve never seen, it usually comes up during our briefing before the show.”

A sense of rhythm

Like Tina, Luis also feels that the interpreter must have a great sense of the cadence of a performance, in order to stay in sync with the artist. Although it depends on the performer, this often means working fast, but in any case it requires taking cues from the performer and offering the same emotions—enthusiasm, intensity, drama—that the performer is trying to convey, including voice inflections, gestures, and facial expressions. The result is that the interpreter is indeed not merely the conduit for what’s being said, but in fact an integral part of the performance. “If you do a good job, the audience erases you from the stage,” says Luis. “They perceive you doing lip-sync with the artist; they put your voice over his mouth … it’s as if you are the artist’s twin brother who happens to have studied Spanish.”

The magicians themselves have a responsibility for the success of their act in front of a foreign audience. “Since interpreters are part of the performance,” says Luis, “most good magicians will choose material that accommodates this situation. For example, in effects where instructions must be given to the audience, they must not be complex. It’s a difficult situation for a spectator to be in, because while physical interaction may occur between the spectator and the performer, aural (listening) interaction occurs between the spectator and the interpreter. And so things must be made as simple and straightforward as possible.”

As for the business end of interpreting, matters such as compensation are dependent, not surprisingly of course, upon the skill and experience of the interpreter. Most interpreters for magic lectures in Spain are not professionals, but those of Luis’s caliber can command above-average fees. “(Magic) Convention organizers see the audience’s response to the interpretation—the overall enhancing effect that it has on people’s appreciation of the performances—and they realize it is worth the fee.”

Who among us would doubt that? We need only think back on the performance described at the beginning of this article to see how demanding such a job would be, and how difficult it would be to do it well.

Sounds like interpreting, doesn’t it?

Chuanyun Bao, Dean of Monterey’s GSTI

Feb 1st, 2006 | Continuing Ed., Interpretation, Interviews, Translation | No Comments

By Steve Goldstein

Chuanyun Bao is the Dean of the Graduate School of Translation and Interpretation (GSTI) at the Monterey Institute of International Studies. He has taught at the United Nations Translators and Interpreters Program at Beijing Foreign Studies University and for the Department of Foreign Languages of Xuzhou Normal University. An active member of AIIC, Dean Bao was a staff interpreter at the United Nations Office in Geneva before he joined the T&I faculty at MIIS. 

This year marked the 50th anniversary of MIIS. Can you talk a bit about the origins of the school, its history, and the significance of this important milestone?
MIIS was founded by a group of professionals 50 years ago who had a strong belief in training professionals for international careers. The school was first called the Monterey Institute of Foreign Studies, then changed to the present name in the 1960s. The 50th anniversary marks the end of our first period of success in international education and the beginning of a new era represented by our affiliation with Middlebury College. GSTI was founded in 1968, and is unique because it is not a school that focuses on language development; students are required to already have language proficiency as they enter our programs. GSTI provides training in translation and interpretation by the highest professional standards and it is a premier school in the field of translation and interpretation in the US. It has a comprehensive curriculum that covers almost every aspect of training in translation and interpretation, including theories, techniques, professional ethics, public speaking and communicative skills, etc. 95% of our faculty are practicing translators and interpreters with training or experience in teaching.

Describe a typical student in your program.
GSTI enrolls about 95 students a year on average, for our seven language programs. We currently have 190 students, of which more than 60% are from abroad. All have a strong interest in translation and interpretation, an interest in world knowledge, and a strong curiosity in learning new things and meeting new challenges.

GSTI recently announced the new MATLM (Masters of Arts in Translation and Localization Management) program. Can you talk about the program a bit, and how it came about?
As more and more of our students have been hired as project managers for localization projects, we recognized the need for more professionals who have language and translation skills as well as knowhow in localization technologies. The MATLM program is unique in that it has three essential components: Tranlsation, Business Management, and Localization Technologies. This combination is made possible by the strong interdisciplinary nature of the programs at MIIS.

You’ve referred to T&I as being an art and a science. In your view, what is the art, and what is the science?
First of all, T&I are a science because they have their rules and norms. Professional training is a scientific and systematic process in which students learn these rules and norms and thus acquire the skills as well as the theoretical knowledge base of translation and interpretation. But it is not enough to know these rules and norms: they must be internalized to become part of your subconscious behavior so that when you use them, they would come out naturally, without much thinking. When one can use these skills as naturally as one’s subconscious self, T&I would become an art. In general, you learn T&I as a science and you practice them as an art—of course after much practice.

With the return of the Winter Olympics this month, can you speak about MIIS’s close association with the Olympic Games?
Dr. Bill Weber, a former dean of the Department of Translation and Interpretation at MIIS, has been actively involved in interpretation for the Olympics. Thanks to his efforts, faculty and students from MIIS were involved in the Los Angeles Games, the Atlanta Centennial Games, the 2000 Sydney Olympic Games, and a few other winter Olympic Games. In the Atlanta Olympic Games in 1996, as many as 40% of the professional interpreters had either worked or studied at MIIS or were then-faculty members; in addition, a number of students worked as volunteers at the game.

Did you see the movie “The Interpreter”? What did you think of it?
I think it is a good movie, although some of the scenes of interpretation are not how interpreters work in real life. I like the movie because it helps the public know what an interpreter is. As a matter of fact, the original title of the movie was “The Translator.” Thanks to our interpreter colleagues at the United Nations Headquarters in New York who explained to the crew the differences between a translator and an interpreter, we now have a movie that is not only entertaining, but also an education to the public about interpretation.

And Justice for All?

Feb 1st, 2006 | Court Interpretation, Interpretation, Reports | No Comments

By Michael Schubert

Launched in 1997, the State Commission on Access to Justice is chartered with exploring ways to improve access to civil justice for low- and moderate-income Californians. The Commission’s new policy paper, “Language Barriers to Justice in California,” documents the need for increased court-interpreter resources in the Golden State.

In our profession and with our various backgrounds, NCTA members know first-hand that California is home to one of the most ethnically, racially, and linguistically diverse populations on the planet. According to data from the 2000 census, roughly 26% of California’s 34 million residents are foreign-born, representing over 220 languages! This extraordinary diversity can be a great asset to the artistic landscape and to the general marketplace of ideas and perspectives, but it also poses huge cultural and linguistic challenges for providers of government services.

These challenges become clearer when one delves further into the census data: a full 10% of California’s 2000 population arrived during the 1990s, and rates of immigration continue to rise. More importantly, 20% of Californians speak English less than “very well,” meaning that they require an interpreter when appearing in court as a defendant, litigant, or witness.

While criminal defendants, witnesses, parties in small claims cases, and parties in a narrow class of civil cases have the right to an interpreter, no such right has been recognized for parties in most civil cases, including evictions, repossessions, creditor/debtor cases, wage garnishments, and family law matters. The judge may assign an interpreter at his or her discretion, but, not surprisingly, there is usually a lack of state funds available to pay the costs when the affected parties are unable to. The issue touches on the need for written translation services as well, since most court forms are available only in English. Even where such forms exist in another language, by law they still must be submitted and filed in English.

Aggravating the growing need for court interpreter services has been a concurrent shrinking of California’s pool of qualified interpreters. Court records show that between 1995 and 2005, the number of certified court interpreters for Spanish, Korean, Vietnamese, Cantonese, Arabic, Japanese, Tagalog, and Portuguese fell from 1,665 to 1,238—a 25% drop! The decline in Spanish interpreters, who make up 88% of this pool, has been nearly 30%. In desperation, the courts have been forced to rely on unqualified interpreters, including relatives and children, with the predictably dubious results for the administration of justice that hardly needs emphasizing among Translorial readers.

Court administrators have stepped up their efforts to attract and retain qualified interpreters, including the launching of a pilot program incorporating specialized telephone equipment, workshops, recruitment campaigns, collaboration with UC Berkeley and UCLA, better cooperation with local courts, and a redesign of the court interpreter program website. The single greatest problem hampering all of these efforts, however, is the lack of adequate funding. Compensation for California’s certified and registered court interpreters currently stands at $265 per day and $147 per half day, significantly lower than rates at the federal level and far below private-sector prices.

The Commission on Access to Justice outlines five principal recommendations:

• Adopt a comprehensive language access policy for courts.
• Develop specific recommendations to implement language access policy.
• Compile existing data and conduct additional research.
• Reevaluate system for recruitment, training, compensation, and certification of court interpreters.
• Evaluate role of lawyers and bar associations, legal services programs, law schools, and law libraries.

The Commission’s full 68-page report is posted at http://www.calbar.ca.gov/ under “Reports” in the left-hand column. The Commission explicitly welcomes the feedback, suggestions, or contributions of NCTA members!

Translating and Interpreting at the Olympics

Feb 1st, 2006 | Event Interpretation, Interpretation, Reports, Sports Interpretation, Translation | No Comments

By Michael Schubert

With the Olympic Winter Games returning to the world stage this month in Turin, Italy, we take a look at what’s behind the decidedly Olympian efforts of our translating and interpreting colleagues—including NCTA members!

Survey the mainstream media for information on how translation and interpretation services for the Olympic Games are handled and you’ll find yourself tripping again and again over such tired phrases as “lost in translation” and “Babel,” interspersed with predictable anecdotes about mix-ups in the mixed zone and confusion at the conferences. Frustration with the pace of consecutive and relay interpreting at media events is another common theme. This scenario seems credible enough, given that the most recent games (2004 in Athens) drew some 10,500 athletes from 202 countries and territories.

Speak with professional translators and interpreters who have actually been in the thick of this prestigious, global, athletic megaevent, however, and a very different picture emerges. Four NCTA members with Olympic experience were of one mind that not only was the quality of the professional linguist teams top-notch but that the honor and excitement of being part of such an important undertaking eclipsed any negative aspects.

The MIIS Connection

Who recruits and coordinates these elite teams? Wilhelm (Bill) Weber and Daniel Glon are part of a common thread in the organization of translation and interpreting services for past Olympic games, as is the local institution—and NCTA corporate member—with which they share a long association, the Monterey Institute of International Studies. Not surprisingly, Mr. Weber and Mr. Glon have résumés that sparkle with not only linguistic distinction but athletic prowess.

A native of Geneva and an accomplished equestrian, Bill Weber was Dean of the Graduate School of Translation and Interpretation of MIIS from 1978 to 1992. His involvement with the Olympics goes all the way back to the 1968 Winter Games in Grenoble, and the International Olympic Committee remains an important client of Language Services International, his formerly California-based and now Hawaii-based company. When the Olympics came to Los Angeles in 1984, Mr. Weber directed International Olympic Committee officials to the incredible talent pool among MIIS students, alumni, and staff, and from these circles a total of 30 interpreters and 15 translators were hired to work in Los Angeles that year. Mr. Weber subsequently served as Chief Interpreter for the games in Calgary (1988), Atlanta (1996), and Salt Lake City (2002), and describes the Olympics as akin to a mini United Nations.

Past MIIS professor and native Frenchman Daniel Glon is a cycling buff and former racer and played rugby at a national level. Mr. Glon began translating for the Olympics at the Munich games in 1972. Most recently, Mr. Glon served as Chief Translator for the 2002 Salt Lake City games. Mr. Glon is founder and president of AILOS (Association internationale des Linguistes Olympiques et Sportifs), a non-profit working to bring together translators and interpreters with sports expertise to meet the needs of sports organizations and events organizers worldwide. He also created the French-English site www.supralingua.com. In an interview available there, Mr. Glon describes the work of Olympic translators as involving a lot of legal and medical documents as well as the official daily newspaper, the Olympic Record. He speaks of the huge glossaries that he and Mr. Weber and their teams manage—technical lingo for bobsled racing or figure skating, for example, plus terminology for newly added disciplines.

Scale and Scope

Every written document associated with the games must, according to Olympic guidelines, exist in the two official Olympic languages, French and English. This means a bounty of work for French translators like NCTA member Christiane Abel of West Point, California. Christiane holds a Master of Arts degree in Translation and Interpretation from MIIS. Her association with MIIS and Bill Weber led to her recruitment for the 1996 summer games in Atlanta. For one full month before and two weeks during the games, Christiane worked as part of team of 15 French translators in two shifts translating everything from menus, Olympic Village signage, Atlanta mass transit information and, of course, the Olympic Record. The modern office space featured workstations equipped with IBM Translation Manager software. Despite the tight deadlines, horrendous traffic and housing reminiscent of college days, Christiane savored being part of what she described as an excellent team, and formed good working relationships with colleagues that have lasted to this day.

Another aspect of Olympic translating is the big-screen information at the Olympic stadium and other venues, seen around the world by millions. Agnew Tech-II of Westlake Village, California, founded in 1986 by President and CEO Irene Agnew, collaborated with Big Screen Network Productions to translate its video board programming from English to Greek for every venue and sport at the 2004 Summer Olympic Games and Paralympic Games in Athens, Greece.

Olympic interpreters work assisting the media in interviewing athletes when- and wherever they can, at the post-medal ceremony press conferences and at meetings of the International Olympic Committee and its commissions. Interpreters must prepare by familiarizing themselves with the rules and regulations of the various Olympic sports, the names of previous medal winners and current favorites, athletes’ biographies, and more. But the most challenging interpreting work may be in the so-called “mixed zone,” the area through which athletes pass between their performance venue and the locker room. Media hounds hungry for a word from the star performers jostle for a front-row spot here; shouting is common and even fistfights have broken out. The chaos of this scene naturally exacerbates the job of the interpreter.

Depending on the infrastructure and budgeting/organizational priorities set by the local committee, interpreting at the post-medal ceremony conferences will be simultaneous, consecutive, or even relayed. Where no budget or obligation for professional interpreters exists, volunteers pick up slack. Some sports are so competitive and culturally significant—basketball and soccer, for example—that the national team will hold a press conference regardless of whether it won a medal.

NCTA Olympians

In addition to Christiane Abel, several other NCTA members have Olympic T&I experience on their resumés. Andrea Hofmann-Miller is a German translator and interpreter, and an alumnus of MIIS as well, where she earned the degree Master of Arts in Translation and Interpretation. While there, she met Bill Weber, who recruited her for the games in Atlanta (1996) and Salt Lake City (2002). Before and during the games, Andrea provided both simultaneous and consecutive interpreting services, mainly into her native German. She remembers with fondness the ebullient atmosphere before the opening ceremony and at the pre-Games interviews, when no one had yet been branded a “winner” or “loser.” The presence of many international luminaries and their social and environmental involvement were another highlight.

NCTA member and newly elected ATA board member Jacki Noh, a professional Korean interpreter, was contracted by Bill Weber for the games in Atlanta (1996), Sydney (2000) and Salt Lake City (2002). She describes the highlight of her Olympic work as simply “being there,” and she enjoyed cheering on the Korean teams. Jacki interpreted for both the North and South Korean contingents. Compensation for professional Olympic interpreters is according to terms of the International Association of Conference Interpreters (AIIC), and Jacki describes the pay as competitive, though less so for her Sydney stint because of the exchange rate of the Australian dollar. Despite the stress and travel, however, Jacki regards her involvement with three Olympiads to be a highlight of her career.

Yet another graduate of MIIS, NCTA member Shan Young Tsen, was also recruited by Bill Weber, and worked as a simultaneous interpreter in her native Mandarin in Atlanta (1996) and as a consecutive interpreter in Salt Lake City (2002). The experience was an enjoyable one that she would definitely do again and recommend to others. Shan recalls her self-study crash course in ice hockey terminology and her delight in watching her first-ever ice hockey event as the Chinese women’s team competed.

Shan has no insider information on the 2008 Beijing Games but presumes they will wish to draw first on local translators and interpreters. The press conference hall for Beijing 2008 has already been equipped with a wireless simultaneous translation system. Though the Chinese translation market has grown in leaps and bounds recently to keep pace with China’s growing importance as a global business power, reports indicate that the country still faces an alarming shortage of high-quality professional translators.

Related sites

www.olympic.org Official site of the Olympic Movement (English, French)

www.torino2006.org Official site of the XX Olympic Winter Games in Turin, Italy (English, French, Italian)

http://en.beijing-2008.org Official site of the Games of the XXIX Olympiad in Beijing, China (English, French, Mandarin)

www.aiic.net International Association of Conference Interpreters, Geneva, Switzerland (English, French and selected content in additional languages)

www.miis.edu Monterey Institute of International Studies, California

www.lsiusa.net Language Services International, Inc., Hawaii

www.agnew.com Agnew Tech-II, Westlake Village, California

October Workshops: From Basics to L10n

Dec 1st, 2005 | Continuing Ed., Getting Started, Interpretation, Localization, Reports, Translation | No Comments

By Raffaella Buschazzio and Peter A. Gergay

Getting Started in T&I

On October 15th, NCTA welcomed over 50 people to our workshop, “Getting Started in T&I.” Norma Kaminsky, an M.D. and an ATA-certified English-Spanish translator in medical, pharmaceutical, and other health-related subjects, opened the workshop by sharing basic concepts for beginning translators, presenting the pros and cons of working for agencies, direct clients, and in-house, and the resources translators need, from office space to computers and software, to a well-stocked library.

Jacki Noh, a Korean translator/interpreter specializing in a variety of fields, continued the workshop by focusing on interpretation. She began her presentation by underlining how essential it is for an interpreter to be truly bilingual and bicultural, and to have intellectual curiosity. Then she explained the distinctions between modes and types of interpretation, going into detail on how to become a court and healthcare interpreter.

The workshop ended with a presentation by Karl Kaussen, founder and proprietor of Biotext LLC. Dr. Kaussen focused on the translator-agency relationship, providing useful advice on how to be competitive, how to build up a good reputation among agencies, and how to discuss rates - a ticklish question and not only for newbies in the field! R.B.

Introduction to Software Localization

Some 40 NCTA members attended an informative “Introduction to Software Localization” seminar on October 29th, led by Angelika Zerfass, a recognized leader in the industry. Ms. Zerfass spoke about the concept and practice of localization (l10n) currently sweeping the translation market. She defined localization as “the process of adapting a product or software to a specific culture or geographical area so that the translation flows naturally to the users in that particular region.”

Ms. Zerfass emphasized the need to have a valid localization plan, a project structure, and access to current and valid files, to counter the many things that may go wrong in the areas of templates, translation memories, abbreviations, and more, sometimes due simply to plain inattentiveness to seemingly minor but essential details.

Our shrinking world and an ever-expanding global marketplace clearly point to localization as the wave of the future - something, Ms. Zerfass indicated, that many good translators have been doing in their work already, without being aware of the formal name of the process. P.A.G.