Standards of Practice

and Ethics for

Washington State
Judiciary Interpreters

Accuracy
ism Co
l m
o na p
et
si

en
fes

ce
Pro
Impartiality

Neutrality
ity

Ho
gr

te es
In ty
Confidentiality
Standards of Practice
and Ethics for
Washington State
Judiciary Interpreters

ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE COURTS

COURT INTERPRETER PROGRAM
Washington State
Administrative Office of the Courts
Court Interpreters Program
PO BOX 41170
Olympia, WA 98504

Copyright © 2021 by Washington Courts

Administrative Office of the Courts | Court Interpreter Program.
All rights reserved.
Except as permitted under the Copyright Act of 1976 and as otherwise
expressly provided herein, no part of this publication may be reproduced in
any form or by any means, electronic, online, or mechanical, including the
use of information storage and retrieval systems, without permission in
writing from the copyright holder. Permission is hereby granted to nonprofit
institutions to reproduce and distribute this publication for educational
purposes if the copies credit the copyright holder.

For more information or to request hard copies, please contact the Court
Interpreter Program.
Table of Contents

About This Manual ....................................................................................... 8

Accuracy .................................................................................................. 10
Additions .............................................................................................. 11
Omissions ............................................................................................. 12
Word Repetition .................................................................................. 12
Redundancies ..................................................................................... 12
False Starts and Self-Corrections ........................................................... 13
Filler Words ........................................................................................ 13
Fragmentary Statements ...................................................................... 13
Summarization ...................................................................................... 13
Protocol ................................................................................................ 14
Third-Person References ....................................................................... 14
Identification of Interpreter Statements .................................................. 14
Questions from a Witness ..................................................................... 14
Duty to the Witness ............................................................................. 15
Interpreting Recordings ........................................................................ 15
Signing Declarations ............................................................................ 15
Style and Register .................................................................................. 17
Obscene, Profane or Vulgar Language ..................................................... 17
Nonsensical Speech ............................................................................. 18
Nonresponsive Answers ........................................................................ 18
Double Negatives ................................................................................ 18
Word Choice ....................................................................................... 19
Impediments to Accuracy ........................................................................ 19
Unfamiliar Words ................................................................................. 19
Culturally Specific Terms ...................................................................... 19
Request for Repetition .......................................................................... 20
Ambiguities ........................................................................................ 20
Words with Multiple Meanings ................................................................ 21

Table of Contents 3
 Idiomatic Expressions .......................................................................... 21
When the LEP Individual Intermixes Languages ........................................ 22
LEP Individual’s Command of the Language ............................................. 23
Nonverbal Communication ....................................................................... 23
Rendering Emotions ............................................................................. 23
Gestures Made by Speakers .................................................................. 24
Dealing with Errors ................................................................................. 24
Errors by Speakers .............................................................................. 24
Your Own Errors .................................................................................. 24
Errors by Colleagues ............................................................................ 25
Challenges to Interpretation .................................................................. 26
Team Interpreting .................................................................................. 26
History of Simultaneous and Team Interpreting ........................................ 29
Mechanics of Team Interpreting ............................................................. 30
How Many Interpreters Does It Take? ..................................................... 33
Practices to Avoid ................................................................................ 37
Honesty and Integrity ................................................................................ 40
Representation of Credentials ................................................................... 40
Correctly Stating the Language on the Record ............................................. 40
Honestly Representing Your Skill Level ....................................................... 41
Time Constraints .................................................................................... 41
Attempts to Induce You to Violate the Code ................................................ 41
Integrity and Contradiction ...................................................................... 43
Impartiality and Neutrality .......................................................................... 45
Conflict of Interest.................................................................................. 46
Disclosure of Relationship with Parties ....................................................... 48
Perceived Conflict of Interest (Appearance of Bias) ...................................... 48
Gifts and Gratuities ................................................................................. 52
Upholding Neutrality ............................................................................... 52
Advocacy and Cultural Brokering............................................................... 53
Confidentiality .......................................................................................... 55
Attorney-Client Privilege .......................................................................... 55

Table of Contents 4
 Rendering Services for Different Parties ..................................................... 58
In-court Proceedings ............................................................................ 58
Out-of-court Encounters ....................................................................... 59
Family Law and Other Civil Cases ........................................................... 60
Evidentiary Materials............................................................................... 60
Testifying in Court .................................................................................. 61
To Lay a Preliminary Foundation ............................................................ 61
To Serve as a Witness .......................................................................... 62
Serving as an Expert Witness for Other Linguistic Services ............................ 63
Conferring with Colleagues ...................................................................... 63
Mandatory Reporting .............................................................................. 63
News Media and the Public ....................................................................... 63
Competence ............................................................................................. 65
National Classification of Interpreters ........................................................ 65
Prerequisites ......................................................................................... 66
Knowledge, Skills and Abilities .................................................................. 67
Credentials ............................................................................................ 68
Interpreter as Officer of the Court ............................................................. 69
Lodging Complaints ................................................................................ 70
Professional Demeanor and Protocol .......................................................... 70
Preparation for an Assignment .................................................................. 71
Jury Instructions .................................................................................... 72
Modes of Interpreting.............................................................................. 72
Relay Interpreting .................................................................................. 73
Standby ................................................................................................ 73
Declining an Assignment.......................................................................... 74
Professional Development ........................................................................ 74
Collegiality ............................................................................................ 74
Check Interpreter ................................................................................... 75
Professional Associations ......................................................................... 76
Interpreter Fatigue ................................................................................. 76
Pre-Session ........................................................................................... 76

Table of Contents 5
 Written Translations................................................................................ 77
Transcriptions ........................................................................................ 78
Cultural or Linguistic Expertise ................................................................. 78
Remote Interpreting .................................................................................. 79
Special Considerations for Interpreting with Deaf, Deaf-Blind, and Hard of Hearing
Individuals ............................................................................................... 81
Qualifications of Sign Language Interpreters ............................................... 81
Code of Professional Responsibility ............................................................ 82
Interpreting in the Courtroom .................................................................. 83
Preparation for Trial Interpretation ......................................................... 83
Positioning in the Courtroom ................................................................. 83
Specialist Interpreters ............................................................................. 84
Types of Specialist Interpreters ............................................................. 84
Certified Deaf Interpreters (CDIs) .......................................................... 85
Deaf-Hearing Interpreter Teams ............................................................ 86
Waiver of Right to an Interpreter .............................................................. 88
Visual Recording of Testimony .................................................................. 89
Accommodations for Deaf Individuals Serving as Jurors ................................ 89
Empaneling a Deaf Juror ....................................................................... 90
Interpreting Considerations ................................................................... 90
Role of the Interpreter in Jury Deliberation .............................................. 91
Fundamentals of Ethics for Interpreters ........................................................ 93
Knowing Your Ethical Values .................................................................... 93
Codifying Expected Behavior .................................................................... 95
Making Ethical Decisions .......................................................................... 95
Appendix 1 - GR 11.2 Code of Professional Responsibility for Judiciary Interpreters
.............................................................................................................. 96
Appendix 2 - Oath of Interpreter ................................................................. 101
Appendix 3 - Language Disorders and Speech Patterns ................................... 102
Appendix 4 - The Five Stages of Second Language Acquisition ......................... 104
Appendix 5 - A Bit of History ...................................................................... 105
The Nutca Territory ............................................................................... 105
Interpreters as Agents of the Spanish Crown ............................................. 105

Table of Contents 6
 Interpreters in the Americas.................................................................... 109
Court Interpreters in New Spain............................................................... 112
Ordinance of 1548 ................................................................................. 115
Appendix 6 - Ordinance of 1548 (Facsimile) .................................................. 119
Appendix 7 - Ordinance of 1548 (Translation) ............................................... 127
Appendix 8 - Chapter 2.43 RCW Interpreters for Non-English-Speaking Persons . 136
Appendix 9 - Chapter 2.42 RCW Interpreters in Legal Proceedings ................... 137

Table of Contents 7
 About This Manual
This manual is a practical guide to assist interpreters in fulfilling their
professional and ethical responsibilities. It also serves as a valuable resource
for judges, attorneys, schedulers, court personnel, and anyone else who
works with interpreters or wishes to study the field.
The inspiration for this manual came from the Professional Standards and
Ethics for California Court Interpreters. It is based on Washington State
Supreme Court General Rule (GR) 11.2 Code of Professional Responsibility
for Judiciary Interpreters and was funded by Seattle Municipal Court and the
Washington State Administrative Office of the Courts, Interpreter Program.
The authors wish to extend special thanks to James Wells and the Honorable
Judge Damon Shadid for making this manual possible, and the Judicial
Council of California for generously sharing the content of their manual.

Authors:
Milena Calderari-Waldron, WA State Court Certified Spanish Interpreter,
DSHS Certified Spanish Medical and Social Services Interpreter, DSHS
Certified English to Spanish Translator. General Certificate of English,
University of Cambridge. O levels in Spanish, French, and Latin, University of
London. Licence d'Histoire de l'Art et Archéologie, Paris I Panthéon-
Sorbonne. Drafting member of ASTM F2089-15 Standard Practice for
Language Interpreting. Co-author of GR 11.2 and GR 11.4.
Emma Garkavi, WA and CA States Court Certified Russian Interpreter,
American Translators Association Certified English to Russian Translator.
Equivalent of BA in English Studies, St. Petersburg State Language School.
Equivalent of MS in Electronics Engineering, St. Petersburg State
Electrotechnical University. Drafting member of ASTM F2089-15 Standard
Practice for Language Interpreting. Co-author of GR 11.2, GR 11.4, and WA
Bench Card for Courtroom Interpreting (Spoken Languages).
Linda Noble, WA State Court Certified Russian Interpreter, American
Translators Association Certified Russian to English Translator. BA in Russian
Studies, University of California at Santa Cruz. Pushkin Institute of Russian
Language, Moscow, USSR. Co-author of GR 11.2, GR 11.4, and WA Bench
Card for Courtroom Interpreting (Spoken Languages).

Content Editor:
Lorane West, MA in English, WA State Court Certified Spanish Interpreter,
DSHS Certified Spanish Medical Interpreter, DSHS Certified English to

About This Manual 8

Spanish Translator. Professional Language Access Editor (Simple English).
Author of COLOR: Latino Voices in the Pacific Northwest, WSU Press.

Reviewers:
Maria Farmer, Claudia A’Zar, Maria Luisa Gracia Camón, Sam Mattix, and
Nancy Leveson, all WA State Court Certified Interpreters.
Chapter on Confidentiality reviewed by Katrin Johnson, J.D., Public Defense
Services Manager at WA State Office of Public Defense.

Copy Editor:
Cynthia Sleight, BA in Linguistics and Minor in Spanish, Seattle Pacific
University. Certificate in Editing, University of Washington.

Cover Design:
Marian Roh, ROHgraphics1

Sign Language Chapter

Author:
Laurie R. Reinhardt earned her PhD in Interpretation Research and Pedagogy
from Gallaudet University. She has been a practitioner for over forty years
and holds Comprehensive Skill Certification, National Interpretation
Certificate-Advanced, and Special Certificate: Legal from the Registry of
Interpreters for the Deaf (RID) and is Washington State Court certified ASL
interpreter.
Editor:
Karen J. Carlson holds Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf (RID)
Comprehensive Skills Certified (CSC); Special Certificate: Legal, and
Washington State Court certified ASL interpreter. She is a former President
and Board Member of the WA State RID and has served as mediator with
RID’s Ethical Practice System (EPS) since 2000.

Illustrations and Diagrams:

Created by the authors with technical assistance from G. Inverso.

1
Compass rose image: 123RF/longquattro; Terrain map lines: 123RF/kovalto1

About This Manual 9

 Accuracy

Interpreters must reproduce in the target language the closest natural

equivalent of the source language message without altering it by means of
addition, omission, or explanation.
—Washington State Court General Rule GR 11.2(f)(1)

Interpreters are obligated to conserve every element of information

contained in the source and target languages.2 In doing so, they fulfill a
twofold duty:
1. To ensure that legal proceedings reflect in English precisely what is
said or signed by the limited English proficient (LEP) individual.
2. To place LEP individuals on an equal linguistic footing with those who
are fully proficient in English.
Interpreters for legal proceedings must first take an oath swearing to
interpret accurately to the best of their skill and judgment. Credentialed
(registered and certified) interpreters sign a permanent oath which is kept
on file at the Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC). Non-credentialed
interpreters must be duly sworn in at the start of every proceeding. (See
Bench Cards for Spoken and Sign Language Interpreters.)
The judge and jury rely entirely on the interpreted version of testimony to
draw conclusions about the credibility of witnesses and the weight of
testimony, as will attorneys in deciding how to proceed with their case.
Therefore, interpreters must retain every element of information contained
in the original message, in as close to a verbatim form as English style,
syntax, and grammar will allow.
Similarly, LEP witnesses should hear precisely the questions that are asked,
without simplification, clarification, or omission. Remember that LEP
individuals rely on an accurate and complete interpretation of the
proceedings in order to effectively assist their attorney in their own defense.
Interpreters have the sworn duty to interpret everything stated by all
speakers, without adding, omitting, or explaining.

2
Source language: The language from which the message is interpreted.
Target language: The language into which the message is interpreted.

Accuracy 10
Additions
Do not add anything to or elaborate on the message you are interpreting,
even for the sake of smoothing over a choppy delivery by the speaker. It is
not your function as interpreter to make any party sound more articulate,
polite, or logical in the target language than they did in the source language.
Exercise great caution in choosing appropriate terms and delivery,
conserving the speaker’s style as closely as possible:
• Refrain from adding polite expressions.
o When the LEP individual replies simply “No,” do not render it as
“No, Your Honor.”
o When the statement was merely “Tell the jury,” do not render it
as “Can you please tell the jury?”
o If a speaker responds with “Uh-huh,” simply repeat it, rather
than converting the answer to “Yes.”
• Be on guard not to add filler words, such as “well,” “okay,” or “so” at
the beginning of a witness’s response if they were not contained in the
original answer.
• Do not add qualifying phrases such as “I think,” “probably,” etc., if the
source language message did not include them.
• If the response to the question “How many people were there?” is
“Five,” do not render that as “There were five of us.”
• At times, interpreters feel inclined to add information to what was in
the source language utterance. However, the information conveyed by
the interpreter in the target language should accurately reflect only
that information which was contained in the source language
utterance. For example, you may know from earlier testimony that an
event occurred in the morning, so when the witness answers the
question, “When did the police arrive?” with “At seven,” you must
refrain from adding any clarifiers, such as, “At seven a.m.”
It is also inappropriate for interpreters to provide two possible renditions of a
word used by a witness. For instance, if a witness uses a single word
meaning eyeglasses, do not render it as “eyeglasses or spectacles.”
Providing multiple renditions may imply that the witness had hesitated
between the two different terms when in fact a single response was stated
confidently.
When single words have more than one meaning in the context in question,
request clarification: “May the interpreter clarify a word?” (See Accuracy,
Ambiguities.) In some languages, for example, a single word could mean
either foot or leg. When clarifying, however, make sure you do not

Accuracy 11
inadvertently take on the role of language or cultural expert. There is no
need to provide additional explanation of the specific linguistic characteristics
of the language.
Interpreters should not attempt to provide conversions of units of
measurement or currency from one system to another. For instance, if the
witness uses the metric system to describe height, weight, or distance, the
interpreter should simply repeat the number in English, retaining the unit of
measurement used by the witness. Retaining the unit of measurement or
currency used by the witness preserves the witness’s exact testimony for the
record.

Omissions
Interpreters are not editors. They do not have the discretion to decide which
portions of the source message will and will not be rendered into the target
language.

Word Repetition
Word repetitions convey important information and reflect a person’s
speech patterns. You should not omit any words for the sake of clarity or
expediency. Thus, if a witness says in the source language, “I, I, I didn’t
see it,” you must convey that hesitation in English by including the
repetitions to the best of your ability, rather than simply saying, “I didn’t
see it.” An exception to this practice is in the case of persons who have a
stutter. In that case, the interpreter should not imitate the stutter,
trusting that the condition will be obvious to others.
Keep in mind that some languages use repetition as the main way of
expressing emphasis or continuous action, as in, “she was talking and
talking.” In such instances, it is acceptable and may be more
idiomatically correct to convey the meaning using a corresponding
linguistic device of the target language, such as, “she kept on talking.”
Rendering the source language repetition into the target language in this
manner does not constitute a change of meaning or an omission.

Redundancies
Redundancies are frequently intentional. For example, when an attorney
says, “Did you watch and observe him at all times?” you should not omit
the seemingly redundant verb. This is particularly so in the legal context,
where such near-synonyms carry different shades of meaning or for legal
reasons may have to be used in combination. You may not be able to
account for every synonym used if sufficient distinct equivalents do not
exist in your target language. Do, however, resist the inclination to leave
out words for the sake of expediency.

Accuracy 12
False Starts and Self-Corrections
People often make false starts and correct themselves when speaking
and then revise their statements. It is important to interpret these false
starts as they provide information about the person’s speech patterns
and degree of certainty.
• Preserve all false starts and self-corrections when rendering into the
target language.
• Do not correct errors made by a speaker, no matter how unintentional
they may be, nor how concerned you may be that the mistake might
appear to be your own and reflect on your ability to interpret.
• Correct your own false starts or misspoken words with the preface
“interpreter correction,” so the record reflects that the corrections are
yours, not the speaker’s.

Filler Words
People often use filler words to gain time to formulate what they want to
say or to fill a silence. For example, they might say “now” or “so” at the
beginning of a question and “well,” “to be honest,” “quite frankly” in their
response. Interpreters have the obligation to render into the target
language all the filler words used by the speaker; it is particularly
important to do so when interpreting witness testimony. Remember that
this will help the jury to evaluate the credibility of the witness.

Fragmentary Statements
People do not always speak logically, as if following a script. This could
be due to educational limitations, because they have told their stories so
many times before that they assume everyone knows what they are
talking about, or because the subject matter is so upsetting that they
cope by speaking about it only obliquely. For example, a witness may say
“I went to the . . . you know . . . and there was . . . it was there.” Such
vague and ambiguous statements are difficult to interpret into another
language because more information is needed to choose the pronouns,
prepositions, and verbs that go with what is left unstated. Nevertheless,
you must do your utmost to render a version as fragmentary as the
original, without inserting any additional information on your own to
clarify the statement.

Summarization
The interpreter’s role is to interpret everything that is spoken, not to assume
the responsibility of deciding what information deserves to be conveyed.
Example: A lengthy document needs to be sight-translated for
the defendant. The attorney is in a rush and asks you to just

Accuracy 13
 review it and give the defendant a summary, so the case can be
called soon. You must decline by stating, for example, “The
interpreter is prohibited from summarizing, but will interpret
your summary of the document.”
Even when you feel pressured, you should stand by your ethical obligations
and decline to summarize.

Remember: If you are summarizing, you are not interpreting.

Protocol
Third-Person References
When speaking through an interpreter, it is common for people to
preface their statements with phrases like “Tell him that . . .” and “Ask
her if . . .” rather than addressing each other directly. If they do so, you
must not edit out those phrases. If someone repeatedly makes third-
person statements, it is generally appropriate to instruct the speakers to
address each other directly. For example, “The interpreter respectfully
requests that the parties speak directly to one another.”

Identification of Interpreter Statements

When you make a statement on your own behalf, it is important to make
it clear that you are no longer interpreting. In this instance, the proper
protocol is to refer to yourself in the third person.
During courtroom proceedings, although it may seem more natural to
address questions or comments directly to counsel, the proper protocol is
to address the judge. This will insulate you from the adversarial nature of
the judicial process. For instance, “Your Honor, the interpreter
respectfully requests that counsel speak more slowly.”

Questions from a Witness

Frequently, a witness who does not understand an interpreted question
will address a question to the interpreter to clarify the matter, for
example:

Attorney: Now, were you there on that date?

Interpreter (in non-English language): Now, were you there on
that date?
Witness (in non-English language): Does he mean, was I at
home?
Interpreter (in English): Does he mean, was I at home?

Accuracy 14
 Do not take it upon yourself to answer the witness’s question on your
own; simply interpret their question into English exactly as it was asked.

Duty to the Witness

When interpreting for a witness, switch to simultaneous mode to
interpret all objections and other statements made during the
proceeding. Keep in mind that the interpreter’s presence is not only to
benefit the attorneys, the court, or the jury, but also to place non-
English-speaking witnesses on the same footing as English speakers.
However, there may be times when the court instructs you not to
interpret something to the witness or not to interpret the witness’s
answer because an objection to the question was raised and sustained.
Comply with the court’s orders.

Interpreting Recordings
Recordings pose particular challenges for any listener—but especially for
interpreters—due to common impediments such as poor sound quality,
overlapping speech, background noise, speed and intermixed languages.
For this reason, interpreting extemporaneously on the record should not
be attempted, regardless of an interpreter’s level of experience. Rather,
proper transcripts and corresponding written translations should be
prepared in advance.
If a judge orders you to interpret a recording, you should comply but
state on the record that you cannot guarantee the accuracy of the
interpretation.
Example: “Your Honor, pursuant to GR 11.2, the interpreter
cannot guarantee the accuracy of the interpretation of this
recording.”

Signing Declarations
When asked to sign a declaration or statement:
• Read the entire statement before signing. Do not feel compelled or
pressured to sign anything before reading it carefully.
• Edit the printed statement, if necessary, to correctly reflect what you
can honestly attest to.
For example, an attorney reviews a document with the defendant. You
interpret everything the attorney says. Then you are asked to sign a
declaration stating that you have interpreted the entire document to the
defendant. You did not; rather, you interpreted the attorney’s
explanation of the document. Your declaration should accurately reflect
what you actually did. (See following sample declarations.)

Accuracy 15
 The above declarations are examples of those used in some courts and
contain problematic wording for interpreters. Unless you did sight
translate the whole document, it is appropriate and necessary for you to
cross out the relevant section and handwrite in “as explained by the
attorney,” “as summarized by the attorney” or something to that effect.

Accuracy 16
 If any interpreter declaration includes verbiage about the LEP individual’s
understanding of the document through your interpretation or of the
language used to interpret, you should cross such statements out as
well. It is not the interpreter’s role to attest to any party’s linguistic
abilities or state of mind. Interpreters may attest only to what they are
qualified to do and what they did.

Style and Register

When rendering the source language message into the target language, do
not alter the register3 to make the message easier to understand or more
socially acceptable. For instance, if the attorney asks, “What did you observe
the subject do subsequently?” you should not say in the target language,
“What did you see him do next?” if more formal synonyms exist. Avoid any
inclination to simplify the question in an effort to make it easier for the
witness to understand. If the witness does not understand the question, it is
their own or the attorney’s responsibility to remedy the situation. It is not
the interpreter’s role to evaluate, give an opinion on, or attempt to cater to
the LEP witness’s ability to understand.
Remember that the jury will draw certain conclusions about the witness’s
intelligence, propriety and level of education based on word choice, style,
and tone, among other things. It is your job to faithfully convey the
speaker’s register so jurors get the same impression they would if the
witness were testifying in English.

Obscene, Profane or Vulgar Language

If a witness uses foul language, do not edit out the offending terms. No
matter how unpleasant or embarrassing, interpret what you hear, finding
the best equivalent in the target language with the same degree of
offensiveness. This is especially crucial during witness testimony, as
jurors will make judgments about the witness based on their manner of
testifying. Jurors should hear exactly what was stated and the manner in
which it was stated.
Obscenities are particularly difficult to interpret verbatim; a word-for-
word interpretation may be meaningless or laughable in the target
language. Instead, use the closest dynamic equivalent; that is, the target
language term or expression most likely to be used in the same way and
to elicit the same reaction by listeners.

3
Register: The level of formality of speech

Accuracy 17
Nonsensical Speech
It is important for the interpreter to make every effort to state exactly
what the speaker said, no matter how illogical, irrelevant, ambiguous, or
rambling it may be. Sometimes, however, this is simply not linguistically
possible without context. In such cases, it may be prudent to switch to
simultaneous mode in order to fully capture the speech pattern and word
choices. If you do, quickly state, “Interpreter needs to switch to
simultaneous mode to maintain accuracy.” Under no circumstances,
however, should you materially edit, omit, or add to what the speaker
said. It is not appropriate to make the speaker sound more logical or
coherent than they are. (See Appendix 3 - Language Disorders and
Speech Patterns.)

Nonresponsive Answers
Interpreters must render nonresponsive answers as accurately as any
other response. It is up to the relevant parties to clarify or make
objections. If an attorney asks the witness what time they left the house,
and the answer is “I had to go to work,” simply render the answer given.
It is up to the attorney to demand a responsive answer.

Double Negatives
A question containing a double negative can elicit an ambiguous answer.
For example, the question “Isn’t it true that you didn’t know Mr.…?”
answered with a simple “No,” may mean “No, it is not true” or “No, I
didn’t know Mr.…” It is not your responsibility to announce that the
question will elicit an ambiguous response or to clarify the answer by
adding any element not contained in the original reply. You must
interpret the question accurately and interpret the reply as simply and
briefly as it was given.
Some double negatives cancel each other out and can be rendered as if
there were no negative at all. A prime example can be found in jury
instructions. The phrase “it is not uncommon for two people witnessing
the same event…” would be acceptable if rendered affirmatively as “it is
common for two people…” Extreme caution is recommended in making
these changes, which should be limited only to situations in which the
target language does not have an equivalent linguistic structure.

Accuracy 18
Word Choice
Correct word choice is critical, especially in testimony. One study4 found
that witnesses’ recollections of how fast cars were going depended on
the verbs used (e.g., “smashed,” “bumped,” or “contacted”) to describe
an accident. Witnesses who were asked to estimate the speed of the cars
when they “smashed” into one another tended to give a higher speed
and recalled seeing broken glass when in fact there was none. Be very
careful in selecting target language terms that accurately and precisely
reflect the source language meaning.

Impediments to Accuracy
Unfamiliar Words
Do not guess the meaning of unfamiliar words. Rather, consult your
dictionary, first stating, “Your Honor, the interpreter needs to consult the
dictionary.” Do not feel rushed to choose the first equivalent you see in
the dictionary—take the time you need to find the best option. By
consulting your reference materials, you demonstrate professionalism.
The parties should be all the more confident in you because of your
commitment to accuracy.
If you were unable to find an appropriate option in the dictionary, inquire
of the party who used the unfamiliar word, prefacing with, “Your Honor,
the interpreter needs to clarify a word used by the speaker.”
When team interpreting, you may also consult with your colleague,
prefacing with, “Your Honor, the interpreter needs to confer with her
colleague.”

Culturally Specific Terms

Judicial concepts, kinship terms, names of foods, and forms of address
are examples of culturally specific terms. They pose a problem for the
interpreter when it is difficult to find words in the target language to
convey their meaning.
If no direct equivalent of a given phrase is readily available in the target
language, you may leave it in the source language, spelling it for the
record. If there is any confusion, indicate to the judge that the witness
has used a term or phrase that does not have a direct equivalent. Certain
articles of clothing, such as head coverings, may have a special word

4
Loftus, E. F., & Palmer, J. C. (1974). Reconstruction of automobile destruction: An
example of the interaction between language and memory. Journal of Verbal Learning &
Verbal Behavior, 13(5), 585–589. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(74)80011-3

Accuracy 19
 that is laden with cultural and religious significance, and cannot simply
be rendered as “a scarf.” Do not attempt an approximate translation or
volunteer further explanation. The attorney can elicit additional
information from the witness with follow-up questions if warranted. In
any case, it is not the interpreter’s role to provide explanations.

Request for Repetition

The requirement to interpret everything said places a great demand on
the interpreter. If you did not understand something stated, or you have
forgotten part of it, do not guess at what might have been said, bluff
your way through, gloss over problem terms, or omit unclear portions of
a message. Instead, request a repetition.
When asked to repeat a statement, there is a tendency for people to
explain rather than simply repeat what they said the first time. One way
to preempt this is to be explicit. “Your honor, the interpreter needs to
request a repetition of what was just said.” The instruction to the LEP
individual would be, for example, “Sir, please repeat exactly what you
just said. Do not explain anything.”
Sometimes only one word is not clear and having the entire phrase
restated would be unnecessary. In this case, simply say, for example,
“Your Honor, the interpreter needs clarification: was the last part of
counsel’s question ‘did’ or ‘did not’ go to the store?”

Ambiguities
The meaning of many words depends on the context. Sometimes
interpreters cannot determine the best interpretation of a word because
they do not have enough contextual information.
For example, the English word “nurse” is gender-neutral, but to interpret
it into Russian, you must know the gender (medical sister or medical
brother). The interpreter would need to clarify with the speaker whether
it is a male or female nurse before properly rendering the word. Another
example is the English word “sibling,” which can refer to a brother or a
sister, and has no equivalent in many other languages
The title of the Spanish language film El secreto de sus ojos highlights
another common ambiguity: “sus ojos” may mean your, his, her, or their
eyes. The director of this film intended the ambiguity, but as the title
was translated into various languages, a pronoun had to be chosen. (The
translators into English chose “their.”) In court, the interpreter must
clarify any such linguistic ambiguities before interpreting and be
prepared to ask for more information when needed.
In cases where the phrase cannot be rendered without resolving the
ambiguity, ask for clarification. Keep your request short, and avoid
becoming an expert witness by offering a lengthy explanation about the

Accuracy 20
 two languages, stating simply: “The interpreter needs to ask a clarifying
question.”
Some ambiguities may be intentional, and you should strive to retain
them if the target language allows. For example, it may be possible to
interpret the question “Where did the car hit you?” without clarifying
whether the questioner is referring to the location of the accident or the
part of the witness’s body. Similarly, an attorney might ask a deliberately
ambiguous question such as “Did you have anything to drink in the car?”
It could be referring to alcoholic beverages specifically or beverages in
general, or the question could be understood as “Did you drink anything
in the car?” or “Was there anything to drink in the car?” If the problem
causes a linguistic roadblock, you should inform the speaker: “The
interpreter needs to clarify the question.”
It is not the interpreter’s job to correct an attorney’s questions. If a
question is vague or ambiguous, it is up to opposing counsel to object. If
there is no objection, interpret the question as indicated above.

Words with Multiple Meanings

The meaning of words depends on the context in which they are used. In
a will, for example, “issue” refers to the children of the person making
the will, while in reference to a magazine, it means a particular edition.
The meaning of any given word might depend on the specific region
where the language is spoken. Someone from the U.S. who says, “I put
it in my boot,” clearly means they put an object inside their footwear.
But a witness from Britain could mean either that they put it inside their
footwear or into the trunk of their car.
If there is any doubt in your mind as to which of several meanings is
intended, ask for clarification. Do not guess.

Idiomatic Expressions
An idiom (also called an idiomatic expression) is a word or phrase that
has a figurative meaning conventionally understood by native speakers.
This meaning is different from the literal meaning of the idiom's
individual elements. In other words, idioms mean more than what the
mere words say.
Common English idioms include “under the gun,” “spill the beans,” and
“kick the bucket.” Strive to render them using an equivalent idiomatic
expression in the target language whenever possible. If you cannot,
simply render the meaning of the idiom. If you are not certain of the
meaning of an idiom, ask for clarification. Do not guess.

Example 1: The speaker uses an idiomatic expression that you

are familiar with, but do not have a readily available equivalent

Accuracy 21
 in the target language. In this case, render the meaning of the
idiomatic expression.
Example 2: The speaker uses an idiomatic expression that you
are not familiar with. Do not guess. Request clarification: “The
interpreter is not familiar with an expression used and needs
clarification.”
If you are working in a team, you have the option of conferring with your
colleague by stating, “The interpreter needs to confer with his colleague.”
The two of you may be able to come up with an appropriate equivalent.

When the LEP Individual Intermixes Languages

It is not the interpreter’s role to interpret English to English. Limited
English Proficient persons in the U.S. often have some knowledge of
English and will insert English words or phrases in their speech. There is
a significant difference between the use of specific English words that
may have no equivalent in the source language or are simply more
familiar to people living in the U.S., and entire phrases spoken in English.
• If it is a single word or word combination (“highway,” “DUI,” “ticket”)
within a sentence, keep the English word used in your rendition.
Я пошла в магазин купить cereal. (I went to the store to buy
cereal.)
• If the LEP witness switches to English and states an entire phrase in
English, it is not your job to repeat it. It is the responsibility of the
parties listening to ask the LEP person to repeat what was said if they
did not understand or request that the LEP person restate it in the
source language so the interpreter can interpret it into English.
Question: Where were you?
Interpreter: ¿Dónde estaba usted?
Answer: Fui al mercado a comprar tortillas.
Interpreter: I went to the store to buy tortillas.
Question: What happened there?
Interpreter: ¿Qué pasó allí?
Answer: I was ticket.
Interpreter: [silence]
Do not repeat what was stated in English, either with or without
grammatical corrections. If parties look at you expectantly or ask you
to interpret, you may state, “Interpreter note: the last statement was
in English.” If anyone tries to insist that you repeat what was stated in

Accuracy 22
 English, you may politely state that it is not appropriate for the
interpreter to repeat statements made in English.
• When a phrase contains a mixture of languages, the interpreter may
state, for example, “Interpreter note: the last statement was a
mixture of languages.” It is the responsibility of the parties listening to
ask the LEP person to request that the LEP person restate it in the
source language so the interpreter can interpret it into English.

LEP Individual’s Command of the Language

Sometimes the interpreter becomes aware that the LEP individual may
not have a full command of the language requested. There are various
reasons why this may be the case, such as when an LEP person from a
Spanish-speaking country is a native speaker of an indigenous language.
• If an attorney is present, let them know. This will give the attorney an
opportunity to confirm the client’s language preferences. “The
interpreter is having difficulty communicating with your client in
Spanish. You may wish to inquire if Spanish is your client’s first (or
preferred) language?”
• If no attorney is present and you are experiencing an impediment to
communication, then indicate it on the record. “The interpreter is
having difficulty communicating in Spanish. Would Your Honor like to
inquire if Spanish is the defendant’s first language?” (See Honesty and
Integrity, Correctly Stating the Language on the Record.)

Nonverbal Communication
Rendering Emotions
People convey emotions such as anger, fear, shame, and excitement not
only in words, but also in facial expression, posture, tone of voice, and
other means. These nonlinguistic means of expression are closely tied to
culture and language. When people do not speak the same language,
they may misunderstand the emotions conveyed. Interpreters should
strive to preserve this element of emotion through subtle voice
modulation.
For example, when a cross-examining attorney bears down on a witness,
your tone should convey that forcefulness, and when a witness answers
questions in a timid way, your tone should convey timidity.
Interpreters should refrain, however, from any kind of dramatics; they
are not actors and should not become the center of attention. This does
not mean speaking without emotional affect or voice modulation, unless
that is an accurate reflection of the speaker’s tone. The key is
moderation. This is particularly important when a speaker becomes very

Accuracy 23
 emotional, lashing out or bursting into tears. In such cases, let the
emotion come through, without going overboard. Do not mimic the
speaker, especially since you can inadvertently increase the effect of
their emotion by doing so.

Gestures Made by Speakers

People may use gestures to convey what they mean, or simply
gesticulate out of habit. It is not the interpreter’s role to reproduce
nonverbal communication. Communication must be verbal in order to be
recorded. Do not mimic any gestures or attempt to replace them with
target-culture equivalents. Simply interpret what was said.
If the witness states, “He hit me here,” pointing to the place on her body
where she was struck, the interpreter should render, “He hit me here,”
without pointing. Everyone can see for themselves where the witness
pointed. It is up to the attorney—not the interpreter—to describe any
physical movement made by the witness so that the transcript will
accurately reflect it (for example, by saying, “Let the record reflect that
the witness has pointed to her right shoulder.”).
This protocol also pertains to gestures, such as giving someone “the
finger,” rubbing thumb and fingers together to indicate “money” or
showing the “peace” sign. Do not verbally fill in the blank or mimic the
gesture. Certain gestures may be enigmatic to all but you, and it can be
very tempting to explain their meaning. Don’t do it. It is the attorney’s
job to capture that unspoken comment by asking, for instance, “What did
you mean when you just flicked your finger on your neck just now?” If
the attorney does not notice the gesture or chooses to ignore it, the
interpreter should not interject or act as an expert witness. Do not
assume the responsibility of reporting what may have gone unnoticed,
had no interpreter been present.

Dealing with Errors

Errors by Speakers
People sometimes misspeak, especially when stating names or dates. Do
not correct an erroneous name or date in your interpretation or bring the
error to the speaker’s attention. Your duty is to render the name or date
exactly as stated.

Your Own Errors

Sometimes you realize after the fact that you have made a substantive
error in interpretation. A substantive or material error is one that may
impact the outcome of a proceeding. You should correct that error as
soon as you become aware of it.

Accuracy 24
 For example, it becomes evident through subsequent testimony that a
word with several possible meanings was misinterpreted. State at the
first opportunity, “Your Honor, based on subsequent testimony, the
interpreter has realized that the word ‘clock’ in the witness’s earlier
response should have been interpreted as ‘watch.’”

Errors by Colleagues
If you hear your interpreter colleague make a substantive error, such as
omitting or changing a significant part of the witness’s testimony, first
wait to see if the interpreter or an attorney questions it. If not, it is
crucial that you remedy the error without delay to avoid the
compounding effect of accumulated errors. Do this as tactfully and
unobtrusively as possible.

Example: The active interpreter is at the witness stand while

you, as support interpreter, are at defense table. The witness
gives a lengthy response with many details. You believe that the
active interpreter has confused or omitted a substantive detail in
their rendition. Give your colleague a moment to correct their
error before interjecting.
If they do not, raise your hand to get the court’s attention and
state, for example, “Your Honor, the interpreter needs to confer
with her colleague.” Do not announce that you believe there was
an error. You and your partner can then confer privately, which
can lead to these potential outcomes:
• You both agree that there was an error. Return to your
seat; your colleague will make the appropriate correction
on the record.
• You both agree that there was not an error. Return to your
seat; no further action is required.
• On rare occasions, you cannot agree, and the matter is
truly substantive, warranting a sidebar to discuss it. In this
case, it would be proper for the active interpreter to
address the judge and make the request.

Remember: Corrections are made to ensure that substantive errors are

avoided and the record accurately reflects what was said.

Determining how and when to correct colleagues’ errors requires great

tact and professionalism. Corrections should be made as promptly and
unobtrusively as reasonable. The goal should never be to show off,
demonstrate your superior knowledge or skills, or make your colleague
look bad.

Accuracy 25
Challenges to Interpretation
Sometimes the interpreter is not the only person in the room who knows
both the source language and the target language. Challenges may come
from attorneys who have some knowledge of the other language and
believe the interpreter has made an error. Or, for example, attorneys
who have prepared their witness and expect a certain answer may
challenge the interpretation because the witness gives a different
answer.
If you are challenged, respond in a polite and professional manner; do
not regard it as a personal affront:
• If you disagree with the correction, simply state, “The interpreter
stands by his original rendition.” You may explain your reasoning, if
necessary, but do not be defensive.
• If you agree with the correction, simply state, “The interpreter
stands corrected,” and provide the corrected version.
Challenges during legal proceedings are normal and should not derail or
demoralize you. At the same time, if you do feel flustered or thrown off,
it is appropriate to ask for a break or switch with your partner.

Team Interpreting
Interpreting is hard! Interpreters do not simply utter words. They must
comprehend complete thoughts and ideas, correctly restructure sentences,
identify ambiguities, decipher speech patterns, take notes, preserve register,
block out background noise, and much more. Interpreters must be familiar
with legal terminology, street jargon, idioms, and metaphors and be able to
retrieve that information from the brain archives almost instantaneously.
Interpreters use up to twenty-two discrete cognitive skills while doing their
job. It is unrealistic to suggest that all of this can be accomplished without
mental fatigue setting in after a very short time.
Cognitively demanding tasks that require sustained attention, such as
interpreting, induce stress. Some of the physiological signs of stress are
increased heart rate and blood pressure, especially systolic blood pressure,
as well as high base rates of the stress hormone cortisol. By identifying
these factors in interpreters, studies have concluded that simultaneous
interpreting is particularly stressful. Interpreter performance can be affected
by stressors such as speed of delivery, poor audio, length of turns, and
distracting working conditions.

Accuracy 26
Research carried out by Barbara Moser-Mercer in 19985 established that
interpreter fatigue—both physical and mental—results from the high degree
of concentration an interpreter must employ to hear, analyze, and
understand ideas in one language and then render those same ideas
coherently into another. The study measured cortisol and secretory
immunoglobulin A levels, well-known stress markers, during simultaneous
interpretation.

0 min 30 min 60 min

Cortisol 10.6 12.5 9.0

SIgA 5.0 10.5 8.7

Stress Markers
14
12
10
8
Cortisol
6
SIgA
4
2
0
0 min 30 min 60 min

These markers show significantly increased stress levels after thirty minutes,
followed by a drop, indicative of burnout—a combination of physical fatigue,
emotional exhaustion and cognitive weariness. The fact that at the sixty-
minute mark the interpreter’s stress level has actually decreased
demonstrates disengagement. This is an unconscious defense mechanism
against stress, during which audio processing skills diminish while output
continues, and the quality of the message is compromised.

5
Moser-Mercer, B. Künzli, A., & Korac, M. (1998). Prolonged turns in interpreting: Effects
on quality, physiological and psychological stress (Pilot study). Interpreting, 3(1), 47-64.
https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.3.1.03mos

Accuracy 27
The study also measured errors in meaning committed by experienced
conference interpreters and found that errors began to occur well before the
interpreter became aware of them. As you can see in the table below, the
error rate increases over time.

Time elapsed 0-15 15-30 30-45 45-60

(minutes)

Numbers of errors 11 16 24 32

Numbers of errors over time

35 32

30
24
25

20
16
15
11
10

0
0-15 15-30 30-45 45-60

Another study by Tommola and Hyönä in 19906 measured pupil dilation

during listening, shadowing, and simultaneous interpreting. Simultaneous
interpreting was associated with the highest pupil dilation levels, indicative
of increased cognitive processing in the brain.
The International Association of Conference Interpreters (AIIC) carried out a
Workload Study7 to investigate interpreter stress. The study compared on-
the-job stress levels experienced by four types of professionals:
• Interpreters

6 Tommola, J., & Hyönä. J. (1990). Mental load in listening, speech shadowing and
simultaneous interpreting: A pupillometric study.
7
Mackintosh, J. (2003). The AIIC workload study. International Journal of Interpretation
and Translation, 1(2), 189-214. https://doi.org/10.1075/forum.1.2.09mac

Accuracy 28
 • Senior Israeli army officers
• High-tech workers
• Teachers
The study found that the stress levels among interpreters registered the
highest.
These high levels of stress can lead to burnout—the final stage in a
progression of unsuccessful attempts to cope with work-related stress.
Due to the unique demands of the interpreting profession, burnout can
literally happen within 30 minutes, as follows:
Stage 1: Stress buildup
Stage 2: Physical fatigue, emotional exhaustion, and anxiety
Stage 3: Defensive coping leading to withdrawal and detachment
Once burnout sets in, the interpreter’s brain is so overloaded that it
disengages from the job and accuracy plummets.
In 2020, Washington State formally recognized the need for team
interpreting in the judiciary by adopting General Rule 11.4.

“To provide for accurate and complete interpreting, a team of two (2)
interpreters must be appointed when it is anticipated that an assignment will
require more than one (1) hour of simultaneous interpreting or two (2)
hours of consecutive interpreting.” See GR 11.4(b)(1).

History of Simultaneous and Team Interpreting

Simultaneous interpreting got its start during the Nuremberg Trials8 at
the end of World War II. Judges from Great Britain, France, the Soviet
Union, and the United States presided over the hearings of Nazi war
criminals.
The International Military Tribunal was charged with holding “fair and
expeditious trials.” This required interpretation of the proceedings into
the languages understood by the defendants and judges—English,
Russian, French, and German.
Until then, consecutive interpreting had been the standard mode of
interpreting. However, due to the sheer scope of the trials, coupled with
the need for relay interpreting, using only consecutive mode would have

8
For more detailed information see: Gaiba, F. (1998). The origins of simultaneous
interpretation: The Nuremberg trial. Ottawa, Ontario: University of Ottawa Press.

Accuracy 29
 been untenable. Thus, in order to expedite the proceedings, a new mode
of interpreting—simultaneous—was born.
Leon Dostert, a French-born American scholar and army officer, worked
with IBM to develop high-quality microphones and headsets needed to
deliver clear interpretation in simultaneous mode. Dostert served as
Chief Interpreter and led three teams of interpreters, who rotated
throughout the day in order to provide continuous and accurate
interpretation, allowing for uninterrupted proceedings. Thus, team
interpreting emerged as the means to provide sustained, accurate
simultaneous interpretation.
Team interpreting is generally required for:
• Trials
• Lengthy testimony
• Depositions, arbitrations, and mediations
• Lengthy motion hearings
• Conferences
• Classes
• Investigative interviews
• Administrative hearings

Mechanics of Team Interpreting

In team interpreting, two interpreters work together. They take turns
serving as active and support interpreter, alternating at regular,
predetermined intervals. Since research has shown a decline in accuracy
after fifteen minutes, this is the recommended interval. While the active
interpreter is interpreting, the support interpreter sits nearby, assisting
with difficult vocabulary, writing down names and numbers that might be
hard to catch, and seamlessly taking over should an immediate need
arise.
Logistics and Etiquette
Meet your teammate and discuss logistics before the interpreting begins.
a. Sort out seating arrangements.
b. Position yourselves so that you can easily hand off equipment, if
necessary, and provide written assistance to one another.
c. Discuss how you can best assist each other.
d. Plan how to share notes, generally by setting a notepad between
the two of you to jot down numbers, dates, addresses, proper
names, etc.

Accuracy 30
 e. Agree on a default time for switching. Fifteen-minute turns are
standard and go a long way toward preventing fatigue. However,
some teams may agree to start switching every 10 minutes due to
intensity, speed and subject difficulty.
f. For switching, use a signal or jot down the time—any system works
as long as you have agreed to it.
g. Agree on how to hand off the equipment. Most interpreters prefer
to have the active interpreter hand over the mic, rather than having
the equipment snatched away while they are in mid-sentence.
Fifteen-minute turns usually work well. As support interpreter:
a. You are still part of the team and supporting your teammate even
though you are not actively interpreting.
b. Be prepared to switch from support to active role at any time, as
your teammate may need to hand off the mic before their turn
ends.
c. Look up difficult terms and jot them down for your partner.
d. Do not whisper or touch your teammate unless you have explicitly
agreed to this. It can be very distracting.
e. You should not be reading the newspaper, doing unrelated work or
disappearing.
f. You may step out briefly, if necessary, but it is polite to let your
partner know by jotting down “restroom,” “back in 5,” or something
to that effect.
g. Serve as a check interpreter during interpreted witness testimony
by supporting the active interpreter and notifying them of any
substantive mistake they may have made. The active interpreter
should take action accordingly, either by correcting the mistake on
the record or standing by their rendition. (See Errors by
Colleagues.)
h. Keep track of the time to let your teammate know when it is time to
switch.
i. Wait for the active interpreter to hand you the mic.
As active interpreter:
a. Don’t hog the mic—respect the agreed upon intervals, even when
you feel that you’re “on a roll.”
b. Hand off the mic immediately if you are struggling or having a
lapse. Do not wait for your turn to end.

Accuracy 31
 c. Work to overcome self-consciousness. Sometimes an interpreter
may feel self-conscious by having their partner seated close by,
hearing their rendition. Know that your partner is there to support,
not judge you. You will learn from each other.

Accuracy 32
How Many Interpreters Does It Take?
The following figures are used to illustrate how interpreters work as a team
in several common scenarios.

Active9 Support Transmitter Headphones

Interpreter Interpreter with Mic for LEP Person

One LEP Defendant

WITNESS JUDGE

PROSECUTION DEFENSE

Interpreters work as a team, providing simultaneous interpreting, switching

at predetermined intervals (~15 mins).
Interpreters may be sitting together at defense table or a separate table.
The active interpreter may need to stand up and move to see and hear
speakers more clearly.

9
Seated person image: iStock/imegastocker

Accuracy 33
 One LEP Defendant + LEP Witness(es) in the Same Language

WITNESS JUDGE

PROSECUTION DEFENSE

Interpreters work as a team. The active interpreter interprets Q & A in

consecutive mode loudly enough for both defendant and witness to hear.
The support interpreter is available for attorney-client communication at
defense table.
The active and support interpreters switch off seamlessly at predetermined
intervals (~ 30 mins) without interrupting proceedings.
If attorneys break into objections and arguments, the two interpreters
switch to interpreting quietly in simultaneous mode, one for the witness, the
other for the defendant.
When LEP witnesses testify, they should speak loudly enough to be heard by
the defendant.

Accuracy 34
 Two LEP Parties in the Same Language

JUDGE

PARTY 1 PARTY 2

Interpreters work as a team, using equipment to provide simultaneous

interpreting to both LEP parties, who thereby hear the same rendition.
Interpreters switch at predetermined intervals (~15 mins).
When one of the parties speaks, one interpreter at a time interprets in
consecutive mode without equipment, speaking loudly enough for both LEP
parties to hear the same rendition.

Accuracy 35
 LEP Witness(es)

WITNESS JUDGE

PROSECUTION DEFENSE

When witness testimony exceeds two hours, a team of two interpreters is

required. GR 11.4 (b)(1).
The active and support interpreters are positioned at the witness stand,
assisting one another with terminology and rotating at predetermined
intervals (~30 mins). They work in consecutive mode, therefore no
equipment is used. Interpreters switch into whispered simultaneous mode,
however, in the event of an objection or argument.

Accuracy 36
Practices to Avoid
Duplicative Simultaneous Interpreting
When two interpreters provide separate renditions of the same source
message, they are not working as a team.

JUDGE

PARTY 1 PARTY 2

Duplicative interpreting causes many problems:

 Interference - multiple audio sources create extra background noise
that interferes with the interpreter’s ability to hear the speaker
clearly.
 An echo effect - interpreters endure the exasperating experience of
hearing slightly different renditions coming from their colleague.
 Interpreter fatigue - the two interpreters duplicate each other’s
efforts rather than rotating and supporting one another. Both will
quickly become exhausted.
 Confusion - the LEP parties hear different versions of the same
message. Whenever there is one source message, the target
rendition should be the same for all recipients.

Accuracy 37
 “Parachute” Interpreting
When both defendant and witness(es) require interpreters in the same
language and a team is already present for the defendant, there is no
need to bring in an additional interpreter for the witness.

WITNESS JUDGE

PROSECUTION DEFENSE

Bypassing the team of interpreters by bringing in a separate interpreter

for a witness is problematic in that it directly impacts accuracy and the
perception of impartiality. This “parachuted” interpreter10 is:
 At a disadvantage by being dropped in, completely unfamiliar with the
case.
 Often expected to work solo, while the other two interpreters sit idly
by, rather than rotating with the interpreter at the witness stand.
 Under the additional stress of being scrutinized rather than supported
by their interpreter colleagues as part of the team.
Additionally, this arrangement can create the impression of interpreter
allegiance to a party rather than to the court.

10
Paratrooper image: Shutterstock/One02

Accuracy 38
 Parachute interpreting is counter to the values of accuracy and
impartiality and should be discouraged. Nonetheless, there may be times
when you find yourself dropped into the middle of a proceeding when a
team is already present. Don’t despair:
• Ask the requester to make arrangements for you to meet with the
prosecutor and the witness prior to testimony (even if it’s just ten
minutes).
• If testimony is protracted (over thirty minutes without an end in
sight), you should request that the court have one of your colleagues
rotate with you in order to preserve accuracy.
Once the rotation of interpreters at the witness stand has begun, both
interpreters should stay near the witness stand (think ahead—ask for
chairs). As always, the support interpreter will assist the active
interpreter and be ready to rotate after some predetermined time.
The best practice is to avoid parachute interpreting altogether. The same
interpreters who have been present throughout the trial should be
assigned to interpret for all LEP witnesses in their language. If an
additional interpreter is brought in, the team already present can remedy
the situation by notifying the court that they are available to rotate with
their colleague on the witness stand. Sample statements:
• “Your Honor, as officers of the court, these interpreters are happy to
team up and rotate with our colleague on the stand.”
• “Your Honor, in this situation, the best practice is for the interpreters
already present to rotate with their colleague at the stand.”
At this point, one of the team members can position themselves at the
witness stand to support the interpreter who was brought in for the
witness.
Working Solo When There Should Be a Team
Interpreters who claim they can work solo for extended periods of time
may be doing so out of inexperience, ignorance, vanity, or fear of losing
assignments. However, agreeing to poor working conditions that have
been proven to cause inaccuracies is an ethical and professional breach.
The more interpreters collectively and consistently adhere to best
practices, the more likely they are to become universally adopted.
Team interpreting is a great opportunity to demonstrate our neutrality,
collegiality, and professionalism.

Remember: As an interpreter, you are not aligned with any party. Once you
have fully internalized this concept, it is more likely that others in court will
respect you as a neutral officer of the court and agree to implement the best
practices of judiciary interpreters.

Accuracy 39
 Honesty and Integrity

Interpreters have an inviolable duty to provide honest services in which their

behavior upholds the values outlined in this code. They must accurately
represent their credentials, training, and relevant experience. Interpreters
must not engage in conduct that impedes their compliance with this code or
allow another to induce or encourage them to violate the law or this code.
—Washington State Court General Rule GR 11.2(4)

Interpreters demonstrate honesty and integrity when they are truthful and
their behavior is in accordance with their professional values.

Representation of Credentials
At the start of any legal proceeding, identify yourself for the record, correctly
stating your qualifications and whether you are permanently sworn. For
example:
• “For the record: Jacob Gon, interpreter in Dinka. The interpreter needs
to be qualified and sworn by the court.”
• “For the record: Steven Ivanyuk, AOC Court Registered interpreter in
Ukrainian. Permanently sworn.”
• “For the record: Cicely Nguyen, AOC Court Certified interpreter in
Vietnamese. Permanently sworn.”
It is essential that interpreters present a complete and truthful account of
their credentials, training, and relevant experience prior to accepting an
assignment, so that their ability to satisfy it competently can be fairly
evaluated.

Correctly Stating the Language on the Record

If you are interpreting in a language other than the language noted on the
docket, make that fact known to all parties. Make sure that the record
accurately reflects the language being used, as it may differ from the
language that was originally noted. There are a number of reasons why this
may be the case. For example, the LEP person may be fluent in more than
one language.
• If an attorney is present, let them know what language you are using.
This will give the attorney an opportunity to confirm the client’s
language preference.

Honesty and Integrity 40

 • If no attorney is present, after introducing yourself on the record,
make sure to add the language you are using: “…interpreting in
Tigrinya (not Amharic), Russian (not Ukrainian), Cantonese (not
Mandarin).”
It is then the responsibility of the court to verify that the LEP person is
comfortable proceeding in that language and establish their preferred
language going forward.
Similarly, if you discover that the LEP person does not have adequate
command of the language you were assigned to interpret, and you have
confirmed this, it is your duty to notify the attorney: “Counsel, the
defendant has indicated that Spanish is not her preferred language.”
If no attorney is present, notify the court. If the judge does not address the
issue, and you are experiencing difficulties communicating with the LEP
person, state the nature of the difficulties on the record. For example, “Your
Honor, the interpreter is having difficulty communicating with the
defendant.” (See LEP Individual’s Command of the Language.)

Honestly Representing Your Skill Level

If you are not comfortable interpreting simultaneously, upon introducing
yourself for the record, let the court know that you will be interpreting
consecutively. If you are not court certified, your simultaneous interpretation
skills have never been tested, so hesitation is warranted. Clearly stating
your skill level is not a sign of inadequacy, but rather a demonstration of
your integrity as a professional interpreter.

Time Constraints
If something comes up which prevents you from arriving promptly to an
assignment, let the requester know right away.
Make any expected time constraints known to the requester when
scheduling. This includes back-to-back assignments, needing to arrive later
than requested, or needing to leave early. Courts may have the flexibility to
accommodate your time constraints if they know about them ahead of time.

Attempts to Induce You to Violate the Code

Having integrity goes beyond simply telling the truth. It means adhering to a
set of ethical principles, even when inconvenient or awkward. Occasionally
you may be asked or even directed to do something that violates your Code

Honesty and Integrity 41

of Professional Responsibility. In order to act appropriately in such
instances:
• Familiarize yourself with GR 11.2 and carry a copy with you. Knowing
the Code will enable you to follow it and justify your actions if
questioned.
• Be polite but firm, and cite GR 11.2 when directed to act against this
court rule.
• If a judge orders you to do something that is not in accordance with
GR 11.2, comply, but first state your objection on the record and cite
the pertinent section of the court rule.
• Familiarize yourself with other relevant court rules, such as GR 11.4
Team Interpretation, as well as the Bench Card and the WA Court
Interpreter Disciplinary Process.
Example 1: You are asked to interpret for a lengthy
assignment, such as a trial, motion hearing, arbitration,
mediation, administrative hearing, or class, and it is not made
clear that you will have a partner pursuant to GR 11.4.
At the time of the request, find out how long the assignment is
expected to last. If it’s over the recommended time limit (see GR
11.4), ask who your partner will be.
If the requester expects you to interpret alone, cite GR 11.4 and
be prepared to quote the relevant section.
Some out-of-court requesters may still refuse to provide you
with a partner. Consider carefully whether to accept such
assignments. If you decide to go ahead, you should inform the
requester that in order to provide accurate interpretation, you
require a ten-minute break after every twenty minutes, as
indicated in GR 11.4. Be sure to clarify that this is not your
personal preference or request—it is a court rule and the
industry standard.11 You are expected to comply with this
standard in discharging your duties. While these conversations
can be difficult, especially for new interpreters, they should
become standard practice for all judiciary interpreters and serve
as an opportunity to demonstrate your professional integrity.

11
ASTM International. (2015). F2089-15 Standard practice for language interpreting. West
Conshohocken, PA: American Society for Testing and Materials. http://www.astm.org/cgi-
bin/resolver.cgi?F2089

Honesty and Integrity 42

 Sample responses:
• “I am prepared to accept this assignment, as long as I
have a teammate.”
• “I need to let you know that if I am working solo, pursuant
to GR 11.4, I will need a ten-minute break after every
twenty minutes.”
Example 2: You are interpreting at the witness stand and
handed a document, such as a hand-written letter, contract, or
text message which you are asked to sight translate on the
record.
Sample response:
• “Your Honor, the interpreter needs to advise the court that
sight translation on the record goes against the Code of
Professional Responsibility.”
If the court orders you to sight translate the document anyway,
GR 11.2 (f)(1)[6] directs you to comply, but first state on the
record, “The interpreter cannot guarantee the accuracy of the
sight translation,” and then proceed to the best of your ability.

Remember: If you sight translate a document into the record, you are
creating new evidence.

It is the responsibility of the party wishing to introduce a document into

evidence to have that document properly translated into English in
advance by a competent translator with the requisite time and tools. By
stating that you cannot guarantee the accuracy of this evidence, you are
protecting yourself.

Integrity and Contradiction

Swearing to honesty and integrity is simple in theory, but how do
interpreters best comply with their duty to uphold these core values in
practice? When a person holds contradictory beliefs, ideas or values, or
participates in an action that goes against these, the person experiences
psychological stress. This is called cognitive dissonance. To reduce that
stress, the person feels compelled to justify their behavior by engaging in
cognitive dissonance reduction.
Example: You are casually chatting with the defendant. You feel
slightly uncomfortable because you know this is something you
are not supposed to do (guilty: I am breaking the rules). To

Honesty and Integrity 43

 alleviate your internal discomfort, you might come up with a
number of justifications to yourself, such as wanting to be polite
or respectful, feeling that you know best without being too much
of a stickler, and the Code is really just a guideline anyway:
• I don’t want to appear rude by ignoring the person I’m
about to interpret for.
• Those rules are not written by people who work in the
trenches; I have enough experience to know what to
do.
Instead of justifying the unjustifiable, you can relieve your
internal discomfort by discontinuing the behavior that is causing
it.
• “I’m sorry, but the rules for interpreters are very
strict—I’m not allowed to chat with you. I will interpret
for you when your case is called.”
• Hold up your hand to stop: “When your attorney
arrives, I will be there to interpret for you…” and move
out of range.
Rules are most effective when people understand and adopt them as their
own on internal moral grounds. That is why you should study the Code and
fully understand why each canon is important. If you find any section of the
Code too difficult for you to adhere to because it clashes with your personal
or cultural values, please do further research so you can truly understand
and adopt the professional rules as your own. Court interpreting is not for
everyone. Be honest with yourself—if you truly cannot follow the Code,
honesty and integrity require that you seek a different profession.

Honesty and Integrity 44

 Impartiality and Neutrality

Interpreters must faithfully render the source message without allowing their
own views to interfere. They must refrain from conduct that may give an
appearance of bias and must disclose any real or potential conflict of interest
to all parties and the court, if applicable, as soon as they become aware of
it.
—Washington State Court General Rule GR 11.2 (f)(4)
Interpreters must strive to keep their interpretation neutral. Interpreter
partiality—both conscious and unconscious biases—may compromise the
neutrality and thereby the accuracy of their interpretation. Though often
used interchangeably, impartiality and neutrality are not strictly
synonymous.
To be partial is to act on the basis of a particular like or dislike for
something, a strongly-held opinion or a preconceived notion. In contrast, to
be impartial is to act on the basis of facts and to exhibit objectivity,
irrespective of our personal preferences and beliefs.
Partiality can lead us to want to support one side in a conflict, dispute or
disagreement, thus compromising our neutrality. Neutrality is defined as
the lack of allegiance to any side.
When we are aware of the attitudes and beliefs we hold about a person or
group, this is conscious or explicit bias. When we expect a group or
person to have certain qualities and behaviors without having real
information about them, this is called stereotyping. And when we evaluate
another person based on that person's race, sex, religion, social class, age,
sexual orientation, disability, ethnicity, language, nationality, politics,
occupation, education, values, or other characteristics, this is called
prejudice. When aware of such biases, we can work to consciously put
them aside while we are interpreting in order to maintain neutrality and
preserve accuracy.
The best way to preserve your neutrality and impartiality is to be self-aware.
Interpreters must limit their practice to those areas where they can maintain
their professional detachment. This is much better than deciding mid-trial
whether to stand up and state that you cannot go on. In a jury trial, even
stating that you are too upset to continue may be considered as commenting
on the case or influencing the jury. If you feel overwhelmed, you can ask for
a break or switch with your teammate without stating any reason. Better

Impartiality and Neutrality 45

yet, avoid getting into these situations by planning ahead and being clear
with yourself about your own limitations.
The conscious biases indicated above are merely the tip of the iceberg. The
greater problem lies in the myriad of unconscious or implicit biases—
learned stereotypes that are unintentional, deeply ingrained, and ubiquitous.
They exist underneath our conscious awareness and have the potential to
influence interpretation.
Example: You may hear a gender-neutral word in the source
language, such as “nurse,” and have only a gendered equivalent
in the target language. While you are consciously aware that
nurses can be either male or female, you may automatically
select the feminine word or pronoun in your rendering if you
grew up with a stereotype of nurses as female. In this case, your
interpretation is not neutral and may even be inaccurate. (See
Ambiguities.)
Interpreters, LEP individuals, attorneys, prosecutors, court staff, jurors,
etc.—we are all susceptible to conscious and unconscious biases. Bias is
natural; what is important is that interpreters minimize its influence on their
professional performance by becoming self-aware and mindful.

Conflict of Interest
Accurate interpretation is a key component of a universally fair judicial
process. The existence of a conflict of interest on the part of the interpreter
may bring into question the interpreter’s neutrality, and thereby the
accuracy of the interpretation.
An actual conflict of interest exists when the interpreter has a stake in the
outcome, be that financial or otherwise. A potential conflict of interest exists
where it is foreseeable that a conflict may arise in the future.
Examples of conflicts of interest:
• The interpreter is a friend, associate, or relative of a party, witness,
victim, or counsel.
• The interpreter or the interpreter’s friend, associate, or relative has a
financial interest in the case at issue, a shared financial interest with a
party to the proceeding, or any other interest that might be affected
by the outcome of the case.

Impartiality and Neutrality 46

 • The interpreter has served in an investigative capacity for any party
involved in the case.12
• The interpreter has previously been retained by a law enforcement
agency to assist in the preparation of the criminal case at issue.
• The interpreter is an attorney in the case at issue.
• The interpreter has previously been retained for employment by one of
the parties.
You must disclose any conflict of interest as soon as you become aware of it.
a. If you are aware of it at the time of the request, you must disclose it
to the requester.
b. If you become aware of it after the assignment has begun, you must
disclose it to the parties and, if this is a courtroom proceeding, to the
court. Your duty to disclose arises as soon as you become aware of the
conflict.
The presence of a conflict of interest will not automatically disqualify you
from interpreting in a given case. The court and/or the parties will evaluate
the totality of the circumstances and decide whether it is appropriate for you
to provide services.
Example: The requester did not provide you with the LEP
person’s name, or that name is a very common one and you
didn’t realize at the time of the request that this could be
somebody you know. Only when the LEP person entered the
courtroom did you recognize them.
• If there is a defense attorney, you should notify them
immediately and let them address the court to resolve the
situation.
• If the LEP defendant is pro se, and therefore there is no
attorney to notify, you need to address this with the court
immediately after you introduce yourself on the record,
adding: “Your Honor, the interpreter needs to advise the
court of a potential conflict of interest.” At this point, the
judge will determine how to inquire further and may

12
If the interpreter has provided services during the prosecution’s interviews of witnesses, it
does not preclude them from interpreting for in-court proceedings. However, it must be
disclosed. (See Confidentiality, Rendering Services for Different Parties.)

Impartiality and Neutrality 47

 dismiss you from the case, or rule that you should indeed
interpret, possibly for the immediate hearing only.
Prior contact with the LEP individual in your capacity as an interpreter does
not generally constitute a conflict of interest.
Example: You interpret for the LEP defendant at an arraignment
hearing in the morning. That afternoon, you interpret for the
same LEP defendant at a review hearing in a different court. This
situation does not constitute a conflict of interest, because the
contact occurred while you were serving in your professional
capacity. In fact, you must not mention this prior interpreted
encounter, as doing so may make you a witness and affect the
defendant’s case.

Disclosure of Relationship with Parties

Be forthcoming about any relationships you have with any of the parties.
Parties have the right to know when an interpreter has an outside
relationship and therefore a potential conflict of interest.

Perceived Conflict of Interest (Appearance of Bias)

A perceived conflict of interest is the appearance to an outsider that the
interpreter has a stake in the outcome, when in fact that is not the case.
While you may know that you have no stake in the outcome, if other people
perceive that you are biased or partial, the neutrality of your interpretation
may be doubted and your role as interpreter may be compromised. In your
capacity as a court interpreter, you may be the only bilingual person in the
courtroom. You bear an important responsibility, as other people are
depending on you to understand what is being said, and the official record
will reflect your interpretation of what was stated in the non-English
language. This is a relationship of trust—in you and in the judicial system
itself—that must be preserved at all costs. For this reason, it is imperative
that you refrain from any behavior that might lead others to think you have
affinity toward anyone involved in the case or favor one outcome over
another.
Examples of behaviors that may create a perception of bias:
• Engaging in conversation with the LEP individual, no matter how
benign the subject matter. You may be talking about the weather, but
you are speaking in a language that others do not understand, leaving
them to speculate as to the nature of that conversation.

Impartiality and Neutrality 48

 • Engaging in small talk with other parties, such as court staff or
counsel. The LEP person may see this and perceive that you have a
bias against them, or that you do not take the matter seriously, if you
are laughing and chatting during breaks.
Tips:
o Remove yourself from the courtroom during breaks, or, at a
minimum, move your chair away from the LEP individual.
o Busy yourself with a book, your phone, or this manual.
o Do not engage in any small talk with the defendant.
o Maintain a professional relationship with all court officers, staff,
parties, and witnesses.
o Keep a professional, formal, and neutral demeanor at all times in
the courthouse—you are being observed by court staff, crime
victims, defendants, and others.
• Being helpful. The urge to help is natural, and no matter how
counterintuitive, you must refrain from gestures that could be
construed as any kind of care-taking, familiarity, or partiality. Do not
hand a tissue to the witness, offer to pour water, help find a page of
an exhibit, walk a document up to the clerk, adjust the microphone for
the witness, etc. Every time you step out of your role as interpreter,
you inevitably appear biased. These tasks are the responsibility of
court staff, counsel, or the LEP individuals themselves.
• Referrals. The LEP defendant may seek advice about hiring an attorney
or obtaining other services. Do not provide any advice or referrals.
Instead, offer to interpret their questions to court staff.
• Close physical proximity. It is often perceived as affinity, so strive to
maintain reasonable physical distance from the LEP person. This is
easier to accomplish if one is using interpreting equipment.
Tips:
o Make sure you have your own chair—it is the court’s
responsibility to provide you with one.
o Sit (or stand if everyone else is) at a reasonable distance.
o Do not lean into the LEP individual.
o Do not hover over the LEP individual—remember that you have
your own chair!

Impartiality and Neutrality 49

 o Use interpreting equipment whenever practical. Invest in your
own—you’ll be glad you did.
• Displaying your emotions through facial expression or body language.
Tips:
o Avoid making extended eye contact with any person.
o Keep yourself busy by taking notes or doodling.13
Some court practices can set the stage for perceived conflict of interest. For
example, when courts assign specific interpreters to one side or the other in
protection order or family law matters, it actually creates an appearance of
bias by promoting the idea that each party has their own interpreter.
Interpreters are not attorneys—they do not represent the interests of any
party.
If you find yourself in such a situation, introduce yourself to the LEP person
choosing words that accurately reflect the nature of the relationship. Word
choice matters.
Example: “Hello, I will be interpreting at your hearing today.”
Avoid referring to yourself as “your interpreter,” as if you belong
to the LEP party, since it can create the false expectation that
you are aligned with the LEP party or assigned to the case and
all subsequent hearings. You are not the LEP individual’s
interpreter. You are the court interpreter.
When two interpreters are assigned to opposing parties during the same
hearing, only one interpreter at a time should be interpreting simultaneously
for all LEP individuals, so that the LEP parties are hearing the exact same
rendition. When more than one interpreter is speaking at the same time, it
creates the impression that the interpretation is tailored to each LEP person.
(See Rendering Services for Different Parties, Perceived Conflict of Interest
(Appearance of Bias) and Accuracy, How Many Interpreters Does It Take?
Tips:
• Confer with your colleague “across the aisle” and let the court know
that you and your colleague have agreed to team interpret in open
court. This goes far to dispel any mistaken ideas that you are each on

13
Doodling has been shown to help the brain remain focused, relieve stress and even aid in
memory. For more information, see: Pillay, S. (2016, December 15). The “thinking” benefits
of doodling. Harvard Health Blog. https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/the-thinking-
benefits-of-doodling-2016121510844

Impartiality and Neutrality 50

 a side, furthers collegiality, and bolsters the appearance of
impartiality.
• During the hearing, position yourselves in such a way that you can
take turns interpreting, just as you would in a trial. This way both
parties hear the interpretation and are receiving one and the same
rendition. Do not hesitate to request equipment from the court or use
your own.

Remember: You are the professional interpreter. Know the protocol and
strive to abide by it in your practice.

Similarly, the fact that some courts assign separate interpreters in the same
language to interpret for a prosecutor’s witness during a trial, rather than
utilizing the team of interpreters already present in court, creates the
impression that the interpreters are biased and thus cannot faithfully render
the testimony of the witness. This undermines our position as neutral
officers of the court and fosters the false idea that interpreters “belong” to
one side. (See Rendering Services for Different Parties and “Parachute”
Interpreting.)
Tips:
• While one of the two interpreters assigned to the trial remains at
defense table to interpret between the defendant and defense counsel
as needed, the other one should be prepared to team up with any
interpreter the court or the prosecution may bring in to interpret for
the witness on the stand. In this way, there would be an interpreter
team at the witness stand.
• If the witness speaks the same language as the defendant, that
witness should speak loudly enough for the defendant to hear their
testimony. Similarly, the interpreter at the witness stand should
interpret the questions loudly enough so that both the witness and the
defendant can hear the same rendition. The interpreter seated at
defense table should not provide a separate rendition of the questions
to the defendant.
• Having appropriate voice amplification for both the witness and
interpreters will facilitate this and prevent voice strain.
Interpreters should avoid creating the appearance of bias by their own
actions.
Example: You are without equipment and have to position
yourself closely enough to the LEP person to speak quietly and

Impartiality and Neutrality 51

 directly into their ear. After a short time, you detect an
unpleasant odor. Now you have put yourself in a bind. You can
carry on while the smell becomes increasingly distracting and
annoying. Conversely, if you suddenly move away from the LEP
person mid-hearing, it may create the appearance of bias from
the perspective of the LEP individual and other observers.
Tips:
• Strive for professional detachment and physical distance consistently.
• Use equipment to position yourself at a reasonable distance from the
LEP person.
• If the attorney and defendant need to confer, you can move closer,
while still positioning yourself so that you do not have to lean into the
defendant.
• Avoid making extended eye contact with any party. This will help you
to maintain a neutral expression that does not reveal your emotions.
Adhere consistently to the established protocols and regularly use the set
phrases described in this section until they become ingrained habits. This will
allow you to maintain a neutral demeanor and avoid actions driven by
unconscious biases.

Gifts and Gratuities

Do not accept gratuities or gifts of any kind from anyone for whom you have
interpreted, whether in criminal or civil court matters. If such a gift is
offered, explain politely that you are paid by the court or whatever entity
hired you and are not allowed to accept any gifts. If they insist, you might
briefly mention that working as an interpreter is very important to you and
that you could lose your job by violating the rules. You may repeat that you
are not allowed to accept any gifts. By the same token, you are not to give
gifts to any party.

Remember: Today’s gift is tomorrow’s obligation.

Upholding Neutrality
While certain situations can move interpreters to experience overwhelming
feelings such as pity or anger, you must set your personal feelings aside in
order to remain in your neutral role while interpreting. Interpreters are not
advocates for non-English speakers or anyone else. Furthermore, you must
not make value judgments about the language or demeanor of the parties

Impartiality and Neutrality 52

for whom you interpret. If the witness uses incorrect grammar, vulgar
speech or even appears to be lying, interpret the testimony just as faithfully
as you would that of any other witness, without conveying by your tone or
expression any personal opinion you may have. If a witness or defendant
dresses or behaves in a manner that you consider inappropriate, leave it to
their attorney to remedy that if they choose, rather than taking it upon
yourself. It is beyond the scope of interpreter practices to offer our opinions
through our words, facial expressions, body language, etc. Be circumspect at
all times.
To reinforce the neutrality of interpreters, trial judges explain to all parties
and potential jurors that the interpreters are nonpartisan and should not be
considered part of either the defense or the prosecution, no matter who they
interpret for during the case. The presence of two or more interpreters using
interpreting equipment at a trial is a particularly effective way of reinforcing
the neutral role of interpreters. Whatever each particular court does may be
beyond your control, but your professionalism and demeanor will still serve
to convey this crucial aspect of your work and remind observers that you are
impartial, neutral, and trustworthy.

Advocacy and Cultural Brokering

Interpreters, by virtue of their knowledge and expertise, are in the unique
position of understanding both languages and many aspects of the cultures
involved. It may therefore be natural for them to want to step in and offer
assistance. In order to maintain neutrality, however, professional
interpreters need to strictly refrain from any appearance of advocacy.
Advocacy occurs when an interpreter:
• Has an opinion of what should happen.
• Doesn’t have the authority to make it happen.
• Tries to convince someone to make it happen.
Common reasons why interpreters may feel the need to advocate for the LEP
individual:
• Messiah complex - “I’m the only one who sees the problem and knows
how to fix it.”
• Paternalism - “This vulnerable LEP person needs my protection.”
• Righteous indignation - “This situation is unfair, and I must right this
wrong.”

Impartiality and Neutrality 53

 • Implicit bias - “This LEP person is too ignorant to grasp these concepts
without my help.”
Regardless of the reason or underlying motivation, advocacy directly
conflicts with your role as a neutral officer of the court. If you find yourself
compelled to advocate, consider a different line of work, such as social
worker, patient navigator, attorney, or victim advocate, where your bilingual
skills would be greatly appreciated.

Remember: Interpreters are neither cultural brokers nor advocates for LEP
persons. Advocacy is the enemy of neutrality.

Likewise, cultural brokering is outside the role of the interpreter.

The concept of cultural brokering is an ancient one that can be traced to the
earliest recorded encounters between cultures. The term cultural broker
was coined by anthropologists who observed that certain bilingual individuals
acted as intermediaries, negotiators, and brokers between colonial
governments and the societies they ruled. Both anthropologists and
colonizers would use “friendly bilingual natives” to pursue their own
agendas.
A cultural broker is an intermediary who advocates on behalf of another
individual or group. Professional interpreters are not and cannot be cultural
brokers. (See Confidentiality, To Serve as a Witness.) In fact, the oldest
known written code of ethics for court interpreters specifically prohibits
advocacy and imposes hefty punishments for interpreters caught advocating.
(See Appendix 7 - Ordinance of 1548 (Translation).)

Impartiality and Neutrality 54

 Confidentiality

Interpreters must not divulge privileged or other confidential information

obtained in their professional capacity. They must refrain from making any
public statement on matters in which they serve.
—Washington State Court General Rule GR 11.2(f)(5)

The relationship between the interpreter and the judiciary is one of trust,
which must be preserved at all costs. For this reason, it is imperative that
any information gained by interpreters during the course of their interpreting
duties remain strictly confidential.
Interpreters are routinely privy to communications that, while not
necessarily privileged by law, are conveyed in confidence. In order to
preserve the integrity of the judicial process, interpreters have an ongoing
duty to refrain from disclosing information obtained while serving in their
professional capacity. (See Appendix 1 - GR 11.2 Code of Professional
Responsibility for Judiciary Interpreters, specifically (f)(5)[2].)

Attorney-Client Privilege
Privileged communications take place within the context of a relationship
protected by law, such as that between:
• Attorney and client
• Doctor and patient
• Spouses
• Clergy and penitent
(See RCW 5.60.060)

Remember: All privileged communications are confidential, but not all

confidential communications are privileged.

The law protects privileged communications from disclosure. When an

interpreter is present to facilitate privileged communication, the interpreter
is included under the privilege and cannot be compelled to disclose
information related to these communications. The privileged nature of
communication between attorney and client is a cornerstone of the U.S.
legal system.

Confidentiality 55
Because the attorney-client privilege often balances competing interests, it
defies a rigid definition. However, one oft-cited characterization was set
forth in United States v. United Shoe Machinery Corp., 89 F. Supp. 357 (D.
Mass. 1950). The court articulated five requirements for the existence of
attorney-client privilege:
1. The person asserting the privilege must be a client, or must have
sought to become a client at the time of disclosure.
2. The person connected to the communication must be acting as a
lawyer.
3. The communication must be between the lawyer and the client
exclusively—no non-clients may be included in the communication.
4. The communication must have occurred for the purpose of securing a
legal opinion, legal services, or assistance in some legal proceeding,
and not for the purpose of committing a crime.
5. The privilege may be claimed or waived by the client only (usually, as
stated above, through counsel).14
Why are attorney-client communications privileged? Because knowing that
these conversations will not be disclosed to anyone else encourages the
client to make full and frank disclosures to their attorney, who is then able
to provide candid advice and effective representation.
The client is the owner of the privilege. When the client chooses to include a
third party (such as a relative, friend or social worker) the seal of privilege is
broken. Interpreters, however, are an exception—their presence does not
break the seal of privilege. Why? Because interpreters are essential to
communication between the attorney and the LEP client and are therefore
included in the privilege. (See RCW 2.42.160 Privileged Communication.)
This is a unique position of public trust that we must not take lightly!
The following examples help illustrate the distinction between confidential
and privileged communications.
Example 1: The LEP defendant brings a relative to an
interpreted encounter with an attorney. The attorney warns the
client that if the relative is present during the interview,

14
The Free Dictionary. (n.d.). Attorney-client privilege. In Legal-
Dictionary.TheFreeDictionary.com. Retrieved June 12, 2021, from https://legal-
dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Attorney-Client+Privilege

Confidentiality 56
 communication between the attorney and client will no longer be
privileged and the relative could even be called as a witness to
testify about what was discussed.
• Scenario A: The LEP defendant asks the relative to wait
outside, while the attorney, interpreter, and LEP defendant
remain in the room.
o Is this communication privileged? Yes.
o Must the interpreter keep this communication
confidential? Yes.
• Scenario B: The LEP defendant insists that the relative
remain.
o Is this communication privileged? No.
o Must the interpreter keep this communication
confidential? Yes.
Example 2: The prosecuting attorney is interviewing an LEP
witness with the assistance of an interpreter.
• Is this communication privileged? No, because the LEP
witness is not a client of the prosecuting attorney.
• Must the interpreter keep this communication confidential?
Yes.
Example 3: The psychiatrist is conducting a forensic evaluation
of an LEP defendant with the assistance of an interpreter.
• Is this communication privileged? No, because the LEP
defendant is not the psychiatrist’s patient.
• Must the interpreter keep this communication confidential?
Yes.
Example 4: The interpreter is interpreting at the witness stand
during a hearing closed to the public.
• Is this communication privileged? No.
• Must the interpreter keep this communication confidential?
Yes.
Example 5: The interpreter is interpreting at the witness stand
during a hearing open to the public.
• Is this communication privileged? No.
• Is this communication confidential? No, it is public record.

Confidentiality 57
 • May the interpreter comment on or give an opinion about
what the witness said? No, because this would
compromise the interpreter’s neutrality and potentially
make them a witness.
Example 6: In the course of a court proceeding, the attorney
and LEP client need to confer briefly at defense table.
• Is this communication privileged? Yes.
• Is this communication confidential? Yes.
• Must the interpreter keep this communication confidential?
Yes.
Confidentiality and privilege are vitally important concepts. Interpreters
must fully understand how these concepts intersect in different situations in
order to correctly evaluate the propriety of interpreting for multiple LEP
individuals involved in the same court proceeding—a subject that is still
widely misunderstood. The following discussion serves to further clarify
these concepts.

Rendering Services for Different Parties

In-court Proceedings

The same interpreter may interpret:

• In simultaneous mode for all LEP individuals requiring that language.
• In consecutive mode for any LEP witness requiring that language, no
matter who calls the witness.
Here is why:
1. Court proceedings are not privileged communications; and
2. Interpreters are neutral officers of the court, under oath to abide by
their Code.
Therefore, regardless of which entity has secured the interpreter—court
or prosecutor’s office—any court-appointed interpreter may and should
team up with any other interpreter for simultaneous interpretation.
Similarly, interpreters may and should team up and rotate at the witness
stand during lengthy LEP witness testimony. Further considerations
regarding team interpreting may be found in Impartiality and Neutrality,
Perceived Conflict of Interest (Appearance of Bias) and Accuracy, How
Many Interpreters Does It Take?

Confidentiality 58
 Exception: In proceedings involving multiple LEP parties, such as
codefendants, with separate privilege and separate counsel, each of the
parties should be assigned an interpreter to facilitate attorney-client
privileged communications. That interpreter should not “cross the aisle”
to interpret during the privileged communications of any other attorney-
client pair, unless the parties have explicitly agreed. However, those
interpreters should team up to provide simultaneous interpretation of the
proceedings.
Remember that an interpreter participating in a privileged attorney-client
communication is in a unique position of trust. The client’s complete
confidence in the integrity of the privilege is paramount. If the client
becomes concerned that the interpreter is “going back and forth”
between different channels of privileged information, it could inhibit their
willingness to fully disclose vital information to their attorney, thus
hampering the attorney’s ability to adequately represent their client.
To reiterate, in all cases, interpreters in the same language should work
as a team and rotate to provide all of the simultaneous interpretation of
court proceedings, regardless of which party they are assigned to. Only
one interpreter in any given language should be providing simultaneous
interpretation at any given time.

Out-of-court Encounters
The same principles that apply to in-court proceedings apply to out-of-
court encounters: interpreters are neutral officers of the court and sworn
to maintain confidentiality. That said, once you have interpreted
privileged communications between attorney and client, carefully
consider the propriety of interpreting for out-of-court encounters related
to the same case. You may do so as long as that party’s defense
attorney is present.

When an interpreter has interpreted attorney-client privileged

communications, may that same interpreter then interpret:
• During a defense interview of a witness for the defense?
o Yes, because the defense attorney is present.
• During a defense interview of a witness for the prosecution?
o Yes, because the defense attorney is present.
• During a prosecution interview of a witness for the defense?
o Yes, as long as the defense attorney is present.
• During a prosecution interview of a witness for the prosecution?

Confidentiality 59
 o No, because the defense attorney is not present.
Whenever you are called upon to interpret for a defendant and you have
rendered services in the prosecution’s investigation of the case, you must
disclose this fact. (See Impartiality and Neutrality, Conflict of Interest,
Fundamentals of Ethics for Interpreters, and Appendix 1 - GR 11.2 Code
of Professional Responsibility for Judiciary Interpreters (f)(4)[3](iii)).

Family Law and Other Civil Cases

The interpreter’s role and duties are the same in both criminal and civil
cases. However, family law and dependency cases deserve special
mention, as they tend to be emotionally charged and typically involve
multiple LEP parties who may be appearing pro se. Some cases involving
the same parties go on for years and involve a wide variety of
professionals, including advocates, facilitators, educators, parenting
evaluators, and forensic psychologists. The majority of these
communications are not privileged. (See RCW 5.60.060 for exceptions.)
In fact, oftentimes they are not even confidential, as these professionals
provide reports for the court record. Nevertheless, interpreters are bound
by their Code to maintain confidentiality.
Although the parties to a family law or dependency case may be hostile
and/or fearful of one another, during in-court proceedings, the same
interpreter:
• May interpret in consecutive mode any statements made by any LEP
individual requiring that language.
• Should interpret in simultaneous mode for all LEP individuals requiring
that language.
There is no justification for having multiple interpreters simultaneously
interpreting the same language at the same time in open court. (See
Impartiality & Neutrality, Perceived Conflict of Interest (Appearance of
Bias), and Accuracy, (Practices to Avoid).

Evidentiary Materials
Sometimes, interpreters have had the opportunity to review evidentiary
materials before they are presented in open court and admitted into
evidence for the jury’s consideration. These materials may include written
documents, images, and recordings. You must not comment on the content
of these materials to anyone. Doing so could jeopardize the due process or
privacy rights of the parties or affect the outcome of the case. You could
even create the risk of a mistrial.

Confidentiality 60
Testifying in Court
On rare occasions, interpreters may be contacted by an attorney about
possibly testifying. The reason interpreters are asked to testify is most likely
either:
• To lay a preliminary foundation so that witnesses to the interpreted
conversation may testify about it;15 or
• To serve as a witness to what transpired at an interpreted
encounter.
If you are contacted to testify, you may want to notify that specific court’s
interpreter scheduler about the situation. Regardless, the appropriate steps
you take will depend on the purpose of the testimony sought. You may
contact the attorney who issued the subpoena to find out the purpose and
politely remind them of your Code of Professional Responsibility as it
pertains to interpreter confidentiality. Pointing this out in advance may
prompt the attorney to withdraw the request to testify.

To Lay a Preliminary Foundation

Attorneys may be required to call interpreters to testify in order to lay a
foundation for or authenticate the interpretation of a conversation, so
that other witnesses may testify about it. If you are called for this
reason:
1. Consider providing the requester with a statement to the effect that
you did indeed render interpreter services on the day and time and
for the matter in question and that you were qualified to do so. You
may also attach supporting records such as a calendar entry,
confirmation of services, invoice form, as well as your credentials
and your résumé. Ask whether the information you have provided is
sufficient and therefore your testimony in court may be waived.
2. If the requester still wants you to appear in court, it would be
prudent to confirm that it is solely for the purposes stated above—
to lay a foundation for the testimony of other witnesses—and that

15
Mathers, C. M. (2000). To testify or not to testify: That is the question. Views: A Monthly
Publication of the Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf, 17(9), 1, 6-7. https://pieinc-
wi.com/content/uploads/2019/07/Prereading-Mathers.pdf
Mathers, C.M. (2004). Responding to subpoenas. Retrieved June 12, 2021, from
http://intrpr.info/library/mathers-responding-to-subpeonas.pdf

Confidentiality 61
 your testimony will be limited to this information. At this point, you
may receive a subpoena and you will be required to appear in court.
3. Appear in court professionally dressed and well prepared. Bring
hard copies of the Code of Professional Responsibility and RCW
2.42.160 for your own reference in addition to any documents listed
in the subpoena.
In your capacity as a professional interpreter, you may attest to:
• Your skills, education, training, and qualifications.
• The date, time, and place of the interpreted encounter.
• The languages used.
• The fact that you interpreted accurately to the best of your ability and
in accordance with the Code of Professional Responsibility.
Testify to issues only within the established scope. Do not volunteer any
additional information.

Remember: You are not a witness to the interpreted encounter and are
prohibited from disclosing any communication you were privy to in your
professional capacity, as well as from commenting on any matter, including
what the parties did or did not understand.

This situation could become a slippery slope. Most likely the questioning
will be limited to the stated purpose of laying a foundation. Be prepared,
however, for a question outside that narrow scope if the judge allows it.
Be assertive, but polite, referencing your Code and RCW 2.42.160, both
of which protect you from testifying about the content of any interpreted
communication.
Suggested response to questions outside the scope such as, “Did the
defendant understand?”
“As a court interpreter I am required to adhere to GR 11.2. I am
concerned that answering that question would be a violation of my
professional and ethical duties under that rule.” (See also Impartiality
and Neutrality, Advocacy and Cultural Brokering.)

To Serve as a Witness
If you are being called to testify as a witness of what transpired during
the interpreted encounter, seek legal advice if the requester is not
dissuaded and proceeds to subpoena you. By law, a subpoena requires
you to appear in court and testify. If you testify about anything you
learned while interpreting or offer any opinion, you risk damaging your

Confidentiality 62
 reputation and even jeopardizing your ability to continue working as a
court interpreter.

Serving as an Expert Witness for Other Linguistic

Services
In the course of your professional interpreting work, you may be asked to
provide related linguistic services, such as translation or transcription. You
may subsequently be called to provide expert witness testimony about your
work product. This is expert witness testimony for which you are hired and
paid. (For more information on expert witness testimony, see Competence,
Transcriptions.)

Remember: You may not serve as an interpreter in a case for which you
are also an expert witness. (See Appendix 1 - GR 11.2 Code of Professional
Responsibility for Judiciary Interpreters(f)(4)[3](i).)

Conferring with Colleagues

It is customary and appropriate to ask colleagues for advice. When doing so,
exclude identifying information and make sure that those persons
understand that maintaining confidentiality is expected of them as well.

Mandatory Reporting
While members of some professions are mandated by law to report known
and suspected cases of child or vulnerable adult abuse, in Washington State,
interpreters are not included in the list of mandatory reporters. (See RCW
26.44.030 and RCW 74.34.020.)

News Media and the Public

Interpreters may be assigned to high-profile cases that attract a great deal
of media attention because of the nature of the case or the personalities
involved. The media, in their efforts to get information not otherwise
available, may try to interview the interpreter. You must not agree to an
interview or make any comment to the media about a case.
In response to any query, a simple “No comment,” will do. Even if a reporter
simply asks you about interpreting techniques, refer them to a colleague not
involved in the case rather than offering your own comments.
In addition to preserving the integrity of the case and protecting all parties,
refraining from commenting will spare you from getting embroiled in any

Confidentiality 63
controversy. Even innocent comments can be taken out of context and
distorted in the media, jeopardizing your professional reputation and ability
to remain in the interpreting profession.
Court proceedings are usually open to the public. Friends and relatives of the
parties may approach you to inquire about the case. Let them know you are
not allowed to discuss the case, and refer them to the attorney handling the
case or to court staff. Courteously but firmly avoid engaging in any
discussion of the case.

Confidentiality 64
 Competence

Interpreters must not knowingly accept any assignment beyond their skill
level. If at any point, before or during an assignment, they have
reservations about their ability to satisfy an assignment competently, they
must immediately disclose this to all parties and, if applicable, to the court.
In their professional capacity, interpreters must not give legal or other
advice or engage in any activity that may be construed as a service other
than interpreting or translating.
—Washington Court Rules, General Rule 11.2(2)

In order to fully appreciate what competence means for interpreters, it is

essential to understand the broad scope of requirements, prerequisites, and
classifications that pertain to interpreters.

National Classification of Interpreters

The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) classifies
Translation and Interpretation Services (54193) under Sector 54—
Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services.
Professional services are occupations in the tertiary sector of the economy
(service industry), requiring special training in the arts or sciences. Some
professional services require professional licenses, such as those issued to
interpreters by the Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC).
Professionals perform work which:
• Is predominantly intellectual in character.
• Requires consistent exercise of discretion and judgment.
• Requires advanced knowledge in a field of science or learning
customarily acquired by a prolonged course of specialized intellectual
instruction.
• Uses the advanced knowledge to analyze, interpret, or make
deductions from varying facts or circumstances.
The advanced knowledge required from professionals cannot be attained at
the high school level.
Professionals provide an important service to society and:

Competence 65
 • Can gain rights and access to do things that the average person
cannot.
• Can potentially have great negative impact on society.
• Experience a higher level of regulation of their work.
• Earn higher salaries.
• Have higher social status and power.
Several language service industry surveys indicate that the majority of
interpreters in the U.S. are highly educated professionals.16 About 75% of
interpreters work as independent contractors, and most supplement their
income by providing translation services and/or teaching.17

Prerequisites
Interpreting is a complex, demanding task that requires much more than an
excellent command of languages. A native or near-native level of proficiency
in both working languages—English and another language—is a prerequisite,
but not sufficient in and of itself to provide quality interpreting.
Pursuant to the federal Interagency Language Roundtable (ILR),18 an
individual’s interpretation performance level depends on the following:
• Command of two working languages
• Ability to choose an appropriate expression
• Familiarity with the cultural context of both languages
• Knowledge of terminology in specialized fields
• Observance of protocols applicable to different settings
• Mastery of interpreting modes applicable to these settings

16
Tomasi, S. (2019). Compensation of court interpreters in the state of New York: A report
supporting the reclassification and reallocation of the court interpreter job title.
https://najit.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Compensation-of-Court-Interpreters-in-the-State-of-New-
York.pdf
17
Pielmeier, H., & O’Mara, P. (2020). The state of the linguist supply chain: Translators and
interpreters in 2020. CSA Research. https://insights.csa-
research.com/reportaction/305013106/Toc
18
Interagency Language Roundtable. (n.d.).
http://www.govtilr.org/Skills/interpretationSLDsapproved.htm

Competence 66
The ILR has established that it is at Professional Performance Level 3, as
described below, that the necessary skills align to enable accurate
interpretation. Interpreters at this level are normally able to:
• Interpret consistently in the mode (simultaneous, consecutive, and
sight) required by the setting.
• Provide renditions of informal as well as some colloquial and formal
speech with adequate accuracy.
• Meet unpredictable complications successfully.
• Convey many nuances, cultural allusions, and idioms, though
expression may not always reflect target language conventions.
• Deliver the interpretation with appropriate voice modulation where
hesitations, repetitions, or corrections may be noticeable but do not
hinder successful communication of the message.
• Handle specialized subject matter with requisite preparation.
• Uphold high standards of professional conduct and ethics.

Knowledge, Skills and Abilities

In order to become a judiciary interpreter, one must have a native or near-
native level of fluency in two working languages. Research in the field of
second-language acquisition has demonstrated that near-native fluency in a
second language requires, on average, between seven and ten years of
immersion in that language.19
In addition to near-native fluency in two working languages and a broad
general education, interpreters must have Knowledge, Skills and Abilities
(KSAs) specific to interpreting in all three modes: consecutive, simultaneous
and sight translation. These KSAs are acquired through formal training and
experience in the professional arena and documented through testing,
degrees, certifications, and professional credentials. The American Society
for Testing and Materials (ASTM)20 identifies the following KSAs for
interpreters:
• Concentration: Ability to remain focused for extended periods of time

19
https://najit.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Compensation-of-Court-Interpreters-in-the-State-of-
New-York.pdf See footnote 14 for full citation.
20
https://www.astm.org/Standards/F2089.htm See footnote 9 for full citation.

Competence 67
 • Subject matter expertise: Knowledge of the topic and relevant
terminology
• Research skills: Ability to find and assimilate information on a broad
range of topics in preparation for interpreting assignments
• Comprehension: Ability to fully grasp meaning, subject matter,
pragmatic intent, and cultural subtext of the source message
• Analytical skills: Ability to construe the meaning of the source
language message completely and accurately and find target language
equivalencies while under severe time constraints
• Short-term memory: Ability to retain the source message and
reproduce it accurately in the target language
• Note-taking skills: Ability to jot down key concepts that will aid in the
reconstruction of the source message
• Cultural awareness: Knowledge of culture-specific references and
concepts that allow interpreters to render the message faithfully
• Clear delivery skills: Good enunciation and voice projection
• Interpersonal skills: Courteous and professional attitude toward peers
and others
• Flexibility: Ability to adjust to unexpected events and rapidly changing
circumstances

Credentials
RCW 2.43.030 requires the appointment of AOC-credentialed interpreters in
legal proceedings. The AOC offers two types of credentials: Certification in
languages for which an interpreting performance exam is available and
Registration in languages for which an interpreting performance exam is not
available, so a language fluency interview is conducted instead.
The steps to becoming an AOC-credentialed court interpreter:
• Pass the written exam with a score of at least 80%.
• Attend an orientation.
• Pass an oral exam
o To become certified, the interpreter must demonstrate the ability
to accurately render meaning from target to source language by
passing an exam in each of the three modes of interpreting—
simultaneous, consecutive, and sight translation.

Competence 68
 o To become registered, the interpreter must demonstrate fluency
in English and the other language by passing an Oral Proficiency
Interview.
• Attend full-day class on courtroom protocol and ethics.
• Undergo a fingerprint background check.
• Execute an oath stating that the interpreter will uphold the Code of
Professional Responsibility for Judiciary Interpreters (GR 11.2).21
• Receive an interpreter ID badge.
To maintain the AOC credential,22 every two years interpreters must:
• Acquire sixteen continuing education credits (general, performance,
and ethics).
• Complete twenty hours of courtroom interpreting.
• Sign a declaration of personal conduct.
Interpreters whose AOC credential has lapsed must disclose that fact to any
party requesting their services. The judge must provisionally qualify them at
every court appearance until their credential is re-established. (See Bench
Card.)

Interpreter as Officer of the Court

The two reasons interpreter services are provided in legal proceedings are:
1. To enable LEP individuals to understand the proceedings.
2. To enable the court to understand LEP individuals when they address
the court.
Interpreters are officers of the court. The term officer of the court is
applied to any person who, in their professional capacity, has an obligation
to promote justice and effective operation of the judicial system, such as
judges, attorneys, clerks, bailiffs, and interpreters.23

21
The oath is permanent as long as the interpreter remains in compliance with all the
requirements.
22
Washington State Administrative Office of the Courts. (2020). Washington state court
interpreter program. Washington Courts. https://www.courts.wa.gov/programs_orgs/pos_interpret/
23
Interpreters have been deemed Officers of the Court as far back as 1548, and practiced in
the captaincy of Nootka, which includes the territory of current-day Washington and
Oregon. (See the Appendix 7 - Ordinance of 1548 (Translation).)

Competence 69
As officers of the court, interpreters must maintain high standards of
professional conduct that promote public trust and confidence in the
administration of justice. Interpreters provide services to all participants in a
court case, including: defendant, counsel, prosecutor, judge, jurors,
witnesses, probation officers, and court personnel.

Lodging Complaints
When you observe violations of court rules pertaining to interpreters, you
are encouraged to file a written complaint. Include as much detail as
possible and submit the complaint to the Issues Committee of the
Washington State Supreme Court Interpreter Commission.

Professional Demeanor and Protocol

• Dress appropriately for a professional setting.
• Inside the courtroom, do not cross the well (the space between the
judge’s bench and the parties’ tables). Walk along the perimeter when
you are needed at the clerk’s bench or the witness stand.

• Do not position yourself between the attorney and their client.

Competence 70
 • While waiting for your case to be called, find a seat well away from the
LEP individual, such as in the area where attorneys wait or in the jury
box.
• Use your phone, laptop, or other device judiciously when in a
professional setting.
• Address people by their last name (Mr. Jones, Ms. Smith).
• Address judges as “Your Honor,” attorneys as “Counsel,” bailiffs as
“Madam or Mister Bailiff,” law enforcement agents as “Officer,” etc.
• Use the formal form of address in the target language (for example,
“usted” in Spanish for “you”). However, the informal form of “you”
would be correct when:
o Addressing young children, for whom the formal address
would be odd and unnatural.
o An attorney addresses their client or a witness by their first
name and treats them in a familiar way.
As an interpreter, you must be mindful that communication is the primary
objective of the interpretation process. You should not draw attention to
yourself by mimicking, exaggerating, or changing the emotions expressed by
others. Be careful as well to avoid displays of your own emotions or
reactions.

Preparation for an Assignment

It is important to familiarize yourself with a case before proceedings begin.
You may do this by asking the appropriate party for copies of relevant
documents such as police reports, charging documents, or briefs. If no
documents are provided, ask for basic information about the case. For a trial
or motion hearing, it is important to get this information in advance so that
you can obtain the appropriate reference materials to familiarize yourself
with the circumstances of the case and the names of the parties and
witnesses. In some courts, you can obtain information directly from the
court’s website by entering the case number.
While it is important to obtain information about a case in advance, you
should not solicit it from the defendant, witnesses, or their friends and
family members. It is, however, common and appropriate for interpreter
colleagues to pass on information they have gained while working during a
trial. Colleagues who have been working on the case can provide a wealth of
background information to get you up to speed.

Competence 71
Jury Instructions
Jury instructions convey highly technical and complex legal concepts, often
in archaic or obscure wording. Moreover, since jury instructions are read
from prepared text, the pace is faster, there are fewer pauses, and
intonation is less natural than in normal speech. These factors make
interpreting jury instructions extremely challenging. It is therefore
imperative for each interpreter to have their own copy of the jury
instructions. The court may allow interpreters to sight translate the jury
instructions off the record at a normal speed in advance of the court’s
reading, for example, during a break. The judge can then state on the record
to the jury that the instructions have already been interpreted to the
defendant. You may suggest this as an option to the court ahead of time.
The Bench Card provides guidance to judges on this matter.

Modes of Interpreting
Professional interpreters use different modes of interpreting, depending on
the type of proceeding and their skill level.
Definition of Interpreting Modes per ASTM F2089 – 15 Standard Practice for
Language Interpreting:24
Simultaneous Interpreting—the rendering of a speaker’s or
signer’s message into another language while the speaker or
signer continues to speak or sign.
Consecutive Interpreting—the rendering of a speaker’s or
signer’s message into another language when the speaker or
signer pauses to allow interpreting.
Sight Translation—the rendering of a written document directly
into a spoken or signed language, not for purposes of producing
a written document.
Consecutive mode is used when the LEP person is an active participant in
the communication, such as during witness testimony and depositions, in
order to preserve a clean record. During interviews, even when no record is
being created, it is also the best practice to use consecutive mode in order
for the LEP person to hear the original fully, followed by the interpretation.
Sometimes interpreters may have to switch from consecutive to
simultaneous when testimony becomes rambling or incoherent. Additionally,

24
https://www.astm.org/Standards/F2089.htm See footnote 9 for full citation.

Competence 72
interpreters switch to simultaneous mode to interpret objections so that the
witness can follow along with the objection.
Consecutive mode may also be used in any situation where the interpreter
does not have the necessary skills to use simultaneous mode (non-certified
interpreters, for example).
Simultaneous mode is used to allow LEP individuals to follow in their own
language everything that is stated in English, such as during the majority of
courtroom proceedings, court-mandated classes, etc. Interpreting equipment
is strongly recommended for this mode of interpretation, and professional
interpreters should have their own. However, for short simultaneous
interpretation, interpreters may whisper directly into the ear of the LEP
person without using equipment. This is known as chuchotage (French for
“whispering”).
Sight translation is used to verbally render written documents. Interpreters
are frequently called upon to sight translate forms such as guilty plea,
waiver or advisement of rights. If documents are being reviewed or
discussed during remote interpretation, it is essential for the interpreter to
receive a copy of such documents.

Remember: Sight translation on the record is strongly discouraged.

Relay Interpreting
Relay interpreting is used to interpret from one language to another through
a third language, such as from English into K’iche’ via Spanish:
English<>Spanish<>K’iche’. It is necessary when no interpreter commands
the required language pair directly, such as English<>K’iche’.

Standby
When an LEP individual has a marginal need for interpretation, the court
may appoint a standby interpreter, who is available to step in as needed.

Competence 73
You may not find out until just before the encounter that the LEP person
needs standby interpreting only. If you are informed off the record by the
LEP person or their attorney, make sure to put on the record that you have
been requested to serve in standby mode. For example, “Your Honor, the
interpreter has been advised that the LEP party requires standby interpreting
only.” This clarifies why you are not actively interpreting.

Declining an Assignment
Just as you should decline an assignment when you believe that your
personal biases may impact your impartiality (see Impartiality and
Neutrality, Upholding Neutrality), you should also do so when you anticipate
that the assignment is beyond your abilities. Sometimes, however, you only
learn of the hurdles in the midst of the assignment. This can be due to a
variety of factors, such as the particular vocabulary being used or the
speaking patterns (see Appendix 3 - Language Disorders and Speech
Patterns) of the person for whom you are interpreting. While you have a
responsibility to adequately prepare for your assignments, it is not
reasonable to expect to have full command of all possible regional dialects
and areas of terminology. When you find yourself in over your head, it is
your professional obligation to inform the parties and offer to withdraw.

Professional Development
Expand your knowledge and improve your skills through steady practice,
professional training, ongoing education, terminology research, and regular
interaction with colleagues. Stay abreast of new technologies, current issues,
and policies that affect your profession. Continually immerse yourself in your
working languages by reviewing written, audio, and visual media. It is
impossible to predict what will come up during legal proceedings. It could be
unusual slang and dialects, complex forensic evidence, religious references,
etc. Expanding your vocabulary and improving your diction, memory
retention, concentration, and delivery will make you a better interpreter.

Collegiality
The interpreting profession is best served when its practitioners maintain
high standards of professional conduct and show due respect for one
another. How you comport yourself reflects upon the image of the
interpreter profession as a whole. Exercise due decorum in the court by
exhibiting formal demeanor even when you know your colleagues well.
Similarly, refrain from maligning your colleagues, whether in or out of court.
When you need to address serious concerns regarding the behavior of

Competence 74
interpreter colleagues, utilize the proper channels25 and be mindful of your
motivations and manner. There is much to be gained from fostering a spirit
of goodwill with your fellow interpreters.
Colleagues are a unique resource for support, recommendations, vocabulary,
and professional development. Many seasoned interpreters mentor and offer
support to beginners, and we can all learn from each other.
Engage in social media authentically with transparent, honest, and respectful
communication. Exercise sound, professional judgment when using social
media and check privacy settings on all social media accounts. Be aware that
interactions on social media often differ substantially from those which occur
in person. Be especially careful to elevate our profession and support our
colleagues on social media.
Refrain from posting complaints, criticism, statements, photographs, video,
or audio that can be viewed as malicious, obscene, threatening, or
intimidating. Disparaging comments can even be viewed as harassment or
bullying. Avoid connecting with court personnel, schedulers, and attorneys
via social media.

Check Interpreter
A check interpreter may be called in to monitor the interpretation of their
colleague. This can be awkward, regardless of which role you are playing.
However, this also presents an opportunity to leave your ego at the door and
view it from the positive perspective of having another interpreter present to
protect the record. If you are the check interpreter, do your best to assist as
you would if you were partnering with them in a team interpreting situation,
rather than critiquing their interpretation. Remember, you are neutral and
impartial regardless of who hired you, and it is not your role to promote the
agenda of any party. Your loyalty is to accuracy. If a correction needs to
take place, do it in a way that does not undermine the other interpreter’s
confidence. At the same time, do not feel obligated to make unnecessary
corrections simply to justify your presence. (See Accuracy, Errors by
Colleagues.)

Washington State Administrative Office of the Courts. (2020). Interpreter commission.

25

Washington Courts.
https://www.courts.wa.gov/programs_orgs/pos_interpret/index.cfm?fa=pos_interpret.displ
ay&fileName=interpreterCommission

Competence 75
Professional Associations
Professional associations have much to offer, such as:
• Educational workshops and programs
• Newsletters, magazines and position papers
• A platform for interpreters to share their experience and knowledge
and seek advice
• Up-to-date information in the field
• Career information and employment opportunities
• Access to products, suppliers, and services such as errors and
omissions (E&O) insurance and collection services
• A directory of members and practitioners
• Member discounts and group purchasing activities
• Representation of the profession to public and governmental entities
It behooves professional interpreters to belong to translator and interpreter
(T&I) professional associations. Two prominent T&I associations in the U.S.
are the National Association of Judiciary Interpreters and Translators (NAJIT)
and the American Translators Association (ATA), which has a dedicated
division for interpreters. There are also local associations, such as Northwest
Translators and Interpreters Society (NOTIS), a chapter of ATA.

Interpreter Fatigue
An interpreter’s role is both physically and mentally demanding and requires
an awareness of the proper working environment. It is your obligation to
ensure that working conditions provide for optimum performance and
accuracy. You should establish the ground rules for regular breaks before an
assignment begins. It is far easier to do this in advance than attempting to
interrupt or wait for a natural pause. Do not wait until you feel fatigued, as
extensive research has shown that your accuracy will start to decline well
before you perceive the fatigue setting in. For example, prior to a
consecutive interpretation assignment (depositions, interviews), you can let
the parties know that you will require a break every hour.

Pre-Session
It is good practice to have a brief pre-session with the LEP party for whom
you will be interpreting. This pre-session could consist of the following:
1. Identify the LEP party in the courtroom by calling their name.

Competence 76
 2. Introduce yourself with, for example, “My name is X and I will be
interpreting for you today.” (Keep it short and avoid referring to
yourself as “your interpreter.”)
3. Ask the LEP party if they are represented by an attorney and if that
attorney is present.
4. Let the LEP party know that you will be waiting “over there” until you
are needed. This could be the other side of the courtroom, the jury
box, or anywhere away from the LEP party, so as not to invite any
conversation.
5. If the attorney is present, introduce yourself.
6. If you have to leave to interpret in another courtroom, let the bailiff,
clerk, LEP party, or counsel know that you are stepping out and will
return.
The attorney will often speak with their client prior to the hearing. This is a
good time to remind the attorney and their client that, as a court interpreter,
you are bound to the same rules of confidentiality as the attorney. Inform
the LEP person that you are duty-bound to interpret everything that is said.
This will discourage them from speaking directly to you.
If during an attorney-client pre-hearing meeting the attorney steps away—
no matter how briefly they allege they will be gone—excuse yourself and
leave at the same time as the attorney. Do not remain alone with the LEP
person. You can say to the LEP person simply, “I will return shortly.” Stay
out of the room until the attorney returns.

Written Translations
As a court interpreter, you may occasionally be asked to provide a written
translation. As the interpreter of record, you are under no obligation to
undertake this task if you do not feel competent to do so.
Written translation and oral interpretation are not interchangeable fields—
they require very different skill sets. While interpreters work in both
directions, translators most often work in only one direction, translating into
their dominant language. In fact, many interpreters do not work as
translators, and most translators do not work as interpreters. In the
language services industry, interpreting and translating are considered two
distinct professions.
The court interpreter exam does not test written translation skills. Therefore,
unless you hold a specific translation credential, you should be very cautious
about agreeing to provide written translations. Before you agree, take a

Competence 77
moment to evaluate the nature of the document, its intended purpose, the
stakes at hand, and your competence to translate, especially into your non-
dominant language. A minor error may make the document incorrect or
downright laughable.
If you are asked to translate a written document and have doubts about
your competence to provide a translation that will stand up to scrutiny, let
the requester know that you are not certified to translate into language X
and cannot guarantee its accuracy. Written translations may be contracted
out to someone with the appropriate expertise. The National Center for State
Courts has developed a Guide to Translation of Legal Materials.

Transcriptions
Interpreters may be asked to provide transcription-translations of audio
files. This is a specialized project that requires careful handling, knowledge,
skills, and tools. Prepare yourself accordingly before taking on such an
assignment. The transcript will very likely be used as evidence and you may
be called as an expert witness. For more information, see Guidelines and
Requirements for Transcription-Translation.

Cultural or Linguistic Expertise

In your capacity as a court interpreter, you may at times be asked to
provide your expert opinion on matters outside the scope of interpreting.
Laypersons, non-professional interpreters, court staff, attorneys, and judges
may assume the interpreter has expertise in non-interpreting related fields,
and hope to rely on your knowledge on a myriad of subjects, from culture to
credibility. People tend to overlook the fact that we are not allowed to give
our opinions in our capacity as interpreter, no matter what individual
expertise and education we may have.
A court interpreter may not simultaneously serve as an anthropologist,
linguist, or psychologist, and should not be considered an expert on the
culture, language proficiency, or cognitive abilities of an LEP individual. An
interpreter who has the relevant additional credentials, experience, and
training may render services as an expert witness but is then precluded from
interpreting in the same case. In other words, interpreters might wear many
hats, but only one at a time. (See Impartiality and Neutrality.)

Competence 78
 Remote Interpreting
Historically, remote interpreting (RI) was viewed as a back-up plan, to be
used only when an on-site interpreter was not available. Necessity being the
mother of invention, the COVID-19 pandemic sparked technological
advances leading to increased RI usage in courts around the country. The
technology rapidly improved, and users became adept at using the required
equipment. As a result, RI has gained widespread acceptance as a trusted
language-access solution throughout the U.S. for certain types of legal
proceedings.
Courts have moved from occasionally using telephonic interpretation to
implementing a wide variety of technology-mediated communication
modalities. This invites us to take a closer look at the quickly changing area
of remote interpreting.
Remote interpreting modalities:
• Audio-only interpreting (telephonic) uses a single audio-channel
that restricts interpreting to consecutive mode.
• Video Remote Interpreting (VRI) uses a single audio-visual
channel that restricts interpreting to consecutive and sight translation
modes for spoken languages. For sign languages, VRI does allow for
simultaneous interpreting.
• Remote Simultaneous Interpreting (RSI) uses audio-visual
platforms with two or more channels and is specifically designed for
simultaneous interpreting in spoken languages.
• Hybrid RSI solutions, such as a separate phone line in addition to the
VRI platform, are used when the audio-visual platform does not offer a
separate channel for simultaneous interpreting.
Technology does not change your duties as interpreters. Whether working on
site or remotely, it is imperative for interpreters to call attention to any
hindrances to accuracy, such as poor audio quality, background noise,
overlapping voices, failure to pause for the interpreter, etc. For example,
“Your Honor, the interpreter is hearing a lot of background noise and could
not clearly hear the witness’s response.”
Remember to mute your microphone any time you are not actively
interpreting. Be mindful of when your camera is turned on. You may be
working from home, but remember that you are “in the courtroom.” Dress
accordingly and arrange for an appropriate background.

Remote Interpreting 79
Remote communications are completely dependent on technology, so
interpreters must have adequate equipment and use a stable Internet
connection with speed sufficient for optimal platform performance. Invest in
high-quality noise-cancelling headphones that provide protection from
acoustic shock by limiting volume to 85 decibels.
Interpreters may need to remind speakers how important it is to have
quality audio in order to ensure accurate interpretation. It is not acceptable
to “try your best” with inadequate equipment and turn to guesswork to fill in
the gaps, any more than you would when working on site. The equipment
necessary to ensure accuracy is readily available. It is your obligation to
obtain it, learn to use it, and upgrade it regularly.
RSI presents additional challenges, especially for team interpreting. If you
will be working in a team, find out in advance who your teammate is and
coordinate with them, especially if you will be in separate locations. Log in to
the communication platform well in advance of the start time to test
equipment and iron out any technology glitches.

Remote Interpreting 80
 Special Considerations for Interpreting with
Deaf, Deaf-Blind, and Hard of Hearing
Individuals
The Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 2.42 ensures the constitutional
rights of deaf,26 deaf-blind, and hard of hearing individuals (D/DB/HH) who
are unable to readily understand or communicate in spoken English, when
involved in legal proceedings. It mandates the appointment and payment of
qualified interpreters to assist individuals in these settings. This chapter is
designed to help interpreters and legal professionals understand how RCW
2.42 supports equitable language access for D/DB/HH individuals in
Washington state’s judicial system.

Qualifications of Sign Language Interpreters

RCW 2.42 directs courts to appoint qualified interpreters for D/DB/HH
individuals and to secure such services from a list of interpreters maintained
by the Office of the Deaf and Hard of Hearing (ODHH) under the Department
of Social and Health Services. The statutory language in RCW 2.42 for
appointing a qualified interpreter was left undefined and subsequently
caused concerns about the lack of clarification. Washington’s Court
Interpreter Program does not administer an exam to certify sign language
court interpreters, therefore, AOC partnered with ODHH to develop a set of
criteria to determine qualifications for American Sign Language (ASL) court
interpreters using national certification standards developed by the Registry
of Interpreters for the Deaf (RID).
Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 388-818-500 was updated to clarify
which ASL-English interpreters qualify to work in court settings, and it
provides guidance to courts on how to better serve D/DB/HH individuals.
There are two categories of court interpreters for sign language
interpretation that are most qualified to work in Washington Courts with
hearing-impaired individuals (See WAC 388-818-520):

26
Throughout this chapter, the term deaf (rather the deaf/Deaf) is used to encompass the
range of lived identities for individuals who identify as either deaf (an audiological condition
of not being able to hear) or Deaf (deaf people who share a common language (ASL),
culture, values, and beliefs).
See Woodward, J., & Horejes, T. P., (2016). deaf/Deaf: Origins and usage. In G. Gertz, & P.
Boudreault (Eds.), The SAGE Deaf Studies Encyclopedia. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Special Considerations for Interpreting with Deaf, Deaf-Blind, and Hard of Hearing
Individuals 81
 o Certified court sign language interpreters
o Certified court intermediary interpreters
A certified court sign language interpreter is presumed to be the most
qualified to interpret in court hearings. (See WAC 388-818-530.) To qualify
as a certified court sign language interpreter, the interpreter must possess
one of the following:
o Specialist Certificate: Legal (SC:L) from the RID
o Generalist certification from the RID with a passing score on the
SC:L written test
Certified court intermediary interpreters are also presumed to be the
most qualified to interpret in court hearings because of their training, skills,
and experience. (See WAC 388-818-540.) To qualify, an interpreter must
hold a current certified deaf interpreter (CDI) certification from the RID.
WAC 388-818-600 encourages courts to make every effort to hire certified
court sign language interpreters and determine whether an intermediary
interpreter is necessary.27
Court personnel should verify an interpreter’s credentials. The ODHH has a
list of qualified and registered ASL-English court interpreters on its website.28
As long as interpreters remain in good standing, they are considered
permanently sworn.

Code of Professional Responsibility

As officers of the court, ASL-English court interpreters must maintain
high standards of professional conduct that promote public trust and
confidence in the judicial system. All court interpreters in Washington
state are bound by the canons in the Washington State Courts General
Rule (GR) Appendix 1 - GR 11.2 Code of Professional Responsibility for
Judiciary Interpreters. While nationally certified ASL-English interpreters
recognize a Code of Professional Conduct developed by the RID, GR 11.2
supersedes it. Both codes require adherence to the principles of
accuracy, confidentiality, neutrality, competence, and professionalism,
but it is important that ASL-English court interpreters study and follow
GR 11.2.

27
Washington Courts Administrative Office of the Courts, (2017). Deskbook on Language
Access in Washington Courts.
http://www.courts.wa.gov/programs_orgs/pos_interpret/content/pdf/StateLAP.pdf
28
https://fortress.wa.gov/dshs/odhhapps/Interpreters/CourtInterpreter.aspx

Special Considerations for Interpreting with Deaf, Deaf-Blind, and Hard of Hearing
Individuals 82
Interpreting in the Courtroom
Preparation for Trial Interpretation
Preparation mitigates barriers to an accurate and meaningful
interpretation and ensures a more efficient proceeding. The court should
provide access to any case file information critical for interpreter
preparation. (See Competence, Preparation for an Assignment.) This may
include pleadings, witness lists, police reports, jury instructions, and
other information.

Positioning in the Courtroom

ASL-English interpreters must have clear sight lines with the D/DB/HH
individual. This may mean positioning yourself within the well of the
courtroom (the empty space between the judge’s bench and the parties’
tables). The interpreter should ask permission of the court to enter the
well.
Legend:
SLI Sign Language Interpreter
HI Hearing Interpreter (an interpreter
who hears)
CDI Certified Deaf Interpreter
DL Deaf Litigant

1: Interpreter Positioning Options in the Well

Special Considerations for Interpreting with Deaf, Deaf-Blind, and Hard of Hearing
Individuals 83
Specialist Interpreters
There is a wide range of communication diversity among D/DB/HH court
attendees. While RCW 2.42 refers to qualified interpreters and intermediary
interpreters, this section outlines the unique communication needs of
D/DB/HH individuals and offers accommodation options to meet their needs.
Washington courts may serve deaf people who use atypical forms of sign
language, have secondary disabilities (e.g., deaf and blind), use sign
language and speech-read Spanish, or do not know any sign language and
speech-read English. In each of these situations, the traditional
accommodation of providing the services of an ASL interpreter alone is
insufficient for ensuring equitable access to court services, and a specialist
interpreter is needed.

Types of Specialist Interpreters

Specialist interpreters hold a generalist interpreting credential and have
received additional specialized training and additional credentialing as
appropriate and available to verify their specialization. The following five
interpreting specialties are defined below with expanded guidelines on
the use of deaf interpreters working with non-deaf interpreters.
• Certified Deaf Interpreters (CDIs) are the most commonly
deployed specialists in legal proceedings and related services. CDIs are
native or near-native deaf signers who work in tandem with non-deaf
certified interpreters (an interpreter who can hear) to meet a deaf
individual’s unique linguistic needs.
• Deaf-Blind Interpreters provide interpretation for those who are
unable to hear a spoken language and cannot readily see ASL.
Accommodations may include tactile interpreting, Pro-Tactile
interpreting, or close vision interpreting.
• Trilingual Interpreters provide interpretation between spoken
English, spoken Spanish, and ASL.
• Oral Transliterators (OIC) provide communication access to
individuals who do not use sign language and rely on speechreading.
• Cued Language Transliterators (CLT) convert one language from
the spoken mode of communication to a visual “cued mode making all
phonemes of that language uniquely visible on the hands and
mouth.”29 CLTs are nationally credentialed by the Testing, Evaluation,

29
National Cued Speech Association https://cuedspeech.org

Special Considerations for Interpreting with Deaf, Deaf-Blind, and Hard of Hearing
Individuals 84
 and Certification Unit (TECUnit), an independent assessment
organization.

Certified Deaf Interpreters (CDIs)

According to RCW 2.42.140, “if the communication mode or language of
the hearing-impaired person is not readily interpretable, the interpreter
or hearing-impaired person shall notify the appointing authority who
shall appoint and pay an intermediary interpreter to assist the qualified
interpreter.”
Some D/DB/HH individuals’ life experiences preclude them from
developing typical language or adequate knowledge of the US judicial
system, making access to due process inadequate. For this underserved
portion of the general deaf population to meaningfully participate in the
judicial process, they require a CDI.
Deaf interpreters have rich communication methods that are generally
unavailable even to the most skilled interpreter who can hear. The deaf
court interpreter’s value lies in providing an interpretation that conveys
information that conforms to the experiential and linguistic framework of
the deaf litigant.30
A deaf interpreter is proficient in recognizing specific and effective ASL
constructs because they share the same experience of being oriented to
the world visually, rather than auditorily. CDIs have specialized training
and expertise in utilizing gestures, drawings, props, and other
communication strategies to enhance comprehension. Thus, the deaf
individual using this specialized interpreting service receives the same
content as the other parties.
Deaf individuals who benefit from CDI services include, but are not
limited to, those who:
• Use atypical signed communication.
• Experience a bilingual home/school environment where languages
other than English and ASL are used.
• Possess secondary factors that influence their use of ASL such as
vision loss, intellectual or developmental disabilities, physical

30 Mathers, C. (2009). Deaf Interpreters in Court: An Accommodation That is More Than

Reasonable. National Consortium of Interpreter Education Centers (NCIEC).
http://www.diinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Deaf-Interpreter-in-Court.pdf

Special Considerations for Interpreting with Deaf, Deaf-Blind, and Hard of Hearing
Individuals 85
 disabilities that obscure sign production, mental illness, or issues
related to substance abuse.
• Experience the absence of natural language development during the
critical language acquisition ages of zero to five years old. Typically,
deaf children under the age of sixteen will need to have access to a
deaf interpreter.
• Have limited or no formal education.
• Have not socialized with other deaf community members.
• Are immigrants, migrants, or refugees and may be fluent in other
signed languages but are not currently fluent in ASL. In some other
state jurisdictions, employing CDIs is considered the best practice
accommodation for ASL users, including those who communicate in
standard ASL. Therefore, in addition to the situations listed above,
CDIs may be utilized to ensure communication effectiveness in
significant cases. The hearing ASL-English interpreter may be the first
to identify a need for CDI services and must make this need known to
the court through the court administrator, the interpreting services
coordinator, or the individual’s attorney. ASL interpreters should be
able to clearly articulate the need for such services.
Once a CDI has been requested, all subsequent events must have a CDI
provided unless the CDI has been excused according to and consistent
with RCW 2.42.150.

Deaf-Hearing Interpreter Teams

CDIs work in partnership with ASL interpreters who can hear and are
subject to the same codes of professional conduct, procedural rules, and
oaths as all court interpreters. The ASL interpreter renders spoken
English into sign language for the CDI. The CDI linguistically and
culturally interprets the ASL message in a manner most readily
understood by the deaf individual. In turn, the deaf individual
communicates information to the CDI, who then interprets the
information to the ASL interpreter, who renders the message into spoken
English. (See Competence, Relay Interpreting.) Deaf-hearing interpreter
teams typically work in consecutive mode, meaning one person speaks at
a time. Simultaneous interpretation is not a viable option in this context.
Each situation involving a CDI is unique. Complex linguistic, experiential,
and cultural considerations may provide practical challenges for the
interpreting team. The value of having a CDI lies in delivering an
interpretation readily understood by the deaf individual. It would not be
unusual to see the deaf-hearing team consult with one another to ensure

Special Considerations for Interpreting with Deaf, Deaf-Blind, and Hard of Hearing
Individuals 86
 the accuracy of a rendered interpretation. Court participants may
experience an uncomfortable wait while the communication process is
completed. At times, the CDI may request permission to clarify
testimony from a deaf witness. CDIs may need to use props, calendars,
and drawing materials to best express concepts, which might require
additional physical space. In addition, the interpreting team may request
clarification from counsel to better replicate a visual depiction of a
setting, person, or object.
Here are some suggestions to facilitate the interpreting process:
• Increase the amount of time scheduled for each interaction the deaf
individual has with the court system.
• Prioritize the necessity to use the same interpreting team throughout
the case.
CDI interpreter-mediated events will take longer than court personnel
are accustomed to, as stated above. Additionally, to further facilitate
successful communication:
• Keep questions as specific and straightforward as possible.
• Avoid vague or abstract questions.
• Avoid double negatives.
• Present questions in sequential time order of the actual series of
events.
• If the deaf individual is unable to answer a question presented in a
specific form, the court may consider the allowance of leading
questions by the direct examiner.
ASL is a visual-spatial language, and one noticeable characteristic of
signed communication is nodding. This action denotes the
communication has been received, but it does not necessarily express an
affirmative response. The court may instruct jurors as follows:
When a deaf witness nods, it is not a definitive indication of
comprehension of what is being communicated, but it may
merely indicate a willingness to continue.
Similarly, nodding is not an indication that the deaf individual
answers “Yes” or “No.”
It is best to wait for the interpreters to produce the full
interpretation rendition before drawing any inferences.
Clear sight lines are critical for effective communication. The following
diagrams illustrate how the deaf-hearing interpreting team positions

Special Considerations for Interpreting with Deaf, Deaf-Blind, and Hard of Hearing
Individuals 87
 themselves in a courtroom, both when the deaf individual testifies as a
witness and when they sit at the defense table with an attorney. Please
note that depending on the length of the hearing, two deaf-hearing
interpreter teams may be needed to ensure an effective interpretation.

2: Deaf-Hearing Interpreting Team for Deaf Witness

3: Deaf-Hearing Interpreting Team for Deaf Litigant (DL)

Waiver of Right to an Interpreter

Pursuant to RCW 2.42.150, a qualified interpreter may be waived if all of the
following happen:
• The deaf individual requests a waiver through the use of a qualified
interpreter.
• The counsel, if any, consents.

Special Considerations for Interpreting with Deaf, Deaf-Blind, and Hard of Hearing
Individuals 88
 • The appointing authority determines that the waiver has been made
knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently.
Such a waiver does not preclude the deaf individual from claiming his or her
right to a qualified interpreter at a later time during the proceeding,
program, or activity.

Visual Recording of Testimony

At the request of any party to the proceeding, the appointing authority may
order the testimony of the deaf individual and the interpretation to be
visually recorded as verification of the official transcript of the proceeding.
However, in situations involving a capital offense, the appointing authority
shall order that the testimony involving a deaf litigant be visually recorded
for use in verification of the official transcript of the proceeding. (See RCW
2.42.180.)
While some courtrooms may have built-in video systems, they are often
voice activated and may not capture the signed communication. Additional
video equipment may need to be brought in to focus on the interpretation.

Accommodations for Deaf Individuals Serving as

Jurors
Jurors are an essential part of the justice system. In 1979, John G. O’Brien
of Bellevue, Washington, was the first deaf individual who, with the
assistance of a sign language interpreter, served as a juror in a criminal
trial.31 O’Brien’s accomplishment was met with praise by most and criticism
by others, who did not believe a deaf person was capable of serving. Slowly,
across the country, other deaf people began to fulfill their civic responsibility
and report to jury service with the provision of court-financed interpreters.
The passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 199032 ensured
that deaf individuals received accommodations (i.e., auxiliary aids or
interpreting services) to facilitate participation in all aspects of the legal
system including jury service.
Under Title II of the ADA, no qualified individual with a disability shall, by
reason of such disability, be excluded from participation in or denied the

31
Gannon, J. R., (1981). Deaf heritage: A Narrative History of Deaf America. National
Association for the Deaf.
32
Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. § 12132 (1990).

Special Considerations for Interpreting with Deaf, Deaf-Blind, and Hard of Hearing
Individuals 89
benefits of services, programs, or activities of a public entity, including state
and local governmental agencies.33
The fact that a juror is deaf and requires an ASL-English interpreter to
readily understand the proceedings and communicate with the court is not
grounds to disqualify the potential juror.

Empaneling a Deaf Juror

The appointing authority (judge) is responsible for determining at voir
dire if a juror is qualified to serve on a particular trial, including whether
6the juror meets statutory qualifications for jury service. The ADA
prohibits direct questioning related to the D/DB/HH person’s disability.
Rather, questioning should focus on the skills necessary to adequately
execute the duties of a juror, such as:
• The capacity to attend for extended periods of time
• The ability to weigh the evidence
• The ability to deliberate
Once the presiding judge determines that the prospective deaf juror has
satisfied the required qualifications to serve as a juror, the deaf juror can
still, like any other juror, be eliminated by successful challenge whether
for cause or by means of a peremptory challenge.

Interpreting Considerations
The court will secure a team of two ASL-English interpreters to
accompany the prospective juror throughout their jury service, including
any voir dire, and if empaneled, throughout the trial and deliberations.
Interpretation during voir dire will most likely be conducted in
simultaneous mode when the parties to the case are addressing and
questioning all the prospective jurors. However, when the D/DB/HH
prospective juror is being directly questioned, interpretation will most
likely be rendered in the consecutive mode.
During voir dire, the interpreter will sit or stand where the prospective
deaf juror can easily view them. The interpreter team will evaluate the
configuration of the courtroom to determine appropriate locations during
the voir dire process. This may involve consulting with courtroom
officials. The following diagram illustrates two possible seating scenarios,
dependent on the seating location of the prospective deaf juror.

33
28, 1 C.F.R. §35.

Special Considerations for Interpreting with Deaf, Deaf-Blind, and Hard of Hearing
Individuals 90
 4: Two Positioning Options during Voir Dire

If the deaf juror is empaneled, the interpreters will adapt their

positioning to facilitate the deaf juror’s clear viewing of testimony and
evidence. For example, during videotaped testimony or introduction of
exhibits, the interpreters will position themselves to a place where the
deaf juror can see the evidence, the speakers, and the interpreters as
diagramed below. It is important for the interpreters to remain agile and
anticipate scenarios to keep the sight lines clear.

5: Positioning for an Empaneled Deaf Juror

Role of the Interpreter in Jury Deliberation

Interpreters will accompany the deaf juror into the deliberation room in
order to continue to provide communication access among jurors.

Special Considerations for Interpreting with Deaf, Deaf-Blind, and Hard of Hearing
Individuals 91
 Interpreters for a juror during deliberation are in a unique position of
being the only non-jury person to witness this process. Best practices
would have a jury instruction that includes information on how
communication is best conducted to allow everyone to participate
equally, such as:
• The interpreters are present to facilitate communication and are not
part of the deliberations. Speak directly to the juror as if the
interpreter were not present.
• Interpreters will interpret everything including side comments and
casual conversations.
• During discussion, it is important that people speak one at a time and
preferably identify themselves before speaking. The foreperson may be
enlisted to monitor this process.
As a reminder, ASL-English interpreters are not “on the jury,” but simply
interpreting. It is important that interpreters maintain strict boundaries
and do not speak directly to anyone on the jury. Any side conversation
with jurors, even the simplest comment or greeting, can create the
perception of undue influence in the decision-making process.

Special Considerations for Interpreting with Deaf, Deaf-Blind, and Hard of Hearing
Individuals 92
 Fundamentals of Ethics for Interpreters
Ethics is a branch of philosophy called moral philosophy, which lays out a set
of principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong behavior.
The word ethics derives from the Greek word ethikos (ἠθικός), meaning
morality, or showing moral character. Ethics systematizes, guides and
defends intentional human actions. Human actions are what we do, including
speaking and writing, not what we think.
This manual aspires to guide interpreters in making sound decisions when
facing ethical problems. The fundamental questions of interpreters’
professional lives are questions of value. What is truly worth striving for
when rendering interpreting services?

Knowing Your Ethical Values

Ethical values guide us in determining which intentions, decisions and
actions are right or wrong.
Ethical values influence our decision-making process by:
• Framing a problem and the way we view that problem.
• Providing options for solving a problem.
• Directing our reasoning and judgment in resolving a problem by
reminding us what we must uphold or promote.
Ethical values are further divided into three types:
1. Personal: Individual reflections of our own needs, desires, and things
we consider right and wrong. They develop from our circumstances,
which can change over time. Our family, nation, generation, and
historical environment help determine our personal values.
2. Cultural: Values shared by members of a culture. We are all members
of a culture, with subcultures that have expected and sometimes
enforced values telling us what is right and wrong.
3. Professional: Values shared by members of a profession, dictating
what is good or desirable. These values are standards for behavior
that provide a framework for evaluating practitioners’ actions in the
light of what is right and wrong within the profession.
This manual focuses on the core professional values of interpreters, who
must recognize situations when their professional values may conflict with
personal or cultural values.

Fundamentals of Ethics for Interpreters 93

All professions share the following core values:
• Integrity
• Honesty
• Competence
• Professionalism
Interpreters share these additional values:
• Confidentiality—with doctors and attorneys
• Impartiality—with judges
• Accuracy—with accountants
• Neutrality—with mediators

Professional values provide practitioners with a moral compass to orient

them toward what they must uphold to remain ethical in all their
professional dealings. For interpreters, accuracy is the paramount
professional value – True North34.

34 Compass wind rose image: iStock/MaksimYremenko

Fundamentals of Ethics for Interpreters 94

Codifying Expected Behavior
The Code of Professional Responsibility for Judiciary Interpreters is set up to
guide interpreters in maintaining high standards of professional behavior.
This is part of the recognized need to promote public trust and confidence in
the administration of justice. (See Appendix 1 - GR 11.2 Code of Professional
Responsibility for Judiciary Interpreters.)
GR 11.2 sets forth the professional rules that all interpreters must follow in
judicial settings, under penalty of losing the privilege to practice their
profession. Interpreters who violate the provisions of GR 11.2 are subject to
disciplinary action and other sanctions imposed by law as set forth in the WA
Court Interpreter Disciplinary Process.

Making Ethical Decisions

When resolving an ethical problem, a tried-and-true formula is to first
determine three things. What is ethically:
• Required (positive duty—what you must do)
• Prohibited (negative duty—what you must not do)
• Permissible (alternative solution—what you may do)
Refer back to the Code of Professional Responsibility for Judiciary
Interpreters. What is required, what is prohibited, and what is allowed?
Consult with trusted colleagues. Consider: What would this situation look like
if everyone involved spoke English and no interpreter were needed?
The circumstances of our encounters are inherently unpredictable and have
infinite iterations. This manual is not intended to be a cookbook with exact
recipes to follow in all situations. Rather, it serves as a guide for interpreters
to make ethical decisions that uphold their professional values. By doing so,
interpreters help to preserve the integrity and independence of the judicial
system.

Fundamentals of Ethics for Interpreters 95

 Appendix 1 - GR 11.2 Code of Professional
Responsibility for Judiciary Interpreters

(a) Preamble. As officers of the court, interpreters must maintain high

standards of professional conduct that promote public trust and confidence
in the administration of justice. The purpose of this code is to establish
standards of conduct that interpreters must abide by in order to preserve
the integrity and independence of the judicial system. It establishes core
ethical principles of interpreter conduct in all aspects of their profession.
(b) Scope. The text of each rule is authoritative, while the comments
provide important guidance in understanding the rules.
(c) Applicability. All interpreters serving in the judicial system must abide
by this Code of Professional Responsibility.
(d) Compliance. Interpreters who violate the provisions of this code are
subject to disciplinary action and/or any other sanction that may be imposed
by law.
(e) Definitions.
(1) Source language – the original language of the writer or speaker.
(2) Target language – the language of the receiving reader or listener.
(3) Register – the degree of formality of language.
(4) Sight translation – the rendering of a written document directly into a
spoken or signed language, not for purposes of producing a written
document.
(f) Canons.
(1) ACCURACY. Interpreters must reproduce in the target language the
closest natural equivalent of the source language message without altering it
by means of addition, omission, or explanation.
Comment
(1)[1] Interpreters are obligated to conserve every element of information
contained in the source and target languages. In doing so, they fulfill a
twofold duty: (1) to ensure that legal proceedings reflect in English precisely
what is said or signed by limited English proficient individuals and (2) to
place limited English proficient individuals on an equal linguistic footing with
those who are fully proficient in English.

Appendix 1 - GR 11.2 Code of Professional Responsibility for Judiciary Interpreters

96
(1)[2] Interpreters are required to apply their best skills and judgment to
render, as faithfully as reasonably possible, the meaning of what is said or
signed, preserving the style and register of speech, and the ambiguities and
nuances of the source statement.
Everything must be interpreted, even if it appears nonresponsive, obscene,
rambling, or incoherent. This includes false starts and apparent
misstatements. However, verbatim, "word for word," or literal interpretation
is inappropriate if it distorts the meaning of what is said or signed.
Spoken language interpreters should convey the speaker’s tone without
reenacting or mimicking the speaker’s emotions or dramatic gestures. Sign
language interpreters, on the other hand, should employ visual cues,
including facial expressions, body language, and hand gestures, which are
structural elements of sign languages.
(1)[3] Interpreters have the duty to immediately address any situation or
condition that impedes their ability to accurately interpret. Examples include,
but are not limited to, linguistic ambiguities, unfamiliar terms, inaudible
speech, inability to see a speaker, background noise or distraction, and pace
of speech.
(1)[4] The obligation to preserve accuracy includes the interpreter’s duty to
correct any substantive errors of interpretation as soon as possible.
Interpreters should be prepared to accept feedback, including challenges to
their interpretation, in a professional and impersonal manner.
(1)[5] Due to the difficulty of extemporaneously interpreting recordings
(such as 911 calls), the practice of doing so in court should be discouraged
at all times. Rather, proper transcripts and corresponding written
translations should be prepared in advance. If ordered by the presiding
officer to interpret a recording in court, interpreters should comply but state,
on the record, that they cannot guarantee the accuracy of the interpretation.
(1)[6] Interpreters should refrain from sight translating documents for the
record. Rather, written translations of documents offered in an evidentiary
hearing should be prepared in advance. If ordered by the presiding officer to
sight translate such documents, interpreters should comply but state, on the
record, that they cannot guarantee the accuracy of the sight translation.
(1)[7] The ethical responsibility to interpret accurately includes being
prepared for assignments. Interpreters are encouraged to obtain documents
and other information necessary to familiarize themselves with the nature
and purpose of an assignment. Prior preparation is described below; it is
especially important when testimony or documents include highly specialized
terminology and subject matter.

Appendix 1 - GR 11.2 Code of Professional Responsibility for Judiciary Interpreters

97
Preparation may include but is not limited to:
(i) reviewing relevant documents, such as criminal complaints, police
reports, briefs, witness lists, jury instructions, prior depositions, etc.;
(ii) asking interpreters previously involved in the case for information on
language use or style; or
(iii) asking attorneys involved in the case for additional relevant information.
(2) COMPETENCE. Interpreters must not knowingly accept any assignment
beyond their skill level. If at any point, before or during an assignment, they
have reservations about their ability to satisfy an assignment competently,
they must immediately disclose this to all parties and, if applicable, to the
court.
In their professional capacity, interpreters must not give legal or other
advice or engage in any activity that may be construed as a service other
than interpreting or translating.
Comment
(2)[1] Interpreters are duty-bound to inquire about the assignment in
advance and assess their competence to render services.
(2)[2] Interpreters are not qualified to give written or oral counsel about a
legal matter that could affect the rights and responsibilities of the person
receiving the advice. GR 24 sets forth what constitutes the practice of law.
(2)[3] Interpreters should maintain and expand competence in their field
through professional development. Professional development includes steady
practice, professional training, ongoing education, terminology research,
regular and frequent interaction with colleagues and specialists in related
fields, and staying abreast of new technologies, current issues, laws,
policies, rules, and regulations that affect their profession.
(2)[4] Interpreters should know and follow established protocols for
delivering interpreting services. When speaking in English, interpreters
should speak at a volume that enables them to be heard throughout the
courtroom. They should interpret in the first person and refer to themselves
in the third person.
(3) HONESTY AND INTEGRITY. Interpreters have an inviolable duty to
provide honest services in which their behavior upholds the values outlined
in this code. They must accurately represent their credentials, training, and
relevant experience. Interpreters must not engage in conduct that impedes
their compliance with this code or allow another to induce or encourage
them to violate the law or this code.

Appendix 1 - GR 11.2 Code of Professional Responsibility for Judiciary Interpreters

98
Comment
(3)[1] It is essential that interpreters present a complete and truthful
account of their credentials, training, and relevant experience prior to an
assignment so that their ability to satisfy it competently can be fairly
evaluated.
(4) IMPARTIALITY AND NEUTRALITY. Interpreters must faithfully render the
source message without allowing their own views to interfere. They must
refrain from conduct that may give an appearance of bias and must disclose
any real or potential conflict of interest to all parties and the court, if
applicable, as soon as they become aware of it.
Comment
(4)[1] Interpreters should strive for professional detachment. They should
uphold impartiality by avoiding verbal and nonverbal displays of personal
attitudes, prejudices, emotions, or opinions. Interpreters must faithfully
render all statements, even those they find personally objectionable, without
allowing their own views or opinions to interfere.
(4)[2] As officers of the court, interpreters serve the court and the public,
regardless of whether publicly or privately retained. Interpreters must
uphold neutrality by avoiding any behavior that creates the appearance of
favoritism toward anyone. Interpreters should maintain professional
relationships with persons using their services, discourage personal
dependence on the interpreter, and avoid participation in the proceedings in
any capacity other than providing interpreter services. During the course of
the proceedings, interpreters should not converse with parties, witnesses,
jurors, attorneys, or friends or relatives of any party, except in the discharge
of their official functions.
(4)[3] Interpreters must not serve in any matter in which they have an
interest, financial or otherwise, in the outcome, unless a specific exception is
allowed by the judicial officer for good cause and noted on the record.
Interpreters must not solicit or accept gifts or gratuities from any of the
parties, even as a social courtesy, in order to maintain the appearance of
neutrality. Interpreters must disclose to the parties and/or the court any
circumstance that creates a potential conflict of interest, including but not
limited to the following:
(i) the interpreter is a friend, associate, or relative of a party, witness,
victim, or counsel;
(ii) the interpreter or the interpreter’s friend, associate, or relative has a
financial interest in the case at issue, a shared financial interest with a party

Appendix 1 - GR 11.2 Code of Professional Responsibility for Judiciary Interpreters

99
to the proceeding, or any other interest that might be affected by the
outcome of the case;
(iii) the interpreter has served in an investigative capacity for any party
involved in the case;
(iv) the interpreter has previously been retained by a law enforcement
agency to assist in the preparation of the criminal case at issue;
(v) the interpreter is an attorney in the case at issue; or
(vi) the interpreter has previously been retained for employment by one of
the parties.
The existence of any one of the abovementioned circumstances should be
evaluated by the parties and the court but should not automatically
disqualify an interpreter from providing services. If an actual or perceived
conflict of interest exists, the appropriate authorities should determine
whether it is appropriate for the interpreter to withdraw based on the totality
of the circumstances.
(5) CONFIDENTIALITY. Interpreters must not divulge privileged or other
confidential information obtained in their professional capacity. They must
refrain from making any public statement on matters in which they serve.
Comment
(5)[1] Privileged communications take place within the context of a
protected relationship, such as that between an attorney and client, a
husband and wife, a priest and penitent, and a doctor and patient. The law
often protects against forced disclosure of such conversations. Interpreters
are bound to maintain the confidentiality of all privileged communications.
(5)[2] Interpreters are also routinely privy to communications that, while not
necessarily privileged by law, are conveyed in confidence. In order to
preserve the integrity of the judicial process, interpreters have an ongoing
duty to refrain from disclosing information obtained in their professional
capacity. This duty is consistent with CJC 2.10.
[Adopted effective November 17, 1989. Original Rule 11.1 was renumbered
as Rule 11.2 effective September 1, 2005; Amended effective April 26,
2016; December 18, 2018; March 12, 2019.]

Appendix 1 - GR 11.2 Code of Professional Responsibility for Judiciary Interpreters

100
 Appendix 2 - Oath of Interpreter

Appendix 2 - Oath of Interpreter 101

Appendix 3 - Language Disorders and Speech
Patterns

Language Description
Disorder

Clanging Association of words based upon sound rather than

concepts. The words involved often have a rhyming,
near-rhyming, or punning (choosing words based on
double meanings) quality to them.
That boat hope floats.
The train brain rained on me.

Coprolalia Involuntary swearing or the involuntary utterance of

obscene words or socially inappropriate and derogatory
remarks.

Derailment A sequence of unrelated or only remotely related ideas.

The frame of reference often changes from one
sentence to the next.
The next day when I'd be going out you
know, I took control, like uh, I put bleach
on my hair in California.

Echolalia The unsolicited repetition of vocalizations made by

another person.

Palilalia The involuntary repetition of syllables, words, or

phrases.

Pressured A tendency to speak rapidly and frenziedly. Pressured

speech speech is motivated by an urgency that may not be
apparent to the listener. The speech produced is
difficult to interrupt. It can be unrelenting, loud, and
without pauses.

Tangential Derailment when answering questions. Off-the-point,

responses oblique, or irrelevant answers given to questions.

Appendix 3 - Language Disorders and Speech Patterns

102
 Thought Sudden silences that may last from a few seconds to a
blocking minute or longer. When the person begins speaking
again after the block, they will often speak about a
subject unrelated to what was being discussed when
blocking occurred.

Word salad or A confused or unintelligible mixture of seemingly

schizophasia random words and phrases. The words may or may not
be grammatically correct, but they are semantically
confused to the point that the listener cannot extract
any meaning from them.
May as well go there and trade in some pop
caps and tires, and tractors to car garages,
so they can pull cars away from wrecks, is
what I believed in.

Neologism New words are created that have no meaning except to

the speaker.

Perseveration An excessive focus on a particular topic regardless of

of topic what is asked.

Poverty of Little spontaneous speech. Complete voluntary absence

thought of speech is termed mutism.

Appendix 3 - Language Disorders and Speech Patterns

103
 Appendix 4 - The Five Stages of Second
Language Acquisition
Chart taken from a study by Stephen Crashen and Tracy Terrell in 1983.35

Stage Characteristics Time

Frame
• near-native level of speech
Advanced Fluency 5–7 years

• excellent comprehension
Intermediate Fluency 3–5 years
• makes few grammatical
errors
• good comprehension
Speech Emergence 1–3 years
• can produce simple
sentences
• makes grammar &
pronunciation errors
• frequently misunderstands
jokes
• limited comprehension
Early Production 6 months –
• produces one- or two-word
1 year
responses
• uses key words & familiar
phrases
• uses present-tense verbs
• minimal comprehension
Preproduction 0–6 months
• does not verbalize
• nods “yes” & “no”
• draws and points

35
Krashen, S. D., & Terrell, T. D. (1983). The natural approach: Language acquisition in the
classroom. CA: The Alemany Press.

Appendix 4 - The Five Stages of Second Language Acquisition

104
 Appendix 5 - A Bit of History
The interpreting profession has been around for a very long time—as long as
people have had the need to communicate across linguistic barriers, for
reasons noble to nefarious. It is little wonder, therefore, that we find
mention of interpreters in historical records dating back for millennia. What
is surprising to discover, however, is the extent to which interpreters were
regulated by specific rules of behavior and performance. Thirteenth-century
laws in Spain detail the duties of the alfaqueques—the interpreters of that
era—while an ordinance published in New Spain in 1548 establishes the first
known comprehensive code of professional responsibility for court
interpreters. The requirements and ethical duties of court interpreters today
remain essentially unchanged, nearly six hundred years later. This is a
testament to the enduring nature of the fundamental tenets of court
interpreting, which serve as the scaffolding upon which this manual is built.
Appendix 7 - Ordinance of 1548 (Translation) contains the full text of that
1548 ordinance, written in Spanish and printed in Gothic script,
transliterated into readable 16th century Spanish, then faithfully translated
into English. Anyone intimately familiar with court interpreting will find it
quaint, yet strikingly familiar. A facsimile of the original ordinance is found in
Appendix 6 - Ordinance of 1548 (Facsimile).

The Nutca Territory

A papal bull issued in 1493 by Pope Alexander VI—later clarified by the
Treaty of Tordesillas—granted all lands to the west and south of the Azores
Islands to the Catholic Monarchs Ferdinand and Isabella of Castile. In the
eyes of the Europeans, Spain became the nominal sovereign of the Pacific
Northwest, first known as the Nutca (Nootka) Territory—a political
subdivision of the Viceroyalty of New Spain. In 1794, a royal decree created
the Captaincy of the Pacific Northwest Territories that included the provinces
of El Oregón or Orejón (Oregon), Quadra (Washington State) and Nutca
(British Columbia). By that time, the Spanish Crown had long been in the
business of regulating interpreters.

Interpreters as Agents of the Spanish Crown

Interpreting was a daily occurrence and the need for interpretation services
is referenced throughout antiquity. How did one become an interpreter? In
some cases, children were enrolled in language schools based on their
intelligence or aptitude for languages. Otherwise, the choice of the

Appendix 5 - A Bit of History 105

interpreting profession was generally happenstance, falling on people such
as:
• Children raised in a bilingual home
• Shipwrecked sailors and passengers stranded in a land with a different
language
• Prisoners of war, slaves, and former slaves
While the general public frequently calls interpreters “translators,” these are
two distinct professions requiring different skills. The word translator comes
from the Latin past participle translatus meaning “carried over” and applies
to the transfer of a message written in one language into another written
language.
The word interpreter comes from the Latin preposition inter (between or
among) and pret (root of the word price). Interpreters functioned as lead
negotiators in commercial transactions and as diplomats. They enjoyed
protected status, which is why instances of their mistreatment are
documented in historical records.
The Hebrew language makes a distinction between ‫( מתרגם‬metargem)—
referring to a translator of written texts—and ‫( מתורגמן‬meturgeman) referring
to a translator of spoken conversations. In Arabic, the word ‫( ترجمان‬tarjumān)
became dragoman in Turkish and trujamán in Spanish. Both words,
trujamán and intérprete, coexisted in the Spanish language until the 17th
century. A very special kind of trujamán were the alfaqueques.
An alfaqueque (from Arabic ‫ الفَ ّكاك‬al fakkak, faqqeq or fakkek literally the jaw,
from which comes the verb to unfasten, loosen, or unchain) was an agent of
the Spanish crown in charge of negotiating the release of Christian captives
held in Muslim lands, frequently through payment of a ransom. These special
trujamanes, fluent in Arabic and Castilian Spanish, were either Jews,
Muslims living in Christian lands, or Christians who had converted to Islam.
King Alfonso X of Castile (aka Alfonso the Wise) introduced the first
vernacular law code in Spain, called the Siete Partidas. This seven-part
code36 was written between 1256 and 1265 by a commission of the principal
Castilian jurists of the day, under the personal direction of Alfonso X. Title 30

36
Scott, S. (2001). Las Siete Partidas, Volume 2: Medieval Government: The World of Kings
and Warriors (Partida II) (R. Burns, Ed.). University of Pennsylvania Press.

Appendix 5 - A Bit of History 106

of the Second Partida regulates the appointment and conduct of the
alfaqueques.
As agents of the crown, alfaqueques carried the sovereign’s banner when
traveling. They were selected from among families of good repute by a panel
of twelve “good men” appointed by the crown, its representatives, or the
council from the locality they resided in, and they enjoyed both high status
and special protections. Alfaqueques received compensation directly from
either the king or the council of the locality that had appointed them, and
they bore a fiduciary duty over ransom funds. Pursuant to Law 1, there were
six important qualifications to becoming an alfaqueque:
1. They must be faithful [to the message]
2. They must lack greed
3. They must be fluent in a second language
4. They must not be disliked
5. They must be diligent
6. They must have something of their own (i.e. financial security)
Excerpt from Las Siete Partidas, Partida Segunda:

Título XXX Title 30

Que fabla de los alfaqueques. Concerning the alfaqueques.

De los que cativan et de las cosas We dutifully addressed captives and

dellos fablamos complidamente en their affairs in the laws of the previous
las leyes del título ante deste: title.

et agora queremos decir en este And now, in this one about the
de los alfaqueques que son alfaqueques, we want to say that they
trujamanes et fieles para are interpreters and good at
pleytearlos et sacarlos de cativo: negotiating and releasing people from
captivity.

et mostraremos qué quier decir And we will show what the word
alfaqueque: alfaqueque means.

et qué cosas debe haber en sí And what qualities they must possess
aquel que escogen para este to be chosen for this duty.
oficio:

Appendix 5 - A Bit of History 107

 et cómo debe ser escogido et And how they must be chosen and
fecho, et qui lo puede facer: appointed, and who can do it.

et qué cosas deben guardar et And what things alfaqueques must

facer los alfaqueques: protect and do.

et qué galardón deben haber And what reward they must receive
quando bien ficieren su oficio: when they perform their duty well.

et qué pena quando andudiesen And what penalties when they do it

mal en él. wrong.

LEY I LAW 1

Qué qiere decir alfaqueques, et Meaning of the word alfaqueques and

qué cosas deben haber en sí. what qualities they should possess.

Alfaqueques tanto quiere decir en Alfaqueques means, in Arabic as well,

arábigo como homes de buena men of good standing appointed to
verdat que son puestos para sacar ransom back captives, and these, as
los cativos; et estos segunt los the ancients explained, must possess
antiguos mostraron deben haver six qualities:
en sí seis cosas;

La primera que sean verdaderos First, they must be faithful [to the
onde llevan el nombre; message] within their official capacity;

La segunda sin codicia; Second, they must be without greed;

La tercera que sean sabidores Third, they must be as knowledgeable

también del lenguaje daquella of the language of the land to which
tierra á que van, como del de la they go as of their own [language];
suya;

La quarta que no sean Fourth, they must not be disliked;

malquisitos;

La quinta que sean esforzados; Fifth, they must be diligent;

La sexta que hayan algo de suyo. Sixth, they must have something of
their own.

Appendix 5 - A Bit of History 108

Once appointed, an alfaqueque had to swear an oath to be honest in all
matters relating to the captives, promoting their interests, and protecting
them from harm. They had to uphold impartiality by swearing to keep their
personal preferences from interfering with the faithful execution of their
duties. Penalties, up to and including death, for failing to properly execute
their duties were commensurate with the damages and suffering caused by
their misconduct.
In truth, alfaqueques were bilingual negotiators in the Reconquista,37 not
interpreters. However, their code of professional responsibility has several
underlying ethical values found in current interpreter codes: honesty,
accuracy, integrity, competence, and impartiality. The structure of Title 30
has many elements found in well-drafted codes of professional
responsibility: a preamble summarizing the topics to be addressed, canons
with underlying ethical values to uphold and accompanying commentary,
applicability, and compliance.

Interpreters in the Americas

Interpreters were instrumental in the Spanish conquest of the Americas.
Several ordinances38 published throughout the XVI century mandated
explorers to bring interpreters with them to lands of potential conquest in
order to gain knowledge about the peoples inhabiting them. While the first
interpreters in the Americas were captured Amerindians and shipwrecked
Spaniards, by 1548 interpreters were listed as officers of the court with their
own school39 and a code of professional responsibility. Within half a century,
interpreters went from ad hoc bilinguals to full-fledged professionals. Here is
their remarkable journey.

37
The Spanish Reconquista was a period in the history of the Iberian Peninsula that lasted
more than 700 years, during which the Christian kingdoms reconquered the lands taken by
the Moors.
38Ordinance 14, Law 9, “…the discoverers shall bring interpreters and shall inform
themselves as stated in this law.”
Lyman, T. S. (1980). Spanish laws concerning discoveries, pacifications, and settlements
among the Indians: With an introduction and the first English translation of the New
ordinances of Philip II, July 1573, and of Book IV of the Recopilación de leyes de los reinos
de las Indias, relating to these subjects. Salt Lake City, UT: American West Center,
University of Utah.
39
In 1545, the Franciscan lawyer Juan de Herrera founded the first school for Amerindian
interpreters housed in the monastery of Maní in Yucatan. Notable alumni of this school are
Gaspar Antonio Xiu, known as “the great Nahuatlato,” who was fluent in four languages,
and the brothers Pablo and Pedro Pech, who wrote the history of their people.

Appendix 5 - A Bit of History 109

In 1492, when Cristopher Columbus set sail to discover a new passage to
India,40 he brought with him two professional interpreters fluent in Arabic,
Hebrew, Chaldean, and other languages spoken along the Silk Road.41 Much
to their dismay, when the ships arrived in the Bahamas, the Spaniards were
reduced to communicating with the Amerindians through hand signs and
gestures. On October 12, 1492, Columbus wrote in his journal:

Yo vide algunos que tenían I saw that many [Indians] had scars
señales de feridas en sus cuerpos on their bodies, and when I
y les hize señas qué era aquello, y communicated through signs to find
ellos me amostraron cómo allí out what this was about, they
venían gente de otras yslas que indicated that people from other
estavan açerca y los querían nearby islands came to try to capture
tomar y se defendían. Y yo creyý them and they defended themselves. I
e creo que aquí vienen de tierra believed and believe that people from
firme a tomarlos por captivos. the mainland come here to take them
Ellos deven ser buenos servidores as captives. They ought to make good
y de buen ingenio, que veo que and smart servants, for they
muy presto dizen todo lo que les immediately repeat whatever we say
dezía. Y creo que ligeramente se to them. I think they can quickly be
harían cristianos, que me pareçió made Christians, for they seem to
que ninguna secta tenían. Yo, have no religion. If it pleases Our
plaziendo a Nuestro Señor, levaré Lord, when I depart from here I will
de aquí al tiempo de mi partida take six of them to Your Highnesses so
seys a Vuestras Altezas para que that they may learn to speak [the
deprendan fablar. Spanish language].42

In March 1493, Columbus arrived in Spain with a total of ten Amerindians.

Of them, only one, a young man from San Salvador Island, actually became
an interpreter. He was baptized with the name of Diego Columbus and
formally adopted by Columbus. Later that same year, Diego Columbus
returned to the Caribbean as Columbus’ interpreter during the exploration of
Puerto Rico, Cuba, and Jamaica. He traveled to Spain a second time and

40
The Silk Road closed to Christian traders after the fall of Constantinople to the Ottoman
Empire in 1543. To reach the Far East, traders began considering sailing west across the
Atlantic, which would be faster than sailing around the African continent.
Villalba Fernandez, M. (2019). La figura del intérprete en el descubrimiento de América.
41

Madrid, Spain: Universidad Pontificia Comillas.

42
Fuson, R. H. (Ed.). (1992). The log of Christopher Columbus. Tab Books, International
Marine Publishing. ISBN 0-87742-316-4.

Appendix 5 - A Bit of History 110

eventually settled in Santo Domingo, currently the Dominican Republic.
Diego Columbus is last mentioned in the Spanish records in 1514 and is
presumed to have not survived the small pox epidemic of 1519.43
In February 1519, when conquistador Hernan Cortés first landed on the
Yucatán Peninsula, he found his first interpreter in Father Jerónimo de
Aguilar.44 After surviving a shipwreck in 1511, the priest had been captured
by the Mayas and taken to the Yucatán Peninsula, where he learned Maya
Chontal. In March 1519, Cortés defeated the Mayas of Tabasco, who gifted
him food, gold, and twenty enslaved women. Among them was an Aztec
woman of noble birth who had been sold into slavery by her own people to
the Maya at about age ten.
Baptized by the Spaniards and given the Christian name Marina, she
interpreted from Nahuatl, the language spoken by the Aztecs, into Maya
Chontal45 for Father Aguilar, who relay-interpreted into Spanish. The
Spaniards called her Doña Marina, the natives called her Malintzine (Lady
Marina), and she is known today as La Malinche. She quickly learned
Spanish, and she became Cortés's primary interpreter, mistress, and cultural
broker, as well as the mother of his first son, Martín.
Her interpreting was not always impartial or neutral. For example, after
talking to the wife of one of the lords of Cholula, Malinche informed Cortés of
a plan to murder the Spaniards in their sleep. On October 18, 1519, Cortés
ordered a pre-emptive strike known in history as the Cholula Massacre,
garishly depicted in the Lienzo de Tlaxcala. Malinche figures prominently in
this and other codices, always assisting the Spaniards. Tales of the massacre
nudged other cities in the Aztec Empire to find ways to placate Cortés. On
November 8, 1519, Cortés entered Tenochtitlan where he met Moctezuma,
the Aztec Emperor. Malinche interpreted between them and was an active
participant in Moctezuma’s demise. Malinche’s partiality gave rise to the
pejorative term “malinchism,” used to describe those who feel a deference to
foreign cultures over their own.
She gave birth to Cortés's first son, Martín. In 1522, Cortés’s wife arrived
from Cuba and, soon after, Malinche was ordered to marry one of Cortés’
allies. Though Cortés granted her lands as a dowry, he sent their son Martín

43
La figura del intérprete en el descubrimiento de América. See footnote 29.
44
Varela, C. (2014). Las conquistas Hispanas del siglo XVI: La función de los intérpretes,
lenguas y guías. Cuadernos de la Escuela Diplomática 50, 15-33.
45
The Mayan language family consists of thirty languages within the following branches:
Huastecan, Yucatecan, Ch’olan-Tzeltalan, Q’anjobalan, Mamean and K’iche’an.

Appendix 5 - A Bit of History 111

away to foster with one of his cousins. Having lost her son and no longer
interpreting, Malinche languished in her estates in Orizaba and died in 1531.
In addition to military conquest, there was another no less compelling
reason for the Spanish crown to have interpreters—the conversion of souls
to the Catholic faith. The Catholic Spaniards needed to understand the
peoples of the newly conquered lands to effectively convert them to
Catholicism, in order to compete with the Protestant Reformation. Once
converted, these new Christians enjoyed all the protections of the crown,
including seeking remedy in a court of law.

Court Interpreters in New Spain

In 1528, in order to counterbalance Cortés’ power in the Viceroyalty of New
Spain,46 Charles V created a high court (audiencia) and appointed a rival of
Cortés as its president.
The first interpreters for the High Court were Amerindians;47 Spanish
conquistadors married to Amerindian women;48 Spanish conquistadors who
had arrived to Mexico at a young age;49 the offspring of Spanish
conquistadors and Amerindian women, called mestizos,50 or their
grandchildren and great-grandchildren;51 and creoles—the American-born
offspring of Spanish-born parents.52 Interpreters in this court frequently
summarized instead of interpreting. There are also descriptions of
interpreters sight translating Spanish texts into Amerindian languages or
pictographic codices into Spanish.
Some of these first interpreters served in the many lawsuits in which Cortés
was involved. In one of these lawsuits, interpreter Antonio Velázquez is
accused of receiving chickens, corn, eggs, fish, and clothing. Pedro García
del Pilar was accused by a priest of numerous lies, extortion, and abusing

46
The territory of New Spain included most of present-day United States, Mexico, and
Central America. Its capital was Mexico City, originally known as Tenochtitlán, which was
the center of the Aztec empire.
47
Hernando de Tapia, Juan Juárez, and Pablo Pérez
48
Juan Pérez de Arteaga, Antonio Ortiz, Juan Freyle, Juan Grande, and Álvaro de León
49
Antonio Velázquez, Tomás de Rijoles, Álvaro de Zamora, and Juan Gallego
50
Pedro López de Barahona, Alonso Solís de Aguirre, Francisco Granado, and Juan de León
51
Juan de Leiva and Bernardino de Leiva
52
Francisco de Osorio Ribadeo, Juan Méndez de Sotomayor, and Juan de Riberol

Appendix 5 - A Bit of History 112

Amerindians and eventually landed in jail for stealing gold.53 Other early
interpreters for the high court—Antonio Ortiz, Tomás de Rijoles, and
Hernando de Tapia—were prosecuted by Tello de Sandoval (1543-1547) for
misconduct while rendering services. The misconduct of these early
interpreters would eventually lead to the creation of the first law pertaining
to court interpreters in New Spain:

El Emperador Don Carlos y la Reyna The Emperor Sir Charles and the
Gobernadora [Juana La Loca] en Governing Queen [Joanna The Mad]
Toledo à 24 de agosto de 1529. in Toledo on August 24, 1529.

Mandamos que ningún Intérprete, ó We order that no interpreter doing

Lengua de los que andan por la business in the provinces, cities,
Provincias, Ciudades y Pueblos de and Indian villages—having been so
los Indios á negocios ó diligencias, ordered by Governors and Justices,
que les ordenen los Gobernadores y or doing so on their own—may
Justicias, ó de su propia autoridad, either ask of or receive from
pueda pedir, ni recibir ni pida, ni Indians, either for themselves or on
reciba de los Indios para sí, ni las behalf of the Justices or anyone
Justicias, ni otras personas, joyas, else: jewels, clothing, maintenance,
ropas, mantenimientos, ni otras or anything else; under penalty of
ningunas cosas; pena de que el que forfeiture of their property to our
lo contrario hiciere pierda sus bienes court and tax authorities and
para nuestra Cámara y Fisco, y sea banishment from the land…
desterrado de la tierra…

By 1529, and similar to current practices, court interpreters were freelancers

sometimes paid by the government and sometimes in business for
themselves with their own clientele.
On July 12, 1530, the presiding and hearing judges of the High Court of New
Spain were ordered to procure, as they saw fit, a team of two interpreters or
two separate interpreters for each interpreted event.54 These interpreters

53 Alonso, I., Baigorri, J., & Payás, G. (2008). Nahuatlatos y familias de intérpretes en el
México colonial. Revista de la Historia de la Traducción, 2.
54Capítulo de la instrucción que se dio al presidente y oidores de la Audiencia de la Nueva
España en 12 de julio de 1530 que manda provean lo que más convenga cerca de concurrir
dos intérpretes juntos o cada uno por sí a la interpretación.
Cunill, C. (2018). Un mosaico de lenguas: Los intérpretes de la audiencia de México en el
siglo XVI. Historia mexicana, 68(1). https://doi.org/10.24201/hm.v68i1.3637

Appendix 5 - A Bit of History 113

could have been working in different language directions—one interpreting
from Spanish into Nahuatl and the other from Nahuatl into Spanish—or
taking turns interpreting to stave off fatigue.
On April 20, 1533, the Empress Isabella of Portugal sent a letter asking the
High Court in Mexico to submit a report to the Council of the Indies about
the salary of Nahuatl interpreters.55
In response to some concerns over the accuracy of the interpretation, the
practice of allowing a party to bring a check interpreter was introduced in
1537.

El Emperador Don Carlos y la The Emperor Sir Charles and the

Emperatriz Gobernadora [Isabel de Governing Empress [Isabella of
Portugal] en Valladolid á 12 de Portugal] in Valladolid on September
Septiembre de 1537. 12, 1537.

Somos informados que los We have been informed that the

Intérpretes y Naguatlatos, que interpreters and Nahuatl
tienen las Audiencias, y otros interpreters that High Courts and
Jueces, y Justicias de las Ciudades y other judges and justices in the
Villas de nuestras Indias al tiempo cities and villages of our Indies
que los Indios los llevan para have, when Indians bring them [the
otorgar escrituras, ó para decir sus interpreters] to offer written
dichos, ó hacer otras autos documents, testify, or do some
judiciales y extrajudiciales, y other judicial or extra-judicial
tomarles confesiones, dicen algunas proceeding and take down their
cosas, que no dixeron los Indios, ó confessions, they [the interpreters]
las dicen y declaran de otra forma, say some things that were not said
con que muchos han perdido su by the Indians or they say and
justicia, y recibido grava daño: declare them in another manner,
Mandamos que quando algunos de resulting in many [Indians] not
los Presidentes y Oidores de being granted justice and being
nuestras Audiencias, ú otro gravely harmed: We order that
cualquier Juez enviare á llamar á when some Presiding and Hearing
Indo, ó Indios, que no sepan la Judges of our High Courts, or any
lengua Castellana, para les other judge, summons an Indian or
preguntar alguna cosa, ó para otro Indians not fluent in Spanish, to
cualquier efecto, ó viniendo ellos de question them or for any other

55
Capítulo de carta que la Serenísima Emperatriz escribió a la Audiencia de México en 20 de
abril de 1533 que manda enviare relación al Consejo de Indias del salario de los naguatatos.
See footnote 36 for full citation.

Appendix 5 - A Bit of History 114

 su voluntad á pedir, ó seguir su purpose, or when they appear of
justicia, les dexen y consientan, que their own volition to seek or obtain
traygan consigo un Christiano amigo justice, they [the judges] should
suyo, que esté presente, para que allow and consent for them to bring
vea si lo que ellos dicen á lo que se a Christian friend to be present to
les pregunta y pide, es lo mismo see whether what they [the Indians]
que declaran los Naguatlatos, é say when questioned and asked is
Interpretes, porque de esta forma the same as what the Nahuatl
se pueda mejor saber la verdad de interpreters and interpreters state,
todo, y los Indios estén sin duda de because in this manner the truth of
que los Intérpretes no dexaron de it all may be ascertained, and the
declarar lo que ellos dixeron, y se Indians will not doubt that the
excusen otros muchos interpreters did not omit to state
inconvenientes, que se podrían what they said, and to avoid many
recrecer. other potential problems that could
escalate.

Conquered peoples were considered vassals of the Spanish monarch and as

such, the fate of the Amerindians appears to have been a constant concern
for Charles V. In response to complaints and calls for reform from individuals
such as friar Bartolomé de Las Casas, the emperor issued the New Laws of
the Indies for the Good Treatment and Preservation of the Amerindians
(Nuevas Leyes) published in 1544. These laws were intended to prevent the
exploitation and mistreatment of the indigenous peoples of the Americas.
The ordinance relating to court interpreters is a product of this regal
concern.

Ordinance of 1548
Antonio de Mendoza y Pacheco was the first Viceroy of New Spain (1535-
1550), with jurisdiction over North and Central America and was
headquartered in Mexico City. Many of his policies endured throughout the
entire colonial period. He introduced the first printing press to the Americas
in 1539. The printing press belonged to the Seville-based printer Juan
(Jacob) Cromberger and was operated by the Italian printer Juan Pablos
(Giovanni Paoli from Brescia).56 Years later, when Juan Pablos opened his
own printing house, the first publication under his seal was the Ordinances
and Compilation of Laws by Viceroy Antonio de Mendoza, published in 1548.

56
Guerrerro Nolasco, E. (2012). La imprenta de Juan Pablos en la Nueva España.
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.

Appendix 5 - A Bit of History 115

This publication includes general court rules, as well as court rules for the
officers of the Royal High Court of New Spain. Among the officers of the
court worthy of a court rule specifying their duties and expected behavior,
we find scribes (court reporters), law clerks, attorneys, prosecutors, fiscals
(attorneys general for fiscal matters), filing clerks, doormen, cashiers,
bailiffs, jailers, and interpreters. This ordinance is the oldest known written
code of ethics for court interpreters.
The viceroy ordered the appointment of a number of interpreters to the
Royal High Court of New Spain, located in Mexico City, and set forth their
salary. Following a pre-established rotation, interpreters were to show up in
court every morning at 9 a.m. These interpreters had to be duly sworn to
perform their task “well and faithfully,” expressing the matter before them
“clearly and frankly,” “without omitting or adding anything…, without being
partial toward any of the parties, and without favoring anyone.” Interpreters
found in violation of the ordinance faced hefty fines and the revocation of
their credentials. Interpreters could not accept gifts or ask for compensation
beyond what the court was paying them. They were not allowed to advocate
on behalf of the Amerindians. To avoid conflicts of interest, interpreters
could not hold private meetings with Amerindians to discuss court-related
matters, but rather, “without giving them audience,” had to bring them to be
heard in court. (Find the entire translated code here: Appendix 7 - Ordinance
of 1548 (Translation)
In 1563, Philip II incorporated several sections of the 1548 Ordinance
originally intended only for interpreters of the Royal High Court in New Spain
into the laws applicable to all the Indies. A notable addition to the robust
corpus of laws regulating interpreters came in 1630 when Philip IV
introduced the requirement that interpreters pass examinations and be
approved by vote of the “entire town hall or community of Indians.”

D. Felipe IV en San Lorenzo a 16 Sir Philip IV in San Lorenzo on

de octubre de 1630. October 16, 1630.

Que el nombramiento de los The appointment of interpreters shall

intérpretes se haga como se be done as ordered and they shall not
ordena, y no sean removidos sin be removed [from office] without
causa y den residencia.

Appendix 5 - A Bit of History 116

 cause and shall be subject to trial of
residence.57

Nombran los gobernadores a sus Governors appoint their servants as

criados por intérpretes de los interpreters for the Indians and many
indios, y de no entender la lengua problems arise because they do not
resultan muchos inconvenientes: understand the language: In
Teniendo consideración al remedio, consideration of the remedy and
y deseando que los intérpretes, wishing that the interpreters, beyond
demás de la inteligencia de la knowledge of the language, should be
lengua, sean de gran confianza y of great trustworthiness and
satisfacción: Mandamos que los competence; we order that
gobernadores, corregidores y governors, representatives of the
alcaldes mayores de las ciudades crown, and city mayors shall not
no hagan los nombramientos de appoint their own interpreters.
los intérpretes solos, sino que Instead, [appointments] should be
preceda examen, voto y made after examination, vote, and
aprobación de todo el cabildo o approval of the entire city council or
comunidad de los indios, y que el Indian community. And that once
que una vez fuere nombrado no appointed, they shall not be removed
pueda ser removido sin causa, y from office without cause and they
que se les tome residencia cuando shall be subject to trial of residence
la hubieren de dar los demás at the same time as the other city
oficiales de las ciudades y cabildos officials and councilmembers.
de ellas.

Proof of the Spanish Crown’s continued interest in regulating interpreters

can be found in the Compilation of the Laws of the Kingdoms of the Indies
published in 1680, where an entire chapter is dedicated to interpreters (Title
29 - About the Interpreters).
Although this code was published in the 16th century and contains language
that is strange and possibly offensive to the modern ear, it is remarkable for
its similarities and concern for all participants in legal proceedings. We find
that it contains the same enduring ethical values and tenets found in the 21st
century Washington State Code of Professional Responsibility. Under penalty

57
Juicio de residencia (trial of residence) was a judicial process at the end of one’s term in
office. It consisted of the following: at the termination of a public functionary's term, his
performance in office was subject to review, and those with grievances against him were
entitled to a hearing. This was largely an automatic procedure and did not imply prior
suspicion of misconduct.

Appendix 5 - A Bit of History 117

of severe punishment and loss of licensure, interpreters were required to be
accurate, competent, honest, impartial, and neutral and to refrain from
advocacy. Half a millennium later, so much remains the same.

Appendix 5 - A Bit of History 118

 Appendix 6 - Ordinance of 1548 (Facsimile)

Appendix 6 - Ordinance of 1548 (Facsimile) 119

Appendix 6 - Ordinance of 1548 (Facsimile) 120
Appendix 6 - Ordinance of 1548 (Facsimile) 121
Appendix 6 - Ordinance of 1548 (Facsimile) 122
Appendix 6 - Ordinance of 1548 (Facsimile) 123
Appendix 6 - Ordinance of 1548 (Facsimile) 124
Appendix 6 - Ordinance of 1548 (Facsimile) 125
Appendix 6 - Ordinance of 1548 (Facsimile) 126
Appendix 7 - Ordinance of 1548 (Translation)
The translation of the Ordenanza below is from photocopies of facsimile No.
548, printed in 1945 by Ediciones Cultura Hispánica and acquired by the
Bodelian Library in 1968. The book of ordinances has all the trappings of
early printed books: Gothic script, funky punctuation, and a gross abuse of
abbreviations. The price of paper and ink, as well as labor-intensive printing
costs, incentivized printers and their clients to cut as many corners as
possible. The type characters had to be set on a composing stick, which
needed to fit into a wooden tray called a galley. To produce a compact body
of text, avoid uneven spaces between words, and make lines end evenly,
typesetters used fat and skinny letters and punctuation marks such as the
colon. If the words didn’t quite fit into the line, a word was either shortened
through abbreviations or the letters were printed closer together. To give
you a taste:
Transcription from Gothic to Latin script:

Modern Spanish spelling:

Y que por ello no llevarán interés alguno, más del salario que les
fuere tasado y señalado: so pena de perjuros y del daño e
interese de las partes y que volverán lo que así llevaren con las
setenas y de perdimiento de los oficios.
Here is our transcription to modern Spanish spelling (left column) and
translation into English (right column).

Modern Spanish Script English Translation

Con privilegio [de] With [printing] privilege58 [of]

58
Printing privilege was a precursor of modern copyright. Monarchs used to grant monopoly
rights to a printer for a set number of years.

Appendix 7 - Ordinance of 1548 (Translation) 127

 CAROLUS V IMPERATOR CHARLES V EMPEROR OF THE
HISPANIERES SPANIARDS59

Ordenanzas y compilación de leyes Ordinances and Compilation of Laws

hechas por el muy ilustre señor Don promulgated by the very illustrious
Antonio de Mendoza, Virrey y gentleman Sir Antonio de Mendoza,
Gobernador de esta Nueva España Viceroy and Governor of New Spain
y Presidente de la Audiencia Real and President of the Royal High
que en ella reside, y por los Court60 over which he presides, and
Señores Oidores de la dicha by the Hearing Judges of said court;
audiencia; para la buena for the good governance and conduct
gobernación y estilo de los oficiales of its officers. Year 1548.
de ella. Año de 1548.

[SEAL]

Yo el rey. I, the King.

CARLOS V EMPERADOR DE LOS CHARLES V EMPEROR OF THE

ESPAÑOLES SPANIARDS

Yo, Francisco de los Cobos, I, Francisco de los Cobos, Secretary

Secretario de sus Sacras Cesáreas to their Sacred Catholic Caesarian
Católicas Majestades, las hice Majesties, had them written by their
escribir por su mandado. order.

Registrada. Juan de Samano Registered. Juan de Samano

Por Canciller. JuanGallo de Andrada By Chancellor. JuanGallo de

Andrada

Hermano G. episcopus Oxomensis Brother G. Bishop of Osma

(Obispo de Osma)

El doctor Beltrán Attorney Beltrán

59
Charles I, King of Spain, and Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor (one and the same
individual)
60
In the Americas, the audiencias were given a consultative and quasi-legislative role in the
administration of the colonies and were ultimately overseen by the Council of the Indies.

Appendix 7 - Ordinance of 1548 (Translation) 128

 Tabla. Table of Contents

Tabla de lo que se contiene en este Table of what is contained in this

libro de ordenanzas. book of ordinances

Escribanos...folio i Scribes [Court Reporters]…page 1

Relator...folio vi Law Clerk...page 6

Abogados...folio x Attorneys...page 10

Procuradores...folio xiii Prosecutors...page 13

Fiscal...folio xiiii Fiscal61...page 14

Receptores…folio xiiii Filing Clerks...page 14

Porteros y receptores de las Doormen and Cashiers...page 24

penas…folio xxiiii

Alguaciles…folio xxiii y folio xxvi Bailiffs...pages 23 and 26

Carceleros...folio xxv Jailers...page 25

Intèrpretes...folio xxx Interpreters...page 30

Ordenanzas de esta Real Ordinances62 of this Royal High

Audiencia…folio xxxii Court…page 32

Intérpretes de la audiencia Interpreters for the high court

Que haya número de intérpretes y There shall be a number of sworn

juren. interpreters.

Que haya número de intérpretes y This high court shall have a number
naguatatos de esta audiencia. Y que of appointed interpreters and
antes que sean recibidos a viar el Nahuatl interpreters. And before
oficio juren en forma debida que being allowed to practice, they shall

61
Attorney General who corresponded directly with the crown, especially on fiscal matters.
62
General Rules of Court

Appendix 7 - Ordinance of 1548 (Translation) 129

 viarán sus oficios bien y fielmente; be duly sworn to render their
declarando e interpretando el services well and faithfully; making
negocio y pleito que les fuere statements and interpreting business
cometido, clara y abiertamente sin and lawsuits entrusted to them
encubrir ni añadir cosa alguna. clearly and frankly, without omitting
Diciendo simplemente el hecho del or adding anything. Simply stating
pleito o negocio o testigo que the matter of the lawsuit or business
examinare; sin ser parcial a alguna or the witness [statements] under
de las partes; y sin favorecer más a examination; without being partial
uno que a otro. Y que por ello no toward any of the parties; and
llevarán interés alguno, más del without favoring anyone. And in
salario que les fuere tasado y order to do so, they shall have no
señalado: so pena de perjuros y del interest other than their scheduled
daño e interese de las partes y que salary as indicated; under penalty of
volverán lo que así llevaren con las perjury and being liable for any
setenas y de perdimiento de los damages to the interested parties,
oficios. and for any undue gain they shall
pay restitution sevenfold to the
parties and lose their office.

No reciban dádivas. They shall not accept gifts.

Que no reciba dádivas ni promesas Interpreters shall not accept gifts or

de Españoles ni de los indios, ni de pledges, neither from Spaniards nor
otras personas que con ellos from Indians, nor from anyone else
tuvieren o se espere que tengan with whom they may have or expect
pleitos o negocios, en poca o en to have lawsuits or business,
mucha cantidad aún que sean cosas regardless of the quantity, even
de comer y beber y aún que sean when it is food or drink and even
ofrecidas o dadas y prometidas de when offered or given and pledged
su propia voluntad sin que los voluntarily, without said interpreters
dichos intérpretes ni otros por ellos or anyone else requesting them on
lo pidan, so pena que lo vuelvan con their behalf; under penalty of paying
las septenas para nuestra cámara y restitution to our court, sevenfold
que esto se pueda probar contra their gain, as long as this can be
ellos por la vía de prueba que las proven against them with the same
leyes disponen contra los jueces y due process afforded to judges and
oficiales de la audiencia. officers of this court.

Appendix 7 - Ordinance of 1548 (Translation) 130

 No oigan en su casa a los indios. They shall not give Indians audience
in their homes.

Que no oigan en sus casas ni fuera Interpreters shall not give audience
de ella a los indios que vinieran a to Indians who come for lawsuits or
pleitos o negocios; sino que luego business, inside or outside of their
sin oírlos los traigan ante Presidente homes. Instead, later without giving
u Oidores o cualesquiera de ellos them audience, interpreters shall
para que allí se vea y determine la bring them before either the
causa conforme a la justicia so pena Presiding or Hearing Judges or any
de dos pesos para los extraviados of the others so that the case can be
por la primera vez que lo contrario seen and the cause determined
hicieren y por la segunda la pena pursuant to the law; under penalty
doblada aplicada según dicho es. Y of a two-peso63 fine for first time
por la tercera que demás de la dicha offenders and twice that amount for
pena doblada, [que] pierdan sus second time offenders. Third time
oficios. offenders will pay double the fine
and lose their office.

No ordenen peticiones. They shall not submit petitions.

Que no ordenen peticiones a los Interpreters shall not submit

indios, ni sean en sus causas o petitions on behalf of Indians in
negocios procuradores ni their legal cases or business
solicitadores, so la pena contenida dealings, neither as prosecutors nor
en la ordenanza antes de esta, solicitors, under penalty as indicated
aplicada como en ella se contiene. in the above ordinance sections, as
applicable.

Que estén a los acuerdos. They shall be present at

settlements.

63
The word peso literally means "weight." Initially, the peso was produced in the Spanish
colonies by cutting off a lump of silver of proper weight and fineness from the end of a silver
bar, which was then flattened out and impressed by a hammer. This resulted in a crude,
irregular coin called a cob in English, or a macuquina in Spanish. Appearing first in 1537,
the silver peso (also called peso fuerte, patacón, duro, or piece of eight by the English)
became a standard monetary unit for the entire American continent for three centuries.

Appendix 7 - Ordinance of 1548 (Translation) 131

 Que asistan a los acuerdos y a las They shall be present at
audiencias y visitas de las cárceles settlements, hearings, and Indian
de indios. Y cada día que no fuere jail visits. And every business day,
feriado, a lo menos en las tardes at least in the afternoons, they shall
vayan y asistan en casa del go to the house of the Presiding and
Presidente y Oidores. Y para todo lo Hearing Judges. Regarding all the
susodicho y cualquier cosa y parte aforesaid and anything related
de ello tengan entre sí cuidado de thereto, they should take care that
ellos o cualquier de ellos no se dejen the rulings and business dealings
de determinar las causas y negocios not be delayed; under penalty of
ni se dilaten, so pena de un peso de paying one gold peso64 to the poor
oro para los pobres por cada día que for each day that any of said
los dichos intérpretes faltaren o interpreters fail to appear in any of
cualquiera de ellos en cualquier cosa the aforesaid matters. Furthermore,
de las sobredichas; demás que they shall pay damages, interest,
pagaran el daño e intereses y costos and expenses to the party or parties
a la parte o partes que por esta delayed for this reason.
causa estuvieren detenidos.

Que no se ausenten. They shall not fail to appear.

Que no se ausenten sin licencia del They shall not fail to appear without
President so pena que pierdan el leave from the Presiding Judge
salario del tiempo que estuvieren under penalty of losing their salary
ausentes y de diez pesos para los for the duration of their absence and
estrados por cada vez que los of ten pesos payable to the bench
contrario hicieren. for each time they fail to appear.

No contraten con los indios. They shall not enter into contracts
with Indians.

Que cuando fueren a negocios o When needing to leave this city for
pleitos fuera de esta ciudad, no business or lawsuits, interpreters
lleven de las partes directa ni shall not take anything either

64
The peso de oro known as Tepuzque (the Aztec word for copper), was a gold disc
stamped with its weight and fineness and sometimes with royal countermarks. Although not
strictly coins, Tepuzques served as money and circulated as late as 1591.

Appendix 7 - Ordinance of 1548 (Translation) 132

 indirectamente cosa alguna más del directly or indirectly from any of the
salario que les fuere señalado; ni parties other than their scheduled
hagan conciertos ni contratos con salary; neither enter into
los indios; ni compañías en manera agreements or contracts with the
alguna. So pena de volver lo que así Indians, nor form companies of any
llevaren y contrataren con las kind. Under penalty of having to pay
setenas, y de privación perpetua de restitution sevenfold what they took
sus oficios. or contracted for and lifetime
revocation of their office.

Asistan por su orden. They shall appear per their

schedule.

Que asistan por su rueda y orden a They shall appear per their
las almonedas de su Majestad so scheduled rotation at his Majesty’s
pena de un peso para los estrados auctions of seized property, under
por cada vez que faltare el penalty of one peso payable to the
intérprete a quien cabe de asistir a court for each time the assigned
ellas como dicho es. interpreter fails to appear as
indicated above.

Salario. Salary.

Que por cada día que cualquiera de For each day that any of said
los dichos intérpretes saliere de esta interpreters leaves this city by order
ciudad por mandado de esta Real of this Royal Court, they shall take
audiencia lleve de salario para with them salary to help defray the
ayuda de costa un peso de oro costs of no more than one common
común y no más. Y que no lleve gold peso. And they shall take
comida ni otra cosa alguna a fin de neither food nor any other thing to
pagar lo de ninguna de las partes, pay any party, either directly or
directa o indirectamente, so pena de indirectly, under penalty of paying
pagarlo con las setenas para la restitution sevenfold to the court as
cámara como dicho es. stated above.

Derechos por los testigos. Rights for [examination of]

witnesses.

Appendix 7 - Ordinance of 1548 (Translation) 133

 Que de cada testigo que examinaren For each witness under examination,
siendo el interrogatorio de doce interpreters can take two tomines65
preguntas arriba puedan llevar dos for an interrogation over twelve
tomines. Y siendo el interrogatorio questions, and no more than one
de doce preguntas abajo, un tomín tomín for an interrogation under
y no más; so pena de pagarlo con el twelve questions; under penalty of
cuatrotanto para la cámara. Pero si paying restitution fourfold to the
el interrogatorio fuere grande y la court. However, if the examination
causa ardua, que el Oidor o juez is long and the case arduous, the
ante quien se examinare le pueda Hearing Judge or judge overseeing
tasar demás de los dichos derechos the examination can assess a
una suma moderada; conforme al moderate sum above the standard
trabajo y tiempo que se ocupare. amount based on the duration of the
work.

Que asista el uno en el oficio. There shall be one present at the

office.

Que un intérprete por su orden Every day at nine in the morning,

resida cada día de audiencia en el per the schedule, an interpreter of
oficio del Secretario a las nueve the high court shall be present at
horas de la mañana para tomar la the Secretary’s office to receive
memoria que el Fiscal le diere para from the Fiscal the calendar of the
llamar los testigos que conviene witnesses to be examined by the
examinarse para el derecho del Fiscal’s office. A penalty of two
fisco. So pena de dos reales para los reales66 per day of absence shall be
pobres de la cárcel por cada un día paid to the indigent prisoners.
que faltare.

65
A tomín (plural tomines) was a unit of weight and currency derived from the Arabic word
‫( ث ُ ْمن‬tumn) meaning “one eighth.”
66
The real was a silver coin minted in half-, one-, two-, four- and eight-real denominations.
After the discovery of silver in Central and South America, the eight-real coin (referred to
since then as a dollar, a peso or “piece of eight”) became an internationally recognized
trade coin in Europe, Asia and North America.

Appendix 7 - Ordinance of 1548 (Translation) 134

 Que en lo aquí no proveído guarden Laws and royal ordinances shall be
las leyes y ordenanzas reales. followed even when not provided
herein.

Que todos los oficiales aquí All officers named herein and
nombrados y de suso declarados en declared above, even when not
lo que aquí no estuviere declarado y stated and provided herein: they
proveido: guarden las leyes y shall follow the laws and regulations
premáticas de estos reinos: y las of these kingdoms and the other
otras ordenanzas y provisiones de ordinances and provisions of this
esta Nueva España como en ellas se New Spain as contained therein,
contienen y so las penas en ellas under penalty contained in them.
contenidas.

A gloria y honra de nuestro señor To the glory and honor of our Lord
Jesucristo. Aquí se acaban las Jesus Christ. Here end the
Ordenanzas y compilación de leyes Ordinances and Compilation of Laws
nuevamente ordenadas por el muy newly ordered by the most
ilustre señor Don Antonio de illustrious gentleman Sir Antonio de
Mendoza, Virrey y Gobernador de Mendoza, Viceroy and Governor of
esta Nueva España y Presidente de this New Spain and Presiding Judge
la Audiencia Real que en ella reside, of the Royal High Court over which
y por los señores Oidores; para la he presides, and by the honorable
buena gobernación y estilo de los Hearing Judges; for the good
oficiales de ella. Y fueron por su governance and conduct of its
mando impresas en la muy leal y officers. And printed by their
gran ciudad de México en casa de mandate in the most loyal and great
Juan Pablos. Acabáronse de city of Mexico in the printing house
imprimir a los 22 días del mes de of Juan Pablos. Printing completed
marzo del año 1548. this 22nd day of March in the year
1548.

Translation by Milena Calderari-Waldron reviewed by Lorane West with the

assistance of María Luisa Gracia Camón and Linda Noble.

Appendix 7 - Ordinance of 1548 (Translation) 135

 Appendix 8 - Chapter 2.43 RCW Interpreters
for Non-English-Speaking Persons
Sections

2.43.010 Legislative intent.

2.43.020 Definitions.

2.43.030 Appointment of interpreter.

2.43.040 Fees and expenses—Cost of providing interpreter—

Reimbursement.

2.43.050 Oath.

2.43.060 Waiver of right to interpreter.

2.43.070 Testing, certification of interpreters.

2.43.080 Code of ethics.

2.43.090 Language assistance plan—Required for each trial court—

Submission of plan to interpreter commission—Report.

Appendix 8 - Chapter 2.43 RCW Interpreters for Non-English-Speaking Persons

136
 Appendix 9 - Chapter 2.42 RCW Interpreters
in Legal Proceedings
Sections

2.42.010 Legislative declaration—Intent.

2.42.050 Oath.

2.42.110 Definitions.

2.42.120 Appointment of interpreter—Responsibility for compensation—

Reimbursement.

2.42.130 Source of interpreters, qualifications.

2.42.140 Intermediary interpreter, when.

2.42.150 Waiver of right to interpreter.

2.42.160 Privileged communication.

2.42.170 Fee.

2.42.180 Visual recording of testimony.

Appendix 9 - Chapter 2.42 RCW Interpreters in Legal Proceedings

137