The conversation delves into ideological issues involved in the widespread use of machine translation and the real-life impact for those who may rely on machine translations in various situations. Esther’s research and the wide variety of contributions to the book highlight the need to open a discussion about instilling an ‘ethics of care’ perspective into the use of technology to make AI generated translations more inclusive and relevant for the communities using them.

If you liked this episode, support us by subscribing to the Language on the Move Podcast on your podcast app of choice, leaving a 5-star review, and recommending the Language on the Move Podcast and our partner the New Books Network to your students, colleagues, and friends.

Transcript (coming soon)

In this episode, Brynn and Dr. Cho discuss Dr. Cho’s new book, Multilingual Practices and Monolingual Mindsets: Critical Sociolinguistic Perspectives on Health Care Interpreting. With a novel approach, which sees interpreting as social activities infused with power, Dr. Cho’s research and this book have captured the dynamics of cultural, linguistic, and ethnic power relations in diverse sociolinguistic contexts.

For more Language on the Move resources related to this topic, see Reducing Barriers to Language Assistance in Hospital, Life in a New Language, Linguistic Inclusion in Public Health Communications, and Interpreting service provision is good value for money.

If you liked this episode, be sure to say hello to Brynn and Language on the Move on Bluesky! Support us by subscribing to the Language on the Move Podcast on your podcast app of choice, leaving a 5-star review, and recommending the Language on the Move Podcast and our partner the New Books Network to your students, colleagues, and friends.

***

Laura Smith-Khan and Alex Grey

***

Dr Jinhyun Cho

Dr Jinhyun Cho has investigated interplays between monolingualism and multilingual practices in courtrooms, with a focus on interpreters. Focusing on linguistic, institutional and cultural hierarchies in Australian legal spaces, Dr Jinhyun Cho’s work has revealed how power differentials influence the choices that legal interpreters make in the course of interpreting and drawn attention to the need for legal professionals to enhance their awareness of interpreting through the formalisation of multilingualism within university-level studies of law. She is based at Macquarie University in Australia.

Her 2024 collaborative work on the Khmer Rouge Tribunal (the ECCC) represents her broad interdisciplinary approach which brings together interpreting, sociolinguistics and law.

Recent publications

Killean, R., Grey, R., Cho, J., & Stern, L. (2024). Translating atrocity at the Khmer Rouge Tribunal. New Mandala.
Cho, J. (2021). Intercultural communication in interpreting: Power and choices. Routledge.
Cho, J. (2021). ‘That’s not how we speak’: interpreting monolingual ideologies in courtrooms. Griffith Law Review, 30(1), 50-70.

Research project team (L-R): Dr Julie Lim, Professor Ludmila Stern, Professor Sandra Hale, Associate Professor Melanie Schwartz and Professor Stephen Doherty, April 2024

Professor Sandra Hale

In addition to her role in the project led by Ludmila Stern described below, Sandra Hale and another team at the University of New South Wales in Australia (Prof Jane Goodman-Delahunty, Dr Natalie Martschuk and Dr Susan Brandon) have been working since 2020 on a project funded by the United States’ Federal Bureau of Investigation entitled ‘Remote simultaneous interpreting in investigative interviews: The effect of language and interpreter training on deception detection, interpreting accuracy and witness credibility’. Keep an eye out for publications coming out of this project soon.

Recent publications

Hale, S., Martschuk, N., Goodman-Delahunty, J. & Lim, J. (30 Apr 2024): Juror perceptions in bilingual interpreted trials, Perspectives: Studies in Translation Theory and Practice.
Hale, S., Lim, J., Martschuk, N., & Goodman-Delahunty, J. (2023). Note-taking in court interpreting: Interpreter perceptions and practices in a simulated trial. The International Journal for Translation & Interpreting Research, pp.1-21.
Hale, S., Goodman-Delahunty, J., Martschuk, N., & Lim, J. (2022). Does interpreter location make a difference? A study of remote vs face-to-face interpreting in simulated police interviews. Interpreting:  International Journal of Research and Practice in Interpreting, 24(2), pp.221-253.

Michael Jones

Michael Jones has been involved with the interpreting and translation profession for over 40 years and has worked as a NAATI accredited translator and interpreter between English and Italian, French, Portuguese and Spanish (NAATI is Australia’s National Accreditation Authority for Translators and Interpreters). He likes to call himself a language nerd. He has always been fascinated with languages since growing up in Sydney near two of the old migrant camps of the 1960s. He studied Linguistics at Sydney University in the 1970s.

As a lawyer specialising in immigration and citizenship law, Michael Jones also works extensively with interpreters and translators in courts, tribunals and other professional settings, and is happy to share his experiences and observations with others studying the field.

Dr Rachel Killean and Dr Rosemary Grey

In 2023, University of Sydney Law School researchers Rachel Killean and Rosemary Grey launched a new project ‘Translating Atrocity: Bridging language barriers in Cambodia’s war crimes tribunal.’ The project focuses on challenges of interpretation and translation arising in the United Nations-backed Extraordinary Chambers in the Court of Cambodia (ECCC) which works across the Khmer, English and French languages. Drawing on their original interviews with translators and interpreters who worked at the court, Rachel Killean and Rosemary Grey are identifying Khmer terms that have been difficult to translate into English and French and vice-versa; examining how translation challenges have been addressed; and assessing how translators and interpreters have affected the tribunal’s capacity to assess evidence and communicate effectively with the public. The findings have potential value for the functioning of other international tribunals, including the International Criminal Court in The Hague.

Members of the public arriving at the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia to hear its main judgment (Image credit: Rosemary Grey, Phnom Penh, 2018

Rachel Killean and Rosemary Grey hope to continue collaborations with translation studies scholars, as well as interpreters/translators working in international criminal justice.

Recent publications

Killean, R., Grey, R. (2023). Interpretation and Translation in Atrocity Trials: Insights from the Khmer Rouge Tribunal. Cambridge International Law Journal, 12(2), 211-234.
Grey, R. (2022). Translating Gender Diversity in International Criminal Law: An Impossible but Necessary Goal. Australian Feminist Law Journal, 47(2), 163-186.
Killean, R., Grey, R., Cho, J. and Stern. L., ‘Translating atrocity at the Khmer Rouge Tribunal‘, New Mandala, 17 January 2024.
Grey, R. and Stern, L., ‘“Kadago’ in the Courtroom: Language Disputes in Atrocity Trials‘, Opinio Juris, 31 January 2024:

Dr Lucy Xin LIU

Dr Lucy Liu Xin’s research centres on the accuracy of Mandarin-English court interpreting and its implications for due process. She is particularly interested in exploring the interface between interpreting and pragmatics in legal settings. Her recent work explores the multimodal aspects of court interpreting, such as examining multimodal turn-taking strategies of court interpreters and utilizing acoustic tools for the analysis of courtroom discourse. She is based at Dalian University of Technology in China.

Recent publications

Liu, X., & Wang, C. (2023). How Does Interpreter’s Intonation Affect the Pragmatics of Courtroom Questions? A Case Study of Chinese-English Court Interpreting. In J. Zhao, D. Li, & V. L. C. Lei (Eds.), New Advances in Legal Translation and Interpreting (pp. 137-162). Singapore: Springer.
Liu, X. (2020). Pragmalinguistic challenges for trainee interpreters in achieving accuracy: An analysis of questions and their translation in five cross-examinations. Interpreting, 22(1), 87-116.
Stern, L., & Liu, X. (2020). Interpreting Studies. In S. Laviosa & M. González Davies (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Translation and Education (pp. 226-244). Oxfordshire: Routledge.
Stern, L., & Liu, X. (2019). Ensuring interpreting quality in legal and courtroom settings: Australian Language Service Providers’ perspectives on their role. The Journal of Specialised Translation(32), 90-120.
Stern, L., & Liu, X. (2019). See you in court: How do Australian institutions train legal interpreters? The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 13(4), 361-389.

Dr Laura Smith-Khan

Laura Smith-Khan’s work explores how multilingualism is managed in and conceptualized by tribunals and courts in the context of assessing credibility in asylum applications in Australia. This was one focus of her doctoral research and has continued to be an area of interest in her more recent work.

She has also examined how migration lawyers and agents play a role in mediating multilingual communication in migration procedures, both at the initial application stage and at the tribunal, when an appeal is necessary. This work has led her to travel to Belgium in 2023 to spend time at Ghent University as a visiting scholar, and where she continues to have an external affiliation with UGhent’s Centre for the Social Study of Migration and Refugees. She has presented her research to judges and other decision-makers from Australia and internationally and it has also been cited in EU Agency for Asylum guidance on credibility and evidence assessment.

Recent publications

Smith-Khan, L. (forthcoming). Incredible language and refugee legal processes: Challenging asylum credibility assessments, in J Setter et al (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Language and Prejudice.
Maryns, K., Smith-Khan, L. & Jacobs, M. (2023). Multilingualism in asylum and migration procedures, in McKinney et al (eds), Routledge Handbook of Multilingualism, 2^nd ed, Ch. 26.
Smith-Khan, L. (2023). Incorporating sociolinguistic perspectives in Australian refugee credibility assessments: The case of CRL18. Journal of International Migration and Integration, 24, 727-743 (invited contribution for special issue).
Smith-Khan, L. (2021). ‘I Try Not to Be Dominant, but I’m a Lawyer!’: Advisor Resources, Context and Refugee Credibility. Journal of Refugee Studies, 34(4), 3710-3733.
Smith-Khan, L. (2019). Why refugee visa credibility assessments lack credibility: A critical discourse analysis, Griffith Law Review, 28(4), 406-430.

Professor Ludmila Stern

Professor Ludmila Stern is leading a team including Professor Sandra Hale, Professor Stephen Doherty and Associate Professor Melanie Schwartz from the University of New South Wales in Australia and a number of partner organizations on the project, Access to justice in interpreted proceedings: The role of Judicial Officers, funded by an Australian Research Council Linkage Grant.

The research team is examining the ways judicial officers can improve courtroom communication and prevent miscommunication and error, particularly in criminal cases where speakers of ‘new and emerging’ and First Nations languages are involved, and where interpreters receive limited or no specialised training. Using an interdisciplinary approach that involves court observations, interviews with judicial officers and interpreters, and discourse analysis of court transcripts, the project aims to generate new knowledge about the variations in judicial officers’ communications practice when working with interpreters, and their impact on the effective transmission of information in the courtroom.

Having initially started in two international courts, the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia / International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals and the International Criminal Court, the project then focused on the way judges and magistrates work in interpreted proceedings in Australia courts, with field work now completed in the Australian jurisdictions of New South Wales, Victoria, Tasmania, Queensland, Western Australia and the Northern Territory.

Dr Xiaoyu Zhao

Dr Xiaoyu Zhao recently completed her PhD on interpreting studies at the University of New South Wales in Australia. Her PhD project investigated the impact of court-specific factors on Simultaneous Interpreting performance and explains these factors’ effects using Cognitive Load Theory. Her research has provided empirical evidence that enhances the understanding of the impact of task-, environment-, and interpreter-related factors on Simultaneous Interpreting performance in the court context. Additionally, it offers insights into interpreter training and professional practices that align with both national and international standards aimed at improving interpreters’ working conditions.

Dr Xiaoyu Zhao is currently working as an adjunct lecturer at Monash University in Australia and as a research fellow at the Monash Suzhou Research Institute in China. Her current research projects include a corpus analysis of interpreted texts in court settings and court interpreting pedagogy.

Recent publications

Zhao, X. (2023). A multidimensional investigation of cognitive load and performance over time during simultaneous interpreting between English and Mandarin Chinese [Doctoral dissertation, UNSW Syndey]. UNSWorks.

What about you?

Do you work or research in an area related to multilingualism in courts and tribunals, or another area where language and law intersect? Join the LLIRN!

What other language and law topics would you like to learn about? Have your say on our next “LLIRN About Us” blog post. Let us know in the comments or join the network and send us an email!

Upcoming Events

Multilingualism in courts and tribunals is the focus of two presentations scheduled within a themed session at the upcoming Australian Linguistic Society Conference (26-29 November at ANU). The session’s overall theme is ‘Law-and-Linguistics Research: Language, Diversity and Inclusion in Law’, and includes:

• Joseph van Buuren presenting new research on Australian criminal appeal judgements where applicants claim they have been denied rights or procedural fairness on the basis of language difference;
• Helen Fraser promoting inclusivity and justice in the use of language as forensic evidence by analysing the origins of linguistic ideologies and misconceptions in the law.

Find out more about these and other fascinating aspects of English in Korea in this episode of the Language on the Move Podcast. Brynn Quick speaks with Dr. Jinhyun Cho about her 2017 book entitled English Language Ideologies in Korea.

English Language Ideologies in Korea critically examines the phenomenon of “English fever” in South Korea from both micro- and macro-perspectives. Drawing on original research and rich illustrative examples, the book investigates two key questions: why is English so popular in Korea, and why is there such a gap between the ‘dreams’ and ‘realities’ associated with English in Korea?

If you enjoy the show, support us by subscribing to the Language on the Move Podcast on your podcast app of choice, leaving a 5-star review, and recommending the Language on the Move Podcast and our partner the New Books Network to your students, colleagues, and friends.

Transcript (added 09/09/2024)

Brynn: Welcome to the Language on the Move Podcast, a channel on the New Books Network. My name is Brynn Quick, and I’m a PhD candidate in Linguistics at Macquarie University in Sydney, Australia. My guest today is Dr. Jinhyun Cho.

Jinhyun is a Senior Lecturer in the Translation and Interpreting Program of the Department of Linguistics at Macquarie University in Sydney, Australia. Her research interests are primarily in the field of sociolinguistics and sociolinguistics of translation and interpreting. Jinhyun’s research focuses on intersections between gender, language ideologies, neoliberalism, and intercultural communication across diverse social contexts, including Korea and Australia.

Jinhyun is the author of the 2021 book Intercultural Communication in Interpreting, Power and Choices, and she has authored numerous other publications for international journals. Today, we will be discussing her 2017 book English Language Ideologies in Korea. This book critically examines the phenomenon of English fever in South Korea from both micro and macro perspectives.

Drawing on original research and rich illustrative examples, the book investigates two key questions. Why is English so popular in Korea, and why is there such a gap between the dreams and realities associated with English in Korea? Jinhyun, welcome to the show, and thank you so much for joining us today.

Dr Cho: Oh, thank you for having me.

Brynn: To start us off, can you tell us a bit about yourself and how you became a linguist, as well as what led you to studying how people think about and view the English language within Korea?

Dr Cho: Sure. I was born in Korea and grew up there, and I spent almost 30 years of my life in Korea before moving to Australia. And I worked as an interpreter between English and Korean in Korea.

And I have to tell you this, and that I didn’t speak English at all until I finished university.

Brynn: I cannot believe that. When I read that in your book, that was an incredible revelation to me.

Dr Cho: It might sound interesting to you and to the listeners, but back then, and I know that was many years ago, the Korean education on English, it focused on grammar and reading. And there was no speaking element at all.

So, I never had a chance to learn how to speak English until I finished university. And I got my first job at a small company after university, which I didn’t enjoy at all. And I started wondering what else I could do.

And I knew that there was such a job as a translator and interpreter, because one of my friends at university, her brother was an English-Korean interpreter. And that looked so cool, instantly switching between English and Korean, and he was working for an established broadcasting company in Korea. So, I thought that, oh, that sounds so cool, and I want to be one of those people.

So, I enrolled in a coaching school designed to train people who wanted to be a translator and interpreter. And that, to provide more details on this, because it doesn’t exist outside Korea, I know that there’s some in Japan. So coaching schools, these schools train people to sit for exams to enter a graduate school that specializes in translation and interpreting.

So that’s how it works, because it’s so competitive to get into a graduate school, graduate schools for translation and interpreting. So, I enrolled in one of those coaching schools and studied English for 14, up to 16 hours a day, and for two years. And that’s how I successfully got into this best graduate school in Korea.

And so, I took it for granted, right? Because everybody in Korea wanted to be good at English and they wanted to learn English. So, I thought that I never questioned why I wanted to learn English so much.

And then revelation came to me when I moved to Australia. And here, English is so natural, right? And everybody is expected to speak English.

And if you don’t speak English, then there’s something wrong with you. Whereas in Korea, if you speak English well, then you’ll be instantly admired. So, I thought that the gap was so interesting and started wondering why I wanted to learn English so much.

And then that led to this research question, as you said, right? So why do people in Korea pursue English so feverishly? You know, so much so that there is this social phenomenon of English fever.

And that’s how I got into this research.

Brynn: And just you saying that you studied English for like 14 to 16 hours a day, I cannot imagine doing that in another language. That had to be exhausting. It does feel like almost feverish study.

Is it exhausting to do that?

Dr Cho: Feverish study, I think it’s a perfect description of how I studied. Oh, it was exhausting. A session at the coaching school, it started at 7 a.m. So, I got up at 5 a.m. You know, because it was very far from, you know, where I lived.

So, I took about more than an hour. So, I got there and then took the three-hour session. And after that, me and then other students in the class, we created a study group.

So, we studied there until like 5 p.m. And after that, I came home and did some exercise and had dinner and studied more English until I went to bed.

Brynn: Collapsed. Collapsed.

Dr Cho: Collapsed. That’s right. And I think I was so consumed with that.

And sometimes I went to bed with CNN on, and I’m hoping that I could, you know, soak in more English in sleep. So that’s how I studied then come to think of it, yes.

Brynn: Well, and that’s what’s so interesting about the book is that you introduce us to this idea of this English fever, but also just this huge drive to study English.

But what’s so interesting is that then you take us back in time and you show in one of the first chapters of the book, it talks about the history of the English language in Korea. And what I find so interesting about that is that there’s this very real beginning point of when English literally made landfall in Korea. And this was in 1882.

Take us through that history a little bit, just in brief, from the arrival of English through to the Korea that we know today from a global perspective.

Dr Cho: Yes, I mean, this was so fascinating. So, this is a discovery that I made during my PhD, at the beginning of my PhD. So, I didn’t plan to examine this from a historical perspective.

But while, you know, just like any other research, you make a discovery by accident. So, while I was collecting data, I found out that the beginning of translation and interpreting in Korea, it coincided with the arrival of English in Korea. And to provide you more background on this, so you said back in 1882, Korea, so Korea’s predecessor, the Joseon dynasty, the last dynasty of Korea, it was under precarious geopolitical situations.

So, it was surrounded by strong and ambitious neighbours, which included Japan, Russia and China, which had acted as Korea’s elder brother traditionally. So, China was like a protector of Korea. And Japan in particular was the most ambitious because Japan was the first country in Asia that introduced modern technologies and civilizations from the West, primarily from the UK.

So, you know, the geographical situation of Korea is a peninsula. And Japan wanted to occupy Korea so that it could advance into the mainland China and into the bigger continent. So, in order to curb Japanese ambition, China joined forces with the US.

And then that led to this first international treaty in Korea, Korea-U.S. Treaty. And back then, there was nobody who could speak English in Korea.

And naturally, that led to the establishment of the English-Korean Translation, sorry, English-Korean Translation and Interpreting School, which is Dongmunhag. So now, what is interesting here is that the beginning of English fever in Korea, it happened at both top government and grass roots levels. And then top government level, that means that the king of the dynasty, King Gojong, had absolute trust in the US.

Why? It’s because of this Good Offices Treaty that was established between the US and Korea. And let me read you the clause of the treaty.

“The Good Offices on being informed of the case, to bring about an amicable agreement, thus showing their friendly feelings between the two countries.” So, this is a mere legal requirement. It meant nothing to then U.S. President Roosevelt.

However, King Gojong of Korea, he interpreted this as unflinching commitment from the US to protect Korea. So, the king relied on the US literally like a child does for his father.

So that was the beginning of English Fever. And also, the beginning of the US as the most powerful and generous country in the world. So that was the perception of the US at that government level.

But at the grassroots level, Translation and Interpreting. So even before this first English Korean Translation and Interpreting School was established, translators and interpreters, there was such a job in Korea because Korea had a lot of trade and business relationships with China. So, translators and interpreters, although they belong to the middle class, they were very wealthy because by using their bilingual skills, they made a lot of money out of trade.

So, becoming a translator and interpreter in Korea, there was an opportunity to climb up the cost system. The cost system in Korea back then, it was so rigid. So, there was no way that you could transcend the class barriers.

So, for people who were at the lowest class, becoming a translator and interpreter, that was the only opportunity to transcend the class barriers. And now what’s really interesting about this government established translation and interpreting school is that students were accepted regardless of class backgrounds. As long as you are linguistically talented, everybody was accepted, right?

So that opened the door for people, commoners in Korea, to become, to belong to a higher class. And then there was more American missionaries in Korea.

There were a lot of American missionaries who arrived in Korea in the 19th century, and they established the schools to teach English. This is what I found so fascinating that the English simultaneously became the language of the US and the language of power, and also the tool for class mobility for commoners. And that’s how English gathered forces and became the language of mobility and the power in Korea.

So, from a global perspective, I think in contemporary Korea, of course, you would say that there’s no such thing as a caste system, but there’s no society that is classless. Right?

Brynn: Exactly.

Dr Cho: Yeah, we all pretend that there’s no class, but there is.

Brynn: Of course there is.

Dr Cho: Yes, that’s right. So, in Korea, the reason why people pursue English so much is the amount of capital that’s attached to English. So English, this is the key findings from my research, that the English constitutes all four capitals and identified by Bourdieu.

So, it’s an economic capital and a cultural capital, social capital and also symbolic capital.

Brynn: Which is amazing. And I think for people who maybe aren’t familiar with English in Korea, or even just the concept of how very powerful English is in the world right now, to think that just having a language gives you that much capital, that much power, that much social mobility. I think especially to monolingual English speakers, it’s kind of like, what? What do you mean? It’s just my language. It’s just English.

But it really is. And in your book, you also go through the wartime era, like with the American occupation in Korea, and how that then influenced English as well. Can you tell me about that a little bit?

Dr Cho: Yes, that’s when there was a watershed in the popularity of English, and more importantly, the images of the US in Korea. So, as you know, Korea was colonized by Japan, and Japan pulled out of Korea when the Second World War ended, the US-led bombing of Hiroshima. And then when Japan left, the US came in.

And so that was to help Korea to manage the transition, right, from the colonized country to become an independent country. And to Koreans, the fact that the colonization was ended by the US, right? And then that made them believe that the US was the most generous benefactor.

And so, US basically freed up Korea. And then people had this fantastic image about the US, and coincidentally, the meaning of the US in Korean. In Korean, the US is called Mi-guk, which is based on the Chinese name of the US, Maegaw, and that means beautiful country.

Brynn: What!? Oh, my goodness. Amazing. I’m going to refer to it as beautiful country from now on. (laughs)

Dr Cho: Yes, you are from the beautiful country. (laughs)

Brynn: The beautiful country, yeah. Oh, that’s amazing.

Dr Cho: Yes. So then, and then the US was established as the most beautiful and wonderful country in the world. And as the language of the US, you know, English represented the power.

And then I wrote in the book that the very first president of the US, you know, Seungman Lee, he was baptized by the US because he was anti-communist. And then, and then he himself studied English at an American missionary school in Korea and went to the US to study. And he was the first Korean who finished a PhD.

And then spent most of his life, you know, in the US. So, Seungman Lee identified himself as American with the US. So, in his book, Autobiography, you know, it reveals his identification of himself and with the US, the freedom, the spirit of freedom and democracy.

So, you know, that kind of ideology view, idealised view of a country, and if that image of the country and then associated images of the language have been accumulated throughout history, then it’s only natural for people to believe that that is true, right? So, the whole point here is that English fever in Korea is not a contemporary phenomenon. It has always existed throughout history, but not many people know about this historical background about English in the US.

Brynn: That is so interesting how just idealizing a certain country or a certain culture can have that knock-on effect to the language of that country or culture. And on that, you discuss in your book, these two groups of English speakers in Korea. And in Korean, they actually have their own terms in the Korean language.

So, we’ve got haewepa, and those are people who learned English while living or visiting abroad in English-dominant countries. And guknaepa, people who learn English as a foreign language within Korea. And the fact that these specific terms even exist might be surprising to people, because it was to me when I first read it, who aren’t familiar with English ideologies in Korea.

So, tell us about what these terms say about the socially constructed nature of linguistic insecurity and neo-liberal ideologies in Korea.

Dr Cho: Yes, again, I didn’t think that this is specific to Korea, right? And because it was natural that people refer to each other that all you are haewepa, because you learned English abroad. And then we are guknaepa, because we have never had a chance to go abroad to learn English.

But it was only after I came here, again, when I was discussing my research and when I told this to people and people were surprised, like you, what? Oh, is there such a term?

Brynn: There’s actual words.

Dr Cho: Yeah. It’s an actual word that is popular, you know, in Korea. So, I thought, oh, that’s so interesting.

And then I started wondering, maybe the fact that such a term exists, you know, that reveals that it works as distinction, you know, between those people who learned English abroad and then people who learned English within Korea. So, it’s not, it’s much more than the fact that, you know, certain people had a chance to learn abroad and the certain people didn’t. It really is about class distinction, that because in Korea and also in many countries, in many non-English speaking countries, having an opportunity to go to an advanced country, and a lot of advanced countries are English speaking, right?

And then go to those advanced countries to study, that itself works as a class marker, right? That your family has enough resources to support you. And also, back then in Korea, going abroad, it was not allowed, right?

Except that you are from certain classes such as diplomats, or from those top class, from the top class. So, I started wondering maybe being a heawepa itself, and overseas learners of English itself, it works as a marker of class. And then that naturally, the other group who never had a chance to learn English abroad, they feel inferior, right?

And then they are not confident about the English, which I observed at the graduate school. Because at the graduate school, and I was one of those guknaepa students, because I learned English at home, right? And whereas there were a lot of students who learned English as a child because of their father’s job, you know, as a diplomat or posting, the father was posted to an English-speaking country, you know, from this company.

And then I observed that this underlying feeling of inferiority among guknaepa students, domestic learners of English and including myself.

Brynn: Yeah. Did you feel that you had to work harder as a guknaepa than the other people?

Dr Cho: Yes. Yes. We often, you know, say some things like, oh, yeah, such and such, you know, a person, their pronunciation is excellent.

Okay. She sounds like British, or he sounds like American, or he sounds like a New Yorker, right? And because they learned English, you know, in those places, yeah, in the US, whereas we, there was no term that could define us.

And the thing about language learning is that, okay, you can learn grammar. I can’t generalize, but in general, right? And people who learn the foreign language as a child, then they tend to acquire better pronunciation.

And then those students who learned English at home, and in general, our pronunciation wasn’t as good as that of, you know, overseas learners of English. I think in itself was a significant source of insecurity for us, you know, who wanted to become top interpreters in Korea. And people do get impressed by good pronunciation.

Brynn: Oh, of course. Yes, absolutely.

Dr Cho: Yes. So that was a significant factor. And then that led us to study harder and harder.

Brynn: For 14 to 16 hours a day.

Dr Cho: And then of course, I didn’t know that it was part of neoliberal ideology. So, I worked under those dominant ideologies without knowing that I was influenced by the historical factors of Korea, as well as the contemporary ideology of neoliberalism.

Brynn: Exactly. And I can absolutely see how that would happen, where, like you said, just the fact that these names exist for these two people does signify sort of this larger story that’s going on, where we’re putting more power and emphasis into the people who do get that chance to go abroad, and who do get to go study, you know, because they do maybe have more money, they have more power already. So, they’re kind of already starting with that leg up, and that’s going to make the guknaepa people feel like they have to go even harder, and even higher.

And not only do we have these two groups of people kind of vying for power, there’s also an incredible part in your book that talks specifically about sort of these gender roles in translating and interpreting. So, there’s a part that talks specifically about Korean women who go into translating and interpreting work, and the factors that are related to gender that influence this. Can you tell us more about how these women view English and English related work, and how their language journeys construct gender norms and expectations?

Dr Cho: Sure. In Korea, back then – I mean, things have changed so much.

Brynn: Sure.

Dr Cho: So, these days, a lot of young Koreans, they don’t want to marry. And if they marry, they don’t want to have a child. And I’m not sure if you know this, but Korea has the lowest birthrate in the world.

Brynn: Does it?

Dr Cho: Yes, it’s less than 0.7%. That means only one out of three women has a child. That’s rock bottom.

Brynn: Wow, that’s amazing.

Dr Cho: Yes. However, there is still this social expectation that you have to marry, and then you have to have a child. And that completes your female biography.

If you are a single woman and a childless, then, well, you might be successful in terms of career, but the people, especially from older generations, they will say something about it.

Brynn: Sure. They’ll say, but you haven’t really lived up to the cultural expectations of what womanhood is.

Dr Cho: That’s right, exactly. So, when I conducted this research, that was in 2012. Right?

So, it was 12 years ago. And a lot of my participants, so there was a single participant, they were living under the marital pressure. You have to get married.

Brynn: You need to find a man. Go find a husband. (laughs)

Dr Cho: Yeah, go find a husband. And at the same time, these women, they wanted to have their own career. And some of them, they worked for companies like I did, and they realized there was a glass ceiling.

And there was only so much that women could do in a corporate setting, which is still true in contemporary Korea, because Korea has one of the lowest levels of female executives among the OECD countries. And so, the glass ceiling is so strong there. So as a woman, there’s a limit to how far you can go.

So, I think to these women, becoming a translator and interpreter, there was an opportunity for them to build their own career, free from corporate structures and gender biases and gender norms, and especially jobs relating to Korea. They have this international image, becoming a translator and interpreter. Oh, there are open-up opportunities to work for international companies, or like the UNESCO or the UN, or you can work for an international company based overseas, or you can do some job relating to language.

So, I think they saw learning English as an avenue to lead their own independent female biography. And that’s how they expressed their beliefs in English, you know, as a language that could change their life and free from the gender norms.

Brynn: And that echoes what we saw before with in, you know, the late 1800s and the early 1900s when Korean, I’m assuming more men at that point, were using English as their sort of ticket out and their ticket up that social ladder. And it’s amazing that you then see that happening over 100 years later, but with women this time.

Dr Cho: Oh, yes, oh, that’s a very good point, Brynn. So back then, and of course I, you know, don’t have time to explain everything, right? That is just to relating to that.

So, one of the distinctive points of the history of English in Korea is this phenomenon called New Women’s Movement. And that’s during the Japanese colonization. So, the New Women’s Movement that was inspired by burgeoning feminism in Japan first, and then that influenced Korea.

So those Korean women who were educated overseas in Japan, you know, primarily because Korea was a Japanese colony, and then they learned advanced concept of feminism and women’s rights. So when they went back to Korea, they lead this movement, New Women, literally. So new women, they distinguish themselves from old women, you know, which was, you know, typically a good wife and a wise mother.

Again, there is this Korean expression, “hyunmoo yangcheo”. Literally, again, that means good wife and wise mother. So, there was the female, there was a gender expectation.

And they rejected the old gender norm to establish themselves as a model, like a new model for Korean women. And they, they consumed English and also Western civilization, right, to import Western ideologies and also to become Westernized. So, when the movement first started, it received a lot of support, including people, the Korean male intellectuals, because of the Korean male intellectuals, educating the populace, you know, under the colonisation.

It was one way to achieve independence. However, as the New Women’s Movement gathered forces, the new intellectuals, they started, they turned their back against them, because they didn’t want women to be too strong.

Brynn: You can get powerful, but only to a certain point, and then we’re going to stop you, right?

Dr Cho: Yes, exactly. That’s what happened. And I mean, also those new women, the leaders, and there was, you know, Korea was an extremely conservative country, and it still is, you know, to some extent, but they, you know, believed in free love and free sex, right?

And that didn’t go down well.

Brynn: That wouldn’t have gone down well with the powerful men. No, no, no. And obviously, we cannot talk about gender roles, especially of women, without talking about beauty standards.

And something that many women all over the world can relate to is the idea of unrealistic beauty standards that society sets on us. And your book discusses how these female interpreters and translators actually have to perform what you call aesthetic labour because they’re under pressure to not only be amazing in English, but also to look beautiful in order to compete with others in the translating and interpreting market. Tell us about that.

Dr Cho: Yes. It was a very interesting discovery. At the end of my research, I observed this phenomenon in Korea, which was called good-looking interpreter.

It was a social phenomenon and frequently featured in Korea that they had this capture of a good-looking female interpreter in action. And they said, Oh, such a such person, she’s one of those good-looking interpreters. And I was thinking, this is very interesting.

Why suddenly good-looking interpreters? And if you are familiar with Korea, you would know that there’s social pressure on good looks. And it’s not just for women, for men too.

Korea, it has obsession with beauty. And at first, I thought that maybe it’s part of that. And then as I had conversations, with the participants, I realised that the interpreting market in Korea, it was becoming saturated.

And because the number of schools specialising in translation and interpreting, it increased and that there were more graduates who specialised in English translation and interpreting. And then more and more people had opportunities to go abroad. After the Korean government lifted the ban on going abroad, and more and more people went abroad to learn English and study it.

And so, there were more English speakers in Korea. So, one way to distinguish language professionals from those people who could speak English, but not to the extent that they could translate and interpret. For female interpreters, I found out that it was beauty.

And the more beautiful you are, then the better chances you might get, especially if you are a freelance interpreter. Why? Because a lot of interpreters in Korea, they work for males.

So, the market itself, it gives an illusion that it’s a female dominant profession, because a lot of language workers are females. However, who do they work for? The males.

Brynn: The men.

Dr Cho: Yeah, the men. They are the top executives of companies, and they have important positions in industries. Therefore, it’s the men who hire female interpreters.

And very interestingly, a look was an important factor. And one of those ads that I collected as part of the data, it specifically said that a woman of a certain height, it said that it has to be over a certain height of 163cm or 165cm. And what’s the height to do with the language work?

So that itself, it demonstrates the male expectations of language work and language workers. And hence the term aesthetic labour is not just about language, but it’s also about how you look.

Brynn: Which is just mind-boggling to me to think that somebody could, like you had to, study for 14 to 16 hours a day for years to do all of this really difficult mental and intellectual work. And then to get to a point where someone then says to you, but you also have to conform to beauty standards, that just feels galling, you know? But you don’t see that happening with men at the same rate in Korea, or do you? What do you think?

Well, there was only one male participant. So, and then that person, he had a different motivation to learn English. So, I haven’t had an opportunity, you know, to observe if the same rule applies to men.

But, you know, if you just look at the gender dynamics of the industry, then it speaks itself, right? And it’s a male-dominated, it’s a female, yes, it is a female-dominated profession. However, the industry itself is controlled by men.

Brynn: That’s what’s so interesting.

Dr Cho: Yes.

Brynn: And something that you talk about is, yes, it’s female-dominated, but that also means that because they are freelance workers, they don’t always have consistent work. Can you tell us a little bit about that?

Dr Cho: Oh, yes, sure. In Korea, the interpreting industry is very different, you know, from, we are in Australia, right, in Australia, and in English-speaking countries, because in English-speaking countries, community interpreting is the mainstream interpreting. So, community interpreting, it refers to the type of interpreting that helps migrants who are not fluent in the societal language, right?

So non-English-speaking migrants who have trouble accessing health care, education, or government assistance, then they need language support. So, translators and interpreters in Australia and in other migrant-receiving countries, they are community interpreters, because they serve communities. Whereas in Korea, Korea is becoming multicultural, because there are a lot more migrants, especially from Southeast Asia.

However, traditionally, Korea is ethnically, it has this belief that Korea is an ethnically homogeneous country. Therefore, the type of interpreting there is not community interpreting. There is community interpreting, but it’s not the mainstream interpreting.

So, the mainstream interpreting is simultaneous interpreting. If you are not familiar with interpreting, you might have seen the image of interpreters working in booths, right? And then speaking into the microphone, interpreting the speech of this prominent political figure, President Obama, giving a speech at the United Nations, or interpreters working for companies.

And because there are a lot of big companies in Korea, like Samsung and Hyundai, and those companies, they have trade relations with businesses overseas. So to deal with the business transactions in English, because English is a global language, then they need a translator and interpreter. So therefore, a lot of interpreters in Korea, they work for businesses or for governments, and either they work for companies on a fixed-term contract or they freelance.

So, when they freelance, again, their clients, they are coming from those industries, government officials or they are top-ranking businessmen. So when you work for these people who have power, then what are the criteria that they are looking at when they hire an interpreter? So again, it’s a gendered question.

Brynn: Yeah, absolutely. And that means that even though this profession of interpreting is so glamorized and, you know, these, especially the women, study for so long, they might have to perform this aesthetic labour, but they might get hired and not have this work all the time. It’s just sort of when these companies need it.

And that means that their own financial income is not going to be consistent, which is just so fascinating to think how glamorized the profession is, but then the reality is, but we’re not always going to have a consistent good income.

Dr Cho: I think that’s the illusion about freelancing jobs. People think that they can be free to build their own career, but when you’re in the industry, you are not controlled. You don’t understand, right?

And then you are literally working for these people at the top. So, therefore, being a freelancer comes with a significant amount of insecurity, feelings of insecurity, financial, and also its feelings, because you don’t know when your next job will be. You might be unemployed for how long or how many months, and that’s why they keep pushing themselves to accept more jobs and to enhance individual competitiveness.

Brynn: Yes, that’s exactly it. It’s that always enhance that competitiveness, look better than anyone else just to try to get those jobs.

Dr Cho: Yes, yes.

Brynn: And this book was published in 2017, and you said that a lot of your work came from 2012. It’s now 2024. Where do you see the future of English language translating and interpreting going in Korea?

Is the profession still ultra-competitive and wrapped up in language ideologies, or do you see it changing in any way?

Dr Cho: I think the profession itself is still very competitive. And then it’s regarded as one of those highly professional jobs. However, because of AI, it’s a very big question.

You know, it’s sometimes said in media that it’s one of the first jobs that might be replaced by AI. Yes, but I don’t see it coming yet because, you know, myself, I have done a lot of experiment with the AI translation and I’m not interpreting. But yes, AI works well for certain type of translation such as legal documents, because the legal documents, there is a template, right?

Brynn: It’s like a formula.

Dr Cho: Yeah, that’s right. So, if you have, if AI has a lot of databases to work out the structure, then it does quite a good job. However, for other types of jobs, and as you know, in language, the hidden meanings of language in humans do a far better job at capturing those meanings. Capturing the nuance of human communication and emotion.

And then, so the AI is still, I think there is still a lot of room for improvement in terms of AI. But it’ll be interesting to see how things will change, because the profession itself, especially translation, there has been this prediction that a lot of translators will become post-editors. That means that the AI will do draft translation, and the human translators will review the draft translation done by AI.

And that is already happening in Korea. For example, Netflix, I understand that it does a lot of translation. It’s done by AI, machine translation.

But for interpreting, I think people still feel uncomfortable, right? It’s not natural, speaking to a machine, maybe young generation might not. But people, they prefer to have face to face conversation.

So, for interpreting, I think there is a long way to go.

Brynn: And that is interesting that maybe for, and we should specify for maybe people who don’t know, translating means the written language, literally translating from one language to another, whereas interpreting is for spoken or signed languages. And like you said, that’s often in person. It can be simultaneous or it can be consecutive.

And what about for you? What’s next for you and your work and teaching at Macquarie and research? What do you have coming up?

Dr Cho: Oh, well, in line with this conversation, so I’m working on my third monograph, and it’s about healthcare interpreting in Australia.

Brynn: Which I’m extremely excited about.

Dr Cho: Yes, yes, I can see that. So, I’m approaching healthcare interpreting in Australia again, from a historical and a contemporary perspective, and from a critical social linguistic perspective. Because the contrast in terms of English between Australia and Korea, and that always made me wonder, that why is English so natural in Australia?

I’m asking the question, and people might find that, you know, what a pointless question, because Australia is an English-speaking country. But we know that it’s a multilingual country, and over 300 languages are spoken in Australia. But the English has become so dominant, and then again, so how the historical dominance of English, how has it shaped people’s perspectives on other languages, represented by translation and interpreting, and also their perspectives on other language speakers, represented by interpreters, and how English monolingualism, so how does that impact interpreting?

So, from a historical perspective, again, again, in any societies, and it’s not just Korea and Australia, but in any societies, the very first foreign encounter, it generates interpreting, right? Therefore, interpreting is a birthplace of foreign intercultural communication. So that’s how I see it.

Brynn: That’s going to be fascinating. I cannot wait to read that, because as you know, that’s a lot very similar to research that I am conducting. So, we’re going to have to have another chat sometime soon after that’s done and do another episode.

Well, thank you so much, Jinhyun, for coming on and for talking to me today.

Dr Cho: No worries, I really enjoyed it. I hope that the listeners will enjoy it too.

Brynn: I think they absolutely will. And thank you for listening, everyone. If you enjoyed the show, please subscribe to our channel, leave a five-star review on your podcast app of choice, and recommend the Language on the Move podcast and our partner, the New Books Network, to your students, colleagues and friends.

Till next time.

If you enjoy the show, support us by subscribing to the Language on the Move Podcast on your podcast app of choice, leaving a 5-star review, and recommending the Language on the Move Podcast and our partner the New Books Network to your students, colleagues, and friends.

Transcript (by Brynn Quick, added 07/07/2024)

Brynn: Welcome to the Language on the Move Podcast, a channel on the New Books Network. My name is Brynn Quick, and I’m a PhD candidate in Linguistics at Macquarie University in Sydney, Australia.

My guest today is Dr. Ella van Hest. Ella is a postdoctoral research associate at Ghent University in Belgium at the Department of Translation, Interpreting and Communication, where she is a member of the MULTIPLES research group. She is also affiliated with the interdisciplinary Centre for the Social Study of Migration and Refugees, also known as CESSMIR. Her research interests include language and migration, multilingual communication, (non-professional) interpreting, and language policy. Her previous research for her MA focused on the effects of Flemish language and integration policy on adult newcomers to Belgium.

Today we are going to talk about the research that she conducted for her PhD, which was a linguistic ethnography on language diversity at an abortion clinic in Belgium. The paper, which she co-wrote with July De Wilde and Sarah Van Hoof, is entitled Language policy at an abortion clinic: linguistic capital and agency in treatment decision-making and was published in 2023.

Ella, welcome to the show, and thank you so much for joining us today.

Dr van Hest: Thank you for inviting me.

Brynn: To start off, can you tell us a bit about yourself and how you became a linguist as well as what led you to wanting to conduct research into the language practices of an abortion clinic in Belgium for your PhD?

Dr van Hest: Yeah, sure. So actually, when I was 17 years old and I had to make a decision on what to study, I just knew for sure, okay, I want to do something for languages. Like at that point, I was not so reflexive or so aware of what linguistics actually was or what you could do with it.

But I really wanted to do something with languages. So I started Applied Linguistics, German and Spanish, and then into Dutch, which is my native language. And after that, I did a master’s in interpreting.

And well, as I said, at that point, I was not so aware of all the options within linguistics and all the sub fields, but it sort of started when I was doing my master thesis research that I really got interested in the link between language and migration, and especially what it is like for people who come to Belgium, for instance, or any other host society, so to speak. How is it for them if they are learning the language, which was what I focused on for my master thesis, or how is it for them when they don’t speak the language, they’re needing language support, which was then the focus for my PhD research. So that’s how I sort of got interested in that.

And then the fact that I ended up doing research on abortion care and linguistic diversity in abortion care in Belgium was sort of a matter of, okay, what is an unknown context, an underexplored context or setting to study language diversity, because we already know something about it in other medical contexts, for instance, but I thought, okay, abortion care is so relevant and so understudied. And yeah, that’s actually a little bit how I ended up doing that. And I’m also, I have to say, I’ve been very grateful for the clinic, the abortion clinic where I could carry out my research that they allowed me in and let me do that ethnographic research there.

Brynn: That’s what I found so interesting about your paper was the setting. The research that I’m doing for my PhD also looks at medical settings and how language is assessed and how linguistic proficiency is assessed and then how interpreters are then called or used or not used. That’s what was so interesting in reading your paper was that it was at an abortion clinic, which I personally haven’t come across before. But as you said, it is such an important setting where we do need to know more about what happens with language at this clinic.

And in the paper, you start off by talking about the language policy of that clinic where you were conducting the research. This particular institution’s policy said that a patient seeking a medical abortion needed to have a strong proficiency in Dutch, English or French.

Can you just tell us as listeners, what exactly is a medical abortion? How does that differ from a surgical abortion? And why did the clinic state that this language policy was necessary?

Dr van Hest: That was indeed the most important point of this particular paper that we’re discussing now, which was also published in the Journal of Language Policy. So, like the focus was really on that particular aspect of the linguistic diversity in the clinic, because I also focused on, as you mentioned, right, like using interpreters or not, or also conversational, interactional dynamics of multilingual counselling sessions.

But for this particular paper, the focus was on this language policy about medical abortion. So, what is medical abortion? Well, in Belgium and also in a lot of other countries, but there are some differences, but in Belgium, usually women, when they want to terminate the pregnancy, they can choose between two different treatment types.

And one is a medical abortion and the other one is surgical. And the medical abortion, which this paper is mainly about, consists of taking several pills, medication. Usually this is done in two phases, but again, there are differences in approaches and in other countries, sometimes they only use one type of medication or they do it in a different way.

So, but the situation in Belgium is that usually women first take medication that blocks the pregnancy hormone. And then later on, like two days later, they have to take medication that actually will make the uterus contract and cause a miscarriage. So that’s one treatment option.

And that’s very different from a surgical abortion where it’s actually a doctor who performs the abortion, who empties the uterus via a suction, like a suction aspiration. And so those are two completely different types of treatments. And there’s some factors that influence eligibility.

For instance, pregnancy duration. And here there’s differences between countries, but in Belgium generally, they limit it until about eight, nine weeks of pregnancy. Because after that term, the foetus is larger and it could lead to more complications.

So, a surgical abortion is preferred. And then there’s also all other kinds of medical or psychosocial factors that could influence the decision for which treatment. But, and that’s the main point of this paper, in this particular clinic, also language plays a huge role.

And it’s actually a little bit complicated, so maybe bear with me. The whole point of this medical abortion, as I just explained, it’s about taking medication on two different days and it’s about your body causing you to have a miscarriage. And it’s really a whole process of managing, it’s a woman who has to sort of do the work.

There is a small risk of complications. It’s very small, it’s a very safe procedure in general, but something might happen, and usually that’s excessive blood loss. But in any case, these complications might occur.

And especially since COVID, there’s a lot of emphasis on making sure that the clinic can follow up while women are doing this treatment at home. So, before the pandemic, that’s also, I didn’t specify that earlier on, but a large part of my data collection was during the pandemic. Before the pandemic, the clinic made sure to sort of plan the two phases of the medication in the clinic.

So, women would have that miscarriage in the clinic usually, but also there, there was sometimes, the problem sometimes was that the miscarriage did not happen in the foreseen timeframe. And so, they reserved a certain time slot for women to be in the clinic to have that miscarriage, but then in some cases it didn’t happen. And then they sort of, they had to send her home and say, look, okay, you’re going to have this miscarriage at some point during the day.

In case there’s anything wrong or you have questions, you need to call us on this phone number. And so that’s where phone communication, verbal communication comes in and that’s where language starts playing a key role. And during the pandemic, the clinic decided sort of as a measure to limit the amount of people present in one physical space, right?

They said, okay, let’s do all these miscarriages from home. So, like, let’s have the women manage the miscarriage from home all by themselves, but with telephone backup, right? So, it’s sort of almost like a kind of help line to call the clinic, but not even just a help line.

Like they were actually also really supposed to call the clinic between a certain timeframe during a treatment to update them. Like how is it going? How is the blood loss? How is the treatment going?

And so, with that in mind, the clinic said, okay, this is too complicated when there’s a language barrier. When we cannot understand each other, it’s very hard for us to assess, are these cramps normal? Is this too much blood loss or is it a normal amount should we send this woman to emergency care or not? Yeah, what is she feeling? How is she doing?

And so, to ensure safety, the clinic said, okay, look, if there’s too much of a language barrier, we don’t offer this option. And as you mentioned, Dutch, English and French are the three languages which are allowed, so to speak, to have the medical abortion. So, if a woman has some or enough proficiency, whatever that is, because the definition of what exactly is enough proficiency is not that clear-cut.

But in any case, she needs to have proficiency in one of those languages. And that’s a logical consequence of the linguistic reality in Flanders, which is where I carried out my research. So in Flanders, Dutch is the official language, mother tongue of all the staff working in the clinic.

But since we’re in Belgium, and French is another official language, many of the staff also speak some French. And then there’s English as the global language that everyone in high school learns and is supposed to know or have proficiency in when they look for jobs and so on. So those three institutional languages, so to speak, are okay for being eligible for a medical abortion.

It’s quite complicated. It has to do with safety and the unpredictability as well of the medical abortion. Perhaps I did not emphasise that enough before, but I talked about the small risk of complications, but there’s just also a general unpredictability in the sense that with surgical abortion, you know upfront very clearly, treatment is going to happen like this and it’s going to take about 20 minutes.

Whereas with the medical abortion, for some women, this miscarriage happens within three, four hours. For others, it can last up to even 24 hours. So there’s a very high variation in how smooth it goes, also in terms of pain, like some women experience like bearable cramps, others have a lot of cramps, a lot of pain.

And so that’s why it’s so hard to manage. And that’s why communication plays a key role for this clinic.

Brynn: And it’s really interesting that what you mentioned about the communication on the telephone being so important, and especially in this sort of post-COVID world, and like you said, collecting this data during COVID, all across the world, we all know that medical centres kind of had to make a lot of choices. Whether you were in a hospital or a GP or an abortion clinic, anything like that, there was this real reduction in the number of people who could come into the medical centre. And so that’s what is fascinating in this paper, is the amount of telephone communication that needs to be happening in this circumstance.

And kind of on that note, a really interesting piece of data that you uncovered in your research was that this staff at this clinic seemed to be kind of unaware of the potential for using telephone interpreters with their linguistic minority clients. And that non-professional interpreters, or what we might call ad hoc interpreters, such as the client’s family member, were often used to facilitate communication, especially for the psychological counselling aspect. Can you tell us about why the clinic had not made the use of professional interpreters more of an institutional policy?

Dr van Hest: Yeah, of course. And I think I have to also nuance here a little bit or give some background information. First of all, you mentioned that sometimes they use non-professional interpreters, like the client’s partners or relatives or friends, like a person they brought along to the clinic with them for language support and other types of support.

And so perhaps I should explain here that in Belgium, women, when they want to terminate the pregnancy, they first need to receive counselling, like the first appointment. And then they have to sort of do this session with an employee of the clinic, which can be a psychologist or a nurse or social worker to sort of see, you know, are they sure that they want the abortion and then explore a bit the context. There’s usually also the whole explanation of the treatments, you know, like what to expect.

And, you know, also this decision-making usually when they’re eligible for both. And contraceptive counselling. So that’s sort of this first session.

And then, and then that’s stipulated by Belgian law, women have to wait for six days before they can have their actual treatment. Yeah, so then during that first appointment, it’s the second appointment for the actual treatment is then scheduled. And so, it’s during those counselling sessions that they do sometimes use professional interpreters. I have to say rarely, but I mean, there were staff who offered this option. I sometimes saw it happening. It was not the majority of cases while I was there for sure.

But very often this person that the client had brought along would act as the interpreter during that consultation, that counselling session, let’s say. But then this medical abortion and then this whole fact of, you know, it has to be followed up on by telephone. There, indeed, as you mentioned, I noticed while interviewing staff that they were not really considering to use telephone interpreters and that they were not really aware of the technical option to do so, so that you sort of have like this three-way telephone conversation.

But what they also mentioned, and that’s actually true, looking at the numbers of interpreting services in Flanders, is that there’s just a shortage of certified interpreters. And especially in terms of what I just explained about this unpredictability of the medical abortion, the clinic says, yeah, look, even if we would know how to technically do this with telephone interpreters, we’re still not sure that there’s actually an interpreter available at that point, because we never know when the client is going to, if she’s going to call us, if so, when she’s going to call us to ask about certain problems or complications that she’s experiencing. So that unpredictability aspect is still there, despite, I mean, even if you would have the technical knowledge to connect an interpreter on the phone.

And then what I perhaps should also explain is that in this particular clinic where I carried out my research, it was just one, like it didn’t visit various clinics in Flanders or in Belgium for that matter. But the majority of clients is, well, let’s say, I mean, I have difficulty using the word native, but you know what I mean? Like there’s usually like not really a huge communication barrier.

And there’s sort of like this minority parts of the clientele with whom the staff need to find ways to communicate. So perhaps it’s also, I can imagine, for instance, settings where clinics, where there’s a higher amount of migrant clients or that have a very specific target audience, for instance, where they would be more aware of and more explicit about language. But that was not really the case here.

And then in general, the use of interpreters. So even, let’s say for the counselling part, leaving aside now the medical abortion for a moment. Also there, I noticed, I mean, they have the infrastructure, they do sometimes offer, I mean, they have like this agreement with the certified interpreting service.

What I saw there was a lot of differences between staff members in terms of how familiar they were with the options of how to book an interpreter, how to make the phone call, what to ask, what to do when you’re doing a consultation with an interpreter. And yeah, also just like personal preference. Like there was a lot of discretionary power for staff to sort of decide what they wanted to do about it.

But I have to say that actually now I’m still in touch with people from the clinic where I conduct my research. So, I finished my PhD in October last year. So now I’m sort of seeing with them how we can make the findings of my PhD usable, like having really practical relevance for them and to sort of help them with decision-making aids on when to use an interpreter or when not and this kind of thing.

So, I do have to say that being there as a researcher, as an ethnographer, as an observer, this language awareness and awareness of using interpreting services did sort of grow. Yeah.

Brynn: And that part that you were just saying about it being so discretionary and how the decisions would sort of differ between staff members about, does this person have enough language proficiency to be eligible for a medical abortion or no, they don’t have enough language proficiency. They need to only be able to get a surgical abortion. That was really, really fascinating to see that there wasn’t sort of this, you know, assessment checklist or anything like that, because I’ve come across that in my research as well, that really having some sort of a concrete step-by-step process of this is how you assess a patient’s language proficiency, it doesn’t exist in that many places in the world.

So it was interesting to read in that context that that was happening for you too. And I’m really glad that you mentioned about how you as a researcher and ethnographer, sort of the research that you’ve conducted has now potentially led to some effects, which I want to get back to that. I want to hear about that in a minute.

I do want to come to one point in the paper because it stuck out to me. In the paper you say, and this is a quote, among the diverse group of clients in the clinic, a social order or stratification becomes apparent due to the linguistic capital that is unequally distributed.

Talk to us about what you mean by linguistic capital because not everyone who listens to us is a linguist. They might not know what this concept of linguistic capital is, but how did that capital affect the clients from different linguistic backgrounds?

Dr van Hest: Yeah, okay, so linguistic capital, we’re really entering into sort of the theory of social linguistics now, right? So basically, what’s the most important to understand that that’s sort of the viewpoint for which I look at language is that it’s a very social thing. Language can be a regulator or an enabler.

It’s like a resource for people to use. Language allows us to act as social human beings, you know? And this concept of language capital or linguistic capital, which was coined by the French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu, is sort of a concept that helps us to see how language functions as a form of social power or within the framework of Bourdieu.

It’s a kind of cultural capital that gives you access to certain spaces in society and that has a certain value, and that’s the most important. So that’s also the linguistic capital. So Bourdieu theorized it as this kind of economic metaphor, like some languages are more valuable on the market than others.

So yeah, that idea of his has then been sort of picked up by social linguists, and then nowadays we also see this more as a dynamic. We use the concept to sort of also unpack the dynamics of how do these processes of differentiation come about and so on, whereas with Bourdieu it was a little bit more like static, there’s a certain value or not, whereas nowadays we sort of also look more like how do linguistic resources travel, right? That’s an idea of Jan Blommaert, this idea that your linguistic capital or your resources may be valuable in one place, but then when you go somewhere else, they’re not, or they’re only valuable in certain contexts or domains of society.

So yeah, that’s a little bit what linguistic capital is about. I mean, in a nutshell, right? I am sure there’s others who would explain this so much better than I do now, but I sort of found the concept useful to discuss what was going on in the clinic here because it sort of seems like certain clients in this abortion clinic, when they do have the linguistic capital, they have the free choice to choose between medical and surgical abortion, which is often also important emotionally, because there’s a difference between the clients in the clinic in that they have different linguistic capital, and if they dispose of the right linguistic capital, it sort of allows them to freely choose between medical or surgical abortion, which are two completely different ways of experiencing an abortion.

So, there’s this emotional aspect to it. And it also goes beyond the choosing between the two treatment types. I’m also thinking about looking up information on the website, for instance, before they actually go to the abortion clinic.

Also, the website is available in Dutch, French and English of this abortion clinic. And so, you sort of have this difference in which linguistic capital you can, or how much your linguistic resources are worth in that setting. And Dutch, English and French are highly valued because they allow for you as a client to be cared for when you’re at home doing the medical abortion and the clinic is talking to you on the phone. So that’s what it’s about, actually.

Brynn: It’s really evident in the paper, and that’s something that I found really fascinating, was this idea of choice and how somebody who comes in with that linguistic capital of speaking or having, quote, high proficiency in French, Dutch or English, they are going to have a choice. They’re going to a certain extent, obviously. At a certain stage of the pregnancy, they’re going to have a choice if they want to do the medical abortion or the surgical abortion.

And you’re right. It can be an emotionally trying decision or time. And to give a person a choice in that type of situation does mean a lot.

And like you said, if someone is deemed to not have that proficiency, then that choice is kind of automatically taken away. And their treatment option is chosen for them. And in the paper, towards the end of the paper, you discuss a concept called exclusive inclusion, which was written about by Roberman in 2015.

What does exclusive inclusion mean? And how did you see it play out in the language policy at this clinic?

Dr van Hest: Yeah, so this concept, exclusive inclusion, refers to a kind of exclusion, but not the exclusion that we typically think of in terms of completely discriminating people or not allowing them access to crucial spaces in society or crucial services or means. So, what Roberman explains is that when we look at inclusion, exclusion dynamics, we should look beyond material sufficiency and sort of like her paper is also titled, not to be hungry is not enough. So, it’s like it’s not just about making sure that people can buy food and that they’re not living in poverty.

It’s also about making sure they can actually participate in spaces, practices that are socially relevant. Yeah, that are, as she describes it, it’s about access to social resources of real value and to participation in the arenas of social recognition and belonging. So, in terms of the abortion clinic and why I found the concept applicable in this case is because I thought, well, these women for sure also receive good abortion care.

They’re helped by this very engaged team of practitioners, which I also really want to emphasise. They were so engaged. They were so helpful. This whole policy was also thought of for their safety, right? So, it’s like out of genuine concern. And they receive good care.

They’re helped in a timely manner. You could actually even say that the surgical abortion is sort of, I mean, and there’s definitely discussions about that, but I mean, it’s sort of like, I talked about this unpredictability, right, of the medical abortion, whereas, you know, with surgical abortion, you know, like, okay, it’s that day. It’s going to be just 20 minutes, then it’s over. It’s immediately checked with an ultrasound and so on. It’s like sort of, I mean, it is a good abortion care. It is a good abortion treatment.

So, they’re not excluded, but they are exclusively included in the sense that they don’t have the same level of participation. They don’t have the same level of choice. When you compare them to other clients who did possess or do possess the right linguistic resources.

So that’s for me what the concept is about.

Brynn: Yeah, it’s all about that choice, right? It’s saying that, okay, well, this group of people can have a choice. This group of people is still going to get good treatment, but they can’t have the same level of choice as the other group of people.

And you do in the paper, you really do a great job, I think, of taking great care to mention that this abortion clinic really did create this language policy from a place of genuine precaution and medical care for its clients. And you mentioned that it’s been reconfiguring other policies to reflect its linguistically diverse clients. You do reflect that it could do more to make medical abortions accessible to clients of all linguistic backgrounds.

And maybe that circles us back to what you had sort of hinted at before, that you’re working with that particular clinic now and talking about what the clinic could do to facilitate that. Are you able to tell us anything that you’re working on in that space now with the clinic?

Dr van Hest: Yeah, sure. So, first of all, again, I cannot stress it enough that this clinic where I studied the language practices, I mean, I do adopt sort of a critical stance in the paper, of course. I mean, it’s a critical social linguistic endeavour, but they were so engaged as a team.

And so, I remember their literal wording about their clients, also talking to them on the phone, such as, I’m worried because, you know, like they’re really, they really want to just make sure that they’re safe. And it’s also a matter of responsibility, obviously, like legal responsibility, you know, like as a clinic, they’re responsible for making sure these abortions happen in safe circumstances. And, you know, as soon as that cannot be fully guaranteed, they have to be very careful with that.

But then, yeah, again, you could say, OK, this is safety and these safety concerns are justified, but the safety structure or the sort of securitizing structure that’s now in place, fully relies on verbal communication. And I think that’s something that they, where they might rethink the possibility, like the role of communication, perhaps with the use of technology, perhaps making sure there are some visual aids with which clients could, I don’t know, indicate the levels of pain they’re experiencing or the amount of blood loss or something like that. I don’t know.

I mean, of course, it’s not a quick solution that’s available for us, but rethinking the need for verbal communication and thinking about alternatives, I think. And then perhaps I should also mention here that it’s not only telephone follow-up, like on the day where women are self-managing the miscarriage. There’s also an important aspect, communication aspect, to the counselling or to the, let’s say, when women come to the clinic to receive their first medications.

Remember, I explained, first they take medication that blocks the pregnancy hormone. So, when they come for that first medication, that’s done in the clinic because at that appointment, they also receive all the instructions for them managing the miscarriage two days later in their homes. And so those instructions are also really detailed.

You know, it’s like it’s two pages with written instructions, which are again available in Dutch, French and English. And that then usually nurse goes over and explains point by point, like you should be careful for this or when this happens, this is normal, when this happens, this is not normal. Then you should call us, then you should go to emergency care.

You know, like all this kind of, also the schedule, like when to take the medication, how many pills, which pain medication can you take and when and so on. So, they’re like quite complicated instructions. And also on that part, the staff is worried in terms of language, like that clients might not understand fully how they should then perform the abortion themselves.

But there, for instance, I think you could work with translated or multilingual video instructions or translated materials in any kind of way. And then to answer your question about sort of what I’m working on now or talking about now with the clinic is that they actually do have these videos explaining the different treatment types and again, available in Dutch, English and French, but they are considering to on the long term having those translated as well to, I would say minority languages, but I mean, languages that a considerable part of their clients speak. So that I think would be one step where you sort of have like the all the control over the process of explaining the instructions.

But then again, the telephone follow-up from a distance will remain an issue. Now, one of the ideas that I’m currently discussing with the person responsible for the clinic, like coordinator, is to understand how abortion practitioners abroad deal with language diversity when offering medical abortions. Because, I mean, generally, as we were mentioning, as we were discussing in the beginning, there hasn’t been that much attention for linguistic diversity in abortion care.

And I mean, abortion care generally, it’s like, as I said, the linguistic aspects of that are quite understudied. And so, I would love to set up a study to investigate how the medical abortion is dealt with abroad. Because I think, and as I mentioned in the beginning, there are some differences between different countries.

And whereas in Belgium, you still sort of have like very high, I mean, majority of the performed abortions are still surgical abortions. But there is an evolution towards more medical abortion that’s ongoing. Like, I think in like 10 years or so, the amount of medical abortions doubled.

And so, it’s really some more and more often chosen treatment type. And so, I think it would be very interesting to see, okay, in countries where this medical abortion is already more common. I mean, it’s impossible that they don’t face a linguistic diversity among their clients.

So how do they do it? And what could be learned from them? Which best practices are there that could be applied also here?

Brynn: That would be really interesting to be able to do that type of research with other people abroad. Because you’re right, it really does differ country to country. And I would be so fascinated to hear what you learn.

And I love that idea of the potential for video instructions. It reminds me of a paper that I read for research that I did that talked about translated discharge papers like from a hospital. They found that the patients that needed it translated into other languages sometimes also had low levels of literacy in general.

And they found that it was easier to actually audio record the discharge paper instructions. And they were able to put it into… Have you ever seen those greeting cards where you can open them and they’ll play a song?

Dr van Hest: Right, yes, yes. Yeah, yeah. Like birthday cards?

Brynn: Yeah, like birthday cards. So they were able to record the discharge instructions onto these cards where you would open it and it would play the instructions for you. And so obviously something like that wouldn’t necessarily work in this type of a medical situation, but kind of what you said, just sort of thinking outside the box, reconfiguring things, making things different than they have been potentially could be a solution.

Other than this really, really interesting postdoctoral work that you’re doing, is there anything else that’s coming up for you? Any other projects that you’re working on or anything that your research group is doing that you find interesting that you’d like to talk to us about?

Dr van Hest: Yeah, so as you mentioned in the beginning, when introducing me, I’m now a postdoctoral research associate here at the department. So, I’m not really working currently, I’m not really working on the abortion topic, but I do hope to sort of find ways in the near future to develop the ideas I have now and sort of collect more data. But what I am working on now is on something completely different.

Nothing to do, it has nothing to do with abortion, but it is still about language and migration and linguistic diversity in institutional settings. But I’m currently working on a project which is very applied, very practice oriented and which is called MATIAS, which stands for Machine Translation to Inform Asylum Seekers. And the idea is that we develop a prototype of a notification tool, a multilingual notification tool that can be used in asylum centres, in asylum reception centres.

So, we also work together very closely with the federal agency, the Belgian federal agency for the reception of asylum seekers. And so, I’ve been visiting various reception centres for data collection in the past year, because what we want to do with this tool is it’s going to be a tool that will allow staff working at reception centres to sort of to update and inform residents about activities and practical stuff, things that are going on in the centre. Like, oh, apologies, the water will be shut off between four and five tomorrow because they’re going to come and do some works.

Or don’t forget, tomorrow we have this activity at 8 p.m. Please join us, something like that, because that’s often very rapid communication or it’s not always feasible to translate that in so many different languages. And obviously in asylum perceptions facilities, there’s a lot of linguistic diversity. And the idea is that the tool would then allow staff to just write that message in Dutch, English or French.

Again, we have those three dominant languages there. And that then the system will translate and send out the messages in the right language to the residents who would then receive the message on their smartphone. And then, you know, one resident would receive that same message in Arabic and the other one in Turkish, for instance, and another one in Pashto.

And so that’s the idea. So, something completely different, very, very practice oriented, very practical, very applied. But it’s really, it’s a lot of fun and it’s my first steps in the field of machine translation as well and language technology.

So that’s fascinating. And then on the sides, I am obviously still developing my ideas on the data I collected for my doctoral research. And also, this whole phenomenon of nonprofessional interpreting really caught my attention when I was doing my PhD.

So, they have like these clients bringing in relatives or their partner or a friend, someone close to them for language interpreting. And what we see in interpreting studies is, I mean, there’s already a lot of research going on that takes this very interactional and institutional point of view. Sort of like, OK, in this particular setting, you have these people coming and going.

And I’m very fascinated to see how those interpreters, those nonprofessional interpreters, so to speak, how they sort of make sense of that and also of their own role and how does that differ when they go from one setting to the other and so on. So, I’m working on something to hopefully in the near future research that. And yeah, I’m also working together with my colleagues on collecting work that deals with nonprofessional interpreting and sort of trying to really get this contextualised perspective.

Like, who are these people? What are the institutional, interactional expectations to sort of shed light on all these different kinds of nonprofessional interpreting practices and different kinds of nonprofessional interpreters? So yeah, that’s sort of something that really became a topic of interest for me research wise.

So yeah, and then we’ll see what the future brings and what I can get funding for and so on. It will also depend a little bit on that. The connecting thread for sure is always language and migration, linguistic diversity in institutional settings.

So, I will continue to be working on that, yes.

Brynn: Ella, your work sounds so cool. Massive congratulations to you for finishing your PhD last year. As someone who has just started on her PhD, I’m looking at you and thinking, okay, I can do this. She did it. We can do it.

Dr van Hest: It’s so exciting for you. You still have the whole trajectory ahead of you. So yeah, enjoy it, I would say as well. It’s so fascinating.

Brynn: Exciting and scary, but also very awesome. So, all of the things. Ella, thank you so much for taking the time to talk to me today, to talk about your work. And I can’t wait to hear where your work goes from here.

Dr van Hest: Thank you so much again for having invited me here today. It was amazing to talk to you.

Brynn: And thank you for listening, everyone. If you liked listening to our chat today, please subscribe to the Language on the Move podcast. Leave a five-star review on your podcast app of choice and recommend the Language on the Move podcast and our partner, The New Books Network, to your students, colleagues and friends.

Until next time.

NSW Police (Image credit: Edwina Pickles, SMH)

Editor’s note: The Language on the Move team closely collaborates with the Law and Linguistics Interdisciplinary Researchers’ Network (LLIRN). To raise awareness of LLIRN and feature the research of its members, we are starting a new series about exciting new research in specific areas of language and law.

In this first post in the series, LLIRN founders and conveners Dr Alex Grey and Dr Laura Smith-Khan introduce the research of three early career researchers working on language, policing, and criminal justice.

***

Alex Grey and Laura Smith-Khan

***

The Law and Linguistics Interdisciplinary Researchers’ Network (LLIRN) came into being in 2019, after an initial symposium involving a group of academics and students, mainly from Australian universities, whose research is interested in the various intersections of language and law. One of our key goals of the symposium was to learn more about each other’s work and create new opportunities to collaborate.

Since then, LLIRN has grown and we have organized and run a number of different initiatives, including multiple panels at conferences across both linguistics and law, a special issue that showcased the work of several of our (mainly early career) members, and a lively and growing mailing list.

Fast forward to 2024, our Listserv now includes members from at least 37 different countries, at diverse stages of their careers, working as academics, as language or legal professionals, and/or in policy or decision-making roles. However, as LLIRN convenors, we have felt that we still have much to learn about the members who make up the network, the expertise they have and their goals. This new blog series intends to address this gap: we want to learn (or “LLIRN”) more about each other, and to make our learning public so that others too can learn more about us.

Northern Territory Supreme Court (Image credit: Dietmar Rabich, Wikipedia)

In the first of this new series, we showcase LLIRN members, Alex Bowen, Dr Fabio Ferraz de Almeida, and Dr Kate Steel, who are working in areas related to language, policing, and criminal justice.

Alex Bowen, University of Melbourne, Australia

Alex Bowen’s in-progress PhD looks at communication about criminal law and justice with Aboriginal people in the Northern Territory (NT) of Australia. His earlier research was about how police in the NT explain the right to silence in police interviews, producing the publications listed below.  He has previously practised criminal and commercial law.

Alex Bowen is interested more broadly in police interviewing, language in legal processes, interpreting and translation, how we understand and talk about law and justice interculturally, and how legal language is influenced by monolingual and colonial assumptions. He is interested in discussing these topics, especially with Indigenous scholars and practitioners, and developing interdisciplinary and intercultural resources for training and education. He may be available for peer review related to the above topics.

Recent publications

Bowen, A. (2019). ‘You don’t have to say anything’: Modality and consequences in conversations about the right to silence in the Northern Territory. Australian Journal of Linguistics, 39(3), 347–374.
Bowen, A. (2021). Explaining the right to silence under Anunga: 40 years of a policy about language. Griffith Law Review, 30(1), 18–49.
Bowen, A. (2021). Intercultural translation of vague legal language: The right to silence in the Northern Territory of Australia. Target. International Journal of Translation Studies, 33(2), 308–340.
Bowen, A. (2021). “What you’ve got is a right to silence”: Paraphrasing the right to silence and the meaning of rights. International Journal of Speech Language and the Law, 28(1), 1–29.

Dr Fabio Ferraz de Almeida, University of Lincoln, UK

Dr Fabio Ferraz de Almeida has experience conducting ethnographic and conversation analytic research in police and judicial settings. This has included research on police interviews with suspects in the UK, criminal hearings in Brazil and, more recently, International Criminal Court (ICC) trials, producing the publications listed below. He is currently working on a paper about the role of judges in witness examination at the ICC, focusing particularly on the tensions associated with their dual-role as both referee and truth-finder.  He lectures in Criminology.

International Criminal Court, The Hague (Image Credit: Wikipedia)

Dr Ferraz de Almeida is broadly interested in studying social interactions in any form of police or legal context and welcomes contact from researchers with similar interests.

Recent publications

Ferraz de Almeida, F., & Drew, P. (2020). The fabric of law-in-action: ‘formulating’ the suspect’s account during police interviews in England. International Journal of Speech Language and the Law, 27(1), 35-58.
Ferraz de Almeida, F. (2022). Two ways of spilling drink: The construction of offences as ‘accidental’ in police interviews with suspects. Discourse Studies, 24(2), 187-205.
D’hondt, S., Perez-Leon-Acevedo, J. P., Ferraz de Almeida, F., & Barrett, E. (2022). Evidence about Harm: Dual Status Victim Participant Testimony at the International Criminal Court and the Straitjacketing of Narratives about Suffering. Criminal Law Forum, 33, 191.
D’hondt, S., Pérez-León-Acevedo, J. P., Ferraz de Almeida, F., & Barrett, E. (2024). Trajectories of spirituality: Producing and assessing cultural evidence at the International Criminal Court. Language in Society, 1-22.
Ferraz de Almeida, F. (2024). Counter-Denunciations: How Suspects Blame Victims in Police Interviews for Low-Level Crimes. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law, 37, 119–137.

Dr Kate Steel, University of the West of England (UWE), Bristol, UK

Dr Kate Steel’s PhD (2022) and continuing research explore interactions ‘at the scene’ between police first responders and victims of domestic abuse, producing the publication below. This work draws from police body-worn video footage within one force area in the England & Wales jurisdiction of the United Kingdom. This research responds to the typical simplification of the crucial role of communication at the scene is and its under-emphasis in official procedure for the first response to domestic abuse, at both local and national levels.

Dr Kate Steel is now working with another police force to develop language guidance specific to the policing context of domestic abuse first response.  She lectures in linguistics.

Recent publications

Aldridge, M., & Steel, K. (2022). The role of metaphor in police first response call-outs in cases of suspected domestic abuse. In I. Šeškauskienė (Ed.), Metaphor in Legal Discourse (224-241). Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Available from https://uwe-repository.worktribe.com/output/9900169
Steel, K. (2023) “Can I have a look?”: The discursive management of victims’ personal space during police first response call-outs to domestic abuse incidents. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law 37(2): 547-572.

What about you?

Do you work or research in an area related to criminal justice and language, or another area where language and law intersect? Join the LLIRN!

What other language and law topics would you like to learn about? Have your say on our next LLIRN “What’s new in language and law research?” blog post. Let us know in the comments or join the network and send us an email!

Upcoming events of interest in this area

Dr Fabio Ferraz de Almeida and Dr Kate Steel will both be presenting their research in the coming months, including at the IAFLL European conference in Birmingham. Dr Fabio Ferraz de Almeida will also present at the Forensic Conversations in Criminal Justice Settings Symposium in Loughborough in September.

You may have seen the movie, CODA, which portrays the experience of a hearing teenager that has a Deaf family. A Coda, a child of Deaf adults, is an identity that represents the experience of having Deaf parents. Jessica showcases a perspective that is not widely discussed, which is the perspective of a Goda, a grandchild of Deaf adults. Her memoir explains the navigation of Deaf and hearing cultures in Australia with grandparents who migrated from the UK. The House With All The Lights On highlights and discusses themes around oralism, language deprivation, Deafness and music, and more!

The House With All The Lights On explores linguistic and cultural dynamics within Deaf-hearing families. Jessica shares her experience having Deaf grandparents and navigating the cultural borderline between Deaf and hearing cultures. It is a wonderful memoir about family, the complexities of identity, and linguistic diversity.

Enjoy the show!

This is early days for the Language on the Move Podcast, so please support us by subscribing to our channel on your podcast app of choice, leaving a 5-star review, and recommending the Language on the Move Podcast and our partner the New Books Network to your students, colleagues, and friends.

Transcript

Emily: Welcome to the Language on the Move Podcast, a channel on the New Books Network. My name is Emily Pacheco, and I’m a Master of Research candidate in Linguistics at Macquarie University in Sydney, Australia.

My guest today is Dr Jessica Kirkness. Jessica is an author, researcher, and teacher of nonfiction writing at Macquarie University. Her work includes researching the value of life writing and creative nonfiction in animating the hearing line: the invisible boundary between Deaf and hearing cultures. As a Goda, spelled G-O-D-A, which stands for a grandchild of deaf adults, she writes about deafness, disability, and family.

Today we are going to talk in general about linguistic diversity in Deaf-hearing families, and in particular about a 2023 novel that Jessica wrote entitled The House With All The Lights On.

Jessica, welcome to the show, and thank you so much for joining us today.

Dr Kirkness: Thanks so much for having me, Emily.

Emily: It’s wonderful to have you here! And so just to start off, could you tell our listeners a bit about yourself? What led you to undertake your PhD in life writing and Deaf studies?

Dr Kirkness: Well, I guess family and love, which sounds trite, but I grew up in a house next door to my grandparents, so it was sort of a dual occupancy household where my grandparents lived in a granny flat on one side of the property and then my family, my mum, dad, brother and sister and I were in the main house. And so, I grew up with Deaf people all around me.

So, my grandparents had a huge hand in my upbringing, and they always hosted really lively Deaf parties and gatherings where I was around sign language and Deaf culture. And I guess naturally I was fascinated by that, I suppose, and just the you know, it was at once kind of part of my everyday life but also a point of intrigue and so when I got really into writing, particularly telling true stories, so creative nonfiction and life writing, I started to dabble with telling stories about my family and my upbringing and I wrote this little essay in an undergraduate course at Macquarie actually. (Emily and Dr Kirkness laugh) Which was called Telling True Stories, and I had this wonderful tutor who encouraged me to keep going. So, I wrote this 3,000-word essay, which then became a series of essays which then became a book.

So it was, also part of the PhD that I wrote. So, this was really investigating this idea of the hearing line that you mentioned in your opening, this boundary, this kind of cultural borderline that exists between Deaf and hearing cultures and again, I was really obviously invested in that having been sitting at that threshold, at that boundary for much of my life and thinking about how I embodied hearingness, how I enacted hearingness as a, as an identity and that was something that I came to in my studies and that was quite radical.

I’d always sort of understood my grandparents to be marked as different and other and that they had a cultural and linguistic background that was their own that they were that you know they identified as part of a cultural and linguistic minority group. And I had a relatively sound understanding of that, but when I started doing my PhD research and I found a lot of Deaf studies material, was doing a lot of research, I was kind of floored by the idea that hearing culture exists and that there are hearing ways of understanding the world and being in the world and it was this real sort of Aha! sort of a moment where it was like, yes, that’s so true! There are particular idiosyncrasies that I have that that show me to be a hearing person that I’m very auditory and that I, you know, I like listening to lectures and podcasts, for example, and I, learn about the world through through that particular sense, whereas my grandparents were very, very visual people and very tactile as well. So, sign language is obviously a kind of a spatial and visual language and so they used their bodies and to communicate but they were also highly sensitive to anything visual unfolding before them. And I really wanted to write about that and that kind of the boundary, the borderlines between our cultures, the ways that we were both similar, I suppose, but then and different in a way that was really important.

Emily: Yeah, yeah, I love that. I absolutely love everything you just said. (Emily laughs) I think it is really, fascinating because you know, I myself, I have Deaf parents which we’ll talk about a bit later in the interview, but, you know, being raised by Deaf people like you were in your childhood being raised by your grandparents where they were very present in your childhood. You have a moment where you’re like, oh, like my ability to hear has influenced the way I function as a human, right?And so, people, there is a Deaf culture and I think people kind of are like, oh, what does that mean?Like, isn’t it just a language difference or a linguistic thing? But no, that visual language, that visual nature really shapes the Deaf community and certain things that are important, that maybe hearing people are perplexed by or don’t kind of relate to and that’s always fascinating to talk about and discuss I think for sure that people don’t realize they have the label as hearing, you know, that Deaf people refer to them as hearing and they may refer to the Deaf as Deaf but that is the thing, that is that difference, that boundary of difference which I think is really interesting that you talked about so thank you for that great kind of introduction.

And so, to talk about your memoir, in particular, The House With All The Lights On, definitely resonated with me as a Coda which is spelled C-O-D-A, a child of Deaf adults for those who might not be familiar with that term. So could you explain the meaning behind the title and other deaf-friendly technologies that you discuss in chapter 3, kind of those cultural things that might be different, people might not be aware of.

Dr Kirkness: Absolutely. So I think, just as preamble, I think a lot of people are surprised to learn that there is a vibrant Deaf culture and that we tend to understand in our culture deafness as a medical problem as something that needs to be fixed and every time I brought a new person home, a new friend or a partner, for example, I always had to navigate that threshold where there was some languagebrokering, there might be some interpreting, people tended not to be able to understand my grandparents voices.And so there was a lot of sort of cultural bridging that I was doing in those moments. And I was always astounded that people weren’t sure.They were very uncertain about how to communicate first of all, but also like, oh, there is a Deaf culture?And so, it felt to me like there was a real need to write a story that came from a Deafcultural space. But to be a sort of a facilitator or that cultural bridge so that I could allow hearing people an insight into the kind of the richness of Deaf culture and language.

But The House With All The Lights On really refers to the idea of literally light being in the house all the time. So, my grandparents needed to have conversations with the lights on because without the light one cannot see. (Emily and Dr Kirkness laugh) And so you can’t read lips. You can’t also read sign language. So, the house was always awash with light and so my grandmother had a million and one lamps on of an evening and she was quite frightened of the dark, because it was, I think it was just very, it took away her ability to understand the world and so darkness had a very different meaning for her I think than it did for me.

And so, the house was always full of light, but also there’s a sort of double meaning here in that sign language is often referred to as the language of light and Deaf people are often referred to as the people of the eye. And so, this kind of light and visual sort of phenomenon was something that I wanted to tease out and flag in the book, which is why the book is called The House With All The Lights On.

Emily: Yeah, I think that’s great. And certainly, sometimes people when they find out I have Deaf parents they will say oh it must be so quiet in your house, and I think that’s not the case either you know sometimes people have these assumptions but just the importance of light like you said. And The House With All The Lights On I just love that visual I think myself, so I wanted you to kind of highlight that in our interview as well.

I really enjoyed reading about the different language practices as well in your family. So could you maybe explain how your grandparents’ upbringing influenced their language and what communication looked like in your family in particular.

Dr Kirkness: Yeah, so communication was a really mixed bag in my family, and I guess for some sort of, a potted history, I suppose. Sign language was banned in many educational contexts for much of the 19th and 20th century. So, my grandparents went to schools where they were encouraged to speak and to lip read and they had a lot of speech therapy and things like that as a vital part of their education. And this was all part of a practice called oralism. And this was basically a pedagogy that encouraged children, not just encouraged, did in fact force them to speak and use auditory kind of practices. If, possible if the, if the child had any residual hearing as well. And that had left a real mark on my grandparents, and I think that they grow up, grew up, acutely aware that they were different. And that their language was not celebrated or encouraged, certainly not when they were in “hearing spaces”, and so there was a real self-consciousness that they developed. Signing in public was something that was quite difficult for them at times. They were always really aware of people staring, sometimes just out of pure curiosity, which was fine, but I think it after a while it would grate, but also people saying unkind things, or being punished at school for signing, for example.

So back in the days of oralism, children had their hands tied behind their backs. They were beaten, they were caned, they were called animals, monkeys, apes for using their native language, which is incredibly sad. But that kind of perception that speech is and and verbal language is better than signed language has been something that I think a lot of Deaf communities have had to contend with over the last several 100 years. And so that really, I think influenced the way that they felt within themselves.

So, they could be quite shy and protective about sign language and where they would sign. So, at home they would sign to one another, and they would sign with their Deaf friends and when we were very small, my siblings and my cousins and I, we would use fingerspelling, which is a, a manual way of representing the alphabet. And we did that for clarification purposes, and we knew very basic signs. So, food, home, more, chocolate, the things that we would want to ask for, the kind of the basics of communication, I suppose. But there was a limit, I think, to how we were able to communicate with one another. And once we went to school and, I actually went to a signing bilingual preschool. So, I was taught to sign at preschool, and it was a sort of I think they called it reverse integration where there were hearing and Deaf kids present and so there was a bilingual educational program and I really loved that, and my brother went to the same one. My sister actually missed out because of mum’s work.

But we, we all knew how to communicate at that basic level, but then there was just this big gap once we went to school. Signing fell to the wayside, and it was something that we, communication was something that we always had to work on. You know, it was never seamless. It was never easy. It wasn’t a thing that we took for granted. But I think as with many families with Deaf members a lot of us didn’t know how to sign fluently and that was something that I learned later in life. So even though I could always use, do the basics, my grandfather went blind in one eye later in his life and that meant that lip reading was incredibly difficult for him and was no longer a solution for us. And so, I put myself through multiple Auslan courses and got myself accredited, which was great. But it also, I guess it really enabled us to have a more meaningful relationship. It was a really beautiful thing to learn, but also a wonderful way of connecting to my grandfather in the last sort of decade of his life. And that was a really radical thing for the both of us and, and something that I still really treasure being able to, to sign with my grandmother now. That’s a real gift.

Emily: Yeah, absolutely. I think a lot of people don’t know what oralism means and thank you for explaining that and also how recent those practices were still in place I’m from the US and so that practice is not really as common anymore, but it was for even the early stages of my parents’ education. So, it’s just recently that signed languages around the world have finally been celebrated and cherished like you said for the cultural values they have and that importance there, but it was something that was kind of, you know, something you did in secret and not in public. So, I think people often don’t realize that experience of Deaf people like your grandparents and how that does influence the language practices your family had, but that’s awesome that you, you know, got to take formal Auslan courses and have that, you know, opportunity. So, thank you for sharing a bit of that story.

And if we can kind of shift now to talk about, in chapter 14 of your book, you discuss the misconceptions around cochlear implants, which are also known as CIs, and maybe the clashes that exist there with Deaf culture. So, I personally was shocked to read the comparison of the implantation rates. So, in the US, it being 59% of profoundly deaf babies receive CIs. While, in Australia, it is as high as 98% for candidates under the age of 2. So, can you tell us more about the misconceptions you’ve researched around CIs and how Deaf communities are responding to technology?

Dr Kirkness: So, I think, on that question of technology, there are lots of technologies that my grandparents did use, they were not implanted with cochlear implants and there’s a long history there that I will go into.But the technologies that were in their house were things like a doorbell that had a flashing light system, and that was connected to the main electrical system in the house.And so, when there was a caller at the door, they’d ring the, press the button and all the lights in the house would flash.There were also alarm clocks that had light functions where they would flash or vibrate and things like that.So, there were all those kinds of technologies too, but one particular technology that is quite, has been quite controversial in the Deaf community has been cochlear implants and they are an Australian invention, so, Graeme Clark pioneered these devices, and they were developed in Australia.

And so that’s one of the reasons that Australian children in particular have a very high uptake of them. And I think the, the comparison with the US is a really interesting one because we have different health systems. And so, there’s, I guess, limited access for potentially to cochlear implants in the US. I think here they’re there are rebates and sort of government incentives that allow children to be implanted at a young age. But they have been without their controversy.

So, I think back in the eighties when they were really becoming, when the public were becoming aware of them a lot of hearing people saw them as a medical miracle and it, you know, they were the bionic ear and it was fantastic and they were going to be this panacea, you know, it’s gonna fix deafness, it’s going to cure deafness. But that is antithetical to what Deaf people believe about their own state of being, that deafness is part of what makes them, them. And that they belong to a linguistic and cultural minority group and though they absolutely understand and, and experience barriers, cultural barriers and barriers with access to information, they don’t always have interpreting when it’s needed. There are, you know, all sorts of kind of barriers that Deaf people are confronting. Nevertheless, deafness and their, language and their close-knit communities and the kind of incredible, close-knit community that Deaf people have is rich and wonderful and they they don’t want to be cured and so that was a real point of tension I think between medical ways of understanding deafness and cultural ways of understanding deafness.

And so, these devices have been seen as a form of eugenics, you know, to eradicate the scourge of deafness and people have used that kind of really loaded language and there is also a long history of eugenics, and you know Deaf people being killed and exterminated in World War 2 and you know this is a really sensitive issue. But I think nowadays people have a more nuanced perhaps take on cochlear implants. There are many culturally proud Deaf people that still want to give their children cochlear implants so that they have access to the world of sound, but they want them to be raised as culturally and linguistically kind of bilingual I suppose, you know, bicultural, bilingual, so that they have access to the Deaf world from a young age but also have access to the hearing world.

So, I think it’s a really complicated thing, but they have been, you know, there’s been protests over the years about cochlear implants. And also, just challenging this idea that once you fit a child with a cochlear implant that they are hearing because they’re not that device gets switched off or taken off at the end of the day and that child remains deaf and there are lots of kind of challenging factors to understand and audiologists have their work cut out for them here. You have to learn to hear with a hearing device, whether it’s a cochlear implant or a hearing aid. And that takes a lot of investment. It takes a lot of investment from the child that’s being fitted with the device, but also from the parents, a lot of speech therapy and audiological training, you know, this is an improving technology, it’s improving all the time, but it’s not the same as hearing and that child, that person once they grow up will still be deaf.

So, I think a lot of a lot of culturally Deaf people really advocate for the use of bilingualism and giving a child access to sign language from a young age because there is that period where it’s incredibly exhausting to get used to the device and there’s a lot of arguments about fitting a child very early so that they have access to language. But there’s also another argument to be made that giving that child any language, whether it’s wherever you come from, I guess in Australia it’s probably spoken English, or whether it’s sign language, you just have to give them something so that you avoid that problem of language deprivation. So, there’s lots of conversation around this, but yeah, that’s, I guess, a little bit of the history of the (Dr Kirkness laughs)-

Emily: I know, I know it’s a loaded question, hey, and it’s definitely something the Deaf community still, is discussing and you know, audiologists do have their work cut out for them, I agree, but I think it is important to bring to the forefront like the voice and opinion of the Deaf community regarding these devices. And so, people are aware, you know, that it’s not as easy as, oh, like now you can hear and that’s, there’s a lot of work that goes into this. I think that’s important to mention. Yeah.

Dr Kirkness: Yeah, exhausting work, you know, really exhausting.

Emily: And in your novel as well, you also discuss the language barriers, which you kind of mentioned a bit so far in the interview, language barriers that you witnessed your grandparents face. And in particular, you share a few stories about the barriers your grandfather faced in hospital. So, in my personal experience I have done a fair bit of language brokering for my parents but what was it like for you to witness the language barriers and you having access to both Auslan and English in those situations?

Dr Kirkness: I think, I open the book with a passage about the moment I had to tell my grandfather he was going to die, that he was quite unwell for the last years of his life and he was rushed to emergency having had a, I don’t know if it was a heart attack, but a heart failure, he was in organ failure and there was nothing more that the doctors could do for him at that time. And he just regained consciousness and there was no interpreter available. And so, I ended up being the one to tell him that there were no more medical interventions possible. And that was a really difficult conversation to have. Not one I imagined having. And one that I, I had because I wanted to spare my mother and my uncle from having to be in that position. And I think Codas often do a lot of that language brokering as you, as you would well know and I, I think that in that moment they really wanted to be family members and they didn’t want to be a conduit for that information, particularly that information. And so that ended up coming to me and it also made sense I think because I had the skills to be able to do so and in a way it was a privilege, but it’s that double-edged sword, I think, of, of having that intimacy with a family member, and delivering such awful news, and being able to break it gently and in a way that I would like him to be treated. I suppose, you know, being able to choose the words is a sort of privilege. But also, an incredibly huge responsibility that weighed on me and I would have loved to be a family member in those moments too.

And I think his experience in hospital was, I’m going to say traumatizing and I don’t say that lightly, it was really awful to feel that he didn’t receive adequate care during his time in hospital. At various hospitals throughout Sydney, the language barriers were so profound that we didn’t feel safe to leave him on his own at any time. And so, we developed a roster so that someone would be with him to be his advocate. We, my mother would write handwritten signs and stick them on the walls with communication tips, you know, things like make sure you tap Grandpa on the shoulder to get his attention before speaking. You can’t yell, yelling will just distort your lip patterns and will mean he can’t understand you. You know, raising your voice does nothing in fact and it’s just confusing. So, there were lots of things like that, that we tried to put in place and there were some end-of-life meetings that we had at the hospital where we had an interpreter present and that was wonderful, but there were lots of moments throughout the day where, you know, an interpreter can’t shadow your loved one, 24/7. That’s just not possible.

So, there were many times that we turned up and and grandpa had had procedures without having informed consent being taken and that was very distressing for him and very distressing for us to witness and we would arrive first thing in the morning with things having been done overnight. And just grandpa having no understanding of them whatsoever. And so there was a lot of sort of calming and pacifying that we had to do for him in those moments. And it was very, very difficult. And in palliative care spaces as well, just that kind of communication breakdown and the lack of cultural awareness and lack of Deaf awareness and this is a really hard systemic thing you know, there’s not a lot of Deaf awareness in the world and you know, medical practitioners are not given a lot of training in this if at all. They might have a couple of hours in a lecture about hearing loss, not about deafness and certainly not about cultural Deafness. And so, you know, and then there’s all the other kind of structural systemic issues within hospitals themselves that I have a lot of sympathy and empathy for, but it was very very difficult to watch a loved one be so alone and so unsupported in that, in that space.

Emily: Yeah, I’m sorry to hear your family had to go through, you know, a traumatizing experience for your grandfather and for you as family members to see that happen to someone you cared about so deeply and people don’t always realize that sometimes in those instances having an interpreter is a luxury almost like you said you know, because there’s interpreter shortages in the US and inAustralia from what I’ve heard for Auslan interpreters, there is a desperate need for more people to become professional Auslan interpreters.And so, when you do get one because they’re very busy and these instances typically in medical situations are last minute or not always planned far in advance, like to book someone in can be, you know, a miracle.(Emily laughs)So, to speak, but we, I wish it wouldn’t be that way, you know, that, hospitals would have a better system and it is a systemic thing like you mentioned and then, families are impacted by that when they should be just thinking about their loved one and caring for them as a family member and not as a language broker or interpreter and so. Yeah, I think it is a huge systemic issue.So, thank you for discussing that and your personal experience. And I really do hope doctors and medical professionals really get that Deafness training because Deaf people exist and they’re gonna be their patients one day.It’s not an if chance there are Deaf people that exist and it’s important to recognize them as part of the population that they’re going to be servicing and giving care to, right?

To switch gears a bit again to discuss some of your fieldwork that you did for your PhD. It was fascinating to read the chapters where you describe doing your fieldwork for your PhD in England. You discuss oralism, Deaf education, Deaf musicians, and how diverse the experiences of the Deaf community are. So could you tell us a bit about how Deaf communities might be misunderstood by hearing society; some people might even be confused by me saying there are Deaf musicians. So, if you want to talk a bit about that.

Dr Kirkness:

Yeah, absolutely. So, I had the great pleasure of going to the UK because my grandparents were raised in the UK and they moved to Australia when I was one years old, one year old, (Dr Kirkness laughs) when I was an infant. And they were from the UK originally and went to schools for the deaf in the UK and so I got to go to both of their schools, which was really incredible, and I got to stay on site at Mary Hare Grammar School where my grandmother went to school, and they have this incredible music program which is initially what sparked my interest. I also am quite musical myself. I grew up performing a lot at school in plays and musicals and singing and playing piano. They were things that I did regularly and I actually had a little keyboard in my grandparents’ home when I was a child and I would come over to their granny flat and I would play on the keyboard and write songs and Nanny, my grandmother, would come and bring me little cups of pineapple juice because I told her that it was good for singing (Dr Kirkness laughs) and she would watch me play on on the piano, the keyboard and she would ask me about music and she was really interested in what I was doing. And then I sort of reached a point in my adolescence where I felt it was this illicit thing that I was really interested in music, and I started hiding it away from my grandparents. I felt this guilt that this was a hearing activity that I was participating in, and I thought that, you know, my grandparents can’t have any access to that world or to that particular cultural practice. So, I best keep it from them.

And so later on when I started doing some research around deafness and music, I realised in fact that I’ve been really quick to make an assumption there and in fact there are many people who are interested in music, many Deaf people who are interested in music and even perform and play professionally as deaf musicians, they might also identify as being culturally Deaf and they might also use sign language, but they’re really they love music as a language and as a phenomenon that is not just an auditory phenomenon. It’s something that is felt in the body, something that exists on a piece of paper, you know, a written score where they’re interpreting a piece of music on the page where there’s a sort of imaginative process and even in some cases with the musicians I spoke to a kind of synesthesia where all these kind of senses are kind of overlaid on one another in different sort of sensory pathways, neural pathways, in the ways that they understand music. And that was fascinating to me, and I was really, really pleased to work with an organization called Music and the Deaf, which are the only organization of their kind as far as I’m aware in the world, and they’re based in Yorkshire in the UK. And they do all sorts of work with deaf children and introduce them, particularly to rhythm and then they move on to pitched instruments and some of these kids have cochlear implants or hearing aids and so they have some auditory perception of music but there’s also that sort of embodied aspect I was talking about and one musician in particular his name’s Sean, he would talk about taking his shoes off when he plays trumpet so he can feel the drum so when he’s playing in a group he would take his shoes off so he’d feel the vibrations and keep time in that way. And he had this really interesting sort of perfect pitch and a way of locating pitch within his body. I think he talked about F sharp being his nose and F natural being in his lips or something like that. It was really, really interesting to hear his take and along with a lot of the other musicians.

I also came to realize that my grandparents were not just interested in me playing the piano because I was playing the piano, they were really fascinated by music in the world too and my grandfather in fact loved musicals and all of his favourite movies were musicals. He loved the sound of music and when my mom was a little girl she actually before captions existed, she actually transcribed the entire film including the songs by hand and my grandfather had a handbook that he would put on his lap as he was watching the film so he could move between the screen and the paper. And he just loved it. He loved the kind of the spectacle of music, performed music, especially dance and things like that. My grandmother loved dance. A lot of rhythmic things, marching bands, my grandfather loved marching bands, The Last Night of the Proms and the the Military Tattoo as well. He was fascinated by that and also things like Songs of Praise. There’s a BBC program called Songs of Praise, which is sort of a, it’s a religious program, but there’s a choir that sings and my grandmother was fascinated by faces in the ways that they would be animated when singing. So, there were all these visual elements that I was suddenly privy to as I started unpicking that assumption that I had that, oh well, music belongs in the hearing world. But in fact, just like sound, Deaf people have an understanding of sound. It’s just not an auditory one all of the time. It’s something that they feel through vibrations. It’s something that they identify with mouth movements and shapes and all sorts of other ways of apprehending the world. Yeah, and I guess that was linked in with this idea of the hearing line that music for me was this kind of threshold. So, there are, I mean, it’s not always adopted in Deaf culture. Sometimes it is seen as a kind of, belonging to the hearing world and almost as a normalising force. There are some people for whom music is just not for them. They say, I’m Deaf, music just that doesn’t appeal to me, it’s not my thing, but there are equally people for whom, music is for them. And I think that was really interesting to consider.

Emily: Yeah, absolutely. I absolutely can resonate with what you’re saying and, you know, my parents, they love music, you know, (Emily laughs) like you’re saying, certain Deaf people in the community do like want to be a part of that, you know, musical experience and I’ve taken my mom to like heavy metal concerts and she loves it! (Dr Kirkness laughs) Like it’s a great experience. Everyone should take their Deaf parents, their Deaf family to a heavy metal concert a lot of the vibration and being close up to the speaker, the spectacle it is, right? And the feelings that you feel in an environment like that, I think it’s awesome! So yeah, I loved reading about that in your book. And kind of to bring our interview to a close, what is next for you and your work? What other research are you working on now? If you could tell us a bit about that.

Dr Kirkness: Yeah, so another memoir actually that I’m working on, and I’m really fascinated with you know ideas around the body and so I’m interested in health and disability and embodiment and all those things. So, the next book I’m writing is actually about sudden illness and I had, it’s a personal story, so it’s about my lived experience being a carer for someone who had a very kind of cataclysmic life changing event. He had a sudden cardiac arrest in his sleep when he was very, very young and I was the first person to find him. So, I’m really writing about you know, what happens to that person who has that kind of life-altering moment, but also what happens to the people around that individual, what happens to the witness and to the to the carer and the people who provide that network of care.

Emily: Yeah, yeah, fascinating. I can’t wait to read your next memoir!

And so, thanks again, Jessica! And thanks for joining, everyone! If you enjoyed the show, please subscribe to our channel, leave a 5-star review on your podcast app of choice, and recommend the Language on the Move podcast and our partner the New Books Network to your students, colleagues, and friends.

Till next time!

Hospital corridor, by Sadami Konchi ©

In this episode of the Language on the Move Podcast, Brynn Quick speaks with Erin Mulpur about how hospitals can provide linguistic minority patients with access to interpreting services.

Erin holds a Master of Public Health and is the System Director at Houston Methodist Global Health Care Services in Houston, Texas, United States.

The conversation addresses the potential barriers to both communication and healthcare that linguistic minority patients may face in hospitals, as well as Erin’s 2021 paper Reducing Barriers to Language Assistance During a Pandemic which details Houston Methodist Hospital’s innovative use of a particular language assistance technology during the first waves of Covid-19.

This episode is a natural extension of Distinguished Professor Ingrid Piller’s chat with Dr Jim Hlavac, so be sure to listen to both episodes!

Enjoy the show!

This is early days for the Language on the Move Podcast, so please support us by subscribing to our channel, leaving a 5-star review on your podcast app of choice, and recommending the Language on the Move Podcast and our partner the New Books Network to your students, colleagues, and friends.

Artwork

The artwork in this post is from Sadami Konchi’s hospital collection. To learn more about Sadami Konchi’s art visit her website or follow her on Instagram.

Surgery, by Sadami Konchi ©

Reference

Mulpur, E., & Turner, T. (2021). Reducing Barriers to Language Assistance During a Pandemic. Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health, 23(5), 1126-1128. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10903-021-01251-2

Episode Transcript

Brynn: Welcome to the Language on the Move Podcast, a channel on the New Books Network. My name is Brynn Quick, and I’m a PhD candidate in Linguistics at Macquarie University in Sydney, Australia.

My guest today is Erin Mulpur. Erin holds a Master of Public Health and is the System Director at Houston Methodist Global Health Care Services in Houston Texas, United States. Today we are going to talk in general about her work with hospital patients from non English-speaking backgrounds, and in particular about the 2021 paper that she co-authored with Travis Turner entitled “Reducing Barriers to Language Assistance During a Pandemic”.

Welcome to the show, Erin. It’s lovely to have you.

Erin: Thank you so much, Brynn. I am delighted to be here today.

Brynn: So, can you start us off by telling us a bit about yourself? How did you become interested in working with hospital patients from non-English speaking backgrounds, and what kind of work do you do now?

Erin: Absolutely. So, I originally grew up in Montana, a state in the US, and I actually grew up on an Indian reservation. It was the Flathead Indian reservation, so the Salish and Kootenai tribes both lived on that reservation. At a young age, I had a deep, deep desire, instilled by my family, to be respectful of all cultures, and also a deep understanding that language is such a vital part to people’s culture. It’s their voice, it’s how they articulate themselves in the world, and when there isn’t a shared language, then it’s really difficult to connect.

Nurse, by Sadami Konchi ©

And so, at a young age that is definitely something that was a part of my life. Moving on, I went to graduate school and, you know, went to undergrad and then to graduate school, and ended up getting my Masters in Public Health after spending some time in Uganda working for a government-run hospital in Iganga District. And again, this focus on wanting to deeply understand other cultures, be respectful of other cultures, and understanding that language is such a vital part of that – it really led me into this role at Houston Methodist, where I am now.

So, what I do at Houston Methodist, I’ve been here for about 10 years, and I oversee our Special Constituent Management Program and also our Global Patient Services Program. So, what that means is that we have patients who travel from over 70 countries from around the world, speak multiple different languages, and they are facilitated by an amazing team here at Houston Methodist that I have the privilege to work with every day. And my staff come from over 30 countries from around the world. They speak so many different languages, and it’s this beautiful, diverse scenery where we have the ability to take care of patients from different backgrounds, different cultures here at out hospital because they travel to Houston for care.

And we also oversee our Domestic Language Program. So, when you think about it from a healthcare perspective, when a physician walks into a room and he notices that a patient does not speak English, he or she is not thinking, “Is this patient traveling internationally, or is this patient a local patient from our community?”. So, our team, my team, has the privilege to take care of both of those patient populations here at this hospital.

And for those who may not know as much about Houston, TX, we are the fastest-growing diverse city in the United States. So, over 40% of people over the age of 5 speak another language than English in our city, and so when you think about that, over 140 languages are spoken in our city. And when we just looked at our data last year, over 70 languages are spoken just by patients at our hospital. So, it’s so, so important to think about language assistance and think about making sure that patients understand the care that they’re receiving, and that is what I’m doing today.

Treatment room, by Sadami Konchi ©

Brynn: That is fascinating, and what an amazing opportunity to do that kind of work. That’s incredible. So, can you tell us what are some common barriers that patients face if they don’t have a high level of English proficiency and seek treatment at an English-dominant hospital? And this could apply at Houston, but it could also apply to where I’m coming from in Sydney, Australia.

Erin: Absolutely. Absolutely, Brynn. I would say that everything can be a barrier, honestly. When you think about patients navigating a website to a hospital – is the website available in multiple languages? If the patient is calling the call centre to schedule an appointment, is that call centre offering language assistance? Are there options to push for Spanish or Arabic or Vietnamese? What is that infrastructure around language assistance? So, I can say that everything is a barrier if it’s not thought about and intentional to make sure that you’re opening access to everyone, not just English-speaking patients.

And that’s what we see here at Houston Methodist, and that’s why we have created content that’s in multiple languages. That’s why we have our phone system that can be in multiple languages. We have so much infrastructure and technology because we know that if you don’t create that, then patients don’t have a voice.

Brynn: Absolutely, and I absolutely agree. And that brings us to your paper, “Reducing Barriers to Language Assistance During a Pandemic”. This is a fascinating paper, and if anyone has the chance to read it, I would highly recommend. So, can you tell us a bit about something called the Vocera Smartbadge? What is that, and how was your hospital already using it before the Covid-19 pandemic struck?

Erin: Absolutely, so our nurses, prior to Covid, had what is referred to as a Vocera Smartbadge. The way that I would articulate that is that it’s like a smart walkie-talkie where you can dial in, you have the ability to ask the device to call other departments and other services, and so it was really leveraged and utilised amongst the clinical team for patient care. So, if the nurse was in a room, needed another nurse, she could push the button and she could say, “Dial this nurse in this other room”, and so it had that technology and was utilised in that way prior to Covid. It was really helpful because it allowed a hands-free way to care for patients, but also have the ability to connect with other people on the care team.

Brynn: And I think for those of us who’ve been in hospitals before, we’ve seen this happen with handheld phones. We’ve seen nurses be in hospital rooms and call each other on handheld phones, so from my understanding, the Vocera Smartbadge is really kind of that same idea, but, like you said, hands-free, and it’s more voice command, voice-activated.

Treatment, by Sadami Konchi ©

Erin: Absolutely, so it can attach to the lapel or a jacket, and you don’t have to dial anything, you can push a button and you can ask the Vocera device to call into a directory that has already been created.

Brynn: Exactly, and so your hospital, during Covid-19, was able to use the Vocera Smartbadge in a really novel way to provide language services to patients during the pandemic. Can you tell us how that happened and what you observed?

Erin: Absolutely, so unfortunately, with the Covid pandemic, here in the US and in many other countries, we had a limited supply of personal protective equipment. So, I currently have staff who provide in-person interpretation. So, you think about any time an in-person, someone needs to go into the room and provide in-person interpretation, they would have to don and doff gowns. So, with the limited supply of PPE, really the goal was to just use PPE for people who were physically clinically caring for the patient to keep them safe. So, it was really a difficult time to think about, “How are we going to provide language assistance and still keep with that value of ours and making sure that our patients understand the care they are receiving, but not have enough PPE for our in-person interpreters?”

So, what we ended up doing is we ended up integrating our technology around language assistance. Over the phone interpretation was then embedded within that Vocera device to where a nurse who was in PPE, speaking with a patient who was limited English proficient, would have the ability to dial in an over-the-phone interpreter and that patient would still be able to hear, from the nurse’s chest, to that patient to be able to understand the care that they’re receiving, and receive care in the language that is needed to them. That was something that we were able to do. We were able to stand that up fairly quickly because we already had the Vocera device in action and already utilised across our system. It made it really, really easy for us to be able to do it once we were able to accomplish that.

What we found during some of the waves during the Covid pandemic, a few of the surges of patients, there was a large Latino population that ended up receiving care at our hospital that were Spanish speaking. So, it came right in the nick of time, I would say, for us to be able to have that in-person, that interpretation provided by the nurse between the patient and the nurse.

Brynn: And that’s so important because, part of the research that I’ve been doing has been looking into the disparities, the health disparities between majority language speakers and linguistic minorities. We know that there was a larger Covid-19 mortality amongst linguistic minority patients. So, the fact that you were able to integrate this technology could have made the difference, literally, between life and death for patients. So, that is fantastic that that was able to happen.

Patient, by Sadami Konchi ©

You mentioned this, this is something that I found really interesting in your paper, was that concept of the voice coming from the person’s chest because the Vocera Smartbadge was located on the chest, so it was almost like that interpreting voice was coming from the healthcare provider which, as we know, can sometimes be something that is tricky to deal with. When there is this, especially over the phone interpreting, or video interpreting, is this idea of distance between the person who is trying to receive the healthcare and then the healthcare provider. So, the fact that it was literally coming from the healthcare provider’s chest, I think, made it that much more valuable.

Erin: Absolutely, no you’re absolutely right, Brynn. When talking with patients and, you know, hearing their experience with that, they understood the limited amount of PPE, and they also understood and felt that that connection with the nurse and having that voice be so close to the person’s heart, it allowed it to be more intimate than it otherwise has been in the past with some of the technology that has been created around language assistance.

Brynn: Absolutely, thank you. Sort of shifting gears a little bit, what do you feel is something that people, generally monolingual English-speaking or Americans or, even in my case, monolingual English-speaking Australians, I know I don’t sound Australian, I’m originally American, obviously. What do you think is something that those people get wrong when they think of people from non-English speaking backgrounds who seek treatment in predominantly English-speaking hospitals?

Erin: That’s a great question, Brynn, and I would have to say that there’s a tremendous amount of unconscious bias that can occur in a healthcare setting, and even outside of a healthcare setting. It persists in the world that we live in, and so that unconscious bias can impact the provider, it can impact the patient, and so what I would say is – have no assumptions. Be curious. Always be willing to learn something new.

So, as an example, in the role I’m in, I work with patients who are coming from the Middle East, and there are Muslim men who come to our hospital for care, and I know that I’m not to extend my hand. It’s a sign of respect in US culture to extend your hand and to shake someone else’s hand, but in other cultures it’s not necessarily seen as respectful. So, that is something that I have had to learn and implement into my life and my routine. That’s the piece around monolingual cultures, I think it’s important to draw no assumptions. To be curious, and to be open to learning. And, when you’re open to learning, you’re also open to making mistakes. Once you’ve made a mistake because, maybe you find out that you have unconscious bias that you’re not aware of, change. Adapt. Evolve. Learn. Continue to grow. Be curious about other cultures.

Brynn: Absolutely, I couldn’t agree more. In your opinion, what can hospitals do to ensure that linguistic minority patients can access care in a language they can understand?

Patient, by Sadami Konchi ©

Erin: I would say, Brynn, that depending on where these hospitals are located – I know that not all hospitals are looking at this data. Maybe some hospitals don’t even have data to look at. So, you know, in our system, we have an electronic medical health records system, and we utilise EPIC. We’re able to see, based on how that patient is flagged within EPIC, we’re able to see if they need language assistance or not. So, we’re able to see that data, and we’re able to implement solutions and structure and infrastructure and policies around that.

For other hospitals, maybe there are some hospitals that don’t have that kind of access to data, and so what I loved about your paper, Brynn, is that you’re looking at what is the community? What is the language of the community that you’re serving? If you don’t have the data within your hospital, expand to your population. What languages are spoken in your population? Those people are coming to your hospital for care. So, what language programs and language assistance do you need to set up to make sure that these patients feel seen and valued and heard? That is something that I think is so important.

And if you don’t have that expertise, it’s ok! There are consultants. There are different organisations, I mean we have a consulting arm to our operations as well. We have the ability to come in and advise, but be ok asking for support and expertise outside if you don’t have that infrastructure created, because, ultimately, what will happen in any hospital setting, is if a patient receives care that does not share the language of the provider, and they consent, or they end up having a surgery, and they have some sort of complication that they were not aware of, the legal risks and the lawsuits that come from patients not understanding their care are so grave for organisations. So, first and foremost, providing language assistance is just the right thing to do. It’s just the right thing to do. If that’s not convincing you enough, there are major financial risks if you do not provide language assistance to patients.

Brynn: 100%, absolutely. So, before we wrap up, can you tell us what’s next for you and your work? It sounds like you all are doing some truly amazing work at Houston Methodist, and I would just love to know where you go from here.

Erin: Yes, so as you can hear from my history, I am a bridge-builder. I like to bridge people to have access and resources and understanding. So, I love the idea of building bigger bridges in the future so more people have access to care, more people understand the care that they’re receiving. I also believe that when you look at healthcare right now, it’s being so rapidly disrupted. There’s so much technology that is being pushed into healthcare. You see so much artificial intelligence as well being utilised in healthcare. That is where I see language assistance going next, but it could be leveraged. I do think artificial intelligence will be leveraged in a healthcare setting in the future and even with language assistance in the future.

But artificial intelligence will never take away from human connection. It will never take away from in-person interpretation and from a person being seen, heard and valued by a person who physically is there with them and is able to speak their language. But when you think about the amount of care that patients receive at a hospital – there’s nurses rounding on them, physicians rounding on them, specialists, respiratory therapists, occupational therapists – there’s all sorts of people that are part of the clinical care team that help that patient while they’re here. Being able to allow them access to multimodalities for language assistance just means that that patient is getting as much language assistance as they can while they’re at our hospital. So, I do see the bridge getting bigger and wider in the future, and I see technology being a big part of that. And that is really where we are looking in the future here at Houston Methodist.

Brynn: And I love that idea of, yes, there’s absolutely a place for these technologies that we’re seeing expanding and developing, but that, at the core, we as humans still need other humans. We need that human connection and interaction that human interpreting can provide.

With that said, Erin, thank you so much for speaking with us today. We really appreciate it, and I feel like our listeners have learned a lot. Thank you.

Erin: Wonderful, thank you so much, Brynn, it has been such a pleasure connecting today.

Dr Hlavac is a senior lecturer in the Monash Intercultural Lab in the School of Languages, Literatures, Cultures and Linguistics. He is a NAATI-certified and practicing professional interpreter and translator. NAATI is Australia’s National Accreditation Authority for Translators and Interpreters.

Dr Hlavac’ research interests relate to interpreting in healthcare settings, interprofessional practice with trainee professionals with whom interpreters commonly work, and the incidence of interpreting and translation amongst multilinguals and in multilingual societies.

In the conversation we explore how professional interpreters, language mediators, and language brokers help to support fair and equitable access to healthcare and other forms of social participation.

How does interpreting work in practice in a hospital setting? Who gets to interpret? How is the need for an interpreter identified? Who pays? What is the role of policy vis-à-vis bottom-up practice? Is the process the same for all languages? Will AI make human interpreters superfluous?

Enjoy the show!

This is early days for the Language on the Move Podcast, so please support us by subscribing to our channel, leaving a 5-star review on your podcast app of choice, and recommending the Language on the Move Podcast and our partner the New Books Network to your students, colleagues, and friends.

Further reading

Healthcare interpreting (Image credit: Sydney Local Health District)

Beagley, J., Hlavac, J., & Zucchi, E. (2020). Patient length of stay, patient readmission rates and the provision of professional interpreting services in healthcare in Australia. Health & Social Care in the Community, 28(5), 1643-1650.
Hlavac, J. (2014). Participation roles of a language broker and the discourse of brokering: An analysis of English–Macedonian interactions. Journal of Pragmatics, 70, 52-67.
Hlavac, J. (2017). Brokers, dual-role mediators and professional interpreters: a discourse-based examination of mediated speech and the roles that linguistic mediators enact. The Translator, 23(2), 197-216.
Hlavac, J., Beagley, J., & Zucchi, E. (2018). Applications of policy and the advancement of patients’ health outcomes through interpreting services: data and viewpoints from a major public healthcare provider. The International Journal for Translation and Interpreting, 10(1), 111-136.
Hlavac, J., Gentile, A., Orlando, M., Zucchi, E., & Pappas, A. (2018). Translation as a sub-set of public and social policy and a consequence of multiculturalism: the provision of translation and interpreting services in Australia. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 251, 55-88.
Long, K. M., Haines, T. P., Clifford, S., Sundram, S., Srikanth, V., Macindoe, R., Leung, W.-Y., Hlavac, J., & Enticott, J. (2022). English language proficiency and hospital admissions via the emergency department by aged care residents in Australia: A mixed-methods investigation. Health & Social Care in the Community, 30(6), e4006-e4019.

Transcript (created by Brynn Quick)

Dist Prof Piller: Welcome to the Language on the Move Podcast, a channel on the New Books Network. My name is Ingrid Piller, and I’m Distinguished Professor of Applied Linguistics at Macquarie University in Sydney.

My guest today is Dr Jim Hlavac. Dr Hlavac is a Senior Lecturer in Translation and Interpreting at Monash University in Melbourne. Today we’re going to talk about language barriers in a diverse society and how they can be bridged through interpreting between different languages. Welcome to the show, Jim.

Dr Hlavac: Thank you very much for the invitation, Ingrid, and to be on the Language on the Move Podcast.

Dist Prof Piller: Maybe I should say servus and tell our listeners – Jim and I are old friends, and usually we would have this conversation in German because that is our main shared language. So, doing this in English is actually a bit unusual for us. Maybe, Jim, you can tell us a little bit about yourself. How did you get into interpreting?

Dr Hlavac: Well, Ingrid, it’s probably not uncommon for people in my situation to have been brought up bilingually, or with even three languages, but also mobility – living in different countries – being born in Australia but then going to the birthplace from my parents when I was 7.5. And then, going back to other places where I have relatives and friends, spending time in Europe growing up, then coming back to Australia. So, often mobility has been affected which has accounted for my acquisition of languages and also my use of them.

When I travelled again from Europe to Australia in 1995, I had done kind of ad hoc unpaid translation and interpreting work for others, and I decided I really should formalise my credentials. So, I attempted a test and passed it, and since then I’ve been a what’s called a NAATI – NAATI for those who don’t know – it’s the National Accreditation Authority for Translators and Interpreters – I’m a NAATI translator and interpreter, and I work across 3 languages – English, Croatian and German.

Dist Prof Piller: Thanks a lot, Jim. Jim, maybe can you tell us what a professional interpreter actually does? I don’t think everyone knows. I mean, it sounds very glamorous. What do you do?

Dr Hlavac: I’m glad it sounds glamorous. Some parts are glamorous, some parts are less glamorous. So, what you do if you’re a professional interpreter is that you should have training, which I do have. You should have credentials such as I have from NAATI. Basically, when you work with other people you are working with 2 or more people who don’t have another language. When you work with them, you interpret everything that they say or sign – everything – so you don’t leave things out. You don’t add things. You don’t distort things. You’re impartial. You’re neutral. You’re not on anyone’s side, regardless of who’s paying for you. If you do have a particular relationship with a particular party, that should be declared to the other one.

You also observe confidentiality. Often, interpreters work in situations where people are talking about quite personal or intimate details, and it’s important for an interpreter to observe that confidentiality and to not pass on to anyone else information of events happening in interpreting assignments.

Interpreters work sometimes on site face-to-face with others. Sometimes it’s remote by video interpreting facilities or telephone. We all know about COVID. Everything went remote. So, there are different modes that you can use to communicate with people. But that, in a nutshell, is what a professional interpreter does.

Dist Prof Piller: So, you’ve been stressing “professional” interpreter now, and I’m wondering about – I mean any bilingual can interpret, right? People who don’t have the qualifications you have can also go and interpret, so can you maybe tell us what’s the difference between a professional interpreter and a language mediator or language broker?

Dr Hlavac: So, Ingrid, lots of bilinguals do interpret. If you speak to some bilinguals, they’ll say, “I can’t interpret, and I hate having to do it,” so it’s not a natural progression. It is something else, but you’re right in that many bilinguals do, as a matter of course, do it within their families or circles of friends or whatever.

So, what distinguishes a professional interpreter from a mediator or a broker is the following. I’ve talked about a professional interpreter. A mediator typically is someone who has a different role. They might be a youth worker, a settlement worker, a social worker, housing worker or perhaps a guide at a hospital, etc. where their primary role is to do something else, i.e. to help a person find employment or housing or what have you. And they might do so using another language other than, let’s say, English in Australia, which is the dominant language. Sometimes they’re just having conversations in that language. Sometimes they might be working with an English speaker as well, in which case they do interpret. But they often don’t know or care to know that when they work as an interpreter relaying other people’s speech or signing, that they have to do so fully without distortion. They can’t add their 2 cents’ worth, so to speak.

So, there’s always an issue with a mediator that their own primary role gets in the way, or they’re advancing the situation of a person for settlement or housing, and often the linguistic skills that they have are questionable. Sometimes they can be good, but they haven’t been tested. They don’t see themselves as an interpreter. They don’t know about ethics, etc.

A broker is something else. A broker is typically a family member who is often pressed into service. Sometimes they put their hand up, but often they’re pressed into service. Often, it’s a child who, if the parents don’t speak English, let’s take Australia, is there to interpret what the parents say to an English speaker and vice versa. Classic situations are hospitals, maybe police stations, other places, etc. Now, a broker is a family member, and so although they might look like a person doing interpreting, what they’re doing, their primary role, is being a family member. They’re looking after their parent, or whoever it is. They’re advocating for their interests. They’re making sure that what they hear and what they say is conveyed to their advantage. They’re also available all the time. They understand the parents’ language very well, etc. They’re also available all the time, and they’re free. So, they sound like they’re really great people to use in these situations, and often they are.

But there are some pitfalls, and the pitfalls are that not every child wants to or should be in that kind of a situation. A child can never typically tell a parent how to behave, what to do, because the power relations are such that they’re there to simply hear what they’re told to do.

There’s also many cases of brokers intentionally or unintentionally changing things. Imagine in a healthcare interaction the parent says something and the child doesn’t quite understand or really fully grasp what it’s about and says what they think the parents says. They convey that into English, and so what the healthcare worker hears is a description of symptoms that are actually different from what the parent says. Or, conversely, they might not understand the healthcare professional properly, be too shameful or kind of shy to ask for repetition or clarification, and they tell the parent something else that they think they’ve heard from the healthcare professional.

So that can lead to misdiagnosis, forms of treatment being misunderstood or not followed, to quite embarrassing situations. Let’s say an adult has a particular health issue which is an intimate issue. Is it appropriate that the child is privy to that information, and are they really likely to convey that? And also, when you think about yourself, would you like to go to the doctor and have your brother-in-law sitting next to you and you’re divulging information about your medical history and expecting your brother-in-law or whoever it is to recount this accurately and correctly, and they’re not going to change things that the doctor might say to them? How does that affect your relationship with your brother-in-law afterwards if he’s privy to all these things?

Dist Prof Piller: Yeah, look, I’m sure there are many, many difficult situations, and you’ve probably got a huge amount of stories to tell us. You’re not only an interpreter yourself, you’re also an interpreting researcher. A lot of the research you do is in healthcare, and you’ve already started us on healthcare. I guess, by the sound of it, it sounded like you’re not a huge fan of language brokering, and you pointed out all the problems that there are with family members actually interpreting for other family members.

But at the same time, we kind of know that it happens, and so I guess I’d be curious to hear from you specifically about interpreting and language mediation and language brokering in the healthcare system. What are the main barriers that patients in Australia who do not speak English, or who don’t speak English well, what kind of barriers do they face in accessing adequate healthcare in Australia?

Dr Hlavac: Typically, they have a number of barriers. There are often low levels of health literacy. They don’t know the health system in this country. They don’t know what services are available or that they’re entitled to. If they don’t speak English fluently, then they might not know that they’re entitled to an interpreter in most healthcare interactions that they’re likely to have. If they don’t know that, then they’re not going to ask, or ask a family member to ask on their behalf.

So, the challenge is for healthcare workers to recognise that a person is unable to communicate effectively in English and to offer or to organise an interpreter on their behalf. I’ve done some research, and even amongst those people who claim that they do know that health interpreting services are for free, it’s often the healthcare provider who still ends up providing them. And it sounds silly, or sounds obvious, but often people with so little English don’t know how to ask for an interpreter. They don’t even have those skills sometimes. And if you haven’t got effective communication, then, as you know, as the healthcare professional, they can’t work out what the symptoms are, what the level of health literacy is. They can’t work out a diagnosis and things like that.

Dist Prof Piller: So, who actually has to ask? I mean, you’re saying patients may not know they have the right to an interpreter, or they may not know how to ask. What’s the role of the healthcare professional, or how does – if I go to the doctor and I don’t speak any English, how does it actually work that an interpreter comes in? How is that decided, and what’s the process?

Dr Hlavac: So, the process is that, if you go into a large hospital, particularly in a metropolitan area like Sydney or Melbourne, you’re likely to have front of house staff who knows that this is one of the questions that they would ask as a regular feature when they’re addressing you for the first time through triage or whatever. Now, if you can functionally express yourself clearly, fluently, then they’re unlikely to ask you, but they still might. So, they’re obliged to ask this question, “Do you need an interpreter?” or “What language would you like your healthcare services provided to you in?”, which is a kind of optimal question, you know.

So, it’s up to them, and there’s a lot of cultural competence training happening in hospitals. There’s a lot of information that healthcare workers learn through professional development through their respective professional associations – how to work with interpreters. There’s a lot of skilling up that has happened across, particularly, hospitals. GP clinics are not so skilled up very much. I’m tracking data that’s looking at use of interpreters by GP clinics. It’s lower. Aged care facilities are also lower, so we do have variation. They key thing is, often it’s the front of house person to make the diagnosis. If they don’t, though, the healthcare professional can make the call that this person, this patient, needs an interpreter. So that’s how it usually happens.

The other challenge is, I mentioned health literacy and what have you. There’s a lot of information that’s been translated as well. I know we’re talking about interpreting mainly, Ingrid, but here in Victoria, I’m based in Melbourne, there’s the Victorian Health Translations website, which is 28,000 translations of material related to healthcare across 150 languages. There’s a lot of information out there to advise people about healthcare conditions, and one of the challenges is the discoverability of these resources. How do you get to them? They’re there, but how does the person for whom they are intended actually access them?

Dist Prof Piller: I’ve been wondering about that a lot, actually, because they’re usually organised by language, right? So, if you’re not good at spelling the Latin alphabet, or if you don’t know the name of your language in English, it’s really hard to find that information.

Dr Hlavac: It is. Typically, it’s a family member often, a younger family member, I did talk about brokers, who can lead them there. But they also need to know about this existing. So we do have a challenge in the accessibility of this information to people we want it to reach. When you do get to that site, you’ll find that there’s not just written text there. They’re moving now to audio files as a way of conveying information to people because we have a lot of data to tell us that this is the way people like to consume health information. Not through written text, but through an audio file. And there’s audio plus video. So, the repository of translations in Victoria does reflect people’s preferred ways of reading or gaining information in other languages. And it’s also quality checked.

There’s a lot of work happening recently of, firstly, the translations being checked and sampled amongst communities. And secondly, when healthcare departments or healthcare facilities are looking to compose a document in English, let’s say about Covid or whatever, that they actually involve translators at the stage where the plain English version is developed in the first place. It’s very helpful if you can have translators as part of the group, working on them, so that when the translations are then developed you don’t have the issues of “What does this mean? Let’s rephrase this”, etc. So, there is a lot of work happening in this area to optimise health translations. But we’ll go back to interpreting because I know that’s your focus.

Dist Prof Piller: Yeah, well look, I mean translation is fascinating too, and that leads me to another question. How do we actually know which languages are needed? We can go back to the clinics, so the receptionist establishes that this person needs an interpreter, but how do they find the right interpreter? Or, going back to your translations, how do we actually know in which languages do we need to make available information about a particular condition, for instance?

Dr Hlavac: The big hospitals collect data on not only interpreter requests, but the languages that are being requested, and they direct their resources to employing interpreters either in-house or freelance for those languages which are in demand. But they could have, you know, within the catchment area of northern health here in Melbourne, they service residents across 150 languages. They also have data from the ABS. Every 5 years we have the census.

So, we do have a fairly fine-grained idea in each municipality or local government are, what the profile is of the languages of the residents there, and also the level of English proficiency. The census data, the census has a question – “If English is not your language spoken at home, what is your level of proficiency in English?”, right? There are 2 gradings – “not at all” and “not well”. When residents tick those responses, that’s pretty indicative that those are people that will need an interpreter. So, we’ve got some demographic data. We’ve got data from hospitals themselves to know which languages are needed.

In terms of sourcing the interpreters, yes, Ingrid, this is a challenge because for bigger languages we do have an ok kind of cohort of interpreters to fall back on, but for new and emerging languages like Rohingya, when Rohingyas started to arrive say, 5, 6, 7 years ago, Chaldeans 15 or 20 years ago, we had to quickly develop testing for potential interpreters for those languages. Then getting them out to be able to work in communities. Often, it’s a kind of chicken and egg situation where you kind of approach people who are community leaders and ask them if they know of people who have good language skills who might have been doing this before migrating to Australia. And to locate people who have the attributes that you’re looking for in a potential interpreter and supporting them through training.

Dist Prof Piller: Yeah, I guess one problem that also kind of relates to named languages, you know. I mean, in my own research I’ve encountered people who’ve said they needed an Arabic interpreter, but they actually needed someone with Sudanese Arabic but then got someone with Lebanese Arabic and it was really, really difficult. The interpreter couldn’t really understand them. Or there have been all these media reports about the Yazidis in northern NSW who speak a variety of Kurdish but couldn’t really work with the Kurdish interpreters because their brand of Kurdish was quite different. So, I guess that’s an additional challenge.

Dr Hlavac: It is, and we do know about them. South Sudanese Arabic – there are 3 varieties of Kurdish that NAATI credentials. There are regular meetings, and I’ve been a part of them, between the language service providers who are at the coal face (Australian or British idiom for “front end” or “grassroots level”). They supply the interpreters, and they get together with NAATI, with the professional associations, and they say, “Hey, we’ve got this problem. We can’t find interpreters for this language. We’ve got a high incidence of people reporting this language, but they can’t understand the interpreters.” There are different varieties of Kurdish, etc. So, these things are fairly quickly made aware to the people who need to know about them, and we do respond accordingly.

Australia, through NAATI, is probably the only crediting organisation to have 3 varieties of Kurdish. And that’s simply because, as you said, there are Kurdish varieties that are mutually incomprehensible. And the whole thing of interpreting is that you need to be able to communicate effectively. If Lebanese Arabic interpreters aren’t able to communicate effectively with a South Sudanese Arabic speaker, the interpreter needs to inform the service provider, the English speaker, about this issue, that they are unable to communicate properly and that they need to rebook the assignment with a South Sudanese Arabic interpreter.

You do have speakers who might be speaking varieties that are not your primary one. You kind of, well you know about this very well, Ingrid, you practice accommodation. You try and work out how do they speak, you try and avoid things that are specific to your variety. I’m often working with Slovenians, who I don’t understand that well, and they, through misallocation that happens. If you really can’t understand that, the onus is on the interpreter to declare this issue, and for that assignment to be booked with the correct interpreter.

Dist Prof Piller: So, does that happen a lot? Like, you talk about misallocation. Is that a problem in the system, and then if I’m, I don’t know, I need to attend the emergency department, for instance. Maybe there is not a whole lot of time, actually, for people to find out what language I speak, and then to book and rebook, so how does that work?

Dr Hlavac: Yeah, it’s not easy, but there is infrastructure to address this. If you turn up to emergency and you’re incoherent or what have you, there are people at front of staff who will try to work out how much English you have, and if you don’t have English, what’s your language. They’ll often ask you anything – your country or language – in English, etc. It’s often possible for front of house staff to at least work out the language or the country of birth. Often, the country of birth does not coincide with the language, but that’s at least a piece of information that’s helpful for the front of house staff to start the process of locating an interpreter.

The free interpreting service is available 24/7. This is financed by the federal government. It’s free, so the healthcare facilities with emergency departments use this service, particularly after hours, and the ability to be able to locate and get an interpreter on the other end of the phone is not bad. The waiting time is usually between 3 and 5 minutes on average, which is not bad. There is a fair bit of infrastructure in place to address this issue.

People say, “This costs a lot of money”, etc. But if you look at the sums and if you look at the rates of misdiagnosis, healthcare workers not being able to communicate properly, the health effects, etc. and how much it costs the health system when these things happen – it’s much cheaper to pay for interpreting services that address the linguistic discordance in the first place.

Dist Prof Piller: Jim, you’ve got fantastic data, actually, on how the provision of interpreting services kind of reduces length of stay in hospital and how it reduces readmission rates for linguistically diverse people. So, really, this kind of value for money that our interpreting system gives Australian society – can you maybe talk us through that research and how interpreting really, you know, improves outcomes for people from non-English speaking backgrounds and overall lowers the burden on the Australian taxpayer if you will?

Dr Hlavac: So Ingrid, yeah, that was data that was collected by a colleague of mine, and friend, Emiliano Zucchi, based at Northern Health here in Melbourne. He tracked the use of interpreting services over 10 years. In those 10 years, interpreting services greatly expanded, as did the population in the area, but what we had happening was, and we can’t quite say it was only the interpreting services that resulted in lower length of stay in hospital and lower readmission rates. We’d need to do what’s called multivariate analysis to say that conclusively. But what we did see was that the increase in interpreting services co-occurred with these really good health outcomes – reducing the length of stay in hospital, lowering readmission rates – those are compelling reasons. They’re also reasons that hospital managers like to see. It’s not just the fact that patients and healthcare workers can communicate with each other optimally. There are great healthcare outcomes that have occurred or co-occurred with this happening.

Dist Prof Piller: Yeah, that’s really brilliant. I mean, we’ve already been talking about NAATI a lot and provisions in Australia. Our listeners come from all around the world, so I was wondering whether you could talk us through how Australia compares in terms of provisions for people who don’t speak English or don’t speak it well to other countries and the interpreting provisions and translation provisions available there?

Dr Hlavac: So, Australia compares favourably. I go back to really 1975 when they changed the macro policy, social policy of Australia, to introduce multiculturalism. If it wasn’t for multiculturalism, the flow on effect of that such as interpreting services would not be in this country to the extent that they are. So, Australia compares favourably in that throughout your provision of services acorss health, education, defence, employment, welfare – no matter what it is, each department has to have a multiculturalism policy, including linguistic diversity.

Part of linguistic diversity is the linguistic diversity of the government employees in that department, but also the people who use those services. So, when you’re unemployed and you need welfare assistance, the government department that you go to has to have a policy on providing interpreting services if you require them. Health is a big area, what I’ve mentioned. The courts, police, defence, tourism, etc. So, it’s actually built into the provision of all government services.

When you have money from government at federal and state level to support this, you can build up an infrastructure. When you don’t have the government support, it’s much harder. It’s much less prevalent and widespread, so that’s really the reason why Australia does compare favourably and why, compared to other countries, you do find, you know, a good service in terms of interpreting service and translation.

Dist Prof Piller: So, you’ve already spoken a lot about top-down and that the policies in Australia are really favourable, and the funding situation is quite favourable. Can you maybe talk us through bottom-up efforts? What needs to happen in institutions? Government can only do so much, you know. We need the policy framework in place, but at the same time at the institutional level, as you said earlier, people have to make things happen. There has to be a commitment to multilingualism and service provision for everyone and so on and so forth. I know that, from your research, you’ve also done a lot at the institutional level. Can you tell us a bit about what works and what doesn’t work?

Dr Hlavac: That example I gave before, when language service providers gather around a table to talk shop, to talk about what’s happening, what are our problems, issues, things we’re not doing well. That’s an example where people who are at the coal face do tell those people further up about what their gaps are and how they can be addressed. People aren’t short of suggestions. Now, sometimes those suggestions can’t always be addressed, but there’s this interchange of people at various levels that does characterise the system here which is pretty comprehensive.

If I go back to the 1970s though, when I was talking about multiculturalism being a key thing, there were people such as police officers complaining to their local members of parliament to say, “I can’t actually interview this potential witness because they don’t speak English and I don’t speak their language. They’re getting someone off the street to interpret. What are you going to do about it?”. You had doctors writing letters to say, “I can’t treat my patients. What are you going to do about it?”. When the country had actually gotten to a stage where they thought, “Ok, migration is an ongoing thing. This problem is not going to go away. How are we going to solve the problem?”. There were a lot of activists in that period coming up with lots of suggestions, and that’s how a lot of almost revolutionary things happened in that period. We’re fortunate we’ve had bipartisan support from both Liberal and Labor parties. Both sides of politics continue to support multiculturalism. So, interpreting services have not become a political football which can affect their future existence. So, that’s how things kind of panned out.

I’m sorry I’m not giving you a very good bottom-up example, but there’s a lot of interchange happening at many levels, and the system is kind of being fine-tuned, reviewed, and it’s open to lots of suggestions which are forthcoming from lots of people.

Dist Prof Piller: Yeah, look, I mean, that’s the democratic process, I guess, and it is encouraging to see it working. Now, I hear a lot of people currently coming forth with suggestions about AI and saying, you know, “We won’t need interpreting anymore in the very near future because AI is going to do it all for us,” and all those translation apps and so on and so forth. So, I have to ask that question, Jim. Are language technologies going to make human interpreting and translation superfluous?

Dr Hlavac: Ingrid, what a question! It might, one day, not tomorrow or the day after. With voice recognition technology which is the basis for technology understanding human talk and then being able to convert it into another language is really advancing, as we all know. We can turn on the captions function and that will probably give a pretty good rendition of what I’m saying and what you’re saying.

So, we’re speaking English, and hopefully we’re speaking standard English and speaking reasonably slowly and clearly, so voice recognition technology is good if you’re speaking a big language slowly, clearly, and a standard version of it. If you’re speaking a slow, standard version of another big language, you’re probably going to be able to use technology that is going to, I don’t know, probably interpret most of what is said correctly without too many mistakes and distortions. So, the technology is there, and it’s improving.

However, there’s two things. Most of the interpreting assignments that interpreters work in in this country is they’re working with people who typically don’t speak standard varieties who are often, particularly in health, they might be sick, distraught, unwell, unhappy, they don’t speak coherently. They don’t speak slowly. They don’t speak clearly enough. And so, the technology is not there to be able to pick up what they’re saying to then reliably be able to transfer it into English.

For the time being, the technology is not good enough to deal with the vast array of different varieties that people use in their vernaculars when they’re interacting with a healthcare worker. You need a lot of feeding of data from all sorts of languages, including colloquialisms, dialect, variation, etc. to have a voice recognition technology system that reliably can replace an interpreter. I don’t think it’s going to happen tomorrow or soon, but it might happen in 10 or 15 years, but it’s up to interpreters to work with this because there still needs for many things to be some sort of human overview, or at least supervision of this.

I’ve got a PhD student who’s testing voice recognition and using a tablet and asking interpreters, “Do you want to take notes like you normally do, or do you want to look at the tablet and see what the transcription looks like? When you interpret, is it easier from that or from your notes?”. So, there’s research happening.

The other thing is though, Ingrid, if the technology makes a mistake and there’s some sort of horrible outcome, who has liability for it? If you try and contact Google Translate and say, “Hey you made a mistake and this cost me $100 million. Can I sue you?”, you won’t get an answer, probably, because it is unclear who is responsible for that transfer of recorded speech from one language into another if you use automatic or neural translation technology. So, it’s a grey area, but we’re not going to be replaced tomorrow I don’t think.

Dist Prof Piller: Yeah, look, personally I don’t even think in 10-15 years. I mean, there is so much technology hype, and I guess I’m also interested in the dangers of that belief that at some point in the future interpreters will be replaced because, as you’ve pointed out, it’s the most vulnerable and the most high-stakes situations where technology actually fails. Technology is great if I need to get directions, if I’m a tourist somewhere and sort of in the leisurely, fun situation. Then it’s really, really good to have Google Translate or Google Lens or whatever. But if I’m in a vulnerable situation, a high-stake needs situation in healthcare, before the courts or whatnot, I think there is a real danger, actually, of thinking that this leisure and fun situation is somehow going to transfer to that situation where it really matters. Where we need human accountability. Where we need to make sure that it’s the right variety, it’s all those connotations that are there and so on and so forth as you’ve explained so beautifully.

Dr Hlavac: Yeah, things are developing. People might think, “Hey, I used it on holiday, why can’t I use it with my legal client here?”. There are some disclaimers and warnings out there. So, for example, Optus has a particular function where they can do speech recognition software, so you can speak, let’s say, German to someone. And at the other end of the telephone call, someone can speak Italian or Swahili or whatever. They said this is good for general communication only. They’ve kind of used the term “general communication”.

They do warn that this is not suitable for health or legal or high-risk situations. So, it’s often up to people to assess what the level of risk, particularly if there’s a miscommunication or mistranslation, what the consequences of that are. So, you know, the messages, as you said, it might be good in low-risk situation, but as soon as you have something at stake, you need to ask yourself questions. And human beings are a better evaluator of risks are. Human beings do make mistakes, but they are better in dealing with high-risk situations than what the technology has to offer us at the moment.

Like we say to our students, though, those interpreters who don’t work with interpreters will end up without a job, but those interpreters who do work with technology can look forward to continuing to have a job.

Dist Prof Piller: Well thanks a lot. I think that’s sort of a good note to end on actually. Thank you so much, Jim. And thanks for listening, everyone. If you enjoyed the show, please subscribe to our channel, leave a 5-star review on our podcast or on your podcast app of choice and recommend the Language on the Move podcast and our partner, the New Books Network, to your students, colleagues and friends.

Til next time!

Dr Laura Smith-Khan during her keynote at InDialog (Image credit: Dries Cavents, UGhent)

Editor’s Note: Asylum seekers in countries of the Global North need to communicate a credible fear of persecution to assessors who speak a different language, come from a different cultural background, and operate in a different institutional context. To bridge these gaps between asylum seekers and assessors, the work of interpreters is essential, yet widely devalued and erased. Dr Laura Smith-Khan explored these vanishing acts in her keynote lecture at the recent InDialog 4 conference at Ghent University, Belgium. We are privileged to be able to share a version of her talk with our readers.

***

To grant protection to asylum seekers, officials in the global north require them to communicate a fear of persecution. Not only that, they also must believe them. The process of evaluating an asylum claim and an asylum-seeker’s credibility involves multiple forms of communication, and given the transnational nature of seeking asylum, this setting is one with a great deal of linguistic diversity.

Therefore, it should be obvious that interpreting is a common feature in asylum procedures and that interpreters play a crucial role in facilitating the communication of the various participants involved. Yet misconceptions about interpreting can affect participation in interpreter-mediated encounters and can also influence the way asylum communication is evaluated as part of the credibility assessment process.

Existing studies have found that interpreters’ work is sometimes devalued, and interpreters are even made invisible within institutional structures, discourses and practices. This is despite a large body of research about the many roles and impacts interpreters have within the encounters they mediate, both in asylum procedures and beyond.

Below I’ll share some of my own research, focusing on refugee credibility assessment in Australia. I will introduce some key “language ideologies” that operate in asylum procedures. I believe this is important, because “the study of interpreters, their experiences, and the ideologies of voice and language within which they work offers ways to interrogate the contradictions of global capital and its related humanitarian enterprises” (Kunreuther & Rao, 2023, p. 250). So I will explore how these ideologies have an impact on institutional understandings of interpreting, and through this, how they can undermine how asylum seekers’ communication and credibility are assessed.

Seeking asylum in Australia

To provide some context, here is a short overview of the process for seeking asylum in Australia (see Diagram). The procedures differ depending on whether people seeking asylum arrive by boat or with a visa.

First, for people arriving by boat, they have a basic entry interview. And then if the government allows them to, they will later make a protection visa application, along with other asylum seekers who were able to reach Australia by plane, with some other visa, for example as tourists or students.

The protection visa application is assessed by the Immigration Department, and involves completing a long set of complicated application forms and then later participating in a detailed and rigorous interview with the official who is tasked with evaluating the application.

If the application is unsuccessful, a merits review, where the facts of their case are reconsidered, is possible. There are two separate bodies for this: people who arrive by boat have their application reconsidered by the Immigration Assessment Authority, which usually reviews the existing records only, and does not call the applicant for further questions. In contrast, people who arrive with a visa can opt for a review which is carried out by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal and involves attending a further hearing.

If the applicant is successful at the merits review stage, they can seek judicial review. If they continue to be unsuccessful, they can make further appeals up through the Australian Federal court hierarchy. However, what can be considered in a judicial review is quite limited and it is difficult to successfully navigate this process without professional legal assistance, so only a small proportion of cases are appealed there, and even fewer are successful.

In this post, I’ll draw on a mix of data from Australia: published decisions from one of the merits review bodies, the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, a Federal Court decision, and interviews that I conducted with migration lawyers.

Language ideologies and the law

In Anglophone scholarship, the concept of “language ideology” began developing in the late 1970s. It is the idea that everyone has their own “common-sense” beliefs about what good language is and about how communication works or should work. Importantly, scholars emphasize how power structures are implicated in how particular language ideologies are mobilized and prioritized. For example, Ingrid Piller notes that language ideologies “serve to legitimize the social order and therefore they are always interested, multiple and contested” (Piller, 2015, p. 87). Diana Eades concurs, observing that they “can play an important role in the reproduction of inequality (Eades, 2012, p. 474).

This concept has proven useful for examining a variety of legal contexts, when it comes to understanding how testimony and evidence are gathered and assessed. Drawing on a range of existing research, Eades articulated some key language ideologies relevant to legal processes. In summary and for our purposes they are:

• Ideology of inconsistency: A “central strategy” to undermine witness credibility – this involves identifying inconsistency between different tellings of a story.
• Ideology of narrator authorship: The idea that the witness or interviewee produces testimony on their own.
• Ideology of decontextualized fragments: Accepting that it is okay to take single words or phrases out of their original context to examine and test them.
• Ideology of entexualization: Related to the previous ideology, this one involves taking decontextualized testimony, and recontextualizing it somewhere else. In legal and bureaucratic settings, this often involves transforming oral texts into written ones. This transformation is accepted as producing an accurate and official record of institutional encounters.

Here, I’d like to consider more closely these ideologies and explore how they affect understandings of interpreting and interpreters within migration procedures, and in turn, how this can affect policy, practices, and participation within these processes.

A central concern in asylum procedures is determining whether an asylum-seeker’s stories and claims are credible. Much like what Eades found in the criminal law context, one of the key ways refugee credibility is tested relies on the ideology of inconsistency: asylum-seekers are made to tell their story on multiple occasions in multiple ways to try to pick up inconsistencies between each telling.

The three remaining ideologies Eades identifies all help enable the testing of inconsistency. They also all rely on or help to produce a certain understanding of the role of interpreters and interpreting: that interpreting is neutral, and that it puts minority-language participants on an equal footing with other participants, and has no tangible impact on the production of testimony.

As we will see, this means and requires that interpreters and interpreting become almost invisible in the official documents of the asylum decision-making institutions.

Acknowledging the interpreter

I examined a collection of 27 published decisions from the Administrative Appeals Tribunal where credibility is discussed. These are the documents where the Tribunal decision-maker sets out the asylum claim, explains what happened in the hearing, where they ask the asylum seeker questions about their claim. During the hearing, they also raise any concerns that they have and give the asylum seeker the chance to respond. The written decision should include the details of this process and explain the official’s reasoning process for arriving at their decision.

Figure 1

In this corpus of decisions, I found that there is very little mention of interpreters: in four cases there is absolutely no mention of interpreting, nor does the official specify that the decision was conducted in English, so it remains completely unclear what language or languages were involved (see Figure 1).

In the decisions where it was clear that an interpreter was present, more than half only have generic, copy-paste template sort of statements about them, for example “The Tribunal hearing was conducted with the assistance of an interpreter in the Punjabi and English languages.”

While these written decisions often describe the applicant (or asylum seeker) as speaking, saying, claiming, responding etc, interpreters themselves are only infrequently presented as communicating.

In eight cases, including one where the hearing was conducted in English, there is a little more discussion of interpreting, but only because it has been raised as an issue by an applicant or their lawyer. In only two decisions does a decision-maker make what appears to be unsolicited remarks related to an interpreter.

This very minimal inclusion of interpreters in these written decisions contrasts sharply with how asylum applicants are represented. Throughout, they are most often described as communicating, e.g. “the applicant stated this”, “the applicant claimed that” (for more discussion see Smith-Khan, 2017), when of course in actual fact in most cases it would have been an interpreter’s English words that are being written down or summarized. Already in this corpus of decisions, it is evident that the written performance of credibility assessment hinges primarily on presenting how the asylum-seeker communicates, with very little explicit recognition of interpreters’, or indeed other interlocutors’, contributions to the communication.

Raising multilingual communication, challenging authorship

When applicants or lawyers try to challenge this invisibility of interpreting or translation, it can be hard for them to get the decision-makers to accept their arguments.

For example, in one case in this corpus, a decision-maker drew on the ideologies of inconsistency and decontextualized fragments to find an asylum-seeker not credible. She was mainly concerned about the inconsistent use of the words “giving” and “sending” when it came to the part of the applicant’s claim where he talked about sharing information about Christianity with his customers.

In this particular case, it was earlier noted that the applicant, who was Chinese, had professional assistance putting together his application, and that he had prepared a written statement which was “later translated into English” to be included as part of the application. The tribunal hearing was conducted with a Mandarin-English interpreter.

The official reports in her decision:

The Tribunal indicated to the applicant that there appears to be inconsistencies in the evidence, namely that in oral evidence he had said that he was giving the customer some material whereas in writing he has claimed that he was sending the material. The applicant stated that the mistake had been made by the translator. The Tribunal indicated that the inconsistency could raise doubts about the veracity of his claims and his credibility generally, and his general credibility. The Tribunal invited him to comment or respond. The applicant said if there is any doubt he is regretful.

From what is evident from the written decision, the asylum seeker (referred to as an “applicant” as per Tribunal conventions) consistently stated throughout the hearing that he gave and did not send these materials, so the apparent inconsistency is between what appears in the written statement prepared when he initially applied for asylum, and later when interviewed.

Here, along with relying on decontextualized fragments to find an inconsistency, the ideology of narrative authorship is clearly demonstrated. When raising the apparent inconsistency between “sending” and “giving” the tribunal member assigns authorship to the asylum seeker: the applicant said in oral evidence and the applicant claimed in writing. However, in fact, those utterances and words were produced by two others: an interpreter and a translator. When the applicant seeks to respond to this issue – again, communicating with the assistance of an interpreter – he raises this exact point: that it was the translator who produced the English version of the statement and so it must have been a mistake they made.

The tribunal decision-maker mentions this particular inconsistency at multiple points, and the applicant consistently points to the translator. But unfortunately, the tribunal member does not accept this at any point and continues to suggest that this inconsistency undermines the applicant’s credibility.

Written texts as reliable representations

I’ve been discussing these types of issues and ideologies for some time now, and a few years ago I was excited to find an Australian Federal Court review where the original rejection had involved a similar type of inconsistency, and the Federal Court judge rejected the use of decontextualized fragments (Smith-Khan, 2022).

Part of the claim was that the asylum-seeker’s family started running a shop, and that sometime later the shop had been attacked. The apparent inconsistency was that during one interview, the asylum-seeker talked about an attack occurring “a few months” after opening the shop; and at another interview, the asylum-seeker provided two dates that suggested the attack was about six months after the shop opened. The merits review official rejected the case, and at first appeal a judge agreed with their approach.

In a further appeal to the Federal Court of Australia, however, I was very happy to discover that the asylum seeker’s lawyers argued that the judge should look beyond these decontextualized fragments to consider the actual interaction, involving questions and answers, that took place in one of these interviews. Even better, the judge accepted this argument, and throughout his written decision, we find extracts of a transcript of the immigration interview to which he refers to demonstrate this reasoning.

Analysing protection interview discourse

Particularly relevant to our current discussion is this extract of the transcript (see Image). The transcript is reproduced in the court decision (references are to the Immigration Officer (Off) and the asylum seeker (App)).

By looking more closely at the interaction, instead of just those decontextualized fragments, the judge concluded that the original finding of an inconsistency was not logical, and that the answer “a few” could be explained by the way the questions were worded, and because of the official’s interruptions too. He observed that “the question … posed two alternatives. It was not an open question” and the asylum seeker’s “answer was the most accurate of the two alternatives.”

Importantly, the judge also emphasizes that relying on decontextualized words is particularly problematic “in an interview where the [asylum seeker] was unrepresented and which required an interpreter …” (my emphasis).

However even in this exceptionally positive case in which we see an uncommon resistance against these pervasive language ideologies, where the lawyers and judge support the approach of looking more closely at the interaction, we are still not actually looking at the interaction itself. We are looking at an entextualization of a spoken interaction into a written transcript.

And very significantly for our purposes, not only is it a transcription of speech into writing, in doing so, we also see a multilingual interaction, involving Arabic and English, transformed into a monolingual English one. In the process, all of the asylum-seeker’s and interpreter’s Arabic utterances simply no longer exist.

We also see an interaction that actually had at least three speakers – the decision-maker, the asylum-seeker and an interpreter, transformed into one where the interpreter is once again made invisible.  All of the interpreter’s English utterances are textually reassigned to the asylum-seeker, reflecting and reinforcing this ideology of narrative authorship.

This shows that even in very exceptional cases where there is resistance to the problematic language ideologies at play in asylum credibility assessments, these ideologies are so deeply engrained in institutional practices that they persist in ways like this.

Hypothetical transcript with the vanished interpreter contributions in red.

Perhaps the choice of a monolingual transcript was pragmatic in this particular case, since the lawyers’ arguments relied on questioning approach rather than any particular issue with interpreting. However, the fact that they could make this choice suggests that transforming multilingual oral communication into monolingual written texts is an accepted norm in this setting. Further, the choice to attribute the English utterances to the asylum seeker, similar to the Tribunal decision corpus, further erases the interpreter’s contributions.

In this example from Australia, we can see how the choices made in how audio recording of the immigration interview is transcribed involves a transformation process. However, in many other jurisdictions, this can happen through other forms of entextualization. In places where asylum interviews are typically not audio recorded, the immigration official must simultaneously conduct the interview, while also making a written record of what is apparently said (Maréchal, 2022; Wadensjö et al., aop).  Arguably with that arrangement there is even less transparency than in the Australian case, because there will be no audio records to consider when seeking to examine the accuracy of that written record, or to raise issues with the interpreting or any other part of the interaction. However, even in the Australian case, we can see that languages and participants circulate unequally throughout asylum procedures: multilingual interactions become monolingual documents, and interpreters, though very often physically present in interview room, are all but erased on paper.

Structures and practices

If we look beyond the decision-making process, these ideologies also help justify and are reinforced by structural aspects of asylum processes, and again the Australian setting provides a clear example, but these considerations are also relevant elsewhere.

Despite Australia being a world-leader in terms of its professional accreditation for interpreters, poor working conditions for community interpreters suggest that their professional skills are not highly valued. These conditions include being poorly paid and working mainly in insecure freelance roles (Cho, 2023). For legal interpreting many report not even having access to a chair to sit on in court, or a table to take notes, or not being given water to drink, or adequate breaks (Hale & Stern, 2011).

In the asylum system, interpreters are generally only booked for the exact start time of the asylum interview or hearing, and are given very little or no briefing on the application. The government department is effectively the client – they choose and pay the interpreters. The interpreters do not have permanent contracts but work casually, on an ad-hoc basis through external agencies. This set-up understandably has an impact on the power dynamics in the interaction, limiting interpreters’ ability to raise issues about how the officials conduct the sessions, how they ask questions or interrupt the asylum-seekers.

This type of work arrangement is also an environment where interpreters may feel uncomfortable asking for clarifications or sharing doubts. There are also time-related pressures created by room bookings and interpreting assignment booking which limit the duration of interviews or the duration of an individual’s interpreter’s involvement.

The way languages are classified by the interpreting agencies and official interpreter accreditation body can also create challenges: lawyers report having trouble being able to choose the right type of interpreter for their needs, for example not being able to specify a particular variety of Arabic.

Also, while there is effectively a right to interpreting in asylum interviews and hearings, there is no such right beyond the interview room. Some community legal centres have very tight interpreting budgets, and have to sometimes rely on untrained volunteers or family members to help with interpreting, or preference telephone interpreting over face-to-face interpreting because it costs less.

Further, going back to this idea of the asylum seekers being the sole narrators of their testimony, there is no right to legal representation for asylum seekers in Australia. This somehow seems justified in a system where the testimony is ideologically viewed as simply the asylum-seekers’ own.

This is significant for so many reasons: both research and practice both tell us that having legal assistance has a huge impact on how strong an asylum application will be, and whether it will meet very stringent procedural requirements (Ghezelbash et al., 2022; Smith-Khan, 2021). Further though, the lawyers I’ve interviewed often talk about the interaction monitoring role they play in asylum interviews. Being familiar with their client’s case means that they are better placed to pick up any issue that might come up in interpreter mediated encounters and to intervene and advocate on behalf of their client – something that interpreters can’t do due to the limits created by their code of conduct and ethics. Lawyers can also note such issues and use them as grounds for an appeal, putting more pressure on officials to do the best they can to ensure smooth communication (Smith-Khan, 2020).

Having knowledge of institutional processes and challenges, they are also better placed to navigate the bookings processes, to best ensure an appropriate interpreter is chosen. This makes them valuable in terms of addressing some of these structural issues just discussed, yet only the small number of asylum seekers who have access to legal support can benefit from this sort of assistance.

If we adopt this ideology of asylum-seekers producing their refugee narrative all alone, then all of these structural issues are much harder to challenge, and both interpreters’ and lawyers’ contributions to the production of refugee testimony can be denied.

Conclusions

In this post I have introduced some key language ideologies that operate in asylum processes. Through the data I have shared, I have tried to demonstrate how these ideologies affect how asylum claims are assessed and how asylum seekers’ credibility is evaluated. In particular, I have sought to demonstrate how these ideologies operate to render invisible interpreters’ and interpreting’s contributions in asylum communication. This is a key part of the institution’s discursive performance of objectivity and legitimacy that acts to entrench their authority to make these types of decisions: because for them to rely on assessments of asylum-seekers’ communication in the way they do, other participants’ contributions in the co-production of testimony cannot be acknowledged.

To close, I want to leave us with this thoughtful quote in which to find motivation for our work:

As figures who stand at the intersection of global economic and political projects, interpreters enable the movement of people, ideas, and capital across borders. An understanding of the invisible labor of interpreters disturbs the alleged transparency, neutrality, and ease of communication that is so foundational to the authority of institutions of global governance. (Kunreuther & Rao, 2023, p. 250)

This is why I believe that research in this area is so crucial, and that we must all continue to do our part to investigate interpreters’ work and working contexts, and to challenges discourses, rules and practices that devalue them.

References 

Cho, J. (2023). Bilingual workers in a monolingual state: Bilingualism as a non-skill. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism. 10.1080/13670050.2023.2213374
Eades, D. (2012). The social consequences of language ideologies in courtroom cross-examination. Language in Society, 41(4), 471-497.
Ghezelbash, D., Dorostkar, K., & Walsh, S. (2022). A data driven approach to evaluating and improving judicial decision-making: Statistical analysis of the judicial refugee of refugee cases in Australia. UNSW Law Journal, 45(3), 1085-1123.
Hale, S., & Stern, L. (2011). Interpreter quality and working conditions: Comparing Australian and internationa courts of justice. Judicial Officers’ Bulletin, 23(9), 5-8.
Kunreuther, L., & Rao, S. (2023). The Invisible Labor and Ethics of Interpreting. Annual Review of Anthropology, 52. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-anthro-052721-091752
Maréchal, M. (2022). Engagements institutionnels. Enjeux glottopolitiques de l’interprétation dans les instances décisionnaires de l’asile en France. Glottopol : Revue de sociolinguistique en ligne, 36. 10.4000/glottopol.1653
Piller, I. (2015). Language Ideologies. In K. Tracy (Ed.), The International Encyclopedia of Language and Social Interaction. 10.1002/9781118611463
Smith-Khan, L. (2017). Telling stories: Credibility and the representation of social actors in Australian asylum appeals. Discourse & Society, 28(5), 512-534.
Smith-Khan, L. (2020). Migration practitioners’ roles in communicating credible refugee claims. Alternative Law Journal, 45(2), 119-124.
Smith-Khan, L. (2021). “I try not to be dominant, but I’m a lawyer!”: Advisor resources, context and refugee credibility. Journal of Refugee Studies, 34(4), 3710-3733. https://doi.org/10.1093/jrs/feaa102
Smith-Khan, L. (2022). Incorporating sociolinguistic perspectives in Australian refugee credibility assessments: The case of CRL18. Journal of International Migration and Integration. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12134-022-00937-2
Wadensjö, C., Rehnberg, H. S., & Nikolaidou, Z. (Ahead of print). Managing a discourse of reporting: the complex composing of an asylum narrative. Multilingua: Journal of Cross-Cultural and Interlanguage Communication. https://doi.org/10.1515/multi-2022-0017

Anthropologist Napoleon Chagnon interviewing unidentified Yanomami people

Editor’s note: How do researchers in anthropology and sociology deal with linguistic diversity? Do they learn the language(s) of the people they work with or do they hire interpreters? Turns out that they are quite naive about language and do neither systematically, as new research by Katarzyna Sepielak, Dawid Wladyka, and William Yaworsky shows. How to make good decisions about language choice and language mediation in fieldwork needs to become part of research training.

***

Katarzyna Sepielak, Dawid Wladyka, and William Yaworsky

***

We have surveyed field researchers in sociology and anthropology programs in the United States and found only limited proficiency in field languages, accompanied by a widespread reliance on translators and interpreters. The scholars, therefore, did not dispense with translators as early-twentieth century anthropologists called for (Mead, 1939); instead, they dispensed with the myth of linguistic fluency. At the same time, results indicate disparities in the use of vernacular and translation services in the post-colonial societies and haphazard ‘hiring’ patterns of interpreters that cause ethical and methodological concerns.

The imaginary anthropologist is a fluent polyglot; the real anthropologist is too time-poor to learn another language

When you think about an anthropologist, what stereotypes do you imagine?  Maybe a gaunt Englishman wearing a pith helmet with a copy of African Political Systems (Fortes and Evans-Pritchard, 1940) stuffed in his back pocket? Our imaginary anthropologist is, of course, fluent in a language at risk of extinction, learned during years of field research while living with an endangered community.

Perhaps your image of a sociologist is quite different. You might conjure a scholar working in an urban setting in their home country, which of course is in one of the complex industrial societies. They are studying social problems using their native language with locals who also speak the same tongue.

The shape of today’s societies however, as well as forms of field research challenge those effigies. Anthropologists cannot permit themselves the ‘luxury’ of spending years within a single community, being involved in many projects and teaching duties at home institutions. Sociologists, on the other hand, now work in culturally diverse settings and face the same issues as anthropologists a century ago.

Experience with Fieldwork Translation by Discipline

Yet, the scholarly associations and method textbooks are virtually mum on the problem of language, translation and interpreting in field research. To the contrary, a blatant disregard for translation services is noticeable in some discussions, that – righteously – attempt to reclaim the status of research assistants: “Research assistants play a vital role in the research process, often acting as more than just [! – exclamation and bold added] translators or interpreters.” (Dean & Stevano 2016)

We surveyed US-based scholars about their language practices

That is why we surveyed US-based scholars from anthropology and sociology programs. We analyzed 913 answers that provided insights into our respondents’ linguistic capabilities and their experiences conducting research in over 180 countries and interacting with over 400 languages. A more extensive presentation of the results may be found in our article published by Multilingua (Sepielak, Wladyka & Yaworsky 2022).

We discovered that in only 24% of the field sites with languages other than English present did scholars assess that they had professional (or higher) fluency. In almost 60% of cases, our respondents interacted with languages in which they reported a proficiency at or below a limited working level.

It would seem it’s not all bad news with 75% of respondents reporting fluency in at least one fieldwork language. However, they were typically fluent in languages derived from the colonizers, such as French and Spanish, but rarely in languages from the colonized.

Social science researchers are “getting by”

It is then worth noting that most anthropologists and sociologists were getting by at times like everybody else, using interpreters and translators, or conducting research using the English language. ‘Only’ 54.1% of the sociologists in our sample ever collaborated with a translator compared to 68.9% of anthropologists.

Translation and interpreting are often rendered invisible

Example: #interpreter was literally erased from this photo of meeting between Iran's Rouhani and Malaysia' Mahathir in media coverage #xl8 https://t.co/RIcNpy38t2 pic.twitter.com/aNCCivzY0F

— Language on the Move (@Lg_on_the_Move) April 30, 2020

It would, however, be spurious to claim that American sociologists had less need for translators due to their linguistic proficiency. It is rather due to the traditional research interests exposing anthropologists to an increased number of languages and geographies. In comparison, sociologists frequently work in the US and regions like Western Europe where one could claim to “get by” with English.

One could ask how can this reality diverge so significantly from the ideal of language fluency and dismissal of interpreters pushed by generations of authoritative field scholars?

Is English proficiency really the superpower of today’s social scientists?

English is the language superpower of the world (Piller, 2022). And our thematic analysis indicates that researchers turn to this ‘superpower’ quite often. This is due to a variety of circumstances hampering the acquisition of fluency in another language, such as short-term studies, multi-sited fieldwork, international collaborative research, or studies of communities with multiple co-existing languages. While the global popularity of English appears as one of the deterrents to mastering field languages among scholars, one should also note that Indigenous languages such as Nahuatl, Tlapanec and thousands of others are virtually extinct from academic curricula in the US.

Anthropologists, in particular, may be wary about revealing these linguistic deficiencies due to the fear it might undermine their ethnographic authority. They will be mindful of Margaret Mead’s fieldwork being criticized as ‘superficial’ in part due to her linguistics deficiencies (see Freeman 1983) or Napoleon Chagnon wasting months analyzing the fictitious and scatological “names” of Yanomamo villagers presented to him by amused tribesmen (see Chagnon 1992), mold current beliefs of scholars?

Paying lip-service to the importance of linguistic proficiency does make fluent researchers

Well, it would seem so, with 81% of our respondents perceiving knowledge of local language as important and 95% agreeing that knowing the vernacular enriches the understanding of “local knowledge”.  They also agreed that researchers who don’t speak the vernacular miss important data and have less control over the study. A clear example of detachment between the persisting ethos and contemporary practice reported in previous paragraphs.

The invisible translators and interpreters of social science

In this context, the question about what this heavy reliance on translators means for Western representations of post-colonial societies, persists as well. How do scholars perceive its effect on the research process? For one, most respondents agreed that translators help in gaining access to data and that scholars with foreign-language deficiencies should collaborate with them. Nevertheless, concerning was a trend of haphazardly “hiring” persons that interpret (including research assistants, spouses, colleagues, representatives of local institutions) driven by cost and convenience. This widespread practice carries a series of ethical, methodological, and even security risks rarely considered during methods training.

To that end, field researchers did not dispense with translators as early 20^th century anthropologists called for, instead, they dispensed with the sleight of hand of linguistic fluency. This state of affairs should at the very minimum deserve greater attention in current methodological and ethical discussions regarding fieldwork and collaboration with interpreters.

To read the full article

Sepielak, K., Wladyka, D. & Yaworsky, W. (2022). Language proficiency and use of interpreters/translators in fieldwork: a survey of US-based anthropologists and sociologists. Multilingua. https://doi.org/10.1515/multi-2022-0071

Related content

Laihonen, Petteri. (2020). Do concepts and methods have ethics? Language on the Move. https://languageonthemove.com/do-concepts-and-methods-have-ethics/
Piller, Ingrid. (2016). Herder – an explainer for linguists. Language on the Move. https://languageonthemove.com/herder-an-explainer-for-linguists/
Piller, Ingrid. (2021). The interpreting profession in ancient Egypt. Language on the Move. https://languageonthemove.com/the-interpreting-profession-in-ancient-egypt/
Piller, Ingrid. (2022). How to challenge Anglocentricity in academic publishing. Language on the Move. https://languageonthemove.com/how-to-challenge-anglocentricity-in-academic-publishing/

References

Chagnon, Napoleon. 1992. Yanomamo: The last days of Eden. New York: Harvest Books.
Deane, K. & Stevano, S. 2016. Towards a political economy of the use of research assistants: reflections from fieldwork in Tanzania and Mozambique. Qualitative Research, 16(2). 213-228.
Fortes, Meyer, and E.E. Evans-Pritchard (eds.). 1940. African Political Systems. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Freeman, Derek. 1983. Margaret Mead and Samoa: The making and unmaking of an anthropological myth. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Mead, Margaret. 1939. Native languages as fieldwork tools. American Anthropologist 41(2): 189–205.
Piller, Ingrid. (2022). “Women, life, freedom” – the slogan swimming against the global tide. Language on the Move. https://languageonthemove.com/women-life-freedom-the-slogan-swimming-against-the-global-tide/

[Image credit: “Language, power and identity share an entangled relationship”, Michael Joiner, 360info]

Yu Qi and Venus are both victims of a language barrier in Australia that seriously affects their wellbeing. Language barriers can make public communication inaccessible and exclude people from equitable participation in education, employment, healthcare, welfare, and all aspects of social life.

The number of people who suffer from linguistic exclusion is high. UNESCO estimates that 40 percent of students worldwide experience a mismatch between their language repertoires and the language of instruction. Even within OECD countries, the literacy skills of over 30 percent of the adult population are insufficient to cope with complex bureaucratic demands.

Language barriers can relate to language choice, medium, and platform.

Language choice barriers exist where institutions privilege one particular language in communication with multilingual populations. These barriers mostly affect migrant and indigenous minorities. The mismatch between the language of the institution and that of stakeholders can be egregious. Australian research, for instance, found that schools communicated enrollment information exclusively in English, even if up to 98 percent of families in the catchment area spoke a language other than English.

Even people who speak the language of the institution well may be confronted with language barriers because institutions usually preference the written medium. Written communication is often mismatched to the audience’s level of education. The readability of COVID-19 restrictions published by the NSW Health Department, for instance, was found to be pitched at readers with a tertiary education. This means many people did not have a fair chance to understand what was required of them. Even so, children as young as 13 and people with an intellectual disability were fined for not abiding by these restrictions.

These two forms of language barriers increasingly combine with a third, where an institution’s communication platform may not be equally accessible. As more and more communication has become digitised, people without computer access or with low levels of computer literacy may be excluded from vital information. For example, the health authorities in Indonesia’s West Nusa Tenggara province provided information about how to stop the spread of COVID-19 mostly on the web. Yet only 20 percent of the population use digital technologies to access written materials.

Yu Qi’s problem was a language choice barrier: her dominant language is Chinese, and she feels overwhelmed by the written English information she receives from her son’s school. At the same time, she lacks the linguistic confidence to request or attend a parent-teacher interview. Therefore, she relies on information she can glean from her son, from other Chinese parents, and she seeks extracurricular tutoring from commercial Chinese-language services. She is not aware that government-sponsored interpreting services exist in Australia, which could help mediate her communication with her son’s school.

Venus experienced a different sort of language barrier: having grown up in West Africa, she is a fluent English speaker. However, her literacy level is low, and she has hardly any knowledge of Australian occupational health and safety legislation, leave entitlements, and workers’ compensation provisions. Therefore, all she could do was “argue” with her supervisor. She could not set in motion the written bureaucratic process of documenting her injury and making a claim that would have secured proper care and mitigated any long-term health consequences.

Supporting language diversity is a matter of social justice. It is a starting point to making institutions more accessible and inclusive. Australia put a plan in place at the national level in the 1980s with the National Policy on Languages. However, having since fallen into disuse, the National Policy on Languages would require an update to adequately serve the changing communication needs of the times.

A comprehensive, effective language access plan includes the provision of translated materials and interpreting services as necessary. It also includes robust communication chains, where low-literacy people have the chance to talk things over as needed. And a needs assessment of the platforms best suited to communicate with the target population would help the plan be accessible and inclusive.

There is no one size fits all but providing information in the languages of key stakeholders, and adjusting the communication medium and platform to their capacities is key to reaching everyone in the community.

In a linguistically diverse world, institutions are likely to already have people with the right linguistic skills among their ranks. Harnessing and rewarding those linguistic skills unlocks potential and allows institutions and individuals to thrive. As the COVID-19 pandemic has shown, communication is a vital aspect of disaster preparedness and response. As we take lessons in a post-pandemic world, every institution could benefit from having a language and communication task force embedded.

Malinche mediating between the Spanish and the Americans (Source: Lienzo de Tlaxcala, mid 16th c)

We live in an age of crisis, as humanity confronts an ever-escalating climate and environmental disaster, the COVID-19 pandemic, and a steep decline in social and political trust. How to prevent, prepare for, respond to, and recover from disasters presents a set of fundamental collective action problems. Collective action can only come about through communication. That’s why language and communication need to be written into robust disaster prevention, preparedness, response, and recovery.

Social and linguistic exclusion go hand in hand

Those who bear the brunt of disasters are often the most marginalized members of society. One aspect of their marginalization is their linguistic exclusion. Linguistic exclusion can take many forms and the most pertinent language and communication barriers relate to:

• A mismatch between the language chosen for public communication and the language repertoires of the target audience
• A mismatch between the medium chosen for public communication and the literacy levels of the target audience
• A mismatch between the channels chosen for public communication and the channels accessible to the target audience

Where these mismatches pile up, as they often do, the result is, first, that excluded groups may lose out on vital information. Second, social fragmentation and loss of trust are likely to follow. These can deepen inequalities further and may result in a vicious circle working against constructive collection action.

Crisis communication in context

Language and communication are fundamental to both the problem and the solution of crises. Students in this year’s postgraduate unit about Literacies in the Master of Applied Linguistics and TESOL at Macquarie University undertook research projects to gain a better understanding of language as both problem and solution in the climate crisis and the COVID-19 pandemic.

One of their research projects was devoted to water scarcity in India. Despite receiving good rainfall, lack of access to safe drinking water has reached crisis proportions in India. The problem is human-made and linked to a poor understanding not only of water conservation but wider political processes that impinge on water allocation, contamination, and over-exploitation.

Those most affected by water scarcity are poor rural women, for whom limited access to safe water intersects with low levels of literacy. Solving their water crisis thus must be embedded in participatory communication processes – in their language, communicated orally, and part of mutual, engaged face-to-face interactions.

This video by Hida Fathima Kassim, Ingrid Ulpen, Thi Tuyet Trang Tran, and Xiwen Chen sums up the students’ findings about water communications.

If you want to learn more how water scarcity has been made on the subcontinent, I’d recommend Mohsin Hamid’s novel How to get filthy rich in rising Asia. It illuminates how water has gone from fundamental elixir of life to capitalist commodity through the rags-to-riches story of a poor village boy rising to bottled water tycoon.

Confronting crises throughout history

Ours is not the first generation confronting the destruction of our world, even if we might be the first to do so on a global scale. Disasters and crises are painfully evident to students of language and culture contact. Foundational moments in language history – for instance, the prehistoric spread of Indo-European across Eurasia, the emergence of English out of a series of invasions of the British Isles, or the dawn of English as a global language – all went hand in hand not only with the elimination of other languages but also the destruction and large-scale transformation of conquered civilizations.

How did former generations deal with such crises?

In another postgraduate unit in the Master of Applied Linguistics and TESOL at Macquarie University, Languages and Cultures in Contact, we sought answers to this question by exploring objects of language and culture context that bear witness to the crises precipitated by often violent language and cultural contact. One of our case study objects was chocolate.

Additionally, we traced the stories and experiences of some of the most engaged – whether voluntary or forced – linguistic and cultural mediators. One of our case studies was of the inhabitants of precolonial Sydney who had to face the disaster of British colonization. How did they deal with the havoc wreaked on their world?

We studied the example of the warrior Bennelong, who was kidnapped by the British with the perverse intention to convince him of their kindness and to teach him English. Initially forced into the role of mediator, Bennelong soon actively sought to establish kinship relationships that would bind the Australians and the British together in a set of mutual obligations.

While we do not have first-hand accounts from Bennelong and the other First Australians who had to become crisis communicators as they confronted the destruction of their world, some of their stories can be gleaned from the accounts of the conquerors, as Inga Clendinnen does in her historical ethnography Dancing with strangers:

Inga Clendinnen "Dancing with Strangers"

In this thread students @MQLinguistics read Clendinnen's historical #ethnography based on the diaries of the officers of the 1st fleet to learn about #InterculturalCommunication between British colonizers and Sydney's Indigenous people pic.twitter.com/dfm6DbHNU7

— Language on the Move (@Lg_on_the_Move) October 7, 2021

Women as linguistic and cultural mediators

Historical ethnography can also give us insights into the experiences of cultural mediators in the Americas. In precolonial American societies, women had long played roles as cultural mediators. Restoring peace after conflict and war was a role for which linguistically and spiritually gifted girls were trained for from a young age in some societies. The aim was that they would be able to act as interpreters and mediators by forging new kinship relationships and mutual obligations so as to minimize violence and suffering on both sides.

Some American societies tried to use this tried and tested approach to mediate inter-ethnic conflict in their encounters with the Spanish or British invaders, too. Some multilingual and multicultural women communicating at the frontline of the invasion crisis have gained ever-lasting fame and the names of Malinche, Pocahontas, and Sacagawea are still familiar today. These larger-than-life characters provide fascinating case studies in crisis communication on two levels: first, as intercultural communicators in their own right, and second, as the symbols of intercultural contact into which they were molded by later generations.

This video by Brynn Quick, Lydia Liu, and Vanessa Sanchez-Guayazan introduces these three women as misremembered linguistic interpreters and cultural ambassadors:

Preparing crisis communicators

In her book Malinche, Pocahontas, and Sacagawea: Indian Women as Cultural Intermediaries and National Symbols, Rebecca K. Jager argues that the precolonial societies into which these women were born had processes and procedures in place to prepare for crises by identifying and training talented girls to become linguistic and cultural mediators.

Malinche, for example, received an elite rhetorical education through the medium of Nahuatl before being sent to live in a Mayan trading hub, from where she was given to the advancing Spanish. This way, she already was an experienced language learner and intercultural communicator by the time she became the interpreter, advisor, and lover of the Spanish commander, Hernán Cortés. In a sign of respect from both sides, the Spanish bestowed the honorific title Doña Marina on her, and the Americans used a honorific title in their language, Malintzin. From what we can gather from the historical record, it seems that Malinche genuinely believed that accommodation between the Americans and the Spanish might be possible, and that she was prepared to work towards bringing about a joint future.

To return to the present day, what processes and procedures do we have in place to prepare the next generation of crisis communicators? How could those processes and procedures be strengthened and improved?

The Sumerian Empire under King Shulgi (2094 to 2046 BCE) (Image Credit: Wikipedia)

Do you know in which language the Sumerians started the written chronicle of humanity?

It is a cliché to state that everyone who reads this sentence is an heir of the Sumerians, regardless of what your genetic background may be. The Sumerians were the first inventors of writing; and the Latin alphabet in which this text is written is a distant descendant of the cuneiform script they invented about 5,000 years ago in the ancient Middle East.*

Most people have heard that the Sumerians of Mesopotamia invented writing, along with agriculture, the domestication of plants and animals, metallurgy, urbanization, and social stratification. Their Neolithic revolution fundamentally reshaped the world, and ultimately ushered in the Anthropocene in which we find ourselves today (Crosby, 2004).

But have you ever stopped to think in which language they were writing? Unless you are an Assyriologist – an expert in the languages, cultures, and history of the ancient Middle East – you may not know the details, but you are likely to assume it was one particular language.

Well, you’d be wrong. The Sumerians were multilingual, and language contact is evident in the written record from Day 1.

The multilingual Sumerians

Sumerian is a language isolate that is not related to any other known language, living or dead (Cunningham, 2013). However, back then, as today, most languages of the Middle East were Semitic languages, like modern Arabic or Hebrew. The continuum of Semitic dialects the Sumerians were most in contact with is called Akkadian. And contact between Sumerian and Akkadian is apparent from the very beginning of the written record (Hasselbach-Andee, 2020).

The Manishtushu Obelisk (Image Credit: Wikipedia)

A key indicator of language contact lies in the fact that the language name “Sumerian” is not actually a Sumerian but an Akkadian word. The Sumerian word for their language was “Eme-gir,” which literally means “native language” (Cunningham, 2013).

The earliest written documents legible to us date from around 2,600 BCE. These documents all provide evidence of sustained multilingualism (Crisostomo, 2020). This evidence takes three forms, namely language mixing, parallel translations, and metalinguistic commentary.

Language mixing

First, there are texts that include loanwords from one language into the other or texts that are so heavily mixed that they cannot even be assigned to one language or another. An example comes from the Manishtushu Obelisk, which dates from between 2,277 and 2,250 BCE. The obelisk is basically a title deed to four estates. This is a short excerpt, with Sumerian words in roman font and Akkadian words in italic (quoted from (Crisostomo, 2020, p. 410):

šu‐niĝin 10 ĝuruš be‐lu gana gu kug‐babbar gana ša‐at e‐ki‐im ù zi‐ma‐na‐ak (“Total: 10 workers, lord of the fields, recipients of the payment of the field of Ekim and Zimanak.”)

As can be seen the text makes use of both languages in about equal parts – translanguaging avant la lettre!

Today, this kind of language mixing is relatively rare in writing, particularly formal writing such as legal texts. The Sumerians clearly had no such qualms about keeping written languages neatly separate. Anyone who went to the trouble of chiseling a record like this into stone surely put up the best kind of language they could think of. So, mixing languages must have felt right and sufficiently “weighty” for such an important title deed.

Whatever the writer’s reasoning was, “Sumerian and Akkadian (Semitic) are, throughout much of our material, intertwined and interconnected” (Crisostomo, 2020, p. 416).

Multilingual texts

In addition to administrative texts, some of the earliest surviving texts are – surprise, surprise – bilingual word lists (Michalowski, 2020).

Sumerian was the powerful lingua franca of the time, but it may well be that, by the time writing really began to take off, most people had switched over to speaking Akkadian. New scribes may not necessarily have been proficient in Sumerian. Therefore, they had to receive formal training in that language as part of their scribal training (Michalowski, 2006). That is why bilingual word lists can be found among the earliest written documents: they served a didactic function and the institutionalization of language learning clearly went hand-in-hand with the institutionalization of writing.

“Ubil-Eshtar, brother of the king, Kalki, scribe, is your servant” (Image credit: British Museum)

Because writing was invented by the Sumerians, writing itself seems to have become associated with Sumerian. It seems likely that Sumerian died out as a spoken language long before it ceased to be used as a written language (Michalowski, 2006).

As a result, scribes not only needed to learn the art of writing, but they also needed to be formally trained in the Sumerian language.

An intriguing example in the kind of diglossia that ensued can be found in an oft-quoted record about an escaped slave. This text records the event in Sumerian (roman font) but reports direct speech in Akkadian (italic font): “Lugalazida, the slave of Lugalkigal, escaped from the Ensi. About his hiding place, the slave girl of Urnigin said: ‘He lives in Maškan-šapir. He should be brought here’” (quoted from (Crisostomo, 2020, p. 410).

Metalinguistic commentary

Over a period of around a thousand years, writing developed from proto-cuneiform – a logographic aide memoire – to become a language-specific writing system, of the sort we are familiar with today. Over the same period, people who knew how to write established themselves as a small and powerful elite of scribes (Taylor, 2013). What made them powerful was not their writing skills per se but the fact that scribes controlled the Sumerian bureaucracy and administration. In short, they collected and distributed goods.

The status of scribes is evident from cylindrical seals – like modern trademarks and signatures. These served to confirm the authenticity and legitimacy of traded objects (Pittman, 2013). The famous seal of Kalki provides an example. The seal is understood to depict a foreign expedition, which included a hunter, the scribe’s royal patron with an ax, and the scribe with tablet and stylus.

As scribes established themselves as a powerful professional caste, training of scribes became formalized and included Sumerian language teaching, as explained above. In keeping with the importance that was accorded to learning Sumerian in scribal education, some of these comments allow us a glimpse into ancient language teaching methods. Then, as today, teachers seem to have taken it upon themselves to act as language police, as this student complaint shows:

“The one in charge of Sumerian said: ‘He spoke Akkadian!’ Then he caned me.” (quoted from (Crisostomo, 2020, p. 408)

At the other end of the social spectrum, speaking multiple languages gave you bragging rights – also just like in our own time. Ancient kings are well known for their boasts inscribed in stone, and Shulgi, “King of Sumer and Akkad, King of the Four Corners of the Universe,” whose reign lasted from around 2,094 to 2,046 BCE, had this to say about his prodigious language capabilities:

By origin I am a son of Sumer; I am a warrior, a warrior of Sumer. Thirdly, I can conduct a conversation with a man from the black mountains. Fourthly, I can do service as a translator with an Amorite, a man of the mountains. I myself can correct his confused words in his own language. Fifthly, when a man of Subir yells, I can even distinguish the words in his language, although I am not a fellow-citizen of his. When I provide justice in the legal cases of Sumer, I give answers in all five languages. In my palace no one in conversation switches to another language as quickly as I do. (Shulgi, 2000, pp. ll.20-220)

“Shu-ilishu, Meluhha language interpreter” (Image credit: Louvre)

Note that Shulgi does not even spell out his first two languages – taking it as implicit that a Sumerian must be bilingual in Sumerian and Akkadian.

What about translation and interpreting?

It should have become obvious by now that the Sumerians operated a bilingual language regime. This is certainly true of the scribal caste – and keep in mind that everyone else would have been illiterate – and the kingly elite. Because these groups were bilingual, there was no need for interpretation between Sumerian and Akkadian.

However, linguistic mediation was necessary with the speakers of other languages, such as Shulgi’s third, fourth, and fifth language.

Like the Ancient Egyptians, the Sumerians institutionalized the role of linguistic mediator for trade and diplomacy. The status of interpreters seems to have been similar to that of scribes, as is evident from another famous seal, the seal of the interpreter Shu-ilishu. The idea of professional certification – modern as it may seem – is also first in evidence with the Sumerians, as this seal demonstrates. This seal also happens to be the first-ever known depiction of an interpreter in action – predating the interpreting relief in the Tomb of Horemheb by almost a thousand years.

The writing on the seal says that it belongs to “Shu-ilishu, Meluhha language interpreter” (Edzard, 1968). The image on the seal depicts a Sumerian dignitary being approached by two figures, presumably Meluhhans, and a small interpreter sitting between them. It is not entirely clear what the Meluhha language was and who the Meluhhans might have been, but they are assumed to have been located in the Indus valley, where the Sumerians had extensive trade interests (Thornton, 2013).

Sumerian multilingualism lives on

As is to be expected from the above, the Sumerians used two different words for “linguistic mediator” – a Sumerian word (“eme-bal”) and an Akkadian word (“targummanu”). Now remember that recently we encountered “dragoman” as a fancy English word for “interpreter”? Do you notice that there is a vague similarity between “targummanu” and “dragoman”?

(Source: Thornton, 2013, p. 601)

“Dragoman” first appeared in English around 1300. It is a relatively rare word that refers specifically to interpreters working in the Middle East and with the Arabic, Turkish, and Persian languages. “Dragoman” arrived in English from Old French “drugemen” or Medieval Latin “dragumanus” and, via late Greek “dragoumanos,” goes back to Old Arabic “targumān.” The modern Arabic word is tarjumān, and from Arabic it goes all the way back to the Sumerians.

“Targummanu” not only made it into English as “dragoman” but into many other modern languages, too. The words for “interpreter” in Turkish (“tercümen”), Georgian (“tarjimani”), Russian (“tolmač”), Polish (“tłumacz”), Hungarian (“tolmács”), and German (“Dolmetscher”) all go back to the same source (Jyrkänkallio, 1952).

It is fitting that the word for “interpreter” in so many modern languages should link us back to ancient Mesopotamia, and remind us that all language is an unbroken chain of transmission from the time when humans first learned to speak some 300,000 years ago.

In fact, “targummanu” did not start in Akkadian but was a borrowing from Luwian, a language spoken in another multilingual and multiethnic empire the Sumerians came into contact with, that of the Hittites, in modern-day Turkey (Melchert, 2020). The Luwian word is likely a borrowing from yet another language, which has been covered by the sands of time (Popko, 2008).

In the peoples of the Ancient Middle East we see our modern selves like through a very old, cracked, blunted, and dusty mirror. One feature we see reaching back into that long history is the commonality of our linguistic diversity.

*Postscript, 21/07/2021: I’ve been asked by a learned reader to clarify that the Latin alphabet does not directly descend from cuneiform. It does not, and you can find the full line of known transmission here and here. Early alphabetic writing systems are more closely linked to Egyptian hieroglyphs than to cuneiform. Whether they were invented independently or inspired by hieroglyphs, and whether hieroglyphs were invented independently or inspired be cuneiform is a matter of ongoing debate that may never be resolved. Given what we know about the ubiquity of linguistic and cultural contact – in the ancient world, as today – I am inclined to think that mutual inspiration is much more likely than independent invention. While there is clear evidence for the independent invention of writing at least three times (Mesopotamia, China, Mesoamerica), the emergence of several writing systems in the Ancient Middle East in relatively close proximity to each other (geographically and chronologically) would suggest, at the very least, transfer of the general idea.

Related resources:

• Who invented writing?
• The Latin alphabet’s take-over of the world’s languages

References

Crisostomo, C. J. (2020). Sumerian and Akkadian Language Contact. In R. Hasselbach-Andee (Ed.), A Companion to Ancient Near Eastern Languages (pp. 401-420). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Crosby, A. W. (2004). Ecological imperialism: the biological expansion of Europe, 900-1900 (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cunningham, G. (2013). The Sumerian language. In H. Crawford (Ed.), The Sumerian World (pp. 95-110). London: Routledge.
Edzard, D. O. (1968). Die Inschriften der altakkadischen Rollsiegel. Archiv für Orientforschung, 22, 12-20.
Hasselbach-Andee, R. (2020). Multilingualism and Diglossia in the Ancient Near East. In R. Hasselbach-Andee (Ed.), A Companion to Ancient Near Eastern Languages (pp. 457-470). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Jyrkänkallio, P. (1952). Zur Etymologie von russ. tolmač “Dolmetscher” und seiner türkischen Quelle. Studia Orientalia, 17(8), 3-11.
Melchert, C. (2020). Luwian. In R. Hasselbach-Andee (Ed.), A Companion to Ancient Near Eastern Languages (pp. 239-256). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Michalowski, P. (2006). The lives of the Sumerian language. In S. L. Sanders (Ed.), Margins of writing, origins of cultures (pp. 159-184). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Michalowski, P. (2020). Sumerian. In R. Hasselbach-Andee (Ed.), A Companion to Ancient Near Eastern Languages (pp. 83-105). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Popko, M. (2008). Völker und Sprachen Altanatoliens (C. Brosch, Trans.). Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
Pittman, H. (2013). Seals and sealings in the Sumerian world. In H. Crawford (Ed.), The Sumerian World (pp. 343-366). London: Routledge.
Shulgi. (2000). A praise poem of Shulgi (Shulgi B). Retrieved from https://etcsl.orinst.ox.ac.uk/section2/tr24202.htm
Taylor, J. (2013). Administrators and scholars: The first scribes. In H. Crawford (Ed.), The Sumerian World (pp. 314-328). London: Routledge.
Thornton, C. P. (2013). Mesopotamia, Meluhha, and those in between. In H. Crawford (Ed.), The Sumerian World (pp. 624-643). London: Routledge.

Joseph is sold into slavery in Egypt by his jealous brothers

Academic interpreting often labors under the assumption that the profession was born in the early years of the 20^th century. Billions of Jews, Christians, and Muslims, of course, know better. They first encounter an interpreter in the biblical story of Joseph, the favorite son of Jacob. Sold into slavery in Egypt by his jealous brothers, Joseph rises to become the deputy of the pharaoh by the grace of God. When the Israelites’ harvest fails, the brothers must travel to Egypt to buy grain. Joseph, who oversees the grain trade, recognizes them, but they do not recognize him. Joseph imposes a series of tests on his brothers to see whether they have repented. Eventually, he forgives them and the whole clan of Jacob moves to Egypt to share in Joseph’s good fortune.

One of the reasons the brothers did not recognize Joseph was that, as an Egyptian official dealing with foreigners, Joseph used an interpreter to communicate with foreign merchants. According to Genesis 42, 23 “[the brothers] did not realize that Joseph could understand them, since he was using an interpreter.”

Interpreting was institutionalized in the Egyptian bureaucracy

Trade was one of the domains that brought Egyptians into contact with speakers of other languages, as in the example of the Israelites. Diplomacy was another area and captive taking yet another. To cope with the intercultural communication demands raised by Egypt’s considerable external dealings in Africa and the Middle East, ancient Egyptians instituted the role of interlingual mediator in their bureaucracy (Kurz, 1985, 1986; Salevsky, 2018).

Some of the earliest evidence for Egyptian interpreting practices comes from the tombs of the princes of Elephantine, which date from the 3^rd millennium BCE. The princes of Elephantine were the governors of the Nubian border province in the south of Egypt. Their titles included “secret advisor for all business concerning the south of Upper Egypt,” “steward of the southern lands of Upper Egypt,” and “the one who has brought back the produce of all foreign lands for his royal lord and who spreads the fear of Horus in foreign lands” (Chrobak, 2013).

In short, the princes of Elephantine were in charge of what was essentially a colony and regularly led raids further south, into what they called “the land of Yam.”

To communicate with their non-Egyptian subjects and contacts, they employed interpreters, as is apparent from another one of their titles: “overseer of dragomans” (Gardiner, 1915). “Dragoman” is a fancy word for “interpreter” (Hermann, 1956), and one I will write about next time.

Whether “dragoman” or “interpreter,” the exact meaning of the hieroglyph “wa” remains a matter of some debate (Falbo, 2016). The hieroglyph is an abstraction of a loincloth that was only used by foreigners or by people speaking a foreign language (Salevsky, 2018). The Egyptologist who first deciphered the inscriptions had already cautioned that it might refer to any “speaker of a foreign language” (Gardiner, 1915). As such the duties of the “interpreter” were probably not restricted to linguistic mediation only but were quite wide-ranging in maintaining various forms of contacts with foreigners (Chrobak, 2013).

The interpreter relief in the tomb of Horemheb

The interpreting relief from the tomb of Horemheb. The interpreter (in the middle) mediates between Horemheb (left) and foreign envoys (right) (Image credit: Rijksmuseum van Oudheden, Leiden)

A striking depiction of the work of an Egyptian interpreter can be found on a bas-relief in the tomb of Horemheb, which dates from the 14^th century BCE. Horemheb was a general under the pharaoh Tutankhamun before he became pharaoh himself. The relief shows envoys from Libya, Nubia, and Syria prostrating themselves before Horemheb. According to the inscription, these foreigners are begging the Egyptians to send their armies and turn their countries into protectorates because the people there “live like animals in the wilderness” (Kurz, 1986).

One cannot feel but cynical about the age-old lies with which empires justify their exploits to themselves.

Between Horemheb and the envoys, we see an interpreter in action. It is a clever visual depiction of an essentially oral act: the interpreter is shown twice, once facing Horemheb and once facing the envoys. We can almost see him turn from one interlocutor to the other, as the image gives us a strong sense of the dynamism of the interpreting act.

Sadly, it is today impossible to get a full view of the complete interpreting scene because in the 19^th century the relief was broken up into pieces and sold to European tourists. The three pieces that make up the interpreter relief are today housed in museums in Berlin, Leiden, and Vienna (Kurz, 1986).

Training an interpreter corps

The records suggests that, for the longest time, Egyptians could not be bothered to learn foreign languages themselves (Hermann, 1956). In an eerie resemblance to today’s English monolingual mindset, they felt that for an Egyptian, speaking Egyptian was just fine. It was non-Egyptians who had to adjust and become bilingual by learning Egyptian.

Despite their strong sense of superiority, they did no want to leave the business of interpreting in the hands of foreigners. Therefore, they systematically created an interpreter corps of people who were not only bilingual but also Egyptian in culture and tastes. At least since the Middle Kingdom (2040 to 1782 BCE), they did this by bringing sons of foreign royal families to Egypt at an early age so that they could learn the Egyptian language and be socialized into the role of interlingual mediators (Kurz, 1986).

Only when the Egyptian empire began to decline, did Egyptians themselves start to learn foreign languages. From the 6^th century BCE, Egyptian boys were sent to live with Greek families so that they could become bilingual in Greek. The Greek historian Herodotus reports that, by the 4^th century BCE, their descendants had congealed into an interpreter caste, whose status ranked between that of merchants and seafarers (Kurz, 1986).

Interpreting gives way to multilingualism

By then, the power of the pharaohs had waned, and Egypt had become a multilingual polity. With the Persian conquest of 525 BCE, Aramaic replaced Egyptian as the language of the state, and with Alexander’s conquest in 332 BCE, Greek became the dominant language (Thompson, 2009).

Multilingual Cleopatra

When the pharaohs’ power had been assured, they could leave the pesky work of intercultural communication to others. Not so Cleopatra, the last pharaoh, with whose death in 30 BCE 5,000 years of Egyptian empire came to an end. In addition to Egyptian and Greek, she knew at least seven other languages. According to Plutarch’s Life of Antony (27, 3-4), “in her interviews with Barbarians she very seldom had need of an interpreter, but made her replies to most of them herself and unassisted, whether they were Ethiopians, Troglodytes, Hebrews, Arabians, Syrians, Medes or Parthians.”

References

Chrobak, M. (2013). For a tin ingot: The archaeology of oral interpretation. Przekładaniec: A Journal of Literary Translation, Special Issue 2013, 87-101.
Falbo, C. (2016). Going back to Ancient Egypt: were the Princes of Elephantine really ‘overseers of dragomans’? The Interpreters’ Newsletter, 21, 109-114.
Gardiner, A. H. (1915). The Egyptian Word for “Dragoman”. Proceedings of the Society of Biblical Archaeology, 37, 117-125.
Hermann, A. (1956). Dolmetschen im Altertum. In K. Thieme, A. Hermann, & E. Glässer (Eds.), Beiträge zur Geschichte des Dolmetschens (pp. 25-59). Munich: Isar Verlag.
Kurz, I. (1985). The rock tombs of the princes of Elephantine: Earliest references to interpretation in Pharaonic Egypt. Babel, 31(4), 213-218.
Kurz, I. (1986). Das Dolmetscher-Relief aus dem Grab des Haremhab in Memphis: Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte des Dolmetschens im alten Ägypten. Babel, 32(2), 73-77.
Salevsky, H. (2018). The Origins of Interpreting in the Old Testament and the Meturgeman in the Synagogue. The Bible Translator, 69(2), 184-198. doi:10.1177/2051677018786366
Thompson, D. J. (2009). The Multilingual Environment of Persian and Ptolemaic Egypt: Egyptian, Aramaic, and Greek Documentation. In R. S. Bagnall (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of papyrology. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199843695.013.0017

Additionally, multilingual crisis communication has been the focus of the research projects conducted by Master of Applied Linguistics students at Macquarie University as part of their “Literacies” unit. We close the year by sharing some of their findings.

Here, Peter O’Keefe uses media sources to explore the public health communication strategies employed during Melbourne’s COVID-19 outbreak in Brimbank, a highly linguistically diverse suburb and, at the time, a COVID-19 hot spot.

***

A drive-in Covid-19 testing site in Melbourne (Image credit: Bloomberg; Photographer: Carla Gottgens)

Melbourne is a city that takes pride in being one of the most cosmopolitan in the world. Like the rest of Australia, it is home to many migrant communities and in some local government areas like Brimbank, the number of migrants exceeds that of those born in Australia. It seems then rather unfair that in this time of emergency, communicating vital information to residents who rely on a language other than English for day-to-day life has come in an ad hoc fashion. This piecemeal approach to public health communication has resulted in a delay that could arguably be claimed responsible for it becoming a “hotspot” for COVID-19 infections this past winter. I will argue that failure to communicate effectively about vital pandemic information leads to distrust; and distrust in the government not only fuels conspiracy theories but undermines social cohesion at a time when we need everyone to stand together.

Crisis communication in linguistically diverse societies

There is no doubt, COVID-19 has laid bare failure in policy for emergency communication delivered in minority languages by governments all over the world. Delivering pandemic information in linguistically diverse countries is a serious challenge and Australia is not alone in this regard. What is clear, though, is that some countries, most notably China, have taken the challenge a little more seriously and acted with greater speed in addressing it. From the outset of the New Corona Virus crisis in Hubei province, expert linguists were called upon to aid with not only dissemination of information but also with patient-doctor interaction in what is now known as ground zero for the COVID-19 pandemic (Li et al 2020).

Poor translation quality undermines trust

Compare this with the response in Australia, in particular in Brimbank. Although there were top-down efforts to deliver translations of pandemic information in various community languages, these were seemingly symbolic rather than serving a practical purpose.

All of these translations appear to have been simply machine done. The Japanese translation I examined contained pragmatic and discursive errors along with curious word choices.

Would the government seriously consider communicating with other governments in the world using Google Translate? Using poor translations is a sign of disrespect.

Deploying monolingual door knockers undermines trust

Perhaps in an effort to address the issue of communicating with non-internet users, the Victorian government dispatched door knockers to deliver in-person information about testing in hot spot suburbs. The private company to which this task was outsourced, employed poorly trained staff without proficiency in the main non-English languages of the area, whose communications reportedly caused further confusion.

Main languages spoken in Brimbank, according to Australian Bureau of Statistics data

Migrants cop the blame for public communication failures

This communication breakdown may also have contributed to stigmatizing migrants as unwilling to participate in the public health effort and get tested.

The chief health officer of Victoria at one point declared that conspiracy theories circulated by migrants on social media were perhaps “partially responsible” for people believing that COVID-19 wasn’t real. However, there actually was no evidence that anyone refused a COVID-19 test on the grounds of not believing that COVID-19 was real.

What is sadly ironic about this claim is that conspiracy theories rely on people’s distrust of government to be believed. Lack of effective communication with the community especially in times of emergency creates distrust, so surely the government must accept some responsibility for any conspiracy theories that may have been circulating.

COVID-19 crisis communication is a test of social cohesion

In this post I have attempted to argue that emergency pandemic communication is more than merely conveying information. It serves a purpose to also persuade and comfort. If it can be effective in comforting, then this will build trust. This is necessary to ultimately persuade people to change their behaviors in a spirit of cooperation. The Victorian government’s actions in this area have had the opposite effect.

Just as COVID-19 has exposed the injustices and inequities across societies, it has also shown the different levels of social cohesion in various countries around the world. It takes a team effort to beat a pandemic, where all members of the community stand together regardless of their language, their political and cultural beliefs, or their level of literacy.

Reference

Li,Y., Rao, G., Zhang, J., and Li, J. (2020). Conceptualizing national emergency language competence. Multilingua, 39(5): 617–623.