InterpreterEducationOnline.com offers courses for legal interpreters in a number of languages such as French, Arabic, Polish, Spanish, Russian, Hmong, Mandarin, and Vietnamese to name the few. More languages will be available in the beginning of 2010. InterpreterEducationOnline.com helps to expand knowledge and perfect techniques of those who are wishing to and already have a career in legal interpreting.

The courses are offered in three sections: Advanced Course which lasts 16 weeks and offers in depth training, methods, and techniques for legal interpreters looking to become state certified court interpreters or simply advance their skills and careers. The second option is Basic Course which lasts six weeks and is composed of three units that teach basic knowledge every interpreter should know and master. Lastly, Single Topic Units are just that, single lessons for which interpreters may show interest in; ranging from Substance Abuse to Vehicular Accidents to SI and CI techniques. Our courses offer a gamut of legal and technical information that every interpreter will find helpful and frankly necessary in development of their career.

Bromberg & Associates, LLC was founded by Jinny Bromberg in 1999. It is an American company based in Michigan which provides online language-specific training solutions for interpreters. Bromberg & Associates, LLC is a full range language service provider, member of NAJIT, NCIHC, ATA and ALC. The company is a DBE and WBE certified business and GSA Federal Supply Schedule Award holder. More information is available at www.BrombergTranslations.com and www.InterpreterEducationOnline.com.

Should a student only be pushed to learn a new language so they can be admitted into a school or program of their choice? This is a wrong disposition many have. Learning another language from the early age does not only train the ear for its perfecting, but also helps mental development, intellectual growth, understanding of one’s native language, and it opens a lot more doors down the road, than starting to learn a language in high school. So why is it that language only becomes mandatory when it is already, a bit too late for many?

One session that caught my eye was Winning the RACE: Embracing e-Learning and Embarking on an e-Course in Translation. Susan Xu, the head of the Translation and Interpretation program at Singapore Institute of Management, shared how she overcame her initial resistance and resentment towards implementing e-learning format for translation studies. Professor Xu has designed an e-learning course in Mandarin-English technical translation, but she wasn’t convinced that the same kind of technology could be used for interpreter training. The authors of Interpreter Education Online hope to present at the next ATA conference and demonstrate an unlimited potential of e-learning in interpreting pedagogy and its successful application in multi-language interpreter training.

What about women who are here as immigrants, who do not speak English, and to whom it is taboo to even speak to somebody about what happens behind closed doors in fear they may be judged or persecuted in their own community? Since the male (husband/father) is a dominant figure in virtually all immigrant families, he is more versed in the language and is often the one who handles all the ‘business’ outside of family’s doors. To speak out against her abuser to someone outside of her community, she is many times hurdled by her lack of linguistic knowledge. Because of such barriers many immigrant women are unable to give a detailed police report and usually, an interpreter is not present.

What about undocumented immigrant women? Abuse is universal, blind to borders, an infringement on the human right, and it should be stopped regardless of what the immigrant status may read.

This day is celebrated every 30th of September and has been promoted and emphasized by International Federation of Translators, which was established in 1953. This day is celebrated on the feast of St. Jerome, who is the patron saint for all translators, as he was the first one to translate the Bible.

The article by Tim Padgett and Dolly Mascarenas talks about a woman, an illegal immigrant in Mississippi, who may lose her child because she does not speak English. The article reads: “State Department of Human Services (DHS), which ruled that Baltazar Cruz was an unfit mother in part because her lack of English “placed her unborn child in danger and will place the baby in danger in the future.” (08.31.09) This is not only a matter of providing correct interpreting services to this woman (she speaks Chatino, spoken in rural areas of Mexico, very little Spanish, and no English), but also a matter of judgment, illegal immigration, and the right to raise a child regardless of language barriers. It is also worthy of mention that upon arrival to the hospital Ms. Cruz was provided with a Spanish speaking interpreter, whose Spanish was quite different from one of Ms. Cruz and who did not speak or understand any Chatino. Although Ms. Cruz’s relative was there to interpret, the hospital declined their services and insisted on ones they have provided. It may be of question if Ms. Cruz signed the declination of interpreting services or if the hospital simply assumed that her relative did not speak any English. This behavior starts with lack of training to the staff, lack of available interpreters, lack of resources, but mostly lack of understanding. One can think that if we are surrounded by an increased number of properly trained personnel and enough interpreters, the behavior would decrease. The awareness of different cultures needs to be heightened, as well as tolerance which is achieved through understanding, communication, and education.

Is it just of Department of Human Services to judge if a woman is able or not to raise a child if she does not speak English? It is also mentioned that the child has been awarded to a foster family, as it was endangered. Is it upon others to make decisions on behalf of another human being if they do not simply share the same tongue and dehumanize them in such a way? To correct instances such as these, institutions should have provided training for staff in rules and regulations of Title VI, recognition of different languages, or even in understanding of handling situations such as Ms. Cruz had to endure. Well trained interpreters are crucial not only to a proper relationship between service providers and clients, but also in strengthening communities, heightening tolerance, and upholding basic human rights, but lack of available training persists to be the problem.

A Spanish-language interpreter for Franklin County Municipal Court was fired last month because he couldn’t interpret legal terms, possibly jeopardizing the constitutional rights of thousands. “It’s the legal standard to hear and understand the charges against you so that you can defend yourself,” said Bruno Romero, Interpreter Services program manager for the Supreme Court of Ohio. “It’s a critical point.” Richardo Bustos, 42, made up words, including the Spanish word for “defendant,” and guessed when he did not understand legal terms in English, according to court documents. “It very well may be a violation of their rights,” said Gary Daniels, associate director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio. Bustos couldn’t be reached for comment last night.

The court does not know how many people Bustos interpreted for in the approximately 2 1/2 years he worked for the court, said Keith Bartlett, court administrator. Records show that almost 18,000 people used a Spanish-English interpreter in 2007 and 2008 in Franklin County Municipal Court. Administrative Judge Carrie Glaeden said the court does not plan to review the cases that Bustos worked on. “In 99 percent of the cases (in my court) where Mr. Bustos would have been interpreting, the English-speaking attorney, judge and prosecutor and Mr. Bustos … understand what the plea will be. If Mr. Bustos misinterpreted a word, the end result is the same. Everyone agreed on the plea and on the fine,” she said. “The fact that it doesn’t happen all the time is of no comfort to the person it did happen to and who is now in jail,” said Daniels. Defendants should understand exactly what is said in court, he added. They could appeal their cases based on Bustos’ involvement, but they would need proof that the interpreting was inaccurate, said Jack R. Kullman Jr., Franklin County Court of Appeals administrator. That might not be easy, he said. Court reporters record only what is said in English, and interpreters speak quietly to participants to avoid disturbing the proceedings.

The Municipal Court employs two full-time Spanish-English interpreters and contracts with a company for additional Spanish-English interpreters and for other languages, but does not track which interpreter works on which cases. According to court documents, in a June hearing regarding his qualifications, Bustos testified that he had “not mastered legal vocabulary in English or Spanish, for sure,” but because everything is repetitive in the courtrooms he has a “well-enough grasp of actual phrases and words.” Judge Julia L. Dorrian disagreed. She determined that Bustos was not qualified to interpret, although he is bilingual. He was fired six days later, on July 8. Bustos had been on a work-improvement program for more than a month because of complaints by Emily Hurt, a public defender enrolled in a Columbus State Community College Spanish 101 class, who reported that she’d heard Bustos translate semana as “month.” Semana means “week.” After that, the public defender’s office began questioning Bustos’ ability.

There is no standard qualification process for interpreters in Ohio, according to a 2006 Supreme Court report. At that time, 32 percent of interpreters working in Ohio’s courts had received no related training. The Supreme Court provides interpreter training and has trained more than 600 interpreters, said Romero. Bustos attended at least one training, according to court documents.

A customer survey recently launched by LinkedIn addressing thousands of its translator members caused many ATA members and other professional translators to be outraged. The “survey” seemed to be aimed at determining those translators who are willing to translate LinkedIn’s website into other languages for free.

The third question of the survey asked what “incentive” translators would prefer. However,the possible answers did not include payment. Choices included “because it’s fun”, “upgraded LinkedIn account”, and “other” all of them indicating that LinkedIn was looking for volunteers to localize their website.

This is controversial for two reasons. Professional translators view it as highly disrespectful towards them and their work from a networking site for professionals. Many members would be happy to volunteer for charities or a not-for-profit institution but not a for-profit business like LinkedIn.

Apart from that, the concept of volunteers working on such a group effort called “crowdsourcing” has not always resulted in quality translations. This was the case with Wikipedia and Facebook who have also localized their websites using a group of volunteers. According to Jiri Stejskal, president of the American Translators Association, companies often “lose their face and money” when using volunteers who turn out to be incompetent. Poor translations often need to be corrected by qualified professionals, such as ATA members, in the end.