Sign Language Interpreting: A Human Rights Issue

Viewed as isolated cases, sign language interpreters facilitate communication between 1 or more people. Viewed broadly, sign language interpreting may be seen as a tool to secure the human rights of sign language using deaf people. To fulfill this goal, interpreters must be provided with proper training and work according to a code of ethics. A recent international survey of 93 countries, mostly in the developing world (H. Haualand & C. Allen, 2009), found that very few respondents had an established sign language interpreter service, formal education and training opportunities for interpreters, or an endorsed code of ethics to regulate the practice of interpreters in their country. As a consequence of these limitations in the interpreting field around the world, there is potential for deaf people’s human rights to be violated. In this article, the accessibility and training of sign language interpreters are discussed from a human rights point of view within the context of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities, and a snapshot of the previously unexplored interpreting scene in various countries around the world is given

Working with Active Interpreters: A Commentary about Interpreting Terminology and Concepts

This commentary is a critical discussion of some terms that are frequently used when we talk about interpreting. Several of the popular terms may actually downplay the work done by both the interpreters and the other participants in interpreted interaction. In order to accentuate the work done by the interpreter as well as the active contribution by all participants in an interpreted dialogue, the commentary suggests some other terms. We would rather have us talk about working with interpreters than to ‘use’ interpreters, that interpreters interpret from a signed language to a spoken language rather than ‘voice for’, and that we refer to processing time instead of ‘lag time’ or ‘delay’. Interpreter educators, trainers, and researchers in the field of interpreting are in a position where it is both possible and desirable to strive towards using terms that more accurately represent interpreting and the interpreting process than some of the terms currently in use

Accessibility and diversity: Deaf space in action

How disabled people gather and share common experiences is empirically not a well-addressed issue in discussions about disability identity and unity. Among Deaf people, there is a long tradition for meeting in transnational contexts. Based on an intensive multi sited fieldwork at several transnational events, the article presents some examples of how deaf people negotiate social positions as Deaf that value difference. They gather as a community of communicators, marked by an identification founded on sharing one another's languages, common histories and through strong similarities in terms of culture and feeling oppressed by the hearing society. The identity negotiations taking place at these meeting places prove relevant to disabled people in the way they explore pressing issues such as accessibility and conflicting perspectives on what a disability shall mean in the lives of people affected by impairment

Sound Studies Meets Deaf Studies

Sound studies and Deaf studies may seem at first impression to operate in worlds apart. We argue in this article, however, that similar renderings of hearing, deafness, and seeing as ideal types - and as often essentialized sensory modes - make it possible to read differences between Sound studies and Deaf studies as sites of possible articulation. We direct attention to four zones of productive overlap, attending to how sound is inferred in deaf and Deaf practice, how reimagining sound in the register of low-frequency vibration can upend deafhearing dichotomies, how “deaf futurists“ champion cyborg sound, and how signing and other non-spoken communicative practices might undo phonocentric models of speech. Sound studies and Deaf studies emerge as fields with much to offer one another epistemologically, theoretically, and practically

Interpreted Ideals and Relayed Rights: Video Interpreting Services as Objects of Politics

Key WordsVideo interpreting, video relay services, comparative politics, legislation, accessibilityAbstractThe different definitions of video interpreting (VI) services in the U.S., Sweden and Norway serve as a foundation for a discussion on how a technology that at first may appear the same, serves widely different goals in different social and political contexts. In the U.S., video interpreting is defined as a telecommunication service to secure functional equivalence for all. In Sweden, the goal is to secure access to telecommunication services for disabled people. In Norway, VI is defined and organized as an extension of the public sign language interpreter service. This article gives insight into how ideology and politics shape the organization of a certain technology or service and impact the very scope and benefit of the technology itself. Further, the paper shows how the emerging VI services are interpreted, in light of the existing politcal ideals in each of the three countries, and how the services gradually also relay a certain set of rights through the way they are organised

I endringens tegn : diskurser i døvebevegelsen

"I endringens tegn" er en studie av diskurser i den interessepolitiske døvebevegelsen. Prosjektet "Døves tilgang til og bruk av informasjon" utgjør den empiriske basis for oppgaven. Prosjektet hadde som grunnantakelse at døves manglende tilgang til auditiv informasjon medfører at døves demokratiske rettigheter blir krenket, og at det var behov for å dokumentere forholdene. Oppgaven ser på hvordan døvebevegelsen i kampen for å bedre døves tilgang til informasjon tar i bruk og deltar i de diskurser den som aktør i norsk politisk offentlighet har til rådighet og er konstituert innenfor. Disse diskursene er identifisert ved tre dikotomier, normalitet/avvik, likhet/ulikhet og oss/de andre. De tre dikotomiene utgjør tre binære hierarkier, der de privilegerte polene konstitueres av sin relasjon til de underordnede polene. Diskursene forstås samtidig som intertekstuelle, ved at de forholder seg til hverandre både synkront og diakront. Gjennom en normativ normalitets- og avviksdiskurs, er døve blitt definert som funksjonshemmede eller avvikere. Selv om døve barn tidlig blir møtt som avvikere både av sine egne foreldre og av leger, gjør de ikke nødvendigvis denne forståelsen til sin. De transformerer både forståelser av lyd og ideer om avvik og utfordrer etablerte forståelser av 'normalitet' og 'avvik'. Samtidig skjer det gjennom normalitets- og avviksdiskursen en eksklusjon av døve fra 'normaliteten' som danner grunnlag for døvebevegelsens deltakelse i en materiell likhets- og ulikhetsdiskurs. Konsekvensene av døves manglende tilgang til informasjon gjøres her til et kollektivt samfunnsproblem. Det argumenteres for at staten og andre offentlige aktører må løse disse problemene gjennom materielle og politiske tiltak som for eksempel økt teksting av TV-programmer. I begge disse diskursene brukes begrepet 'hørende' jevnlig for å benevne de andre, og døveforbundet kan også forstås som en type etnisk korporasjon for en medlemsmasse som i stor grad definerer seg selv som medlemmer av en språklig minoritet. I en identitetsbasert oss og de andre-diskurs understrekes forskjellene mellom oss døve og de andre hørende, men tilstedeværelsen av de andre er essensiell for den retorikk som føres. Ved å delta i en slik diskurs, etablerer døvebevegelsen i tillegg et dikotomisk og komplementarisk forhold mellom døve og hørende. Døvebevegelsen forstås som et diskursivt spille-rom, der aktørene spiller med disponible diskurser og figurerte verdener i sin argumentasjon for bedre tilgang til informasjon for døve. Ved å etablere politiske og ideologiske visjoner for fremtiden, trekker den veksler på etablerte diskurser og aktiviteter, men lar også aktørene se seg selv et annet sted enn i den umiddelbare nåtid. På denne måten kan døvebevegelsen også bidra til medlemmenes identitetskonstruksjon. Teorier om figurerte verdener (Holland, Skinner Lachicotte & Cain), språklige metaforer (Kronenfeld og Lakoff & Johnson) og kritisk diskursanalyse (Wodak og Fairclough) står sentralt i analysen

Rome – a Temporary Deaf City! Deaflympics 2001

A Publication within the Anthropological Project: «Transnational Connections in Deaf Worlds»The texts in this publication, Rome – a Temporary Deaf City, is based on fieldwork done in Rome, the summer of 2001, where the quadrennial Deaf World Games were held (now called Deaflympics). This fieldwork is the first one within the anthropological project «Global Connections in Deaf Worlds». The research team from Stein Rokkan’s Centre for Social Science Research in Bergen consists of Jan-Kåre Breivik (hearing anthropologist), Hilde Haualand (deaf anthropologist) and Per Solvang (hearing sociologist). By the time we went to Rome none of us were experienced in doing cofieldwork during such intensive events. The ethnographic paths were actually made while walking through the streets of Rome. Following a short introduction, the first text, by Breivik, is about some anthropological challenges related to fieldwork in nonconventional settings. The second one, by Haualand, is a description of how Rome gradually changed into a deaf village within two hectic summer weeks – and then, all in a sudden, disappeared. The third text, by Solvang, is a comment upon Haualand’s text. He is in particular focusing upon particular episodes, during the Deaflympics, which points towards nuances in deviance discourse (in which deaf life is also a part of). The fourth text, by Breivik, focuses on the close connections between deaf sports and transnational deaf life. It is in particular the team-sports, such as soccer, which are put in front. The final text, by Haualand, is a summary and a kind of location of Rome/Deaflympics within the broader project. Here, we invite our readers to participate in the project. This can be done by commenting upon and posing question towards the project, the researchers and our texts, and by proposing changes or revisions. You are also invited to supplement and broaden our work by providing us with your observations and considerations. This project is strongly user-oriented, and we are therefore inviting deaf persons to participate. We are in particular looking for deaf persons with experiences from the transnational deaf scene, but we are not excluding anyone because of this. This publication is also available in Norwegian and on the Internet. You can download the texts (in both languages) from the project-website: www.deaf.linator.com. Here, you will also find more information on the project and different ways to reach members of the research team