Page 210 - Reading Between the Sign Intercultural Communication for Sign Language Interpreters

Techniques for Cultural Adjustments 195

Context Balancing
Shelley Lawrence, Anna Witter-Merithew, Theresa Smith, and other
interpreter educators have noted that one of the major differences
in discourse style between English and ASL is the latter’s use of
expansion, amplification, and elaboration. As discussed in chap-
ter 3, these include adding layers of detail, shifting perspective,
and describing things by indicating what they are not. When in-
terpreting from English to ASL, therefore, a common strategy is to
increase the amount of context, making use of these features.
English discourse structure, in comparison, is more linear.
Where the point in ASL may be implicitly understood from the
accumulation of details, in English the point of a lecture or a large
chunk of discourse is usually stated explicitly at the outset. In ASL
one clarifies a concept by demonstrating it, acting it out, or show-
ing how it works. In English, a label (word, phrase, or technical
term) is often sufficient. In other words, when interpreting from
ASL to English, we may often need to reduce the amount of con-
text in order to make it sound appropriate in English.
Another type of context balancing occurs when there is a ref-
erence to cultural information that one party erroneously assumes
the other party shares. For example, hearing Americans make ref-
erence to many aural aspects of their culture without thinking
twice. Theme songs from television shows and famous lines from
TV commercials or popular songs are woven into everyday con-
versations. Interpreters cannot usually explain the entire refer-
ence, but a parenthetical “G-I-L-L-I-G-A-N’S ISLAND (an old TV show
from the 1960s)” helps clarify a little. By the same token, refer-
ences to artifacts of Deaf culture such as “TTY,” “residential school,”
“relay service,” or “NAD” may need a parenthetical short expla-
nation to bring hearing consumers up to speed.
A cautionary note: sometimes the other party’s ignorance of
the cultural reference becomes the whole point of the rest of the
conversation. In her teleconference, Forestal mentions a job in-
terview where the Deaf applicant was asked if he had any last
questions for the employer. The applicant asked, “YOU HAVE TTY
HERE?” to which the interpreter, with all good intentions, added,
“a telecommunications device that deaf people use to talk on the
phone.” That added clarification essentially ruined the Deaf
person’s strategy, which was to check out the level of awareness
of this prospective employer.

08 MINDESS PMKR 195 10/18/04, 12:02 PM