Brunette, L., Bastin, G., Hemlin, I., and H. Clarke (eds.). (2003): The Critical Link 3: Interpreters in the Community, Amsterdam and Philadelphia, John Benjamins.

Every three years from 1995, an international conference on interpreting in legal, health and social service settings has been held in Canada to explore the world of “Interpreters in the Community.” The first of these conferences was held in Geneva Park in 1995, the second was held in 1998 in Vancouver, and the latest conference was held in 2001 in Montreal. “The Critical Link” series provides insight into each of the conferences through a select number of papers representative of the full range of presentations made at the conferences.

The Critical Link 3 is an overview of the third conference and consists of twenty-one papers – only one-fourth of the total number of papers that were actually presented – giving evidence to the grand scale of the conference itself. The twenty-one papers are organized into the following five sections: From Theory to Practice; The Interpreter and Others – Compromise and Collaboration; Interpreter Training – New Realities, New Needs, New Challenges; The Legal System and the Role of the Court Interpreter – A Dual Dilemma; and Complex Profession, Professional Complexity.

Part I “From Theory to Practice” could – in my personal view – just as well be entitled the “Interpreter’s Invisibility.” The oft-discussed issue of invisibility is revisited by the three papers in this section, where the authors raise questions regarding the conventional demands for the interpreter to be neutral and invisible, and thus call for interpreters and interpreters’ roles to be examined within a wider spectrum.

In the first paper, Claudia Angelelli asks whether the interpreter is truly invisible or whether s/he is an essential partner in the ongoing interaction. Angelelli claims that the notion of an invisible interpreter is merely an illusion, and describes interpreters as being opaque, not transparent. To test this theory, 293 interpreters working in various fields in Canada, the United States and Mexico were surveyed on the visibility of the interpreter. According to the survey, how interpreters define their roles is to some degree influenced by the social and cultural environment and the field of service (e.g. the degree of visibility felt was higher for interpreters working in the medical field than for those working in courts). However, most interpreters described themselves as being an active participant in the communication process – not an “invisible” being. Thus, the “myth of the invisible interpreter” is definitely being challenged.

The second paper by Hanneke Bot discusses neutrality within the context of invisibility. By introducing readers to detailed examples of “interpreter-mediated psychotherapeutic dialogue” in which the interpreter acts as a mediator between therapists and patients during psychotherapy sessions, Bot points out that it is quite impossible for the interpreter to remain objective and neutral. In real life, interpreters need to be able to transgress – not violate – boundaries in order to enhance the effectiveness of treatment. Once again, “neutrality” in the face of real-life situations may only be a myth.

Lynne Eighinger and Ben Karlin examine sign language interpretation in the United States, and present a new definition of successful communication. By describing situations in which sign language interpretation is used, Eighinger and Karlin explain that feminist values discussed in the field of psychology are extremely meaningful when determining “success” in interpretation.

Part II focuses on “The Interpreter and Others: Compromise and Collaboration.” This section explores the many aspects of collaboration that occur between the interpreter and other communication participants, and looks for ways to increase the efficiency of the collaboration.

By providing a description of a unique study on sign language interpretation that was carried out in Quebec, Danielle-Claude Bélanger shows that the existing linear communication model that incorporates only the speaker and the receiver fails to sufficiently explain the complex communication situation in which an interpreter participates. Bélanger then goes on to present a more comprehensive communication model for interpretation situations.

The next paper by Bernd Meyer, Birgit Apfelbaum, Franz Pöchhacker and Alexandre Bischoff illuminates the interdisciplinary nature of interpreting studies. The four authors come from three different countries (Switzerland, Germany and Austria) and have different fields of expertise. Together, they have applied tools of analysis from functional pragmatics, conversation analysis, interpreting studies and health sciences to a transcript of interpreter-mediated doctor-patient communication. The end result is a parallel examination of a single interpretation situation from four different complementary perspectives.

Helen Tebble also looks at medical interpreting, this time from the viewpoint of interpreter training that aims to enhance communication with patients. Tebble gives an overview of workshops held in order to widely introduce a training program that uses a book titled Medical Interpreting and a videotape with recordings of interaction between non-English speaking patients and medical practitioners in Australia.

Part III consists of six papers, making it the largest section in The Critical Link 3. This section deals with “Interpreter Training: New Realities, New Needs, New Challenges,” focusing particularly on the need for interpreters working in special situations to receive specialized training in addition to training for general interpretation skills. Various interpreter training programs are introduced for a number of special interpreting situations.

The first paper by Maria-Paz Beltran Avery discusses “Interpreter Quality Assessments” for medical interpreting. Beltran Avery describes the MMIA’s (Massachusetts Medical Interpreters Association) development of a certificate program for quality assurance, noting that the areas of assessment include “Basic Language Proficiency, Basic Health-related Concepts and Terminology, Basic Conversation Skills and Ethical and Cultural Issues.”

Friedel Dubslaff and Bodil Ringe Martinsen describe the situation for community interpreting in Denmark, pointing out that the rising number of immigrants has created a new demand for community interpretation and, consequently, for effective training programs. Dubslaff and Martinsen introduce a survey that sought to provide an accurate view of the community interpreting situation in order to develop an appropriate training program and to ultimately professionalize community interpretation. The results point to the need to consider the different backgrounds and situations of immigrants and to thus provide focused training at various levels. The survey also provided useful information for program development, such as the profiles of potential students.

The paper by Marco A. Fiola introduces an interesting case study on eight aboriginal languages used in the Yukon, Canada, focusing on issues to consider in training community interpreters for minority languages. Based upon the author’s own experience in a training course for community interpreters who had a high level of proficiency in an aboriginal language and English, this paper discusses such issues as trainee selection, evaluation within the training course and professional practice.

Melanie Oda and Donna Joyette also provide information on a special training program developed in Canada. This time the focus is on domestic violence, and Oda and Joyette introduce the special training necessary for interpreters to facilitate communication in the PAR (Partner Assault Response) Program, a psychotherapeutic program for “non-English-speaking perpetrators of domestic violence.”

Jane Straker and Helen Watts examine the many problems that arise from having interpreters without specialized training work with refugees and immigrants. Detailed information is provided on a “refugee interpreters training program” developed by a refugee-led community organization called Praxis, in coordination with City University.

Carmen Valero Garcés also looks at the issue of immigrants, this time in Spain. Valero Garcés notes that, lacking adequate training programs, the increasing demand for interlinguistic mediators has mostly been filled by non-professional volunteers. Through a survey of a hundred or so healthcare providers and field experts and a separate survey of interpreters working with these experts, the author examines the communication of immigrants in healthcare situations, related problems, and profiles of the interpreters.

The four papers in Part IV deal with yet another specialized area of interpretation – namely, court interpretation.

Yvonne Fowler of the United Kingdom describes various problems that occur during the process of interpreting witness statements by non-English-speaking witnesses. Fowler particularly stresses that witness statement-taking is a complex task that requires a wide variety of skills, and notes that it is quite unreasonable to hold the interpreter fully and solely responsible for all translated contents of witness statements.

In the next paper, Zubaidah Ibrahim and Roger T. Bell give an overview of court interpreting in Malaysia, explaining that court interpreting was first introduced in Malaysia in the 19^th century when Malaysia was under British rule, and that, presently, court interpreters are full-time government employees. Ibrahim and Bell then elaborate upon the reasons behind the current shortage of interpreters and provide several suggestions for improvement.

Bente Jacobsen introduces court interpreting in Denmark, with a focus on “additions” made by interpreters during the interpreting process. Jacobsen organizes additions into three categories: “additions with no impact on the semantic and/or pragmatic content of the source text,” “additions with minimal impact on the semantic and/or pragmatic content of the source text,” and “additions with significant impact on the semantic and/or pragmatic content of the source text.”

Edith Vilela Biasi reports on the court interpretation situation in Venezuela. Noting that the role of the court interpreter has yet to be clearly defined, Vilela Biasi examines how the role of the interpreter has changed in accordance with the revision of the Criminal Procedure Code. Vilela Biasi also discusses the interpreter in terms of “full-fledged social actors,” not just “communication mediators.”

Lastly, Part V examines the complexities that interpreters must deal with in different situations in various countries, clearly showing that just as the historical and social situations vary in each country, the issues facing interpreters differ as well.

First, Ineke Crezee describes the development of health interpreting services in New Zealand and the health interpreter training system. Crezee also provides results of a survey of health interpreters on cultural communications barriers and elements necessary for effective interpretation.

Sarah Bowen and Joseph M. Kaufert also focus on health interpreting, and look into the limitations of four existing methods to assess the economic value of healthcare interpreter programs.

The next paper entitled “Community-based Interpreting” summarizes the results of a very large-scale survey of community interpreters that was carried out from 1998 to 1999. In this paper, Terry Chesher, Helen Slatyer, Vadim Doubine, Lia Jaric and Rosy Lazzari provide information on interpreter profiles, career records, areas of activity and clients, working conditions, qualifications and training, important qualities and particular skills, and perception of roles.

Next, Ann Corsellis, Erik Hertog, Bodil Ringe Martinsen, Edda Ostarhild-Jones and Yolanda Vanden Bosch provide an overview of the European Union Grotius Programme, a two-year project that aims to establish equivalences for legal interpreting and translation in all member countries of the European Union. The authors elaborate particularly on how research was carried out in the process of developing standards for training and assessment.

The final paper is by Roy Thomas who deals with the issue of protecting interpreters working in areas of conflict. Taking the Kosovo Verification Mission as a case in point, Thomas highlights the need for follow-on protection for interpreters.

All twenty-one papers in TheCritical Link 3 help us realize that community interpreting truly lies at the heart of the everyday lives of a great number of people around the world. In many situations including healthcare, administration and legal services, interpreters are the “critical links” that enable communities to function properly. Despite the impact that community interpreters have on societies, unfortunately, so far, interpreting studies have not given enough attention to this area of interpreting. Rather than take issues of interpreting quality and interpreter qualifications as an excuse for lesser academic interest, efforts should be made to achieve a real understanding of what community interpreting entails and to come up with specific measures that can support the substantial development of its many dimensions.

In this endeavor, The Critical Link 3 will definitely be a helpful map that guides the footsteps of anyone who plans to traverse the world of community interpreting.