Translation and Interpreting Studies. The Journal of the American Translation and Interpreting Studies Association - Volume 17, Issue 3, 2022

This article critically analyzes current sign language policy trends and related sign language ideologies regarding interpreter provision and the institutionalization of sign language interpreting in Canada. Particular attention is paid to issues of representation in the provision of interpreters for government emergency briefings during the COVID-19 pandemic. Based on the provision of interpreting services for COVID-19 briefings, sign language interpreting as a profession in Canada is revealed as problematic. This is particularly true regarding the institutionalization of the profession and how existing social hierarchies and ideologies are consolidated with respect to diverse deaf people and interpreters.

Many legal systems have begun to adjust their social and linguistic practices to accommodate non-dominant social groups. However, linguistic diversity is often framed as an exception, and interpreters are viewed as a service to address these exceptions rather than as part of broader structural changes to enable access to justice. This article explores the access to and participation in the Spanish legal system of Spanish Sign-Language users (SSLUs) who are deaf or heard of hearing. Through semi-structured interviews with SSLUs, the article elicits their perceptions of the legal field. These data are analyzed from the perspective of self-determination theory (Deci and Ryan 1985) to identify how SSLUs’ psychological needs of competence, autonomy, and relatedness are linked to the social, cultural, and economic capital invested and distributed through social practices. The goal is to clarify how SSLUs’ habitus sustains or resists monolingual and audist ideologies establishing hierarchies between language communities.

Globally, deaf associations and sign language interpreters’ organizations support the idea that interpreting services are equivalent to access and inclusion for deaf people. Researchers have challenged this assumption by pointing to ‘the illusion of inclusion’ (Russell 2007; Russell and Winston 2014; De Meulder and Haualand 2021), the ‘institution of access’ (Brunson 2011), and the fact that interpreters are needed but not wanted (Pöchhacker 2019; Sheneman 2020). This article explores whether sign language interpreting services are the ideal solution when providing access to communication, information, and services for deaf signers. It presents the perspectives of three deaf employees of the Flemish deaf association and four hearing Dutch–VGT (Flemish Sign Language) interpreters on what constitutes their ‘ideal’ world. By addressing this topic, interviewees considered whether in this ideal world sign language interpreting services would still exist and expressed their views on topics such as communication, access, (in)equity, and inclusion.

Sign language interpreters onstage at public and political events have recently become more visible in the linguistic landscapes of many countries. Accessibility principles and policy measures have gained traction internationally, and Deaf communities have also recently achieved formal recognition of a national sign language in many countries, including in New Zealand and Norway. Resulting discourses of language planning and of access are now converging to position sign language interpreters as simultaneously agents of language planning (specifically, prestige and image planning) and as instruments of accessibility. This article interrogates the ideological context (motives, beliefs, practices) and perceived effects of increasing interpreter presence in public arenas in New Zealand and Norway, based on interview data from interpreters, interpreting service users and providers, and Deaf informants.

In the UK, police reforms to meet needs of a diverse society have been limited in the case of deaf signers to an increase in sign language interpreting services (SLIS). This article explores the consequences of this dependence on SLIS by the UK police. We consider how deaf signers’ contact with the police may be inaccessible, despite national frameworks that ‘guarantee’ accessibility through the provision of BSL-English interpreting. We draw on qualitative data from focus groups and interviews with police officers and custody sergeants who describe their experiences of having contact with deaf signers (or other minority language users) through interpreters. We examine and contrast their perceptions and experiences concerning if, when, and how SLIS provided access, as well as its impact on their contact with deaf signers. We compare these findings with UK police reform policies to identify the current state of these provisions along with potential divergences.