Interpreting in legal settings outside the courtroom is an area where community and legal interpreting intersect, a “gray zone” where the rules from each of these areas may mesh or collide. Thus legal interpreting outside the courtroom is an area that has caused great confusion for both the legal interpreters and the community interpreters who practice in its confines. Two neighboring countries, the United States and Canada, have adopted different approaches to interpreting in this area and to the kind of certification necessary for those community interpreters who work in legal settings. This article discusses non-courtroom legal interpreting in the broadest sense in both the United States and Canada, overviewing spoken non-courtroom legal interpreting in both countries, addressing the various challenges involved, and summarizing the emerging best practices for legal interpreting outside the courtroom, including some current and developing certification programs that affect, or may affect, non-courtroom legal interpreting.
[1]
R. González,et al.
Fundamentals of court interpretation : theory, policy, and practice
,
2012
.
[2]
A. Cederborg,et al.
“That is not necessary for you to know!”: Negotiation of participation status of unaccompanied children in interpreter-mediated asylum hearings
,
2010
.
[3]
K. Zimányi.
On Impartiality and Neutrality: A Diagrammatic Tool as a Visual Aid
,
2009
.
[4]
Y. Fischman.
Secondary trauma in the legal professions, a clinical perspective.
,
2008,
Torture : quarterly journal on rehabilitation of torture victims and prevention of torture.
[5]
James C. Duff.
ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES COURTS
,
2007
.
[6]
W. E. Hewitt.
Court interpretation : model guides for policy and practice in the State Courts
,
1995
.