Working with interpreters FAQ

What does LEP stand for?

• Limited English Proficiency
• This acronym is used to describe the person(s) requiring interpretation

How does it work? 

• Meaning for meaning, not “word for word”
• 3 Modes of Interpretation:
  Simultaneous = interpreting a speech in real-time while the speaker is still talking. 
  Consecutive = speaker pauses, allowing the interpreter to translate their message into another language before the speaker continues
  Sight Translation = orally translating a written text from one language into another, on the spot

Where does the interpreter sit in the courtroom?

• Clear line of sight to all speakers' faces (and hands/body, if ASL)
• Ability to clearly hear and be heard by all (
• If no equipment, sit next to LEP (person(s) requiring interpretation)
• A table and chair

What is a fair rate of pay?

• Pay rates vary depending on state, sector, language pair
• Minimum call-out fees and cancellation policies (e.g. 2-hour minimum, half/whole-day minimum, <24-hour notice cancellation paid, etc.)
• Remote interpretation is a PREMIUM services, not a bargain one

Whom do I address? The interpreter or the LEP?

The LEP. English speakers and LEP speakers are to have a direct conversation with each other and address each other in the first person the same as two English speakers having a conversation would.

Can I ask the interpreter to relay messages or explain things?

No. The interpreter is only there to interpret what you say to each other and should not be asked to step out of their professional role. 

Is the interpreter an advocate for the LEP?

No. The interpreter is a neutral officer of the court whose only role is to enable communication across a language barrier, taking no sides. If obstacles are identified in the interpreter's ability to perform this duty or the interpreter identifies that the LEP speaks a different language than the language the interpreter is interpreting into (or speaks a different language better than they speak/understand the interpreter's language), the interpreter must inform the court in the interest of meaningful access to justice, but this is not considered "advocacy" of an LEP's position in a case.

Should interpreters be left alone with litigants?

No, if it can at all be avoided. LEPs tend to open up and talk to the only other person present who speaks their language and they may reveal crucial things about their case to the interpreter that they do not want others involved in the case to know about, putting the interpreter in an ethical dilemma.