Archivos por Etiqueta: Mejores prácticas

Research into barriers to translation and best practices : A study for the global translation initiative

(2011). [e-Book] Research into barriers to translation and best practices : A study for the global translation initiative / Conducted by Dalkey Archive Press. March 2011, Dalkey Archive Press. 2011

Descargar

For the purposes of this report, “contemporary works in translation” include: literary fiction, poetry, drama, literary criticism, and creative on fiction. The Anglophone world includes: the United Kingdom, Ireland, the United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. This report examines translations of contemporary works from any languages in the world into English. In the university survey, “funders” include those who provide government and university funding, as well as foundations and individual philanthropists. In the publishers and translators’ survey, “funders” include all bodies that provide funds for literature (whether domestic or foreign, agencies, foundations or individual philanthropists).

 

Mejores Prácticas en la interpretación del lenguaje de signos

Stewart, Kellie, Anna Witter-Merithew, et al. (2009). [e-Book] Best Practices: American Sign Language and English Interpretation Within Legal Settings. New York, National Consortium of Interpreter Education Centers. Legal Interpreting Workgroup, 2009

Descargar

This document sets forth the Best Practices and Protocols for American Sign Language interpreters working within legal settings. The mission of the National Consortium of Interpreter Education Centers (NCIEC) is to build and promote effective practices in interpreting education. The NCIEC draws upon the wisdom and energy of experts, consumers and other stakeholders to advance the field. The NCIEC is dedicated to challenging the status quo by promoting innovation, strong partner networks and multiculturalism throughout its programming. As responsible stewards of public funding, NCIEC is committed to products, programs and services that maximize resources and are replicable, measurable, sustainable and non-proprietary. Towards the goal of increasing the number of qualified interpreters and advance the field of interpreting education, the NCIEC has established a number of work teams dedicated to a specific area of specialization. One such workgroup is the NCIEC Legal Interpreting Workgroup, comprised of a group of core and expert members focused on defining the best and effective practices associated with legal interpreting. Interpreting in the legal setting is a long-recognized area of specialization in the field of ASL-English interpreting. Tradition from the field of spoken language interpreting and legal community contribute to the conventional way legal interpreting work is performed. As well, practices have been conceived by ASL-English interpreter practitioners over time through a process of application of theory drawn from the profession’s scholarship. As more scholarship and research emerge, practices evolve, improve, and change.

 

Best Practices Manual On Interpreters In the Minnesota State Court System

Best Practices Manual
On Interpreters
In the
Minnesota State Court System
Prepared by:
Minnesota Supreme Court Interpreter Advisory Committee
May 1999

Descargar

Minnesota law declares it to be “the policy of this State that the constitutional rights of persons handicapped in communication cannot be fully protected unless qualified interpreters are available to assist them in legal proceedings.”1 In its Final Report, the Minnesota Supreme Court Task Force on Racial Bias in the Judicial System recognized that Minnesota’s non-English-speaking population is growing rapidly, making it increasingly challenging for the criminal justice system to meet constitutional requirements of fundamental fairness and equal protection. The Report stated that Minnesota was not adequately providing competent court interpretation for many persons with limited English skills. This lack of adequate interpretation was of great concern in that it resulted in the denial of equal access to the courts, not only for non-English speaking individuals, but also for the hard-of-hearing.