On Jul 29, 5:59*am, "Robert Green" wrote:
"Kurt Ullman" wrote in message
In article , wrote:

stuff snipped

Of the many things she does, she translates for the deaf at trials.

Still think they don't need to be licensed?

Why? *This could just as easily be taken care of the same way you get
okayed as an expert witness. I had testified many times before I got any
kind of certification. They asked about my training and experience, etc..

My dad was an "expert witness" and many courts will simply eject a witness
even with credentials when they start reaching impossible conclusions. *I've
seen it happen in a case where a forensic expert tried to reconstruct a
fire's origin based on blurry 3 by 5 photos that he had not even personally
taken. *He hadn't visited the fire scene, either. *Zoot! *Out he went. *The
outcome might have been different if it has been a jury trial, I'll admit,
but smart lawyers make sure the witnesses they hire are credentialed out the
wazoo and well-spoken, too, before they take the stand. *For engineers, the
credentials part usually (not always) means having a PE license.

As for licensed translators being more competent then their unlicensed
brethren all I can say is there's no shortage of appellate briefs alleging
translation errors during criminal trials and in my limited experience,
those allegations often prove true. *That's because translation is subject
to all sorts of errors.

A brief review of POTUS errors in translation (ostensibly the best
translators money can buy) will reveal "I am a donut!" and "my wife is
frigid," the two Presidential translation errors most cited in the press.
Extra credit if you can tell me what they were really trying to say.

--
Bobby G.

Translation is more art than science...

All languages have dialects -- not all translators know all the
possible
dialects of every language they can translate...

Even sign language has several regional dialects within the US...

~~ Evan