Validating professional standards and codes: Challenges and opportunities

Interpreting

Volumn 8, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 175-193

  Angelelli, Claudia V ^a  

^a SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Focus groups; Healthcare interpreting; Interpreter role; Professional ethics; Professional standards

Indexed keywords

EID: 43249164597     PISSN: 13846647     EISSN: 1569982X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1075/intp.8.2.04ang     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Angelelli, C. (2000). Interpretation pedagogy: A bridge long overdue. ATA Chronicle November/December, 40-44
2. Angelelli, C. (2001). Deconstructing the invisible interpreter: A critical study of the interpersonal role of the interpreter in a cross-cultural/linguistic communicative event. PhD dissertation, Stanford University
3. Angelelli, C. (2002). Report on focus group study on California standards for healthcare interpreters: Proposed ethical principles, protocols and guidance on interpreter interventions and roles. Research commissioned by the California Healthcare Interpreters Association on a California Endowment Grant
4. Angelelli, C. (2003). The visible collaborator: Interpreter intervention in doctor/patient encounters. In M. Metzger, S. Collins, V. Dively & R. Shaw (Eds.), From topic boundaries to omission: New research on interpretation. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press, 3-25
5. Angelelli, C. (2004a). Medical interpreting and cross-cultural communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
6. Angelelli, C. (2004b). Revisiting the interpreter's role: A study of conference, court, and medical interpreters in Canada, Mexico and the United States. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins
7. Argyris, C. & Schön, D. (1974/1992). Theory in practice: Increasing professional effectiveness. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers
8. CHIA (2002). California standards for healthcare interpreters: Proposed ethical principles, protocols and guidance on interpreter interventions & roles. Sacramento: The California Endowment
9. CHIA (2004). California Healthcare Interpreting Association. CHIA objectives. http://www.chia.ws/your_chia.php (accessed 1 March 2005)
10. Davidson, B. (1998). Interpreting medical discourse: A study of cross-linguistic communication in the hospital clinic. PhD dissertation, Stanford University
11. Davidson, B. (2000). The interpreter as institutional gatekeeper: The social-linguistic role of interpreters in Spanish-English medical discourse. Journal of Sociolinguistics 4 (3), 379-405
12. Davidson, B. (2001). Questions in cross-linguistic medical encounters: The role of the hospital interpreter. Anthropological Quarterly 74 (4), 170-178
13. Goebert, B. & Rosenthal, H. (2001). Beyond listening: Learning the secret language of focus groups. New York: John Wiley & Sons
14. Greenbaum, T. (1993). The handbook of focus group research. New York: Macmillan
15. Krueger, R. A. & Casey, M. A. (1988). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage
16. LeCompte, M. D. & Schensul, J. J. (1999). Analyzing & interpreting ethnographic data. Walnut Creek/London/New Delhi: Altamira
17. Mason, J. (1996). Qualitative researching. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
18. Metzger, M. (1999). Sign language interpreting: Deconstructing the myth of neutrality. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press
19. Morgan, D. L. (1997). Focus groups as qualitative research. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
20. Reddy, M. J. (1979). The conduit metaphor: A case of frame conflict in our language about language. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 284-324
21. Roy, C. B. (1989). A sociolinguistic analysis of the interpreter's role in the turn exchanges of an interpreted event. PhD dissertation, Georgetown University
22. Roy, C. B. (2000). Interpreting as a discourse process. Oxford: Oxford University Press
23. Roy, C. B. (2002). The Problem with definitions, descriptions, and the role metaphors of interpreters. In F. Pöchhacker & M. Shlesinger (Eds.), The interpreting studies reader. London/New York: Routledge, 345-353
24. Stewart, D. & Shamdasani, P. (1990). Focus groups: Theory and practice. Newbury Park, CA: Sage
25. Tate, G. & Turner, G. (1999). The Code and the culture: Sign language interpreting - in search of the new breed's ethics. In F. Pöchhacker & M. Shlesinger (Eds.), The interpreting studies reader. London/New York: Routledge, 372-383
26. Wadensjö, C. (1995). Dialogue interpreting and the distribution of responsibility. Hermes, Journal of linguistics 14, 111-129
27. Wadensjo, C. (1998a). Community interpreting. In M. Baker (Ed.), Routledge encyclopedia of translation studies. London: Routledge, 33-37
28. Wadensjö, C. (1998b). Interpreting as interaction. London/New York: Longman
29. Wadensjö, C. (2002). The double role of a dialogue interpreter. In F. Pöchhacker & M. Shlesinger (Eds.), The interpreting studies reader. London/New York: Routledge, 354-370