Mandarin deposition services are used when a deponent is not fluent in English. Here are some tips for attorneys that can help move the proceeding forward more smoothly and efficiently.
1. Interpreters’ credentials for Mandarin deposition services: Clarify and verify
As a rule of thumb, court certified interpreters should be used in legal proceedings, including depositions. When retaining interpreters for Mandarin deposition services, verify that the interpreters are court certified. Confirm that they are certified for the specific language and/or dialect used in the deposition.
Make sure you clarify the interpreters’ credentials before hiring since they do get misrepresented or vaguely presented at times. For document translation, the ATA certification in your language pair and direction is an excellent attestation. For spoken language interpretation, the court interpreter certification and medical interpreter certification are the best credentials available for legal and medical interpreting, respectively.
For more reading on Chinese dialects, please go to Spoken Chinese: Mandarin or Cantonese?
2. A hidden consideration: Interpreters’ efficiency
When hiring interpreters, budget is one of the major considerations for most clients. An important factor that is often overlooked is how efficient the interpreters are. Some interpreters are quick and accurate. This moves the entire process forward more efficiently and smoothly. Court stenographers know what a big difference this can make. For example, in a regular 8-hour day, a court stenographer may get 175 pages of very accurate, easily comprehensible transcript with one interpreter but 100 pages of vague, muddled dialogue with another.
The efficiency of interpreters is a hidden factor that you may not hear much about, but it has a significant impact on your efficiency and overall cost. The interpreters who are quick and accurate tend to charge higher daily fees, but in the end they help you save on the bottom line. Ask around and you may learn by word of mouth which interpreters are in this category.
3. When using two interpreters: Consider alternating
For high-stakes cases, clients may retain two interpreters for Mandarin deposition services. Having two interpreters alternate is the standard practice in sign language interpreting services. Having two interpreters alternate is also the standard practice used by courts nationwide. Why? Because it reduces interpreter fatigue.
However, some clients prefer to have one interpreter serve as a main interpreter (who does all the interpreting) and the other serve as a check interpreter (who listens in and only makes corrections when necessary) without alteration. One rationale for this arrangement is improved consistency, as the two interpreters’ word choices may differ. However, if both interpreters are qualified for Mandarin deposition services, having two interpreters alternate can greatly alleviate fatigue for the main interpreter, thus significantly increasing the overall accuracy.
Therefore, we strongly recommend having two interpreters alternate for the best outcome – provided that both are competent (see below).
4. When using two interpreters: Verify qualifications for Mandarin deposition services
When hiring two interpreters, it is essential that both interpreters are court certified and competent for Mandarin deposition services. If the arrangement is that one interpreter does all the interpreting and the other does all the checking, verify that the check interpreter has equivalent or higher qualifications than the main interpreter (e.g., the main interpreter is court certified, and the check interpreter is both court certified and ATA certified).
A subpar main interpreter may introduce too many omissions, additions, or inaccurate renditions resulting in a significant amount of time being spent on corrections by the check interpreter. On the other hand, an unqualified check interpreter may miss errors that should have been caught, or make false corrections where correct renditions are deemed wrong. In either scenario, it is extremely counterproductive: First, it prolongs the deposition proceeding; secondly, it introduces undue confusions into the record; and thirdly, it may cause conflictual situations between the interpreters, and even between the parties. In extreme cases, the main interpreter may refuse to be checked by an incompetent check interpreter, and result in major disruptions or delays to the proceeding.
In the unfortunate event that an incompetent interpreter is hired, regardless of whether assigned as the main or the check interpreter, it is likely to have a detrimental effect on the outcome of a deposition. To minimize negative impact, you might consider having the unqualified interpreter check only off the record, so that at least the record would be less confusing.
Nonetheless, the golden rule is: only request court certified interpreters, and verify interpreters’ credentials before hiring.
5. When using one main interpreter or a single interpreter in Mandarin deposition services: Take regular breaks
When only one interpreter is retained for Mandarin deposition services, or when a single interpreter serves as the main interpreter throughout, make sure to allow the interpreter to take regular breaks. This is imperative because fatigue is one of the primary impediments to accuracy. Why do courts use two interpreters alternating in court proceedings? It is to alleviate interpreter fatigue.
In our practice, when there is only one interpreter for Mandarin deposition services, we require a 10-15 minute break for every 45-50 minutes of interpreting. The interpreter puts up a sign that says “five minutes until break” to allow attorneys time to wrap up the questions for the session. This has worked very well for both our clients and our interpreters.
6. Speak as if the interpreters were not present
A well-executed interpreting session is one in which the interpreters are almost invisible. The rule of thumb is: all parties should speak as if the interpreters were not present. By doing so, the record is very clear about who said what to whom.
-
-
Attorneys – speak in first person
-
To help maintain a clear record, attorneys should address all questions, answers, and comments in first person directly to witnesses, as if the interpreters were not present.
For example: Instead of facing the interpreter and saying “Ask him where he was on July 5th, 2012”, the deposing attorney should face the deponent and ask: “Where were you on July 5th, 2012?”
-
-
Deponents – speak in first person
-
The deponent should also speak in first person directly to the deposing attorney as if interpreters were not there.
In the above example, the deponent should answer “I was at home” instead of “Tell him I was at home”.
It is essential that deponents not address any questions, statements, or comments to interpreters, or otherwise engage interpreters during a deposition. Confusion or undue drama can be introduced to the record if deponent does not understand the boundaries.
Such confusion can be avoided if deponents have a prior understanding that they are not supposed to engage interpreters. It is recommended that the attorney do a briefing with deponents before the deposition starts to advise them of proper procedures.
-
-
Interpreters – use third person to refer to themselves
-
The interpreters shall perform their duties as unobtrusively as possible, and should use the same grammatical person as the speaker does. However, when interjecting as interpreters, the interpreters should refer to themselves in third person.
For example, when the interpreter needs to ask for a clarification, instead of saying “May I request a clarification”, they should say: “May the interpreter request a clarification?”
By doing so, the record is very clear about who said what to whom.
7. Objections: Leave time for interpreters to render
When the deposing attorney and opposing attorney have an argument over an objection at the deposition, the attorneys should take a pause and allow interpreters time to provide an accurate and complete interpretation of the objection and the arguments, especially when the opposing attorney would like to advise the deponent not to answer the question.
Any cross talk, including simultaneous interpretation, can impair the integrity of the record. Therefore, it is necessary for attorneys to pause after an objection is raised or a comment is made, in order to allow the verbal rendition to be made from the interpreters consecutively.
8. All or nothing
Sometimes attorneys may prefer to have the deponent speak English at a deposition if the deponent appears to speak English well, and have the interpreter stand by and only assist as necessary. This decision is made with the good intention to expedite the deposition process. However, we have found that having deponents speak English may inadvertently introduce confusions – sometimes major ones. Therefore we suggest clients have interpreters interpret the whole session, particularly for deponents who are from outside of the U.S.
Nonetheless, if you decide to move forward with the “witness speaks in English, interpreters stand-by” mode, please be fully aware that interpreters are forbidden by their Code of Ethics to take the initiative to make any clarifications or corrections. Understanding the specific challenges in Chinese English interpretation may help you better monitor the deponent’s English testimony. Read more on our blog: English-Chinese Challenges.
I hope this article is helpful to you in your preparation of a deposition requiring Mandarin interpretation services. Please feel free to contact us for any comments or feedback. For a court’s perspective, please read this article from the Delaware courts: Best Practices for Attorneys Working with Court Interpreters.
