Re-codified languages in a post-conflict
context: credentials, practice and attitudes
amongst translators and interpreters of the
Bosnian, Croatian and Serbian languages
Dr Jim Hlavac
Translation & Interpreting Studies
Monash University
jim.hlavac@monash.edu
Third IATIS Regional Workshop – Western Balkans
25-26 September 2014
University of Novi Sad
1
Summary of paper
Language designations – corpus- and languageplanning
Conflict – language as a salient feature of groups
Norms in Translation Studies
Norms extended to macro-pragmatic features
Features examined here
Informants and sample
Data (statistics and quotes)
Conclusions
2
Corpus planning & language planning
For the purposes of corpus planning in forming a
standard language a group (usually led by
lexicographers) decide on the variant/dialect basis,
vocabulary, orthography, grammatical conventions,
stylistics.
Form
Symbolism
Language planning refers to the regulation of
which language/s enjoy official/sanctioned use in
which areas/regions/countries.
3
Previous and current designations of official
languages in three successor states of SFRY
Official pre1991
designation
BosniaHerzegovina
Croatia
Serbia
Serbo-Croatian
or CroatoSerbian
Croatian or
Serbian
Serbo-Croatian
Croatian
Serbian
Current
Bosnian,
official
Croatian, Serbian
designations
4
Norms
Application of Toury’s operational norms to
relate to ‘the typical practices of T&Is’ in
adhering to or disregarding distinctions in the
designation and form of closely-related
languages.
Toury’s preliminary norms with respect to
‘translation policy’ to refer here to ‘macro-level
or group attributes as well’.
5
(Re-) establishment of shifting norms
How do T&Is translators of closely-related languages,
previously encompassed by a linguistic hypernym, deal
with a changed, post-conflict linguistic situation, and
how their negotiation of reconfigured standard
languages and language designations bears regularities
that can be considered professional norms.
This paper examines homogeneity (and heterogeneity)
of groups of T&Is who ‘actually implement the norms’,
and the reported interactions with consumers of T&I
services who also contribute to the negotiation of
regularities.
6
Research questions
Re-configured regularities of practice represent
instances of T&Is exercising their own power,
submitting to the requirements of other
stakeholders and/or negotiating mutually-agreed
practices.
This paper examines these practices in social
(intra-group, inter-group), role-relationship
(ideographic vs. nomothetic) and occupationallyfocussed (‘principled / ‘code of ethics’-based or
‘situational/pragmatic’) situations to extend the
scope of the notion of professional norms to
include macro-pragmatic features.
7
Features examined in data sample
How do T&Is negotiate interactions with the following
features:
- general, ie. ‘non-work-related’ communication with
someone who speaks/uses a language different from
your own
- when a speaker speaks a language or when a text is
written in a language different to the language
specified upon acceptance of the assignment
- how to negotiate requests with former, or unofficial
designations, eg. ‘Serbo-Croatian’, ‘Yugoslav’.
- questions from clients about one’s nationality
- questions from clients about one’s ‘native language’
- future developments in the similarity/divergence of
the three languages
8
1 accreditation – Bosnian
1 accreditation – Croatian
Inter-
Trans-
preters
lators
1
3
9
7
Total
30 with
4
one
16
accredi1 accreditation – Serbian
4
6
2 accreditations out of –
Bosnian and/or Croatian
5
3
and/or Serbian
3 accreditations – Bosnian,
Croatian and Serbian
Total
4
5
23
24
10
tation
8 with two
accreditations
9 with three
accreditations
47
9
Q1.
When you are not interpreting or translating, but
communicating with someone who speaks a
language different from your own, how do you
speak?
Do you change your speech or expect the other
person to change their speech in any way?
10
Yes. I adapt my speech/text to be
similar to that of the person that
I’m speaking to.
No. I don’t expect the other
person
to
adapt
his/her
speech/text.
Yes. I avoid words or forms that
are specific to my language only.
No.
I
don’t
adapt
my
speech/text.
Yes. I expect the other person to
also adapt his/her speech/text to
be closer to mine.
One
accredit.
Two
accredit.
Three
accredit.
Overall
total %
40
50
44
40
37
38
44
38
33
25
44
34
30
38
22
30
9
13
11
11
11
Q2.
You have been booked for a particular language but
after you commence interpreting for the client, you
realise that the client is speaking another language.
You have accepted a translation task for a text but
after you receive the text, you discover that the
language of the text is different from the one
agreed to, or the language into which it is supposed
to be translated is different to the one agreed to.
What do you do?
12
Check with the client
which language they
want to use / that they
know which language
the text is in.
Do nothing and
interpret / translate as
normal.
Check with the client
which language s/he
wants me to use
One
accredit.
Two
accredit.
Three
accredit.
Overall
total %
53
25
44
47
10
38
33
19
0
0
11
2
37
38
11
32 13
Other / No answer
Some interpreters accommodate to their clients:
I have lived in Serbia and later in Bosnia, so I don’t find it
difficult to change my language to my client’s language..
(INT. 23, Cro.+Bos.+Ser.)
Others state that there can be a two-way negotiation of
how to proceed:
I negotiate with the client on what the best way is for us to
be able to understand each other well. (INT. 22,
Cro.+Bos.+Ser.)
I explain that I don’t have accreditation for the language
that they’re speaking but if they accept that I speak my
language then we can continue. (INT. 7, Cro.)
14
If working for an agency I inform the agency that the language in
actual fact is not Croatian, if that is the case, and then leave it up
to them whether they want to proceed. Especially if the
document is older, the official language was then Serbo-Croatian
no matter which republic, and personally I have no problem with
translating that, except if the alphabet is Cyrillic which I find
harder and usually decline.
(TRA. 21, Bos.+Cro.)
I contact the agency that arranged the assignment.
(INT. 14, Ser.)
One translator mentions that only exceptional circumstances
justify him/her acceding to a client’s request:
If it is an emergency and it is a simple text, then yes, as I am
proficient in Serbian and the Cyrillic alphabet.
(TRA. 12. Cro.)
15
I am accredited as a professional translator
Croatian into English and I am reluctant to
translate anything not strictly Croatian if I have
to certify it, not because I believe I may not have
done a good job but because of the certification
- but have done so and have not had any
adverse repercussions, after consulting the
client/agency.
(TRA. 12. Cro.)
17
Q3.
An agency says that a client wants an interpreter for,
or translator to translate into/from ‘Serbo-Croatian’.
Would you accept this request?
Q4.
An agency says that a client wants an interpreter for,
or translator to translate into/from ‘BosnianCroatian-Serbian’. Would you accept this request?
Q5.
An agency says that a client wants an interpreter for,
or translator to translate into/from ‘Yugoslav’.
Would you accept this request?
18
‘Serbo-Croatian’
One
accredit.
Two
accredit.
Three
accredit.
Overall
average
total
40
50
78
49
17
25
22
19
43
25
0
32
Yes
Possibly
No
19
‘Bosnian-Croatian-Serbian’
Yes
Possibly
No
No
answer
One
accredit.
Two
accredit.
Three
accredit.
Overall
average
total
40
38
56
43
23
12
22
23
37
50
11
32
0
0
11
2
20
‘Yugoslav’
One
accredit.
Two
accredit.
Three
accredit.
Overall
average
total
33
18
22
29
23
38
50
31
44
44
28
40
Yes
Possibly
No
21
The written languages of Bosnia, Serbia and Croatia are
more different than the spoken word. Translating
contracts has to be taken very seriously, as one can not
"jump" from one language to other, as may be possible in
case of interpreting in between" these languages.
(TRA. 12, Cro.)
You only need to look at the community translations that
are produced by practitioners who believe that Bosnian,
Croatian and Serbian are all one language. There are
orthographical inconsistencies, inappropriate use of
register and an irritating habit of mixing up lots of
different forms together. They think it’s some kind of
hotch-potch. But what their work shows is that they have
often never learnt any one standard language properly.
(INT. 5, Cro.)
22
Q 6.
While interpreting or translating, has a client or
other party ever refused to work with you
because they believe that you are not a native
speaker of their language?
23
One
accredit.
Two
accredit.
Three
accredit.
Overall
total %
3
0
11
4
90
100
78
89
7
0
11
7
Yes
No
No
answer
24
No. I clearly state I am Croatian and speak only Croatian. (INT. 1,
Cro.)
One informant mentions that attributes other than proficiency can
be questioned:
No. They just sometimes questioned my ethnicity/religion. (INT. 23,
Cro.+Bos.+Ser.)
Two informants imply that some clients may register that they are
not native-speakers of one of their languages. This does not give rise
to problems:
No. We show flexibility and mutual respect. (INT. 17, Cro.+Bos.)
No. Most of them did not mind. I make sure first that it’s okay by
25
them. (INT 18, Cro.+Ser.)
I believe that the professional quality of an
interpreter overrides the client's unwillingness to
accept "the other language" interpreter. The client
may at first question the language of the interpreter
but accepts him or her during the professional
session if the job is done well.
(INT. 16, Bos.+Ser.)
And another informant reminds us of an old truth:
A good translator/interpreter is not necessarily a
native speaker! (Inf. 5, Cro.)
26
Q7.
While interpreting or translating, has a client or
other party ever refused to work with you
because they believe that you are of a different
ethnicity to their own?
27
One
accredit.
Two
accredit.
Three
accredit.
Overall
total %
3
12
11
6
87
76
56
79
10
12
33
15
Yes
No
No
answer
28
Once a client objected that I wasn't a real Bosnian but
accepted my service. (Inf. 21, Cro.+Bos.+Ser)
Yes, twice they questioned my ethnicity, but
eventually they agreed and it went fine. (Inf. 23,
Bos.+Cro.+Ser.)
One further informant reports instances of refusal:
Occasionally a Croat would refuse my services
because I’m not Croatian, even though I’ve lived in
Croatia. (Inf. 15, Cro.+Ser.)
29
No. I never hide my ethnicity. Clients never refuse me.
(INT. 17, Bos.+Cro.)
No. As they are happy with the quality of work, there is
no need to question the translator's origins. (TRA. 20,
Bos.+Cro.)
Yes. I’ve been asked many times, but out of curiosity, not
with hostility (TRA. 13, Bos.)
Usually in the health care area of interpreting for clients
from Serbia, Bosnia or Croatia, clients do not pose a great
problem with accepting/refusing interpreters not of
“their” “origin”. They are usually very accommodating.
Although, how they react to an interpreter not of their
“origin” is very individual. (INT. 19, Cro.+Ser. Original
punctuation.)
30
Q8.
Do you think that in the future, the differences
between Croatian and the closely-related
languages, Bosnian and Serbian will continue to
increase, decrease or stay as they are now?
31
One
Two
Three Overall
accredit. accredit. accredit. total %
Increase
Stay as they are
now
50
50
67
53
43
50
33
43
7
0
0
4
Decrease
32
Five groups of T&Is whose behaviour indicates the following:
1. T&Is who consider the three languages separate and distinct and
who do not accommodate to others’ languages because they view
communication between speakers of other languages to be nonfelicitous and/or problematic ethically. These practitioners generally
decline requests for assignments for other languages, accept them
only in exceptional circumstances, and work in their ‘own’ language
only. (19 informants)
2. T&Is who consider the three languages separate and distinct and
who accommodate to others’ varieties to facilitate communication
across the linguistic boundaries and who believe that this is a
felicitous strategy in interactions. T&I with one accreditation may
negotiate and accept assignments for other languages.
Interpreters with multiple accreditations accommodate to others’
languages as a matter of course. (17 informants)
33
3. T&I who consider the three languages separate and distinct and
who have an active and native command of at least two, if not all
three of the languages, therefore circumventing the need to
accommodate across linguistic boundaries because they have
multiple-group membership as co-native-speakers of all three
languages. These interpreters are likely to have multiple
accreditations and to work at the same level of expertise in each
language community. Clients’ questions of their ethnicity or
proficiency are responded to with information about their
professional and linguistic credentials. (7 informants)
4. T&Is who consider the three languages to be different but not
separate and distinct. They do not think that accommodation is
generally necessary due to the high level of mutual intelligibility.
These T&Is may have one accreditation but readily accept
assignments in other languages; these interpreters may have
multiple accreditations and advocate mutual non-accommodation
as a negotiated strategy when speaking with interlocutors not of
their own primary language. (3 informants)
34
5. T&Is who consider all three languages to be one
language with different varieties. Some
accommodation is desirable but complete
adoption of another’s variety is undesirable as it
amounts to unnecessary servility and negation of
one’s own ‘primary variety’. T&Is with one
accreditation only accept assignments for other
languages where they are able to negotiate
‘incomplete’ accommodation as an acceptable
strategy. Interpreters with multiple accreditations
may also seek to negotiate ‘incomplete’
accommodation with other interlocutors but risk
possible non-co-operation or refusal from some
clients. (2 informants)
35
Conclusions
• (Non-)Accommodation not an indicator of other forms
of behaviour.
• Different speech/text language requires clarification
• Where engagement occurs for unaccredited
language/s, this occurs on the basis of requests or
urgent circumstances, not as a habitual occurrence
• Ethical, then linguistic reasons, discourage T&Is from
looking for/taking on work in other langs.
• ‘Serbo-Croatian’ is accepted as a designation by some,
‘B-C-S’, and ‘Yugoslav’ less so.
• Non-native speaker proficiency and nationality are
rarely grounds for refusal from clients.
• Over 50% believe that Bosnian, Croatian and Serbian
will continue to develop separately from each other.
36
T&Is’ changing practices are a reflection of the socio-political and
(linguistic and legislative) regulatory changes in the source and/or
target culture(s) which they work in.
Thus, translation ‘norms’ can be conceptualised as regulatory
mechanisms that underpin not only textual, literary-theoretical or
operational-environmental features of translation but, as this paper
has shown, the concept of ‘translation policy’ can be extended to
apply to the designation and form of codes that practitioners work
with.
This extension of norms to refer also to regularities of a
reconfigured ‘language policy’ that translators adhere to is an
example of the dynamic, non-static nature of norms. Norms,
reflecting the circumstances which determine them, may be reshaped, over time and across different situations, according to
changing macro-socio-political and ethno-political features. 37