The DI Bibliography is a compilation of print and video material relevant to Deaf Interpreting. It is a living document and, as such, invites the contributions of titles of any materials addressing – or making mention of – Deaf Interpreters and Deaf Interpreting. Links to articles are made possible by the kind permission of the publishers.

A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z

Adam, R., Stone, C., Collins, S.D., & Metzger, M., Eds. (June 2014). Deaf Interpreters at Work: International Insights.. Washington, D.C.: Gallaudet University Press.

From Publisher’s Abstract: Now, for the first time, a collection featuring 17 widely respected scholars depicts the everyday practices of deaf interpreters in their respective nations. Deaf Interpreters at Work: International Insights presents the history of Deaf translators and interpreters and details the development of testing and accreditation to raise their professional profiles. Other chapters delineate the cognitive processes of Deaf interpreting; Deaf-Deaf interpreter teams; Deaf and hearing team preparation; the use of Tactile American Sign Language by those interpreting for the Deaf-Blind community; and conference interpreting and interpreting teams. This is the 11th Volume in the Studies in Interpretation series. Visit:
Bentley-Sassaman, Jessica (2010). Experiences and training needs of Deaf and hearing interpreter teams. Doctoral Dissertation, Walden University, December 2010.

Deaf-hearing interpreter teams are new to the field of interpreting, and little research exists as to the issues that arise for such teams. The purposes of this qualitative phenomenological study were 3-fold and included (a) exploring the experiences of Deaf interpreters and the hearing interpreters with whom they work, (b) understanding whether Deaf and hearing interpreters felt satisfied with the training they received in regard to working as a team, and (c) discovering gaps that could be addressed through training that would lead to the establishment of more qualified teams. Findings included the need for curriculum development for Deaf interpreters and Deaf-hearing interpreter teams, understanding the roles of the team members, and for training on how to work effectively as a team. Salient themes included ethics, the effectiveness of the interpretation, and mentoring. This study contributed to positive social change by increasing the understanding of Deaf-hearing interpreter team members’ needs. Enhanced preparation and training opportunities will lead to improved interpretations and the effective services to clients of these teams.
Bienvenu, M., & B. Colonomos (1992). Relay interpreting in the 90’s. In L. Swabey (Ed.), The Challenge of the 90’s: New Standards in Interpreter Education, Proceedings of the Eighth National Convention of the Conference of Interpreter Trainers (pp. 69-80). United States: Conference of Interpreter Trainers.

Bienvenu and Colonomos provide a broad overview of relay (Deaf) interpreting, including the process and skills needed to be a relay interpreter, and the skills needed to effectively teach relay interpreters. This article also includes discussion of ethical and legal considerations concerning relay interpreters, as well as discussion of the business of relay interpreting.
Boudreault, P. (2005). Deaf interpreters. In T. Janzen (Ed.) Topics in Signed Language Interpreting: Theory and Practice (pp. 323-355). Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Volume may be purchased at

Boudreault writes from the perspective of an experienced Deaf interpreter and researcher with fluency in LSQ, ASL, French, and English. An overview of the work of Deaf interpreters, his chapter describes a number of roles and functions served by Deaf interpreters, drawing a distinction between Deaf interpreting work between two distinct languages (e.g. LSQ and ASL) and within one language (i.e. mirroring, facilitating, and using International Sign Language), and providing illustrations of seating arrangements for various functions and settings. The chapter also raises ethical concerns faced by Deaf interpreters as they reconcile professional codes of conduct with their own place in the Deaf community. Finally, Boudreault speaks to the need for professional training for Deaf interpreters that appropriately addresses the content areas Deaf interpreters and hearing interpreters might study together and those that are unique to Deaf interpreting work demands.
Brandwein, D.R. (2005). CDI training focus of Illinois RID mentoring grant. RID Views, 22 (7), 7.

Brandwein provides a summary of an experimental program to train Deaf interpreters that was administered by the Illinois chapter of RID. This program, funded by the National RID, included two information sessions that allowed people to learn about the profession of deaf interpreters, a three-day teaching workshop, a four-week test preparation course and monthly study groups.
Bronk, Alisha. (2009). Interpreters: Gatekeepers for the deaf interpreter community. RID Views. 26 (2), 27-28.

Inspired by her experiences with the RID Deaf Members in Leadership Committee, the author shares about her efforts as a Deaf interpreter to collaborate with hearing colleagues. She discusses the benefits of DI/HI team work for interpreters and consumers and calls for all interpreters to work together as allies.
Brück, P. & Schaumberger, E. (2014). Deaf interpreters in Europe: a glimpse into the cradle of an emerging profession. In The Interpreters’ Newsletter, 19, pp. 87-109.

This paper presents the results of a research study exploring the work context and professional experiences of 11 Deaf interpreters based in Europe. Findings indicate that Deaf interpreters are not afforded the same education opportunities or work experiences as hearing sign language interpreters in several European nations. Factors required for successful cooperation in Deaf/hearing interpreting teams are addressed in this study including increased awareness among hearing interpreters regarding the work and skill of Deaf interpreters.
No video available.
Burns, T. J. (1999). Who needs a Deaf interpreter? I do! RID Views. 16 (10), 7.

Burns provides an overview of Deaf/Hearing team interpreting, delineating the criteria that make up a successful interaction, as well as delineating the benefits to everyone involved in the interaction.

Capps Dey, L. (2009). The Role of Deaf Interpreters: Investigating What Deaf Interpreters Experienced. RID Views, 26 (1), 43.

The author provides a summary of research conducted on the experiences of Deaf interpreters, focusing on their work teaming with hearing interpreters.
Clark, T.S. (2012). The 2008 RID research grant: findings reported. In RID VIEWS, Winter, 2012.

A RID Research Grant was awarded in 2008 to the Ventura County Superior Court, CA, for an observational study of Deaf Interpreter/Hearing Interpreter (DI/HI) teams working in courtroom proceedings. This article provides highlights of key findings. The researchers submitted a complete report to RID for the archives.
 No video available.
Cerney, B. (2004). Relayed interpretation from English to American Sign Language via a hearing and a deaf interpreter. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Union Graduate Institute.

Cerney reports on his research into relayed interpretations comparing several linguistic features (message equivalence, length of processing time, syntax and lexical choices, and hand dominance) that differed between the hearing and deaf interpreters’ signed productions. He also analyzed the private communicative strategies that occurred between the hearing and Deaf interpreters during the relay process.
Cobb, M. & Clark, T. (2009). RID research grant update. RID VIEWS, 26 (1), 40.

The article provides an update on a 2007-2008 RID Research Grant awarded to the Superior Court of California, Ventura County to conduct an investigation titled “An Observational Study of the Current Practices of Deaf Interpreters in Five Courtroom Locations Across the United States.” The goal of the project is to document the interpreting and communication strategies employed by Deaf/Hearing interpreting teams working in the court setting. Observations are to be conducted in 2009.
Cogen, C., E. Forestal, R. Hills, & B. Hollrah (Writers/directors). (2006).
Deaf Interpreting: Team Strategies [DVD]. Washington, D.C.: Gallaudet University Academic Technology TV & Media Production Services, Graduate School and Professional Programs.

Narrated by Deaf Interpreter and educator Eileen Forestal, this production demonstrates the dynamics between a Deaf interpreter and an ASL-English interpreter working as a team. The team is shown interacting in pre-conference discussion, interpreting a meeting between a school admissions counselor and a Deaf Russian gentleman who is not yet fluent in ASL, and debriefing in a post-conference session. The 31 minute DVD was a conjoint project of three Regional Interpreter Education Projects funded by the U.S. Department of Education Rehabilitation Services Administration from 2000-2005. Closed captioned. View here.
Cokely, D. (2005). Shifting positionality: A critical examination of the turning point in the relationship of interpreters and the deaf community. In Mark Marschark, Rico Peterson, & Elizabeth A. Winston (Eds.), Sign Language Interpreting and Interpreter Education: Directions for Research and Practice (pp. 3-28). New York: Oxford University Press.

Cokely makes brief mention in this chapter of a task analysis undertaken with a group of Deaf interpreters in which the participants stated that platform work for Deaf interpreters is still rare, and that the “regular” work occurs when there is a perceived “language problem.”
Cokely, D. and Winston, E. (2008). Phase I Deaf Consumer Needs Assessment Final Report. National Consortium of Interpreter Education Centers.

The National Consortium of Interpreter Education Centers is charged by the U.S. Department of Education Rehabilitation Services Administration with the task of conducting needs assessments to inform interpreting education priorities. This document reports on the first phase of consumer needs assessment conducted via an online survey in collaboration with the National Association of the Deaf. Included among the findings are respondents’ views on Deaf Interpreting.
Cokely, D. and Winston, E. (2009). Phase II Deaf Consumer Needs Assessment Final Report. National Consortium of Interpreter Education Centers.

The National Consortium of Interpreter Education Centers is charged by the U.S. Department of Education Rehabilitation Services Administration with the task of conducting needs assessments to inform interpreting education priorities. This document reports on the second phase of consumer needs assessment conducted through face-to-face interviews with consumers in ASL. Included among the findings are respondents’ views on Deaf Interpreting.
Cokely, D. and Winston, E. (2009). Comparison Report: Phase I & II Deaf Consumer Needs Assessment. National Consortium of Interpreter Education Centers.

The National Consortium of Interpreter Education Centers is charged by the U.S. Department of Education Rehabilitation Services Administration with the task of conducting needs assessments to inform interpreting education priorities. This document compares findings of the group of online respondents with those of the group that was interviewed in ASL. Use of Deaf Interpreters by respondents in the two consumer groups is discussed.
Collins, S. and H. Roth. (1992). Deaf Interpreters, TBC News, 49, 1-2.

Collins and Roth provide a brief overview of deaf interpreters, including how and where DIs work.

Egnatovitch, R. (1999). Certified Deaf Interpreter WHY. RID Views, 16 (10), pp. 1, 6.

Egantovitch’s article outlines the importance and benefits of working with a Deaf interpreter and suggests strategies for Deaf/Hearing interpreting teams. He dispels several myths often associated with working with a Deaf interpreter and encourages Hearing interpreters to be open to this kind of team situation.

Forestal, E. (2005). The emerging professionals: Deaf interpreters and their views and experiences on training. In Mark Marschark, Rico Peterson, & Elizabeth A. Winston (Eds.), Sign Language Interpreting and Interpreter Education: Directions for Research and Practice (pp. 235-258). New York: Oxford University Press.

The author reports findings from a series of interviews conducted with Deaf interpreters focused on the interviewees’ background, certification, length and type of interpreting work experience and their perspectives on past and needed training, qualifications, and competencies of Deaf interpreters.
Forestal, E.M. (2011). Deaf interpreters: exploring their processes of interpreting. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Capella University.

The thought processes of Deaf interpreters served as the research focus for this study. This longitudinal qualitative study was designed to assess the thought processes, using a three-phase research approach – a preliminary interview, Think Aloud Protocol, and a retro-debriefing interview to explore the strategies and resources for effective interpretation. The Think Aloud Protocol was conducted with a given task in which the participants had to think aloud as they worked through the task. The preliminary interview gathered background information and experiences as interpreters and the retro-debriefing interview served a technique of collecting further thoughts after the Think Aloud Protocol activity and as a closure for the three-phase procedure. The entire study was videotaped and then translated from American Sign Language to English. A triangulation of the study explored the depths of the thought processes of six Deaf participants during the three-phase activity. Findings indicated results on best practices for strategies and resources for effective interpretation by Deaf interpreters.
Frei, R. (2014). Pain assessment very difficult in deaf patients. In PainMedicineNews, August 2014, Vol. 12(8). McMahon Publishing.

This article in Pain Medicine News reports on the content of a panel discussion held at the Canadian Pain Society 2014 annual meeting. It discusses issues in communicating pain descriptors during interpreted interactions with medical professionals. Deaf interpreters are mentioned in their role as intermediaries between a Deaf person and an ASL interpreter.

Frishberg, N. (1990). Introduction to interpreting, 2nd ed. (pp. 22, 97, 114, 149ff., 153ff., 160-7, 168ff.) Silver Spring, MD: RID Publications.

The author describes Deaf interpreters’ (RSC) roles working with individuals who are deafblind and individuals who have minimal language skills in a variety of settings.

Gonzales, L. M. (2005). Deaf interpreters become pivotal part of bridging cultures conference. RID Views, 24 (8), 24.

Gonzales provides an overview of her experience at the 2005 RID conference in San Antonio, TX, reviewing several sessions she attended, summarizing several topics of discussion pertinent to Deaf interpreters, and suggesting topics for future DI training. Included, as well, is information regarding the re-activated Deaf Caucus.
Guidelines for proceedings that involve deaf persons who do not communicate competently in American Sign Language. Language Services Section, Special Programs Unit, Programs and Procedures Division, Office of Trial Court Services, Administrative Office of the Courts, Trenton, NJ. May 2000, Revised April 2004.

The New Jersey Judiciary developed guidelines to assist judges, lawyers, and others involved in the legal system to (1) understand the unique communication needs of Deaf people who use a sign language other than ASL and (2) provide guidance for improving successful accommodations for such persons.

Hollrah, B. (2012). Deaf Interpreting: Team Strategies for Interpreting in a Mental Health Setting [DVD]. Washington, D.C.: Gallaudet University Regional Interpreter Education Center.

The DVD material includes unrehearsed interpreted situations and discussions that demonstrate the work of a deaf/hearing interpreting team. The material highlights the work of the deaf/hearing interpreting team in a mental health setting, and includes pre-conference discussions and post-conference discussions between the deaf/hearing interpreting team. Samples are presented of how the deaf/hearing interpreting team conducts pre-conference meetings with both the counselor and with the client separately before the mental health session begins. Also presented is the mental health session between the counselor and client working with the deaf/hearing interpreting team. View here.
Hollrah, B. (2012). Examples of a Deaf Interpreter’s Work [DVD]. Washington, D.C.: Gallaudet University Regional Interpreter Education Center.

This production includes unrehearsed interpreted situations and discussions demonstrating examples of a deaf interpreter’s work, including the work of a deaf/hearing interpreting team. The material includes an introduction to deaf interpreting and deaf/hearing interpreting team work, an interview with the deaf and hearing interpreter team, and samples of various interpretation scenarios.
View here.

Johnston, E. (2005). The field of certified deaf interpreting. CIT News, 25 (2) 8-9.

The author presents the idea that the term Deaf interpreter is a misnomer which leads to confusion both in and out of the interpreting profession, recommending instead that they be called transliterators, ASL transliterators. Discussed, as well, are the issues surrounding the role of Deaf interpreters, likening their tasks to those of a mediator (as described in France), and surrounding certification of Deaf interpreters. The author fully supports the use of Deaf interpreters and would like to see the confusion lessened.
Judicial Council of California Administrative Office of the Courts (2010). Recommended guidelines for the use of Deaf intermediary interpreters. Judicial Council of California/Administrative Office of the Courts, San Francisco, CA.

This document promulgates California state guidelines concerning the utilization of Deaf interpreters including situations in which a Deaf interpreter is needed, qualifications and hiring, and advanced planning.
Langholtz, D. (2004). Deaf interpreters today: a growing profession. WFD News, 17 (1), 17.

The author seeks to bring information about Deaf Interpreting to potential DIs, fellow interpreters, Deaf and hearing consumers. He provides a brief history and overview of DI practice and addresses issues of resistance to or acceptance of Deaf Interpreters among hearing interpreters and the Deaf community. Having more proficient DIs will enhance high standards of the interpreting profession.

Mathers, C.M. (2009). The Deaf interpreter in court: An accommodation that is more than reasonable. National Consortium of Interpreter Education Centers.

The author provides an in-depth legal analysis of case law and state statute demonstrating the critical role of the Deaf Interpreters in court settings.
Mathers, C.M. (2009). Modifying instruction in the deaf interpreting model. In J. Napier (Ed.), The International Journal of Interpreting, 1, 68-76.

This article takes the position that a Deaf interpreter can be considered a reasonable accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. The article presents social science research indicating that far more Deaf individuals and a greater range of settings might benefit from the provision of a Deaf interpreter than may have been previously thought. Because the potential need would far outstrip the supply of qualified interpreters, the article sets forth a number of suggestions that Interpreter Preparation Programs can draw upon to modify their curriculum to include Deaf students. Programs are encouraged to look to the language and structure of legal interpreting statutes, case law interpreting those statutes, and common legal discussions of reasonable accommodations. The language may be incorporated into the curriculum to prepare interpreters, both Deaf and non-deaf, to justify, to advocate and to explain the need for a full team of Deaf and non-deaf interpreters. The article concludes with a summary of several practical suggestions that programs can include to ensure that students are given the effective tools to prepare Deaf interpreters for a career in interpretation.
McDermid, C. (2010). Culture brokers, advocates, or conduits: Pedagogical considerations for Deaf interpreter education. International Journal of Interpreter Education, 2, 76-101.

A qualitative review of interpreter preparation programs and ASL pre-interpreter programs in Canada was conducted involving 18 culturally Deaf instructors. Freire’s (2004) model of education as dialogic served as the framework for the data analysis process. Some of the major categories identified included the competencies required of a DI, the benefits of enrolling Deaf students, the advantages of having a Deaf interpreter, issues surrounding education and pedagogy, and finally the DI role. Parallels were drawn between the experiences of a Deaf interpreter and interpreters from minority-spoken languages as conduits, advocates or culture brokers. Deaf interpreters were advised to avoid uncritically adopting a conduit role due to a process of massification (Freire, 2004). Instead and based on context, acting as a culture broker or advocate may be warranted. Where enrolled, Deaf students experience enhanced praxis (agency) (Freire, 2004) as did the Deaf faculty.
Merkin, L. (2004). Deaf Members in Leadership (DML): Representing the Deaf perspective in RID. RID Views, 21 (7), 6.

The author provides an overview of the Deaf Members in Leadership (DML) Committee of the RID, including statements about the Committee’s purpose and objectives, and how the Committee works with various branches of RID. Included are examples of how the DML Committee has been the catalyst for change within RID.
Merkin, L. (2009). Bringing the “deaf heart” to RID. RID Views, 26 (2), 28.

RID’s Deaf Members in Leadership Committee seeks collaborative ways to reintroduce “Deaf Heart” concepts of ASL, visual accessibility, collectivism, culture, history, and Deaf and CODA input into the organization’s policies and initiatives.
Moose, C. (2008). RID and NAD working together: special president’s report. RID VIEWS, Fall 2008, 10-13.

RID President Cheryl Moose provides the history of the Certified Deaf Interpreter test and speaks to RID’s commitment to address the high failure rate among CDI test takers.
Napier, J., R. McKee, & D. Goswell (2006). Sign Language Interpreting: Theory and practice in Australia and New Zealand (pp.144-147). Sydney, NSW: The Federation Press.

In the greater context of their book about interpreting, the authors provide an overview of the role and function of Deaf interpreters, and how Deaf and hearing interpreters work as a team. They also discuss how the use of a Deaf interpreter can be beneficial when working with clients who have limited language skills due to a variety of reasons.

National Consortium of Interpreter Education Centers. (2011). Deaf interpreters at work: mock trial.

Created through a collaboration of the NCIEC Deaf Interpreter and Legal Interpreting work teams, this DVD provides a demonstration of collaborated interpretation involving a two certified interpreters, one who is Deaf and one who is not, working in a (mock) court proceeding. While not intended as a model interpretation, practicing and aspiring interpreters will find much to consider, analyze, and discuss in this demonstration, an interview with the interpreters, and discussion questions provided. To view the video content online, click here.
National Consortium of Interpreter Education Centers. (2013). Interpreting in Spanish-influenced settings: video vignettes of working trilingual interpreters (ASL/Spanish/English). National Consortium of Interpreter Education Centers.

This DVD set depicts trilingual interpreters at work in social services, an adult classroom, VRS, and a parent-teacher conference. The vignette titled “Adult Classroom” (“Clase de adultos”) provides a demonstration of a Deaf interpreter at work. (Total time: 2-hour, 42-minute program divided over two DVDs). To view the video content online, click here.


National Consortium of Interpreter Education Centers. (2012). Interpreting in vocational rehabilitation settings DVD series 6-pack. National Consortium of Interpreter Education Centers.

A set of six DVDs capturing authentic scenarios that occur within the context of Vocational Rehabilitation settings. The six titles include “Stories from Life Experiences,” “Deaf Professionals in Action,” “A Vocational Evaluation,” “Setting a Vocational Goal,” “A VR Staff Meeting” and “Support in the Job Search.” Each DVD has between 20-60 minutes of text involving VR Deaf, DeafBlind and hard of hearing consumers, Deaf Professionals working in the VR context, and other VR professionals. Several examples of Deaf interpreters at work are included. The texts can be viewed with or without an interpreter and with or without captions. To view the video content online, click here.
National Consortium of Interpreter Education Centers, Beldon, Jr., J., Boudreault, P., Cogen, C., et. al. (2008). Laying the foundation for Deaf Interpreter education: Deaf Interpreting as a career choice within the realm of the deaf studies curriculum. In Deaf Studies! Today 2008 Conference Proceedings (in preparation).

The paper recapitulates the Deaf Studies! Today 2008 Conference presentation by NCIEC Deaf Interpreting Work Team members Jimmy Beldon and Patrick Boudreault. Included are select NCIEC National Deaf Interpreter Survey findings, a review of the team’s other work to date, and discussion of Deaf Studies program as a foundation for training as a Deaf Interpreter.
NCIEC Deaf Interpreter Work Team. (2009). Analysis of Deaf Interpreter focus group discussions conducted April-July 2007. National Consortium of Interpreter Education Centers.

This report presents the findings of six focus groups conducted by the NCIEC Deaf Interpreter Work Team to gather the perspectives of certified and non-certified working Deaf Interpreters from across the United States on current issues and future directions in the field of Deaf Interpreting. Several themes emerged from the analysis of the discussions: Formative Experiences of Deaf Interpreters, Professional Standards and Expectations, Formal Preparation of Deaf Interpreters, and Employment Issues. The report synthesizes the focus group discussions around these themes and recommends areas for further study and future action.
NCIEC Deaf Interpreter Work Team (2009). Findings of Deaf Interpreter educator focus groups conducted December 2007. National Consortium of Interpreter Education Centers.

This report contains the findings of a research project undertaken by the National Consortium of Interpreter Education Centers (NCIEC) Deaf Interpreter Work Team in December 2007. The scope of the project was to invite a group of Deaf Interpreter Educators to respond to an on-line survey and to participate in a focus group about some of the issues related to Deaf Interpreting. In total, twelve Deaf interpreting educators participated in the process. The research is but one of the many activities undertaken by the Deaf Interpreter Initiative of the NCIEC to engage processes that would provide current evidence about Deaf interpreting practice in the United States.
NCIEC Deaf Interpreter Work Team (2009). Findings of a national survey of Deaf Interpreters conducted spring 2007. National Consortium of Interpreter Education Centers.

An analysis of data collected through an online national survey of certified and non-certified Deaf Interpreters during the spring of 2007. The report offers an analysis of demographics, work environments, consumers, language demands, and professional development needs and aspirations. A profile of the Deaf Interpreter is offered based on the findings and recommendations are made for further study and action.
NCIEC Deaf Interpreter Work Team (2010). Toward Effective Practice: Competencies of the Deaf Interpreter. National Consortium of Interpreter Education Centers.

This document delineates the competencies required of the Deaf Interpreter based upon studies conducted by the National Consortium of Interpreter Education Centers (NCIEC). The delineation refers broadly to generic and specialty area competencies required of all interpreters, and then delves more deeply into the unique aptitudes, formative experiences, and competencies that differentiate Deaf Interpreters from their hearing counterparts.
NCIEC DI Work-Team. (2009). NCIEC Deaf Interpreting work-team to present at the RID Deaf caucus meeting. RID VIEWS, 26 (3), 43.

Article gives notice of an upcoming presentation by the NCIEC DI Work-Team on findings of the team’s focus group and survey studies, progress of the newly established CDI Task Force, and the launch of a new website, Deaf Interpreting Institute.
NCIEC DI Work-Team (2009). News from the NCIEC DI Interpreting Work Team: Deaf Interpreting Institute, Proposed Domains and Competencies and CDI Task Force. RID VIEWS, 26 (4), 43.

NCIEC Deaf Interpreting Work Team talks about the Deaf Interpreting Institute, proposed domains and competencies and the contributions of the CDI Task Force.
NCIEC Legal Interpreting Workgroup. (2009). State of our art: a discussion of changing trends in the field of legal interpreting. In Handouts Book: 21st National Conference of Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf, Philadelphia, PA. Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf, Inc.

Published handout from a panel discussion presented at the 2009 RID Biennial Conference. Provides summary of four research-based publications of the National Consortium of Interpreter Education Centers work team on legal interpreting: Observational Tool for Deaf-Hearing Interpreting Teams; the Deaf Interpreter in Court: An Accommodation that is More than Reasonable; Best Practices: American Sign Language and English Interpreting within Court and Legal Settings; and Competencies of Interpreters working in Court and Legal Settings: Distinguishing Generalist versus Specialist Practice.

Peterson, D. (2004). Who monitors Deaf interpreters? RID VIEWS, 21 (10), 17.

The author raises several questions regarding Deaf interpreters, particularly regarding who monitors Deaf interpreters to ensure that they uphold and maintain high standards, both professionally and personally.
Policy and procedure manual for requesting agencies. Northeast Deaf and Hard of Hearing Services, Communication Access Services, Concord, NH. February, 2005.

This documents provides an example of established policy mandating the use of Deaf interpreters in particular settings.
Potterveld, T. (2008). Deaf suspects and constitutional rights. RID VIEWS, Fall 2008, 16-18.

The article focuses on a particular court case as a vehicle to explore issues of interpretation in law enforcement settings. It looks at issues surrounding communication of the Miranda warning, qualifications of interpreters, determining when a CDI is required, interpreter roles and accountability, and the benefits of preserving a visual record of police, deaf suspect, and interpreter interactions.

Quigley, S. P., & J. P. Youngs (1965). Interpreting for Deaf People (pp. 41). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.

This work contains a reference to Deaf individuals serving in the intermediary interpreting role.

Reed, S. (2003). Development of training for Deaf Interpreters to work with deaf visually impaired people. In 13th DbI World Conference on Deafblindness Conference Proceedings, August 5-10, 2003, Mississauga, Ontario, Canada. Canadian Deafblind and Rubella Association: 2003, 7.

This workshop presentation given at the 13th DbI World Conference on Deaf-Blindness described the use of Deaf interpreters to work with individuals who are Deaf-Blind.
Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf Professional Standards Committee. (1997). Standard practice paper: Use of a Certified Deaf Interpreter. Retrieved August 26, 2014.

This position paper provides an overview of the role and responsibilities of certified Deaf interpreters.
Reinhardt, L. R. (2015). Deaf-Hearing Interpreter Teams: Navigating Trust in Shared Space. Master’s Theses. Paper 21.

This mixed-method study explored how role function inequalities among Deaf and hearing interpreters contribute to trust issues within Deaf-hearing interpreter teams. Survey data indicated intra-team trust issues appear in three domain areas: preparation, linguistic mediation, and imbalances in role/function duty distribution. Castelfranchi and Falcone’s (2010) socio-cognitive trust theory provides a lens through which the respondents’ experiences are better understood. Trust theory is a process of evaluation and task delegation to team members who support a shared goal. When the delegation process is successfully carried out, Deaf-hearing interpreter teams function in accord to Hoza’s (2010) construct of team interdependency establishing trusting, effective partnerships where individual roles and functions are equally understood and valued.
No video available.
Ressler, C. (1999). A comparative analysis of a direct interpretation and an intermediary interpretation in American Sign Language. In D. Watson (Ed.). Journal of Interpretation. Silver Spring, MD: RID Publications.

The author discusses her research examining the difference between direct interpretation, where the hearing interpreter was working directly from the source into the target language, and intermediary interpretation, where the source message was “fed” to a deaf interpreter. Discussion focuses on the differences in eye-gaze, pausing, head nodding, the number of signs per minute, usage of fingerspelling versus signs, and in how clarifications were made.

Sandefur, R. (1994). Team interpreting: Deaf and hearing interpreters as allies. RID Views, 11 (8), pp. 1, 15.

This short article talks about the importance of hearing and Deaf interpreters working together as a team, highlights the benefits of such teams, with emphasis on trust and respect within these teams. The author provides an overview of the use of Deaf interpreters during the 1993 NAD conference in Knoxville, TN, during which Deaf interpreters served as monitors to ensure accurate representation of the proceedings.
Shepard-Kegl, J., F. McKinley, & D. Reynold. (2005). The role of Deaf interpreters: Lessons from the past and a vision for the future. Interpres, 18 (4), 16-18.

The authors provide an overview of the history of deaf interpreting, including factors that served as catalyst for change in the perception and work of Deaf interpreters. Additional information is provided on the interpreting program at the University of Southern Maine which provides full integration of deaf students in the program.
Smith, C. & Dicus, D. (2015). A preliminary study on interpreting for emergent signers. In Sign Language Studies, 15 (2) Winter. Pp. 202-224.

Sign language interpreters work with a variety of consumer populations throughout their careers. One such population, referred to as emergent signers, consists of consumers who are in the process of learning American Sign Language, and who rely on interpreters during their language acquisition period. A gap in the research is revealed when considering the interaction between this growing population and the interpreting field. The present study thus attempts to provide a preliminary examination of the topic by reporting on the findings of a survey conducted with interpreters affiliated with Gallaudet Interpreting Service at Gallaudet University. Results show that interpreters are working on a regular basis with this population that the work is different from traditional interpreting work with fluent signers, and that interpreters have differing opinions on how the work should be approached. Implications for future areas of study and the overwhelming need for research on this subject are also discussed.
No video available.
Smith, T. (2002). Guidelines: Practical Tips for Working and Socializing with Deaf-Blind People (pp. 95, 148, 159, 161, 169, 199, 239, 240, 244, 245, 250, 259). Burtonsville, MD: Sign Media Inc.

The author recognizes the effectiveness of Deaf individuals in interpreting roles within the Deafblind community.
Solow, S.N. (1988). Interpreting for minimally linguistically competent individuals. The Court Manager, 3 (2), 18-21.

This article provides an overview of working with consumers who have limited ASL skills due to a variety of reason, particularly when working in legal settings. When working with such consumers, it is often beneficial to employ the services of a Deaf interpreter to work as a team with the hearing interpreter. Discussed, as well, is how the use of a Deaf interpreter in legal settings can be beneficial to all participants.
Solow, S.N. (2000). Sign Language Interpreting: A Basic Resource Book (Revised ed.) (p. 99). Burtonsville, MD: Linstok Press.

The author makes reference to the role of Deaf interpreters in the Deafblind community.
Stewart, K., Witter-Merithew, A., Cobb, M. (2009). Best Practices: American Sign Language and English Interpreting within Court and Legal Settings (pp. 10, 19-21, 27-28, 33, 34, 35, 37). National Consortium of Interpreter Education Centers.

Researched and written by members of the Legal Interpreting work team of the National Consortium of Interpreter Education Centers, this paper elucidates best practices – i.e. “the most efficient (least amount of effort) and effective (best results)” – for interpreting in legal proceedings. Many passages advocate the use of Deaf Interpreters as a best practice.
Stone, C. (2007). Deaf translators/interpreters’ rendering processes: the translation of oral languages. In Turner, G. (Ed.) Sign language translator and interpreter. Manchester, England: St. Jerome Publishing. 1(1), 53-72.

Publisher’s abstract: The rendering of English to BSL within television settings provides an opportunity to identify ways in which written languages are translated into oral languages (Ong 1982, Furniss 2004). This research explores the process that Deaf and hearing translators/ interpreters (T/Is) follow when rendering English television broadcast news into British Sign Language (BSL). The distribution of blinks is compared in Deaf and hearing translators/interpreters to illuminate the role of preparation and rehearsal. Think-aloud-protocols are used to explore whether differences between the two groups point to a contrast between translation and interpretation processes. The exploration of similarities and differences between Deaf and hearing T/Is enables the identification of a Deaf translation norm, which in turn can provide guidance to hearing T/Is in approaches to translation tasks. To purchase the article, visit:
Stone, C. (2009). Toward a Deaf Translation Norm. Washington, D.C.: Gallaudet University Press.

From Publisher’s Abstract: As access for deaf people grows around the world, a new profession has begun to emerge as well, that of Deaf translators and interpreters (T/Is). In his new study Toward a Deaf Translation Norm, Christopher Stone explores this innovation, including its antecedents and how it is manifested in public places. Most importantly, Stone investigates whether or not a Deaf translation norm has evolved as increasing numbers of Deaf T/Is work in the mainstream translating for websites, public services, government literature, and television media. For his study, the sixth volume in the Studies in Interpretation series, Stone concentrated his research in the United Kingdom. Visit:

Tuck, B. M. (2010). Preserving facts, form, and function when a deaf witness with minimal language skills testifies in court. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 158 (3), 905-956.

Many courts lack the ability to fully accommodate deaf witnesses who are semi-lingual, non-lingual, or otherwise possess minimal language skills. Courtroom participants use language in precise ways to exert control and power. Monitor interpreters, deaf interpreters, and other best practices do not always protect against inadvertent adjustments in facts, form, or function. The contemporaneous objection requirement bars parties from fully analyzing complex linguistic interactions before they enter the court?s official record. As an alternative, parties can borrow procedural tools from the document translation evidentiary model. Parties can apply additional resources to particular contested portions of the interpretation, and the court and jury can have additional information to help them settle the dispute.

Wilcox, P. (1995). Dual interpretation and discourse effectiveness in legal settings. In Graham Turner & Judy Kegl (Eds.), Special Issue: The Bilingual/Bimodal Courtroom. Journal of Interpretation, 7 (1). 89-98.

The author looks at the history of linguistic and cultural oppression within the court system, its impact on Deaf people, and the role interpreters have played in this setting. Also provided is an overview of the concept and development of Deaf interpreters and how various states and agencies have provided advocacy for interpreters and for Deaf clients who are involved in legal settings.
Williamson, A. (2015). Heritage learner to professional interpreter: Who are deaf-parented interpreters and how do they achieve professional status? Master’s thesis. Paper 22.

Despite the native bilingual status and language and cultural brokering experiences deaf-parented interpreters (deaf and hearing) bring to the classroom and the profession of ASL/ English interpreting, deaf-parented interpreters say that educational opportunities do not account for their specific needs and skill-set. The relationship between demographic characteristics of deaf and hearing ASL/English interpreters who have one or more deaf parent, including their linguistic environments during formative years, routes of induction into the interpretation profession, and their professional status as an interpreter is examined in this mixed-methods exploratory study. This study of 751 deaf-parented interpreters’ survey responses finds that they are achieving national credentials and education and training as an interpreter through some coursework, formal and informal mentorships, and workshops. Degree and certification requirements along with state licensure before working as an interpreter may serve as a barrier to deaf-parented interpreters who, for the most part, have been entering the field through informal induction practices within the deaf community.
No video available.
Witter-Merithew, A. (2010). Conceptualizing a framework for specialization in ASL-English interpreting: a report of project findings and recommendations. Mid-America Regional Interpreter Education Center (MARIE).

Specialization exists in the field of interpreting and interpreter education through both de facto and de jure processes. The de facto status exists because many practitioners self-designate as having specialized competence for working 1) in a particular setting—such as legal or healthcare, 2) with certain populations—such as Deaf-Blind individuals, or 3) within unique functions—such as Deaf Interpreters or interpreting via technology. Evidence of de jure processes includes advanced educational programming for interpreters, as well as standardized testing and certification procedures for designated specialty areas. There are pros and cons to both approaches. This report offers a conceptual framework for specialization that includes a discussion of the downside to specialization that occurs without established standards, assumptions about specialization, guiding principles to the development of specialization, terms and definitions, and case studies that provide illustration of successful and less-than-successful efforts to create specialization.
Witter-Merithew, A. & Mathers, C. (2014). Highly effective court interpreting teams in action . Denver: University of Northern Colorado-Mid-America Regional Interpreter Education Center.

This workbook and the associated videos were developed as a part of the UNC-MARIE Center’s work as a center of excellence in legal interpreting. The structure and organization of the workbook and materials are structured to promote collegial discussion about interpreting performance for the purpose of increasing practitioner understanding of 1) the complexities of the interpreting process, 2) techniques and strategies used by experienced legal interpreters in managing the demands of the interpreting process, and 3) the contribution of Certified Deaf Interpreters to effective delivery of interpreting services in legal settings. The series contains 6 videos taken from legal and courtroom settings. One focuses on a meeting between a Deaf child and a guardian ad litem; two focus on Deaf witness testimony; two focus on expert witness testimony; and one is designed for interpreting practice. To view the videos and workbook online, click here.


Contributors: Brittany Allen, Patrick Boudreault, Cathy Cogen, Dennis Cokely, Diana Doucette, Patty Farlow, Eileen Forestal, Lillian M. Garcia, Priscilla Moyers, Andy Prior, Julie Simon, Sharon Neumann Solow, Brandon M. Tuck, Anna Witter-Merithew.