Phillip Floyd

INTR 455

Christa Gunderson and Carmen Steen

5/15/24

“When you do things right, people won't be sure that you have done anything at all,”

(“Godfellas”). Interpreter’s live by the motto, “do no harm,” in regards to how they approach

their field of work. While interpreter’s look to the Code of Professional Conduct to help manage

difficult situations, “do no harm” is the interpreter’s ultimate guiding principle. But what does

“do no harm” mean?

The nature of the interpreting profession has presented itself as such consistently: “it

depends.” There is seldom an aspect of the interpreting process that escapes the realm of

subjection. During my time at Augustana University and interning with ASLIS, I have been

taught over and over that “right” and “wrong” are only determined by what can be argued. By

having a Code of Professional Conduct that allows for every individual to have their own

interpretation of the rules, the field is built on the basis that interpreters hold the knowledge and

responsibility to act accordingly in ethically difficult situations. However, the fact that there can

be many “right” options doesn’t mean everyone holds that sentiment as truth. So, if what is right

is subjective, who decides that an interpretation was successful?

In many service-based careers, they stand by the motto, “the customer is always right,”

but does that apply to interpreting as well? In my personal opinion, yes and also no. Another,

tragically, “it depends” answer. Of course the consumers’– both hearing and deaf– opinions of

the interpreter’s interpretation are right, but so is the interpreter’s opinion of their own work. In

one of my religion classes at Augustana University, we talked about what “truth” means. My

professor argued, “truth is like truing a blade,” which, to my understanding, means the process of

sharpening a blade back and forth until it is perfectly straight. What my professor meant is that
what is untrue is much more easy to detect than what isn’t and, at a certain point, what is “true”

or “right” or “perfect” becomes subjective– because you can’t tell the level of detail and

craftsmanship that went into the blade with only the naked eye. I’m using this analogy to say that

in interpreting, no one is wrong for their insights and opinions. Interpreting is a career where

everyone has to learn from each other in order for the job to be successful. The hearing consumer

has to be willing to learn about the communication and cultural differences of the deaf consumer

and vice versa; and the interpreter has to be able to learn from both parties in order to connect

them effectively. Although ASL interpreting seems like it should be about the deaf consumer

only, everyone involved in the interpreting process is vital.

As it relates to “do no harm,” the attitude of “it depends” and the growth process of

“truing,” are the foundations of protecting and fostering communication. At the core, the key, the

heart of what interpreters do is facilitating communication. While the concept sounds simple,

something as small as a facial expression or shift in body language can completely change the

outcome of an interaction. If I, the interpreter, am having a bad day and make faces at someone

the deaf consumer is communicating with, do I not harm their interaction? In truth, “do no harm”

means that, as an additional person in this room, I vow to not cause any harm to the consumers,

myself, or the facilitation of communication.

In the end, the reason for interpreters, “do no harm,” and “truing” is to connect to each

other and express ourselves as we want to be expressed. The reason I started my essay with a

Futurama quote is because I believe it encapsulates the idea of interpreting. Language is a

powerful tool, but interpreters shouldn’t hold the power any more than what is needed for the

hearing and deaf consumers to communicate effectively. I believe that the mark of a great

interpreter is someone who makes the consumers feel so comfortable communicating with one
another that it feels as though the interpreter is both a person in the room and that the interpreter

has done nothing at all.

Work Cited:

“Godfellas.” Futurama, created by Groening Matt, 3, 20, 20th Television, 2001.