ABSTRACT

Abstract. This article considers the importance of Ian Mason’s work, on accessing contextual assumptions in dialogue interpreting, by evaluating its implications as regards the kinds of translation and interpretation issues that arise when authority figures encounter ‘illegal’ immigrants in the Southern US. Based on findings from a large-scale research project completed in 2009, the author argues for a higher level of engagement on the part of the interpreter, such that he or she truly will assume the role of ‘interpreter’ as opposed to ‘translator’, active participant instead of a (disingenuously) ‘objective’ intermediary. On the basis of this work, the author suggests methods of alleviating some of the horrific consequences of the xenophobic lust for ‘security’ through border enforcement, and the misguided efforts to create immigration law out of a series of haphazardly assembled proposals and guidelines that hapless police officers are forced to enforce.