I attended a conference recently and was very interested to see how some of the deaf speakers spoke to the audience as I too have this problem – in fact every deaf professional I know has this dilemma.
Who are you actually speaking to? The deaf members of the audience or the hearing members? Which group should come first? Should you use your voice (will anyone understand you?) Should you use an interpreter? (which can feel awkward if you don’t normally use one and want to speak for yourself)
One presenter spoke for himself in a very confident way – but I looked at the faces in the audience and there were some puzzled looks. Why? The presenter has a ‘deaf’ voice (eg: not easily understood) and spoke quickly (like hearing people do) but of course people then had real difficulty in following what he was saying.
Should he have used a voice over instead? I could see he wanted to impress the hearing audience (his mum has obviously told him he ‘speaks beautifully’ – well she should be able to understand him after 30 odd years – but a first timer might not). How easily we are deceived about ourselves and our skills.
Another speaker spoke and signed for herself. This can be messy – as it is not really possible to do both at the same tempo (something teachers of the deaf never fully understand when they do the same in schools). This is the problem I have. My voice also starts to drop (as the presenter’s did too) so hearing people strain to listen. The voice drops because the signing starts to take over.
Leaving it all to the interpreter is not the answer – it works brilliantly for true BSL users as they are comfortable using their own mode of communication which allows their personality to shine through. For the rest of us, well after 35 years of presenting to the public I still don’t have a game plan. What would help is a supportive audience – someone once put their hand up and asked me to stop signing as they were watching the interpreter. Not helpful.
Maybe the answer is to be more tolerant of deaf diversity and allow each deaf professional to do it their way in a warm and supportive way. Also for us to encourage practical advice and follow through suggestions that feel right to us as deaf professionals.
Laraine Callow MBE is the director of deaf training and consultancy Deafworks (who support this site). She has worked in the commercial, charity and arts fields and in areas such as education and employment on D/deaf issues and access for over 20 years. She trains deaf and hearing people around the UK on skills including management, mentoring and deaf awareness. Find out more about Deafworks by visiting their website. Just click here.
Enjoying our eggs? Support The Limping Chicken:
The Limping Chicken is the world's most popular Deaf blog, and is edited by Deaf journalist, screenwriter and director Charlie Swinbourne.
Our posts represent the opinions of blog authors, they do not represent the site's views or those of the site's editor. Posting a blog does not imply agreement with a blog's content. Read our disclaimer here and read our privacy policy here.
Find out how to write for us by clicking here, and how to follow us by clicking here.
The site exists thanks to our supporters. Check them out below:
- BSL Zone: TV programmes in BSL for the Deaf community
- Deaf Umbrella: what support is available for deaf students?
- Bellman & Symfon: home alerting solutions, including the mobile phone transceiver!
- SignVideo: Instant BSL video interpreting online
- SignHealth: check out the BSL health library
- 999 BSL: call 999 in an emergency, in BSL
- Appa: Looking for RSLIs, TSLIs and CSWs, apply here!
- Signly: Adding BSL to websites
- Signworld: Learn BSL online!
- DCAL: world-class research into deafness, cognition and language
- Action Deafness: “A Deaf-Led Charity” – interpreting & community support services
- Sign Solutions: Instant access to Interpreters, training and BSL translation nationwide
- InterpretersLive: On demand BSL video interpretation
- Lipspeaker UK: specialist lipspeaking support
- BID: Deaf services, including advice and support, interpreting, employment and letters
- Performance Interpreting: BSL interpreting at concerts
- National Deaf Children's Society: The leading charity for deaf children
Tyron Woolfe
March 2, 2012
(Speaker = who is addressing the audience, whether signing/speaking or both)
Totally get this common experienced anxiety and am not surprised there’s no perfect answer.
I am from a whole Deaf family who have used BSL for multiple generations where its kinda a preconceived “moral sin” to speak and sign.
Voice-over given to Deaf speakers is often poor, unbeknownst to deaf speakers. Utterly crap in many occasions. Some would argue that its kind of “out of respect” to Deaf audience members to speak and use the BSL interpreter who will often sign far better than the signing presented if using simultaneous bi-modal approach (sign & speak).
Suspect its because interpreters are (still) not trained in voice over skills enough? (welcome to the wonderful world of NVQ routes into interpreting!) I wonder how CSWs manage to work in schools increasingly without achieving Level 3 BSL, given that they should be giving voice over? Voice-over isn’t trained until after Level 3 BSL Language is achieved!! Or do the deaf BSL dominant kids remain silenced?
What gets me is those deaf individuals who either speak or speak/sign but totally neglect their d/Deaf audience members, and try and “pass themselves off as hearing”. I think there are some strong personal feelings at hand here, but I do think there is also a professional duty to really consider d/Deaf members in the audience, no matter who the majority is.
I also think the speaker who chooses to speak or speak&sign then faces the difficulty of trying to explain deafness-related matter when they are passing themselves off as hearing. Its that camouflage issue (“I feel invisible”; “hearing people always forget Im deaf”) but hey, who asked for it in the first place? You can’t have it both ways!?
Larraine’s view that sign and speak simultaneously can be messy is interesting. I think it really depends on the skills of the speaker – I have actually been told by a couple strong BSL-using deaf professionals that they understood me better when I use both simultaneously!!!
I also think its uncomfortable professionally, if one is using sign/speak and yet there are other deaf professionals in that setting who don’t have the choice (“can’t speak that well”) The deaf speaker is left in a moral dilemma. Tolerance of deaf diversity, as indicated by Larraine, is true, but how do we really know that our colleagues are really genuinely tolerant, or are they just trying to be professional?
Tyron
Nick Beese (@ndbeese)
March 2, 2012
Great article about what really is the unspoken! Deaf people’s choice of communication method is often a very personal one. The game plan should be simply to deliver your presentation in whichever way fully engages your audience, and in turn gives you a higher chance of achieving the response/results you are looking for. You want your audience to go away remembering your presentation, and not be thinking about how it was delivered. I think it’s unrealistic to expect tolerance from a big group of people, many whom may never have met a deaf person.
Presenting to big groups is a skill which needs to be honed, hearing people also need to practice and adapt their speaking style for presentations. A deaf person who does not normally use an interpreter should consider practicing with an interpreter.
Tim ( @TimRegency )
March 2, 2012
“Maybe the answer is to be more tolerant of deaf diversity and allow each deaf professional to do it their way in a warm and supportive way.”
Great conclusion,but I have problems with this comment:
“Leaving it all to the interpreter is not the answer – it works brilliantly for true BSL users as they are comfortable using their own mode of communication which allows their personality to shine through.”
…because:
1) What is a ‘true BSL user’? It implies that some people’s use of SL is less valid than others.
2) It implies hat people who don’t use the “correct” (what’s that?) SL must not be comfortable with that SL. Isn’t that a negative assumption?
3) That people who don’t use the “correct” SL – their personality does not shine through.
Which all seem to contradict the good conclusion.
Stephen Iliffe
March 2, 2012
Picture this: One winter afternoon in 1990. I am standing before a House of Commons Select Committee. Directly in front of me is the heavyweight Sir Geoffrey Howe flanked by a dozen MPs and civil servants on either side. I am there as an RNID researcher to speak about Deaf peoples’ right to access the Televising of the House of Commons.
I will be speaking for myself. A BSL interpreter stands in the corner of the room ready to relay their questions back to me, once my speech is over and they begin to grill me. I am well rehearsed. This is my moment. I begin confidently with some key facts and statistics. Five millions viewers rely on subtitles or signs, the cost of providing access is 1% of the production budget, etc, etc. Sir Geoffrey is watching me with a blank face. In the corner of my eye, I spot the BSL interpreter discreetly gesturing to me: “SPEAK UP, we can’t hear a thing over here.” I am talking too softly.
I quickly recover, track back and raise my voice. I suspect I am now speaking too loudly, but I stay cool and carry on. Better that, than the assembled MPs not being able to hear me at all. That was 22 years ago. Even today, I don’t always get it right. But I’d say one does learn through hard experience, trial and error, what works and doesn’t, how to adapt, and how to get it right more often than not. And yes, yes, a receptive and adaptable audience, and empathetic communication support is part of the solution too.
Editor
March 2, 2012
That’s an amazing and insightful story, thank you
John Walker
March 2, 2012
I think Laraine has hit on some interesting issues. Regardless of whether it is a deaf or hearing person, most novice public speakers sound/look like they are talking to their best friend or a parent. Public speaking is a different form of communication that helps the audience to ’embark on the journey with the speaker’. This reflects in the style and tempo of presentation, choice of language, the clarity of the message, and conveying the peaks and troughs of the story. Deaf people often do not have access to this knowledge, and sometimes it shows, regardless of the language the deaf person uses.
Although I have a clear voice, I often tend to work with interpreters because my voice is too soft to reach the back of a room, nor am I am able to gauge my voice against the ambiance noise. I have to say, I have seen some of the best and worst voice overs. I have realised that I can not just ask a random interpreter to come in and provide the voice over of their lives. I have to invest time in the interpreter to ensure they have the relevant knowledge (interpreters call this schema) to make the presentation sound like it is coming from a ‘hearing person’. Any interpreter can open their mouth and ‘say something’ but how many can give a voice over with my humour, temperament, complexity, and match the note of my presentation. In reality, I can count the number of interpreters, who can voice over for me well, on one hand.
The problem with sim com is that it is neither one nor the other. Most people in the audience are monolingual and the invading signs (or voice) only distort the message the speaker wants to make. The additional signs are meaningless to hearing people and similarly meaningless to BSL users. If someone has a point to make, I don’t see how using a creole of English and BSL is going to help the audience to get the message. Language is only a tool and it is up to us to make the best use of these tools by improving our knowledge of language(s) and making the best use of resources (such as interpreters).
I do cringe when I see the word ‘tolerant’. If you look in the dictionary, it is the allowance of the expression of views the listener disagrees with. Tolerance is when we seek freedom of expression and ideas: Cameron is tolerating the dialogue with Scottish National Party but he does not want to enter a discussion about the break up of the union. A tolerant audience allows me to express myself but there is no commitment to listen, to learn and to accept. In any presentation, there are two jobs taking place: the presenter to convey the message as clearly as possible; and the job of the listener in the audience to listen – the speaker should never let the audience ‘get away with it’ because they have chosen to sit in front of you.
Sally
March 2, 2012
Another dilemma – job interviews. This setting has parallels with the issues raised by Laraine and everyone else here.
If you are lucky you can ask them to book a SLI of your choice. More often than not you have to put up with whoever has been booked (and I’ve met some that I really want to ask to leave the room!). If the organisation is not familiar with booking SLIs then it is really hard not to look like you are making too many demands, because ultimately you want to get the job.
It doesn’t end there either. Thoughts that run through your head for the interview: do you sign, use your voice, or sign and speak at the same time. Sometimes the panel may be deaf aware, or have a deaf person on the panel. You also worry about whether the SLI is competent, and whether they will portray your answers in the best possible light (particularly if you are relying on them to do voice overs). You have prepared yourself extensively for the interview, have they done their homework too?
It is a real catch 22 situation. Being interviewed for a job you want to present yourself in the best possible light naturally.
I guess the answer to this dilemma is if you really want that job, is to bring your own interpreter and to be clear about communication with the interview panel at the onset. That is if they haven’t clued up on this already, and taken the lead first!
Stephen Iliffe
March 2, 2012
In response to John’s eloquent post: I do agree about Creole generally not being effective… BUT there may be some exceptions to this. I recently spoke to one school workshop where the deaf audience of was given a choice – BSL or speech? They asked for both at the same time (since none were oral or pure BSL). So I gave the customer(s) what they wanted! Yet the rapport between the speaker (me) and the audience that day was fantastic with real empathy because I spoke/signed like they did. Admittedly that’s a bit of a one off, but shows how one often has to adapt one’s principles to the circumstances at hand.
Paul Redfern
March 2, 2012
This is an interesting debate. Deaf people are expected to use BSL or a variant and if we don’t we are frowned upon. But the catch is that many interpreters are frankly useless when it comes to voicing over. This is often because they don’t know the Deaf speaker well enough – the number of times I’ve had my speech mangled – but my voice isn’t quite ‘hearing’ enough for the audience to listen comfortably.
But if it’s a mainly Deaf and BSL audience, hearing speakers often refuse to use BSL even if they have Level 3 upwards, they insist on using their voice and giving the interpreter the job of signing the BSL. They get away with it. But us Deafies, we are expected to use BSL and if we don’t we are letting the side down – we’re not properly ‘Deaf’ as it were.
Robert Adam
March 3, 2012
And then of course there are those people for whom speaking in English is definitely not an option, and there is no dilemma as to whether I should speak or sign. I could even say that this may mean being a hostage of a poorly skilled interpreter, but I don’t have any other other option. I am happy to say that this has not happened a lot in the past. While I agree that it is down to individual choice, deep down I have felt in the past that people who can sign but choose to speak let the side down. Using BSL with interpreters positions the hearing audience closer to the Deaf experience and I have felt that the Deaf person who chooses to speak is making things easier for the hearing audience, and harder for Deaf people who don’t have that option (i.e. hearing people often find it easier to work with a Deaf person who speaks as opposed to a Deaf person who signs, to the long term detriment of the Deaf community as a whole).
Ben Fletcher
March 3, 2012
why not setup something similar to this?
http://sixminutes.dlugan.com/video-critiques/
:)) (hi to these familiar names, who have commented on here… long time no see!! hope everything’s well)
Jill
March 5, 2012
I’ve had presentations and speeches mangled by interpreters I’d only just met doing voice-overs for me. Once I was emailed the STTR transcript afterwards and felt like crying – it looked like nonsense. I was signing SSE at the time and am more BSL now. What I’d really like to do is to be able to give a copy of my speech to an interpreter and ask them to just read it out. I did once but they still insisted on voicing-over what I was signing. Why can’t they do what the deaf presenter wants? I have no choice regarding voice overs as my voice is far too deaf for anyone outside my immediate family to understand.
Catherine Drew
March 5, 2012
This has been a brilliant read for me; it is good (although not ‘good!’) to see that i am not alone and many share the same difficulties and experiences when it comes to presenting to an audience whether it be an hearing audience/Deaf audience or a mixed audience. The primary problem has always, for me, been the quality of the interpreter’s voice-over; like John/Paul etc have previously mentioned, i can only count on one hand good BSL interpreters and now when i present, i will bring ‘my own’ interpreter as opposed to having the organisation provide one. I find myself now using the same ‘pool’ of good BSL interpreters, it is a shame that many of us find ourselves in similar situations; i hope the NRCPD makes radical changes in the near future with the quality/standards of interpreters, well,i am hoping this for my sanity at least!
Oh Dear
March 14, 2012
Oh dear……Over 20 years ago I’d solved the problem…..speaking to an audience with my speech also written down and using an overhead projector…..any hearing person who sits too far back and can not hear me can read my speech instead.
Simples
deaflinguist
March 15, 2012
This is a subject very dear to my heart, as someone who regularly speaks to both D/deaf only, hearing only, and mixed audiences.
I’d like to turn this one round on its head first of all. One of the things we deafies don’t always realise is how poor many hearing people are at giving a talk: if our only means of access is through other people, BSL interpreters, lipspeakers, speech to text then we don’t realise . . . because we get a version with all the umms, errs, backtracking, and truncated sentences, edited out. I’m constantly amazed at how many highly regarded academics and otherwise brilliant people cannot convey their ideas with clarity.
With a CI I can hear the difference and the widespread nature of poor communication has shocked me a great deal. In giving my own presentations, it’s enabled me directly to pick up on poor voiceover translation which I find horribly distracting. I don’t much like being voiced over for – I prefer to be bimodal because it’s who I am. To me voiceovers simply substitute the issue of supervising someone speaking for you for the issues of bilingualism/Creole/SSE/voicing over for yourself. As you rightly point out, it’s quite difficult to synchronise the two modes, something that needs translation skills.
I’ve found that the techniques I’ve developed to check for physical understanding and intellectual (content) comprehension with D/deaf audience are transferable to hearing audiences. High quality visual materials help, of course. Building a rapport with the audience helps, too – all general communication skills. But we do more, and rightly, with our D/deaf peers. We ask them if they can see us comfortably. We’re used to fellow deafies stopping us to ask for clarification.
How many hearing people take the trouble to find out if the folks at the back can hear the speaker? They take it for granted that everyone hears the same and assume that if they did everyone else can. I don’t, so I find it works quite well with hearing audiences to introduce myself and then ask just this question (even in a formal academic setting). It’s a good test of physical comprehension and is my “tuning fork” for loudness and clarity. One day I’m going to get a Mexican wave with some people saying “down” and others “up” . . .
I might also say that even though I have bionic hearing I won’t necessarily get all the questions, so my interpreter or colleague will assist. This seems to pique their interest and get them on side straight away, and they relax knowing that I’ve told them how two-way communication is going to work.
I’m also a great fan of using a little bit of very subtle humour, perhaps a bit of wordplay, or a startling analogy. Laugh-out loud funny isn’t appropriate, but something that induces a gentle smile or a spark of recognition or surprise amongst everyone means that they’ve kept up with you and works just as well with D/deaf and hearing audiences. It’s not just a means of keeping your talk interesting – it’s a tool that you have to actively use.
In short, I think a lot of it is about skills crossover.
fduser4976
March 28, 2012
It is totally unacceptable for the CPS to order shorthand writers to put (inaudible) if they do not understand what a D/d person said during an interview. In a criminal trial the jury are decision makers and rely on what they hear, so equal access to language is a must have for justice to happen. An interpreter or lipspeaker’s duty is to assist the court. That means interpreters and lipspeakers have to show they are being inclusive and fair towards everyone. They provide clear channels of communication for understanding and a safety platform for dialogue. Hearing audiences, like juries, are not always aware of the reasons why a message is repeated on the record. I prefer to reduce, avoid or eliminate the potential for errors and ommissions. As an LSP I know my services are not just needed within the court, but also by the court reporters who transcribe official records for lawyers after the event for the Court of Appeal and High Court Judges who review cases based on what is down on the official record in written English, so it is vital that all LSPs continually monitor the effectiveness of different communication methods, because diverse cultural audiences have personal preferences and have their own barriers.
Sam
April 1, 2012
I can see the merits in raising this issue but do think the article smacks of labelling all deaf professionals as having difficulty with public speaking:
1) not all deaf professionals have speech that it is difficult for hearing people to understand (in fact some have excellent clear speech based on personal appreciation of how important this is)
2) as ‘deaflinguist’ states, not all hearing people have great speaking skills either! The article seems to convey a personal view that all hearing people speak well because well…. they are hearing. Not so as we are all too familiar with mumbling, accents etc and in fact, let’s not forget that public speaking is a huge industry which exists for a reason…for people to improve skills in this arena!
3) why should a culturally Deaf person have to relay their thoughts via an interpreter. This should be a matter of choice for the Deaf person concerned and I feel it is important not to dissuade them from making this decision. There are important implications when using interpreters. Firstly, interpreters are only skilled at that particular task and will not necessarily have the background in the subject matter which the Deaf person has been invited to communicate about. Secondly, after a presentation, attendees often want to speak/network with presenters therefore there is a risk of alienating the Deaf person from this opportunity if they are seen in a secondary role to their interpreter. As long as the audience is given access to e.g. a transcript, copy of powerpoint presentation etc that should enable Deaf people to communicate in their preferred medium. After all, it is they who have been invited to speak, not the bloody interpreter!