ACLU Report on immigrant detention in Massachusetts

On December 10, 2008, the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts released a report titled “Detention and Deportation in the age of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).” The report is quite damning. Although never having committed a crime, over 800 immigrants and asylum-seekers are held in jails or detention facilities throughout Massachusetts, never knowing when they have hearing, or if they will be deported.

The report goes further, tracking 40 such detained individuals through the system and offering many personal stories documenting the abuses committed by Immigration Officials. For example, the ICE transfers people in order to silence complaints; relatives and lawyers are often denied information on their whereabouts. Due process is consistently denied; detainees are held for long periods of time–up to five years in some cases–with the average time being 11 months. Jails are overcrowded.; medical services are insufficient. There are reports of racial slurs, threats, and physical force being used during the deportation process. Language rights are consistently denied, and there are reports of officials putting thumb prints of the detainees on papers they could not read.

For someone working at the University of Massachusetts responsible for training translators and interpreters, I am particularly outraged. This is a liberal state, yet are jails are packed with immigrants being denied hearings and language rights.  Sometimes we in the ivory towers need to get out and do something. Letters to newspaper editors and state and national representatives are certainly advisable.

For more information, please see the executive summary. For those who wish to protest, please see the action alert. The report was released on the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the United Nations in 1948, which recognizes the inherent dignity and equal rights of all members of the human race.

Call for submissions: Rossica Translation Prize/Grants

Academia Rossica, a Russian Culture and Arts Foundation in London, is inviting publishers and translators to submit their new translations from Russian into English for the Rossica Prize 2009. The establishment of this unique prize aims to promote the best of Russian literary culture in the English-speaking world, encouraging the translation of a broad range of authors, genres and periods.

To qualify for the 2009 Rossica Prize, the original work must be written in Russian by any author, present or past and the translation published in 2007 and 2008. The prize is open to works published in any country. The award, totalling £5,000, is to be split between translator and publisher. Deadline for submissions: 31 December 2008.

The Rossica Prize Committee includes distinguished literary figures – Literary Editor of The Independent and founder of the Independent Foreign Fiction Prize Boyd Tonkin, the publisher Christopher MacLehose, Director of the British Centre for Literary Translation Amanda Hopkinson and Director of Literature at British Council Susanna Nicklin.  The panel of judges consists of three leading academics and translators: Martin Dewhirst, Antony Briggs and Robert Porter.  The award ceremony will take place in London on 24 May 2009, the Day of Sts Kyrill and Methodios, the creators of the Slavic alphabet.

Academica Rossica also invites publishers to apply for our newly-launched programme of grants for literary translation from Russian into English. This programme aims to promote Russian literature internationally. On the whole, priority is given to translation of contemporary fiction and poetry; literary non-fiction titles may also be eligible if they are exceptional in terms of literary or stylistic innovation.

For more information, please contact Ruth Atkinson, Literature Projects Coordinator, at
rossica-prize@academia-rossica.org.

Academica Rossica
Russian Culture and Arts Foundation
76 Brewer Street
Piccadilly Circus
London W1F 9TX
+44 20 7287 5712
+44 20 7287 2614

British Army interpreter found guilty of spying

According to the BBC World News of November 5, 2008, Daniel James, an Iranian-born translator for General David Richards, England’s top general in Afghanistan, has been found guilty of spying for Iran. To read the full article,  go to BBC News.

James, from Brighton, England, was accused of three crimes, including communicating information to the enemy, collecting documents useful to the enemy, and willful misconduct in a public office. He was found guilty on the first charge, the most serious of the three, and the jury is still deliberating on the second two.

The prosecution claimed that James had been caught “red-handed” with secret emails while attempting to pass information on to the insurgents and with incriminating photos in his room. In his defense, James claimed that he remained a loyal British soldier and that those accusing him of spying were “mad.”

In light of the current political climate, trying such cases objectively is difficult, as juries, especially military tribunals, are laced with all sorts of local suspicions and prejudices. Indeed, some of the descriptions of James by the prosecution–that he was flamboyant and that he invited the general to a salsa dance–seem to have little to do with the case. My general feeling is that many translators on both sides of the conflict are suffering a disproportionate share of the blame and the punishment.

U.S. Publishers shy away from literary translation

At the 2008 Frankfurt Book Fair, which took place October 14-18, 2008 in Frankfurt am Main, Germany, publishers from over 100 countries displayed their newest publications. Turkey was the guest of honor this year, and special exhibitions on Turkish life, literature, and culture were held.

U.S. booksellers at the fair, however, were slow to browse non-English texts for possible translation and distribution in the United States. Even the Nobel prize winner in Literature, the French writer JMG Le Clézio, is all but our of print in English, let alone the top German or Turkish authors.

In an article published October 17, 2008 in the New York Times, Motoko Rich suggested that U.S. Publishers at the Frankfurt Book Fair spent more time at English-language exhibits than at international ones. Quoting Chad Post from Open Letter Books, out of over 15,000 titles published in the United States this year, only 330, or less than 2 percent, are translations, reminding us of Larry Venuti’s thesis that translation is invisible in the United States. To read the full article, go to “Translation is Foreign to U.S. Publishers.”

Sometimes the economics of not publishing translations makes little sense. David Godine, publisher of Black Sparrow Books, a firm that brought out Le Clézio’s The Prospector in translation, says, “It is ridiculous that more people don’t invest in buying great literature.” He argued that the translation rights for many of the best books abroad can be bought for as little as $2,000. In addition, the publication of famous international writers brings prestige to  U.S. presses.

Often publishers are slow to acquire manuscripts that they cannot read themselves, or are nervous to publish authors they know little about. Here literary translators can be of help. When proposing literary translations, include not just sample chapters, but also help inform publishers about the market and the international prestige of the authors you are proposing. There are very good reasons why Le Clézio won the Nobel prize, and U.S. culture is poorer for not having more of his work, as well as many internationally distinguished writers, available.

New Translation Law in California

In January 2009 a new translation law for Health Care Providers in California goes into effect. HealthLeaders InterStudy, a managed-care news service, reports that many providers have already submitted plans for conforming with the new law.

The law, known as Senate Bill 853, requires health plans to translate vital documents into the top spoken language among a plan’s membership and to provide interpretation services for any language a member of the plan requests. The law includes the following provisions: if a health plan has more than one million members, it must translate materials into the top two non-English languages spoken by its members; for plans with 300,000 to one million members, translation into only one language is required; and for plans with under 300,000 members, translation is required when 3,000 members (or more or 5 percent, whichever is less) indicate a need for translation services.

California has some of the most progressive laws in the country regarding providing translation and interpreting services to limited English-speaking and non-English-speaking patients. The success of the implementation of this law, its enforcement, its success in improving health care, and its overall costs, merits close attention. For more information, see the full article at Earth Times.

resume writing service