Exceeds expectations; creative techniques successfully employed; exemplary result
Meets expectations; successful result
Adequate use of techniques; some minor adjustments needed; result is intelligible
Below expectations; result is confused
Result is distorted
Signed – spoken English
Target mode rendering matched the source mode message
Dynamic equivalent met,very few errors.
Dynamic equivalent met – meaning is present. Any errors are isolated and do not represent a pattern
Meaning is present. Equivalent, but not dynamically equivalent
Meaning is distorted – some correct concepts remain, but they are confused, juxtaposed, or otherwise garbled.
Meaning not present, completely incorrect
Accuracy of the English linguistic rules
Prescriptive grammar used, but not to the point where it distracts from the message – descriptive grammar used properly for affect, formulaic English – dynamic equivalent to signed English utterance.
Large percentage of interpretation includes prescriptive English grammar rules successful, smaller percentage includes successful descriptive grammar.
Grammar mistakes are present to the point of occasional distraction not matching any English grammar errors the signer might have made
Grammatical errors present to the point of confusion of message
Errors garble the interpretation to the point of changing the message to make it incorrect
Target mode produced in culturally Hearing English on the word and phrasal level
American Mainstream culture and/or audience variety/culture vocabulary and phrases achieved. Technical jargon used taking the audience and speaker’s level of expertise into account, words are pronounced correctly, phrased correctly, and the interpretation accurately depicts the signer’s level of knowledge on subject matter. If the signer shows lack of knowledge, the interpreter does not “make up for it” in the interpretation.
American Mainstream culture and/or audience variety/culture vocabulary and phrases achieved. Technical jargon used taking the audience and speaker’s level of expertise into account. Any non-jargon or lay-person language is integrated smoothly into the interpretation without hesitation or verbal stumbling. Any “stumbling” by the signer is matched by the interpreter
Language used is understandable, however the audience has to mentally translate the verbiage used; an obvious effort on the part of the interpreter to “find the words” is present that is not present in the signed utterance.
“That’s not how hearing people say it”, and/or “that’s not the right meaning” Lack of understanding of content and/or comprehension of signs results in inappropriate verbiage.
“That’s not how hearing people say it”, and/or “that’s not the right meaning” Lack of understanding of content and/or comprehension of signs results in distortion of message.
Isolated English word choices
Words are appropriate for the subject matter, signer’s apparent level of knowledge, age, intent, and specialized terms. Everything is pronounced correctly.
Words are appropriate for the subject matter, signer’s apparent level of knowledge, age, intent. Formulaic English is kept even if specialized jargon is missing – those “in the know” would understand
Words are appropriate for the basic meaning, but may distract due to errors in Formulaic English, grammar, content knowledge, and/or pronunciation
Words are inappropriate and confuse the meaning.
Words are incorrect, omitted, or otherwise contribute to a distorted interpretation
Time elapsed between SL utterance and TL interpretation
CI: Waited until the SL message was completely uttered before beginning TL interpretation – activities such as notetaking, and other augmenting activities used.
SI: Waited until an entire unit of meaning is uttered in SL before beginning interpretation in TL. Continuously adjusts time to compensate for linguistic and situational needs.
CI: Waited until the SL message was completely uttered before beginning TL interpretation
SI: Waited until an entire unit of meaning is uttered in SL before beginning interpretation in TL.. Generally maintains time to the point that other features are able to be used.
CI: Waited until the SL message was uttered before beginning TL interpretation, however may have mistook a pause for an ending.
SI: Waited until most of a unit of meaning is uttered in SL before beginning interpretation in TL, however, any success isn’t maintained consistently and other features sound distracting because of it.
CI: Interpreter is often confused about where the utterance ends so is unable to find a complete chunk of meaning in SL before beginning interpretation into TL
SI: Not enough time allowed to gather an entire concept before attempting interpretation and/or successful time lag not maintained.
CI: Apparent confusion about the difference between CI and SI, manifests as jumping in to interpret at every perceived pause.
SI: Not enough time allowed between SL utterance and TL interpretation to let the interpreting process work, nor any of the other features take hold.
Level of environmental, linguistic, and paralinguistic formality
Intent, language, and other features quickly and correctly analyzed and applied. Successful and continuous adjustments made for register shifts.
Intent, language, and other features quickly and correctly analyzed and applied. Adjustments present, but not continuous
Intent, language, and other features analyzed and applied. One or two areas not present – e.g. environmental register successful but linguistic not, or vice versa. Adjustments rare or not present.
Register is only rarely correct, Adjustments not present
Register is incorrect, Adjustments not present
display of intent of speaker including emotions, innuendos, etc.
Interpretation successfully includes SL utterance intent, emotions, knowledge of the content, register, dynamically-equivalent paralinguistics, etc. Interpreter’s “acting” skills renders interpretation sounding as if it is coming directly from the speaker.
TL interpretation represents the intent and dynamic-equivalent of the SL
Interpretation represents the linguistic and emotions of speaker, however some of the interpreter’s personality/emotions, interpreting struggle, etc. “bleeds through” to the point of slight distraction
More of the interpretation represents the interpreter’s personality/emotions, interpreting struggle, etc.than the speaker’s. The signs/words may seem to match on the surface, but the intent is not rendered.
The speaker’s message is garbled/misunderstood due to incorrect rendering of emotions, intent, and/or the personality/emotions, interpreting struggle, etc.of the interpreter.
Fixing message due to interpreter error, omission, or misunderstanding
Repair is smooth, message is now correct, and words and/or phrases employed are in keeping with proper register and don’t call any undue attention to the interpreter
Repair is smooth, message is now correct, no undue attention to the interpreter
Repair doesn’t necessarily completely fix the sentence, subsequent repairs may now be necessary due to time taken in repairing, words and phrases used to make the repair sound stilted and may bring a little too much attention to the interpreter
Repair is choppy and does not correct the message. Words or phrases employed are unclear and can be easily misunderstood by listener as part of the message. Undue attention called to the interpreter
Repair is non-existent, choppy and/or incorrect – making the message worse than the original mistake. Any words or phrases call undue attention to the interpreter
how other features combine to make a cohesive product
All other features “very effective” and meld together smoothly
Interpretation makes sense to the ear and contextually.
There is overall sense, however a few errors or glitches appear and are distracting to the ear.
Meaning is confused due to one or more feature usage (i.e. “operator error”)
Meaning is completely off – usually due to clash between comprehension and at least one other feature
Paralinguistic features such as rhythm, tone, body language, pauses etc.Includes healthy sound of voice, volume, pitch, proper usage of fillers, enunciation, control of breath, and overall projection.
Interpreter sounds well hydrated, volume is appropriate for the room size and does not change the message. Fillers are used appropriately (which may mean not at all), words pronounced correctly, crisply and clearly. Any adjustments needed are done quickly and without undue focus on the interpreter
Interpreter sounds well hydrated, volume is appropriate for the room size and does not change the message. Fillers may be present but are not a pattern of distraction. Words pronounced correctly, crisply and clearly. Any adjustments needed are done quickly and without undue focus on the interpreter
Overall the interpreter sounds well hydrated and volume is appropriate at the beginning, but s/he may run out of breath at the end of utterances, and certain meaning-rich words may be mispronounced.
Interpreter’s voice sounds “off” due to one or more feature being unattended to. Fillers may be a distracting and confusing pattern, volume and enunciation may be inappropriate.
Features are misused/unprepared to the point that it affects the message delivery.
“Poker face” throughout. Interpreter is able to maintain a professional demeanor in appearance, vocal quality, eyes, and body language even if the interpretation and/or environment becomes distressing. If any help is needed, the interpreter asks for it calmly.
Interpreter maintains professional demeanor throughout the interpretation. If any help is needed the interpreter asks for it calmly.
The interpreter is able to maintain professional demeanor through voice or appearance, but not consistently and/or not both. Voice may sound appropriate while face looks distressed. During SL message intake the interpreter my let “sighs” go, or extremities may shake. Any help is asked for with obvious nervousness.
Interpreter is not able to maintain a professional demeanor. The face, voice, eyes, body, and style of asking for help all betray nervousness and/or the interpreter’s feelings about the content/participants.