2026/04/08 by Laurent Zimmermann, David Bekaert · 1 voice
Business, Management and Accounting · Social Sciences · #Conflict of Laws and Jurisdiction #Corporate Law and Human Rights #International Arbitration and Investment Law
paper · doi:10.3917/nqf.451.0005
openalex publication_date 2026/04/08 · openalex created_date 2026/05/02 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/23
What are the expectations placed on interpreters to create the conditions to perform their own missions, all while doing the work of carrying the words of others –whether the professionals who request their services or the individuals who depend on them ? This article is based on the premise that there are tensions both in defining and situating practices of calling on interpreters’ expertise which cannot be grasped without taking into account a sociological characteristic that is fundamental to this profession. Namely, the fact of being racialized. Three interpreting contexts in France are put into perspective. First, the examination of asylum applications within the National Court of Asylum (CNDA). Second, support for asylum seekers in reception centers for asylum seekers (CADA). Third, mental health consultations for foreign patients. Bearing in mind the prudential dimension of public service interpreting, the article shows the ways in which ambivalent processes cause an interpreter’s real or supposed origin to oscillate between a qualifying or disqualifying presumption. More broadly, the scope and nature of the use of interpreters are affected by how the racialization of the profession is perceived, according to both the contexts of intervention and the relational configurations involved. While the function is formally codified in France, the boundaries of the interpreter’s role are, in practice, constantly adjusting on within any given interaction, crosscut by mechanisms of racialization.