Quailman wrote:ThunderingWind wrote:...The "translate a speech" is meant to be just like having a signer at an event or the quiet voice over during the latin mass of a Pope's funeral, that is translate as they go.
...or the interpreters at the UN. I don't know how they do it, with the speech coming into their ears in one language and the words nearly-simultaneously exiting their mouths in another.
As for the from/to question, I would think that translating a speech or document to
or from the foreign language would both be important. Either would demonstrate interpretive skill on the part of the scout.
So what exactly is a 2-minute written speech? When I get into my New Yorker mode, I can say a lot of words in 2 minutes. I'm a fluent Spanish speaker, and meet the requirements for Italian and French - most native speakers tend to speak quickly and there can be a lot of content in 2-minutes of speech. What we can all agree on is that 2 minutes is 120 seconds, regardless of word count.
Simultaneous interpretation from another language to English is hard. That's why it is such a valuable skill, and demonstrates high proficiency or fluency. It also happens to be the most useful interpretation skill (Sacajawea would not have been all that helpful if all she could do was read Shosone).
I guess a generous "interpretation" of the requirement would allow for translating a transcript of a 2-minute speech. But when you look at the requirements it is pretty clear to me that #1 and #2 are intended to show high proficiency in the spoken language (including Sign), while #3 (Sign excluded) and #4 are intended to show proficiency in the written language (which is usually a lot easier).
Sorry if I offend - but if an interpreter cannot keep up with interpreting 2-minutes of simultanteous interpretation of normal spoken speech from another language to English than he or she is not much of an interpreter.
