ARTICLE IN PRESS

International Journal of Intercultural Relations

30 (2006) 523–526

doi:10.1016/j

www.elsevier.com/locate/ijintrel

Book review

ME. Yarmouth, Reading between the signs workbook: A cultural guide for sign language

students and interpreters, Intercultural Press, Anna Mindess, 2004.

When it was first published in 1999, Anna Mindess’s book, Reading Between the Signs:

Intercultural Communication for Sign Language Interpreters, was a breakthrough ineducational materials for sign language interpreters and students of American SignLanguage (ASL), Deaf Studies, and interpretation. It was the first book to address issuesof culture and Deaf/Hearing relations from an intercultural perspective.

Sign language interpreting is a relatively young field. Formal education of interpretersbegan only about 30 years ago. The notion that Deaf people constitute a cultural group,often indicated by the use of a capital letter D, came to the attention of the hearing worldonly fairly recently. It began in the 1960s with William Stokoe’s pioneering research thatproved ASL to be a language in its own right and culminated with the 1988 ‘‘DeafPresident Now’’ protest that brought the first Deaf president to Gallaudet University, theworld’s only liberal arts college for Deaf people. Hall (1994), addressing the internationalDeaf Way convention in 1989, expressed the notion that Deaf people constitute a culturalgroup. Interpreters and interpreter educators became aware of the applicability ofintercultural relations training in 1985 when Richard Brislin (1986) addressed the Registryof Interpreters for the Deaf convention and advocated the use of techniques includingexperiential, cognitive, attribution, and self-awareness activities. A few interculturaltraining techniques, such as the cultural simulation BaFa BaFa, made their way intointerpreter education programs, but the interest in experiential and culture-general trainingwas short-lived and soon gave way to an emphasis on cognitive training about specificdifferences between Deaf and hearing cultures. Culture-specific materials, such as Paddenand Humphries’ (1988) Deaf in America: Voices from a Culture and Lane, Hoffmeister, andBahan’s (1996) Journey into the Deaf-World have been available for some time. As helpfulas these resources are, interpreter education underutilizes the intercultural relationsperspective in preparing students for cultural transition. Before Mindess’s book waspublished, instructors were forced to cobble together whatever resources they could find topresent cultural issues to students, often with little education or training in interculturalrelations themselves. With the publication of Reading Between the Signs, instructors had asource that combined cognitive training on culture in general, on US American Deaf andhearing cultural values, and on intercultural principles, with a section applying all of theseto interpreting. The book is now widely used as a textbook in interpreter preparationprograms and Deaf culture classes.

.ijintrel.2005.11.004

ARTICLE IN PRESSBook review / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 30 (2006) 523–526524

Mindess notes that the workbook, intended to provide experiential training toaccompany the text, is designed to be completed by students independently, althoughshe assumes that it will most often be used in a classroom with an instructor. Experiencedinterpreters may also use the workbook as a means of earning continuing education units,and she suggests that this group refer to the original book when working on the exercises.Although each of the exercises is preceded by a brief explanation of the central concepts itis meant to explore, it is hard to imagine that readers could derive the full benefit of theexercises without reading the original. Instructors in Deaf culture, ASL, and interpretingwho do not have a background in intercultural relations training may be tempted to usethe workbook more as homework exercises than for the experiential learning the authorintends. The danger of this is that students may not move very far in their transition fromethnocentrism to intercultural sensitivity. Interpreters function most effectively at whatMilton Bennett (1993) calls the ‘‘adaptation’’ stage of intercultural sensitivity, able to seethe world from more than one viewpoint and change behavior accordingly. It is a rarestudent who will reach this stage in the course of a 2–4-year interpreter education program;any increase in intercultural sensitivity will require extensive support. Thus, an expandedsection for instructors on goals and how to use the exercises to best effect would be helpful.The original book lends itself well to use in more than one course, allowing more time

for students to interact with its challenging material. For example, a program may chooseto use the first section in a Deaf Culture course and the second in an interpreting course.This also provides rich ground for intercultural team teaching, giving the perspectives ofboth a Deaf and a hearing instructor. The workbook can be used in a similar fashion, butworkbook sections do not correspond exactly to the chapters in the book. The authorexplains that ‘‘the rather fluid connection between the book and the workbook’’ makes theexperience more meaningful and provides a chart matching workbook sections to bookchapters (p. 4). However, tracking the correspondence between the two books can beconfusing. Using similar numbers or the same titles for corresponding sections might havemade it easier for readers to follow.The workbook begins with an introduction subtitled Unpacking Your Cultural Baggage

that explains the purpose of the workbook and how to use it. In this section, as she does inplaces throughout both the book and the workbook, Mindess includes a cross-culturalincident of her own experience. These anecdotes both allow students to see that even an‘‘authority’’ with years of experience is still a sojourner in another culture and provide thekind of concrete example so helpful to students. Experienced interpreters will also enjoyknowing they are not alone in having such experiences! Each section of the workbookbegins with a short explanation of the central concepts it addresses, followed by 3–4exercises that gradually increase in complexity. Many also include a ‘‘bonus exercise’’ thatcan be used for discussion in classes or small groups.The second section explores general concepts of culture. For example, the first exercise

uses the familiar ‘‘Iceberg’’ diagram and asks students to differentiate between visible andinvisible aspects of culture from a list that includes items such as ‘‘folk dancing,’’ ‘‘tempoof work,’’ and ‘‘attitudes toward dependence’’ (p. 9). Others deal with the differencebetween personal, cultural, and universal traits, and matching behaviors with the valuesthat underlie them.Section III, The Intercultural Perspective: Seeing Through Others’ Eyes, offers exercises

to develop what the author calls ‘‘our ‘cultural-switching muscle’’’ (p. 15). One exercisein this section is the well-known DIE: Description, Interpretation, Evaluation

ARTICLE IN PRESSBook review / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 30 (2006) 523–526 525

(www.intercultural.org). The author gives an overview of the exercise, along with photos topractice on, accompanied by sample responses in each of the three categories. She thengives an example from her own interpreting experience and ends by asking students tocontribute and analyze an experience of their own. This is a wonderful activity forinterpreting students, as it accomplishes a dual purpose. It encourages multipleexplanations of an observed incident and it is a useful lead-in for journal writing ininternships and other practicum courses in which students must reflect on their experiencesinteracting in the Deaf community.

Section IV, Basic Distinctions in Intercultural Communication, deals with concepts ofcollectivism v. individualism, high-context v. low-context cultures, time orientation, andcultural rhetoric. Some of these exercises ask students to sort statements, as in the firstsection; still others ask students to reflect on their own reactions to situations andcommunication styles.

Section V, Examining Your Own Values, looks at US American beliefs and values andencourages students to look at their own membership in ethnic, religious, or culturalgroups. The last exercise, How American Are You?, gives pairs of traits that are atopposite ends of a continuum and asks students first to decide which is most characteristicof US Americans and then to plot on a line below where they themselves stand. This is aparticularly useful exercise for interpreting students. It is often difficult to help them to seeunderlying values and beliefs of US American society as a whole, because many of themhold values that differ from so-called ‘‘mainstream America’’, often the very values thatdrew them to the profession in the first place. This exercise both allows them to becomeaware of their own values and to recognize that individuals within a culture are often verydifferent from one another.

Section VI, Politeness Is Relative, has a wonderful activity called What’s Your Limit?,which asks students to look at what sort of information they would feel comfortablesharing and with whom. This is often an area of discomfort for newcomers to the Deafcommunity, who find themselves taken aback by the very direct questions acceptable in theDeaf world. This could also be used as a role-play, allowing students to have a moreaffective experience of coping with the situation. Still another exercise asks readers to takeon the roles of Miss Deaf Manners and Miss Hearing Manners and respond to short‘‘letters’’ asking ‘‘etiquette’’ questions from each perspective, then to contribute andrespond to letters of their own.

The last section of exercises deals specifically with interpreting situations and theassumptions that underlie communications. The first presents a dialogue between Deaf andhearing co-workers and asks readers to restate the direct comments of the Deaf co-workerinto the indirect ones more acceptable in hearing society and to restate indirect commentsinto the more direct ones expected in Deaf interactions. This is an excellent exercise forinterpreters, because the difference between directness and indirectness presents a majorchallenge in interpreting, requiring the interpreter to make split-second decisions about theintent of the communicators and often to choose words or signs to reflect that intent rathergiving a too-literal translation. The final exercises in this section ask the reader to uncoverthe assumptions and expectations of each party in a given situation and apply some of theinterpreting techniques from the book to make the communication go smoothly. The bookcloses with a short list of resources, followed by an answer key for the exercises.

This workbook is a wonderful accompaniment to an exceptionally valuable tool forteaching Deaf culture, ASL, and sign language interpreting. One might also hope for an

ARTICLE IN PRESSBook review / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 30 (2006) 523–526526

advanced workbook in the future, as some of the subtler and more complex issues dealt sowell in the original text are beyond the scope of the current workbook. The issues ofpresentational style, organization of information, and persuasion presented in thetextbook chapter on Reasoning and Rhetoric cause many misunderstandings betweenDeaf and hearing people, and the book’s excellent chapter entitled Cultural SensitivityShouldn’t End at Five O’Clock should be required reading for anyone considering workingwith Deaf people. Finally, more emphasis on activities that allow students to experiencetheir affective reactions to cross-cultural encounters would also be a valuable addition.

Reading Between the Signs Workbook: A Cultural Guide for Sign Language Students and

Interpreters is a welcome resource. However, both the book and workbook should not belimited to interpreters and ASL students. They would be equally valuable for anyonewho encounters Deaf people: supervisors, colleagues, counselors, teachers, and others.Ms. Mindess has made a great contribution to the field and we hope that more will follow.

References

Bennett, M. J. (1993). Toward ethnorelativism. In R. M. Paige (Ed.), Education for the intercultural experience

(2nd ed.). Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press.

Brislin, R.W. (1986). Close intercultural relationships: Benefits and proper preparation. In: M. L. McIntire (Ed.),

Interpreting: The art of cross cultural mediation, Proceedings of the 1985 Convention of the Registry of

Interpreters for the Deaf. San Diego, CA.

Hall, E. T. (1994). Deaf culture, tacit culture and ethnic relations. In C. J. Erting, R. C. Johnson, D. L. Smith, &

B. D. Snider (Eds.), The deaf way: Perspectives from the international conference on deaf culture. Washington,

DC: Gallaudet University Press.

Lane, H., Hoffmeister, R., & Bahan, B. (1996). A journey into the Deaf-World. San Diego, CA: Dawn Sign Press.

Padden, C., & Humphries, T. (1988). Deaf in America: Voices from a culture. Cambridge, MA: Harvard

University Press.

Julie MoorePortland Community College, Portland, OR 97215, USA

E-mail address: jsmoore@pcc.edu