Services
Virtual
Administrator
Publishing
Merchandise
Trevor
Baylis Eco-media Players
Books, CD and DVD
Xmas
CD
Clients
Sgod
- Performance Poet
Media
Support Solutions Limited
THE CHALLENGE OF MULTILINGUAL INTERPRETATION
The first part of this paper comprises a survey (with comment) of a representative sample of the available literature on interpretation. Given that the paper is directed primarily toward professional interpreters and interpretive policy-makers, this will inevitably entail an element of redundancy – of ‘preaching to the converted’. The author begs the indulgence of those to whom much of the material in the first section will be familiar, on the grounds that such an overview of the existing literature is a necessary pre-requisite for an understanding of the context in which the following analysis of multilingual heritage interpretation is set. The relative paucity of analysis on the issue of multilingualism in interpretation to date makes it almost certain that some, even of those directly responsible for interpretive policy (at any and all levels), will be unfamiliar with such material as does exist, and certainly as it impacts on their own areas of involvement.
The second part deals with ‘literature’ of a different sort; this concerns itself with an examination of a representative sample of interpretive signage currently in use in the Highlands and Islands and, where appropriate, has used examples from further afield. This section constitutes an attempt to apply the general principles identified in the previous analysis of interpretation literature to current provision.
This is not intended to be an exhaustive analysis, which would not be possible in a paper of this nature. On the contrary, given the hitherto almost uncharted area of the research topic, this paper sets out to stimulate discussion, partly with a view to influencing strategies and policies relevant to the field but more particularly in order to address a perceived gap in the research currently available on interpretation.
Living in the shadow of ‘Big Brother’ to the south, Scotland has always had to struggle to maintain a separate cultural identity. This struggle shows no sign of lessening. On the contrary, in recent years, perhaps due to increasing globalisation, or perhaps in reaction to greater numbers arriving from outwith our borders to take up residence and posing a perceived threat to our culture and traditions, there is some evidence that the struggle is intensifying.
A new parliament in Edinburgh is only one indication of a renewed determination towards nationhood. Another, and one with which this study is concerned, is reflected in the continued attempts by writers and other artists to find a ‘voice of Scotland’ – a struggle that dates back to before the Act of Union in 1707 and, in the 20th century, has brought to prominence poets like Somhairle MacIlleathainn (Sorley MacLean) and Hugh McDiarmid (Christopher Murray Grieve) and countless other lesser talents, many of them aware, although possibly none more so than those two, that Scotland speaks not with one voice, but many.
If, as one writer claims,
Language is culture is nationhood
Michael Glen, Conference, Association of Heritage Interpreters
then an analysis of the linguistic heritage of the country is a prerequisite for an understanding of what this ‘voice of Scotland’ is based on.
The earliest recorded language in the country we now call Scotland is Pictish, although evidence does exist for one or more earlier tongues, for example some of the main river names, such as the Tay, Livet and Farrar. This evidence, however, is so scant as to be practically useless for the identification of the languages involved. The evidence for Pictish is, although relatively more plentiful, particularly in place-names, not of much more use in reconstructing the Pictish language. It has even been claimed by no less an authority than Professor Kenneth Jackson, that there possibly existed two languages in Pictland, one Celtic and the other non-Celtic (see The Problem of the Picts, Wainwright et al)
Another of the early languages in Scotland is Cumbric, a language which shares roots with Welsh, Cornish and Breton. While it may be possible to reconstruct some of this language by comparison with modern Welsh, it is true to say that Cumbric, like Pictish, will never be a useable language for those involved in multilingual interpretation. This does not, of course, rule out either language as a subject for interpretation in other languages.
The earliest of the languages available to today’s interpreters is Gaelic, which is often referred to as an indigenous or autochthonous language, although both terms are open to question, since the date of its introduction to this area is well-recorded. It is still, however, the oldest useable language of our nation, a fact that its supporters have not been slow to emphasise.
In a paper entitled On the Geography and Social History of Gaelic, Professor Charles Withers claims,
… concentrating on historical statistics (for example census returns) in isolation obscures the growth of pride and interest in Gaelic language and culture since 1881 … and underplays the language’s more vital place in Scottish life today (my emphasis).
Professor Withers continues,
But with respect to its ‘geographic history’ – where and when it was spoken in Scotland in the past, and how and why the domain of the Gàidhealtachd or Gaelic-speaking area has changed – the story has been one of unremitting pressure and, for the most part, retreat.
On the Geography and Social History of Gaelic, Withers, CWJ in Gaelic and Scotland, Edinburgh University Press, W Gillies (editor) (1989)
Certainly, very few people in Scotland can be unaware of the exertions of groups such as the Inverness Gaelic Society, Comunn na Gàidhlig, Comann an Luchd Ionnsachaidh (CLI), Commun na Sgoiltean Araich (CNSA) and many others, both organisations and individuals, in their recent attempts to reverse this retreat.
Nevertheless, the effect of this decline on the Highlands and Islands, that part of the country traditionally known as the Gàidhealtachd, has been such that one observer was led to suggest recently that the term Gàidhealtachd itself is a misnomer, given that the number of native English speakers in the area outstrips any other language community and that parts of the Highlands, notably Caithness, are not traditionally Gaelic-speaking. His suggestion that the name ‘Beurlatachd’ be adopted is possibly intended to be taken lightly but it nevertheless serves as an indicator of the diversity of opinion on the validity of Gaelic and its place in Scottish identity.
Almost at the other end of the spectrum, one correspondent averred that "English is a slave language to the Gael" (private correspondence). In the sense that Gaels throughout the last two centuries were coerced into adopting English by a variety of means, including compulsory education in English, and the systematic inferiorisation of the language and culture, in much the same way as happened in Wales, Cornwall and the USA, the statement is not far short of the truth, if couched in terms that are not likely to find support nationwide.
The third of Scotland’s native languages is, of course, Scots. But what exactly does the name ‘Scots’ refer to? This question has vexed many, in Scotland and elsewhere, at least since King James I and VI moved his court to London. The following passage is taken from The Cambridge Encyclopedia of the English Language compiled by David Crystal
The anglicization of Scottish writing became noticeable after the joining of the crowns of Scotland and England in 1603, and was increasingly dominant throughout the 17th century. Within a decade, southern English became the printing model, apart from in certain legal or literary texts, and by the end of the 17th century there was little sign of a distinctively Scottish variety in manuscript writing. Southern English speech also became the norm, with the use of ‘Scottiscisms’ attracting fierce criticism from the prescriptive attitudes of ‘polite’ society which dominated the middle decades of the 18th century, and which condemned all instances of what was perceived as ‘unrefined’ usage.
The Cambridge Encyclopedia of the English Language, Crystal, D, Cambridge University Press (1995)
Even that hero of the Enlightenment, David Hume (1711-1776), was not immune to this process of anglicization. In fact, it is reported that on his deathbed he recanted not his sins, but his ‘Scottiscisms’. Apocryphal as this story may be, it is nonetheless true, as cited by Ewan MacIntyre, that he (Hume) changed his name from the traditional Scottish spelling of Home when he moved to Bristol, presumably so that it would be correctly pronounced by the English, whose ignorance of the name Home was after all, only part of a larger ignorance about Scotland.
MacIntyre also notes that
He (Hume, in a letter to Cuthbert Elliot) called Scots ‘a very corrupt Dialect of the Tongue we use.’
Whose Justice, Which Rationality, MacIntyre, E, Duckworth (1996)
Nor was this attitude to the Scots language confined to the 18th century. It is, in fact, a commonly held attitude today, and not only in Scotland, but one that is not without its critics. In the words of Sheila Douglas, erstwhile secretary of The Scots Language Society,
In the North of Europe there is a family of languages all of which bear certain resemblances to one another . These are the Germanic languages, which in turn are only one of the groups of languages that form the Indo-European language map. English and Scots are two of these Germanic languages, as are, for example, German and Dutch, Norwegian and Danish. No one argues against the separate existence of any of these languages, except for Scots.
The Scots Language: European Roots and Local Destiny, Douglas, S
Countering the claim that Scots is a dialect of English, Douglas states
To anyone who knows anything at all about Scots, or about language in general, this is manifestly absurd. Scots is not one dialect, but several. Put a man from Wick, another from Aberdeen, a third from Perth, in a room with a Fifer, a Glaswegian and a borderer, and see if they all speak the same dialect. They are just as distinct from one another as a Scouse, a Cockney, a Geordie, a man from Avon, Dorset or Devon would be. Yet Scots is the name applied to the way people speak everywhere north of the Tweed, which would seem in itself an admission that this is a separate language.
(ibid)
In his influential Scots: The Mither Tongue, Billy Kay quotes the German philologist Manfret Görtlach
Scots was and is more removed from English than is the case with modern pairs such as Czech and Slovack, Serbian and Croatian, Bulgarian and Macedonian, or Swedish, Danish and Norwegian – all of which are considered independent languages by their speakers and in consequence, by linguists.
Scots: The Mither Tongue, Kay, B, Mainstream Publishing (1986)
There is a great deal of informed opinion supporting the case for Scots as a language in its own right, but there is no room for complacency among those who seek to promote it. The maintenance of any minority language requires sustained commitment and enthusiasm amongst its supporters, as the countless examples demonstrate (Welsh, Catalan, Euskadi etc), and in the case of Scots, there are particular obstacles in the way for even its staunchest advocates.
Like many other languages which have been marginalised by pressures from a dominant culture, Scots has been seen increasingly as a feature of the ‘lower orders’ (both agricultural and industrial). Even if such social categorisation is no longer acceptable, it is still true to say that the Scots tongue is rarely found ‘above street level’, that is, in use for any higher register than vernacular conversation, despite the efforts of MacDiarmid, Grassic Gibbon, Mitchison and others.
In a paper for the Aiberdeen Universitie Scots Leid Quorum (AUSLQ) entitled Language Politics in Scotland, the author, Steve Murdoch, claims
The languages of Scotland are a source of cultural wealth and pride to the nation. It is not surprising therefore that over the years many groups and structures have evolved and vigorously worked to ensure their survival and development. Though this has been true for both Scots and Gaelic, there is no doubt that today Gaelic has forged support structures which the Scots language lobby must work hard to emulate.
Language Politics in Scotland, Murdoch, S, Aberdeen University (second edition,1996)
Efforts are currently being made in this direction. For example, the language policy statement of the University of the Highlands and Islands (UHI) Project is produced in English, Gaelic, Scots, Orcadian and Shetlandic; the first undergraduate thesis in recent times in ‘braid Scots’ was accepted by Glasgow University in 1993.
The second and more insurmountable problem faced by anyone supporting the maintenance of Scots as a separate language and advocates of its wider acceptance, is the fact that the first and primary written language for the great majority of Scots is English.
To quote Murdoch again:
Janet Menzie’s research into attitudes towards urban dialects in Scotland concludes that in Britain, cultural pressure has established Standard English as the medium for written language which leads many people that speak Scots to believe that they are speaking English incorrectly.
(ibid)
This common reaction is, as Billy Kay maintains in the concluding chapter of Scots: The Mither Tongue
… a direct result of the lack of Scottish content in the educational system and to a lesser extent, the shortage of it in the all-pervasive media which helps form ideas in the second part of the 20th century. When Scottish history or literature is not taught, the implication for many is that it is not worth teaching. Many in fact draw the conclusion that it does not exist. With no grounding in their culture, objective assessment of its worth is well-nigh impossible …
Scots: The Mither Tongue, Kay, B, Mainstream Publishing (1986)
One branch of educational media which ought to concern itself with the promotion of the Scots language is heritage interpretation, especially in areas where it is integral to the object or site being interpreted. This is true not just in the use of Scots, of course, but of all the other languages that are currently in use, and, arguably, all of the languages which contribute to the linguistic heritage of the nation
When we talk of the languages currently in use, we raise the issue of multiculturalism. As Scotland, along with many other countries, becomes increasingly multicultural, interpreters must take into account all the other minority language cultures that nowadays make up part of the Scottish mosaic.
Several recent studies (eg Sam Ham and others; The London Exhibition) show that minority groups are effectively excluded from much interpretive experience, mainly due to the Anglo-centric viewpoints of the majority of planners and the resulting English language presentations.
The integration of the multicultural elements of our society will never be a smooth process: one has only to cast an eye over events in the former Yugoslavia for evidence of this. But it is incumbent on those who strive to interpret our culture and heritage for the benefit of the greatest number to question the in-built and generally unacknowledged racism in this situation which requires their constant vigilance and best efforts to redress.
As complex as it is, the issue of language among Scottish residents is only one part of the bigger picture of multilingualism that interpreters must deal with. After all, a large part of the audience for any interpreters, multilingual or otherwise, will be made up of foreign visitors, that is, those for whom English is, at best, a second language. We have already seen that the ‘language map’ of Scotland is made up of a number of elements; when we include the foreign tourist in our considerations this is much greater.
It is common practice among those who deal with multilingual interpretation to provide translation of an original English text in at least some of the major European languages and more recently, Gaelic and occasional Scots (see ‘Multilingual Text’ for examples and further analysis).
This practice suggests an understanding of interpretation that is based on the commonly accepted definition of ‘translation’ rather than the more specific connotation that it holds for the heritage interpreter – that of ‘explaining the significance of’. Although it is widespread practice in Britain, the assumption that it is appropriate for Scotland is open to question.
All over the world interpretation is presented in a variety of languages appropriate to the area – both native languages and those of neighboring countries or areas. In Europe this generally means that interpretation appears in the language of the country where it takes place and in one or more of the major European languages. It is also common for the text to be repeated in the pre-eminent international language – English.
In Luxembourg, for example, where Luxembourgish is the native language (a regional dialect of German liberally spattered with French), all native Luxembourgers are taught in German from the age of six onwards, and French and English are taught as foreign languages. High German is therefore very common and considered the primary language of entertainment, popular culture and the mass media. French is the dominant other language, however, due in no small part to the large numbers of workers who commute daily to jobs in the burgeoning financial sector from their homes in France and the Walloon provinces of Belgium. Germany is a minor source of labour for Luxembourg. French is the language of the establishment, as all legislation and government is conducted in this language.
These are the three official languages in Luxembourg. English, however, is the dominant language of business. Most multicultural organisations, like Deloitte and Touche (an international tax, audit and management company who supplied this information) operate with English as their lingua franca for official communication, procedure and training.
Tourist brochures and some interpretive panels will generally be in French, German and English, whereas literature from such august bodies as the Family Benefits Board will be in French and German (not English) and also in Portuguese and Italian, to provide for those, mainly lower income, elements, historically well established in Luxembourg.
Palmer, S: Deloitte and Touche (personal communication)
In Switzerland, where the language situation is of similar complexity, with French, Italian and German (Switzerdeutch – the vernacular of the German part - may not seem to the listener much like the High German, but it is closely related, and the written form is the same) as the official languages, English is frequently provided for visitors. It is significantly rare to find any samples of the other national language, Romansch, in print outside, or even within, its home area.
A selection of brochures for tourists in France (ski-resorts, heritage centres etc) demonstrates that the Europe-wide convention of supplying information in the major European languages usually signalled by the flag appropriate to the relevant country, is commonly practised, as is the provision of text in French and English only. Where these differ from similar tourist publications in the Highlands (Historic Scotland, Scottish and local Tourist Boards etc) is the fact that in France, one is less likely to find a direct translation from one language to another. It is obvious from the majority of Scottish examples that each of the foreign language elements is a more-or-less direct translation from an English original whereas, in the French samples, the texts differ subtly from one another, suggesting that each text has been separately composed by native, or competent, speakers of the language involved.
This common practice in Scotland, or at any rate in the Highlands, further indicates an unacknowledged reluctance to engage the foreign readers on their own terms, that is, in ways which are culturally, rather than merely linguistically, relevant. (The issue of Relating is covered elsewhere in this study.)
Multiculturalism and cultural ‘roots'
For freedom of thought and the freedom to be different to be ever-present requires acceptance of individuality and multi-culturalism as the norm.
To cut off a person’s past, the way the African slave owners did, is terribly crippling. Like trees, humans cannot live without roots … Cultures will converge to some degree as the world shrinks, but cultural and religious difference will not disappear …. What we should seek is to make multi-culturalism a part of every culture.
Cultures in Competition, International Herald Tribune, Tokyo Edition, Yung Boon-Yeong, 18 February 1993
The question of cultural roots is one which exercises the minds of many in the field of interpretation. Not only are these roots, like those of the plant world, essential to the maintenance of the culture itself, they are also seen as a salient attraction for visitors to the Highlands. If it is true, as Pricilla Boniface maintains in Managing Cultural Tourism, that
Culture is very much tourism’s main attraction. Without culture to make the difference, every place would seem blandly the same.
Managing Cultural Tourism, Boniface, P, Routledge, London (1995)
then the interpreter must seek to engage the greatest number with the widest variety of aspects of that culture, and that includes the various languages that constitute, both currently and historically, its modes of expression. This is not intended to imply that all interpretation is for the sole benefit of tourists (although, in the sense that very few of us live in or on an interpreted site, we are all tourists, or temporary visitors – even if the site is close to home). On the contrary, it could be said that none would benefit more from an understanding of these cultural roots than the indigenous and resident population.
It is nonetheless true that tourism makes an increasing contribution to the national economy and especially to that of the Highlands and Islands. Consideration of the increasing numbers of hill-walkers, climbers and touring holidaymakers and their contribution to the economy of the Highlands, together with the widespread growth in interest in cultural history, supplemented by the growing demand for genealogical information for diaspora Scots, reinforces the importance of interpretation in conveying the ‘sense of place’ – that complex mix of factual and mythical information and subjective connectedness between people and landscape.
When we include the element of multi-lingualism in the equation, then the reader can be forgiven for immediately considering the links between interpretation and foreign visitors, but this should not obscure the fact that Scotland itself is made up of a variety of language communities. We are multi-cultural nation and, like many other nations in a world of enhanced mobility, increasingly so.
The concept of ‘cultural landscape’ is one receiving increasing attention in the field of interpretation, and deservedly so, but little attention is currently paid to the crucial part played by language in relating to this cultural landscape. Acknowledgment of the concept as describing a widespread phenomenon can be seen in the following, from David Lowenthal’s paper to the Robert Gordon University Heritage Convention (1993), entitled Landscape as Heritage,
National attachments reveal landscapes deployed for identity and cohesion, stimuli for group feeling and action. They form the foundations for present-day changes in how land is seen and valued, notably where environmental feelings are highly self-conscious
Most European heritages depict themselves in landscape terms; they hallow traits they fancy uniquely theirs. Every national anthem praises special scenic splendours or nature’s unique bounties.
On the question of language, Lowenthal continues,
Embedded habits and language barriers hamper comparisons. A sign in the Swiss village of Chateau d’ Oex says in English: ‘Please do not pick the flowers’. In German: ‘It is forbidden to pick the flowers.’ In French: ‘Those who love the mountains, leave them their flowers.’
From which he concludes that,
These phrases all favour flowers, but imply divergent landscape attitudes: English good manners, German minatory prohibition, French aesthetic affection.
Heritage: Conservation, Intepretation and Enterprise (papers presented at RGIT Heritage Convention 1993)
The observed implication of divergent landscape attitudes, redolent of the debate on intrinsic language-based differences in world-view (vide Sapir-Whorff hypothesis) should not obscure the obvious fact that the views expressed are those of the professional interpreter(s) responsible for the text and are not necessarily representative of real cultural differences between the language groups. They may, on the contrary, be an iteration - thoughtless or deliberate - of racial stereotypes, which in this case may protect the flowers while in the long term doing much more lasting insidious damage.
This raises the issue of the responsibilities inherent in the act of interpretation. A large proportion of interpretation, perhaps the largest, is carried out by people trained in various disciplines, frequently those of the natural sciences, who may have little or no training in different languages. The greater facility in languages observable amongst those visitors from other parts of the world compared to British residents, argues a need for more concerted efforts in this area here at home. This need is arguably nowhere more acute than among the interpretive profession, if we are to succeed in bridging the gaps in cross-cultural communication.
Language training is, of course, a matter to be tackled within the school curriculum, but this does not mean that today’s interpreters should ‘muddle along’ until such time as a new breed of linguistically-trained and culturally-informed interpreters emerges through the education system. New ways of tackling the problems must be sought now. In the words of one commentator,
An[other] issue which needs to be addressed is that of training and employment. Few environmental and heritage courses have even begun to address issues of culture, ethnicity and access. These issues must begin to inform such courses, so the gatekeepers of the future are more aware of societal issues, as well as the substantive, professional or content-related material in such courses
Environment, Heritage and Multiculturalism, Agyeman, J, Association for Heritage Interpretation, article (1999)
The Scottish parliament has recently released the report of a nationwide consultation on a National Cultural Strategy for Scotland; under the heading Scotland’s Image (3.17). The report finds
There was a desire to refresh the image of Scotland and Scottish culture which is portrayed, particularly to visitors. The current image was thought to stereotype Scotland as a tartan and shortbread culture. People thought that film and television offered real opportunities to improve Scotland’s image …
Although specific reference is made to Language (3.29) (quoted elsewhere in this study) and to the issues of Social Inclusion and Access, no reference is made to interpretation, a serious omission given the part that interpretation plays in all of these issues (ie national image, language, access and social inclusion).
The issue of foreign language provision in the context of a National Cultural Strategy is nowhere addressed in the report. This, again, is a serious oversight, especially in the light of the stated purpose of the strategy
This [the National Cultural Strategy] could improve the understanding of culture within and outside Scotland and allow culture to play its part in a range of other government agendas including social inclusion, education, health and economic regeneration. (3.14)
It is apparent from this report, among others (eg The Highland Interpretive Strategy Project), that although the will exists to address the issue of an integrated approach to interpreting our cultural (and natural) heritage, little attention has been given to the multilingual/multicultural aspects of such an approach. It is widely recognised, not least within the interpretive profession, that an integrated approach to cultural interpretation must be predicated on the existence of broad networks of professionals. As far back as the mid 1960s’The Peak Blueprint’ - the First Review of the Peak Park Development Plan (1966) - asserted,
…there must be closer cooperation between the Board’s information and interpretation service and the Universities, Institutes of Education, adult and school education services, museums and land user interests in the park (such as the National Farmers’ Union and Forestry Commission), and also with those private individuals and companies who already successfully operate facilities which are broadly speaking interpretive in their nature.
Quoted in Heritage : Conservation, Interpretation and Enterprise, JM Fladmark (ed)
Since that time, many such partnerships have evolved, as well as partnerships of professional interpreters, one of the most recent examples being the European Network of interpretive professionals and supporting organisations, which held its inaugural conference in Bournemouth in July 1999. At the time of writing, the full report of the proceedings of this conference – which took the form of an ‘international workshop’ on Heritage Presentation and Interpretation in Europe – is not available. It is tempting in the interim to quote in full the text of the first bulletin of the network, but the following points will suffice to indicate the main objectives
- over the last twenty years there has been substantial investment in interpretive provision in many countries and today the practice plays a significant role, both in the protection of the natural and cultural heritage of Europe and in contributing to the economy of local areas;
- even the oldest and largest of the national associations (AHI in the UK with nearly 700 members) has too small a membership and financial base to achieve many of its desired objectives;
- there is strength in numbers - a permanent European network will have a stronger professional standing and political profile than any single country association;
- currently interpretive developments are local and projects are little related one to another - whilst there is strength in local individuality and its continuation should be encouraged, networking would also enable opportunities to co-ordinate programmes that address European or global themes and issues;
- as interpretive provision at any single site is unique, and its effectiveness is directly related to the originality, innovation and imagination of the communications programme, networking will provide an important means of sharing experiences and raising standards based upon best practice;
- there are only very limited training opportunities in interpretive practice in European countries and even these remain uncoordinated;
- there is no careers framework or careers advice service for those aspiring to enter the profession;
- there is no source of technical support for practicing interpreters in any single country;
- interpretation is a sophisticated, technical practice, the effectiveness of which will be advanced only through experimentation with innovative practices and academic research, neither of which are coordinated at the European level;
- the establishment of a recognised professional interpretive network will improve access to funding from national and European statutory, business and voluntary sources;
- a permanent European network can become an effective lobby for heritage and interpretive issues and have a voice on the European and world stage (eg, consultee for, or representative at, major European or world events);
- a pan-European network will bring us closer together as Europeans, pursuing our common aim of promoting public understanding and appreciation of the European heritage.
Given these stated focal points of the network, it is perhaps surprising to see no mention of the issue of multiculturalism/multilingualism in this bulletin, although perhaps understandable in view of this being the first report from an organisation still in its infancy. Nevertheless, such an omission from the agenda of the very organisation best placed to deal with these issues, reflects the general attitude of myopia in this area which results in the treatment of multiculturalism – at least as it applies to the portrayal of Highland culture to other language communities – as a neglected aspect of cultural interpretation. This study argues for a review of this general attitude on the grounds that, until multiculturalism/multilingualism is treated as a fundamental aspect of the presentation of our culture to others both at home and abroad, then the basic principles of interpretation are being flouted.
In 1997, a two-day workshop took place in Inverness under the title Interpreting for Success. One of the key speakers at this workshop was Professor Sam Ham of Idaho University, one of the world’s acknowledged experts in the interpretive profession. The following is quoted from the introduction to the proceedings, in Section 2:2 The Interpretive Approach to Communication.
In a non-captive audience the information has to be delivered in a way that retains the attention of the audience while also getting the message across.
Professor Sam Ham in his seminar confronts this situation and outlines four qualities which define the interpretive approach to communication. They are:
- Enjoyable
- Relevant – both in a personal and meaningful way
- Organised
- Thematic
Expanding on the second of these elements, Professor Ham maintains that, for interpretation to be relevant, it must first be meaningful.
This quality is achieved by using words that awake our semantic memory – words that bring along with them a multitude of associations.
If this is true of single words how much more true is it of language in general and language-based cultural perceptions in particular?
Ham goes on to say that
It is a generally recognised educational principle that you can’t learn anything for the first time except in the context of what you already know. In conjunction with this we must always be aware that our habitual jargon, the words we may use every day in a professional context, do not apply to the rest of the world.
This first point – the ‘educational principle’ - is ignored in any interpretation which fails to tell the story – or interpret a theme – in a way that relates to the home culture of the language in which it is presented. As an example, the interpretive audio/visual display at Culloden Battlefield could better emphasise the pan-European nature of the Jacobite movement in the French, German and Italian versions than does the current reliance on an almost direct translation from an English-language original with its concomitant Anglocentric view. It is perhaps pertinent to this study that, in the experience of the staff at the Culloden Battlefield Centre (although this is unsupported by analytical data), the Japanese visitors tend to prefer to listen to the Gaelic version, rather than that in Japanese. This is not because they understand Gaelic, rather that it is seen as a more fitting medium, being integral to the ‘total interpretive experience’ in a way in which the Japanese version is not.
While it may be difficult to integrate this particular theme into Japanese cultural history, the opposite is true of its relationship to the rest of Europe. The Jacobite movement was, as indicated, a phenomenon with social and political ramifications that impinged on the rest of Europe. A failure to adequately address these ramifications from the perspective of the cultures involved is to be seen not merely as a missed opportunity to use interpretation as a means of educating and entertaining a public, but also and much more seriously, as a means of explaining the significance of the ancient links which exist between Scotland and the other countries of Europe and in the process fortifying them.
In his subsequent exploration of the importance of Relevance in interpretive text, Professor Ham touches on the themes of Self-Referencing (eg statements that begin ‘Think of the last time you…’ or ‘How many times have you ever…’) and of Labelling – the process of categorising groups of people (eg positively, ‘All right thinking people…’ or negatively, ‘The worst criminals…’, ‘Disrespectful tourists…’) – with which the audience can associate or disassociate themselves. He makes the telling observation that
[Self-reference] gets people in the audience to think about themselves which, according to Professor Ham, is our most favourite subject.
An understanding of this universal human trait should underpin all interpretation. Added to this, an understanding of the crucial role that native language plays in the construction of self-image should underpin all attempts to reach an audience in that language, for such attempts to be considered interpretation rather than merely tokenism.
Communicating with the audience
A fundamental tenet of interpretive provision, although often ‘more honoured in the breach than the observance,’ can be summed up in three words, ‘Know Your Audience’. A growing body of research data gleaned from customer surveys and questionnaires – increasingly recognised as a key management tool in interpretive ventures – reflects the importance of this principle. Using this data as guidelines, it would make sense to employ this new network (ie the European Network) to set in place a translation facility where, for example, a brief could be sent to all interested parties, who could then prepare interpretive material appropriate to the site or event that is relevant to the language community to which it is targeted.
Interpretation (interpret {L interpres} - to spread abroad)
The word interpretation has many uses. This paper is concerned only with term as it is used by those in the field of heritage, both natural and cultural. Even in this restricted sense, there are almost as many definitions of the term as there are writers on the subject. It is not the intention here to add to this list of definitions. Instead it is hoped that, by the end of this short study, the reader will have a clear idea of what is intended by the term.
Interpretation of the kind with which this study is concerned has been around for a very long time; to quote from the introduction to INTERPNET- an internet site for interpretive professionals –
Interpretation of natural and cultural heritage must be as old as humans. The shaman, storytellers, and elders of tribal groups carried the oral history of their people forward from generation to generation. Before books and modern methods of recording stories, these oral traditions were key to the survival and evolution of cultures.
INTERPNET : What Is Interpretation? Interpretive Professionals (introduction to website)
But the treatment of interpretation as an independent field of study can possibly be dated to Freeman Tilden’s book Interpreting our Heritage. Naturally many changes have taken place since this book was first published (1957) in the practice of interpretation, as in everything else, but it is still true to say that the basic principles laid down by Tilden apply today.
Tilden himself saw interpretation as a new field of endeavour, one that had ‘recently come into our cultural world’; while conceding that some people in the past, notably those in the field of education, had throughout history been, and are, interpreters – according to Tilden’s own criteria, he saw this as occurring more by accident than design, in that there had hitherto been no perception of interpretation as a field of endeavour in its own right but rather that it was commonly conceived as an aspect of the act of education. Accordingly, there had hitherto been only the most rudimentary, if any, training in interpretation.
What was new, in Tilden’s time – and was to be one of the main spurs for his major work (cited) - was the growing formal recognition of the importance of interpretation amongst those involved in the management of National Parks, museums and other such bodies concerned with the protection and promotion of heritage, both natural and cultural.
Tilden himself saw interpretation as
… a new kind of group education based upon a systematic kind of preservation and use of national cultural resources
Cited in On Interpretation: Sociology for Interpreters of Natural and Cultural History, Machlis GE and Field, DR
And what was new about it was
The scope of this activity has no counterpart in older nations or other times.
(ibid)
In the words of the same commentator:
In sociological terms, interpretation had become institutionalized
(ibid)
Since Tilden’s time this ’institutionalisation’ has led to the growth of what can now be regarded as the interpretive profession – internationally recognised as such and seen to be an important contributor to the self-image of all nations.
An examination of interpretation in action reveals several key elements or functions that together define the role of interpretation. The first of these, although not necessarily in order of importance, is information.
We make take it as given that the conveying of information is of primary importance in the production of interpretive text (if not, indeed, all text) but those who deal with interpretation in other languages must bear constantly in mind such factors as cultural perceptions and sensitivities. In the words of T Millburn
There is no denying that language differences must receive special attention in inter-cultural communication, but one should also recognise that differences in beliefs about how people should behave are equally critical, if not more critical, in inter-cultural communication.
Management Review: Millburn,T, January 1997
Most interpretation carries a conservation message, whether explicit or implicit. It is not enough simply to inform the reader (hearer, viewer, etc) of the history or other attributes of any site or resource; the interpreter must also aim to provoke a reaction within his/her audience – a reaction that will lead to a change in behaviour brought about by the increased awareness. In the words of Freeman Tilden, often considered to be the ‘father of interpretation,
- through interpretation – understanding;
- through understanding – appreciation;
- through appreciation – protection.
Any text that seeks to do more than factual reporting must also entertain. Even the apparently simple act of conveying information is rendered much more effective if the reader is first attracted by an entertaining format and then his/her attention is held by an entertaining interpretation. It goes without saying that if a reader’s interest is not maintained throughout, then it is because he/she is bored by it. The interpreter has failed to entertain him/her sufficiently. And it is this aspect of interpretation that allows the greatest scope for the use of other languages. Clever and appropriate use of language is universally appreciated. But there is more than just language in the interpreter’s bag of tricks, as Figure 1 demonstrates.
Originally derived from a group of Roman Catholic cardinals established by Pope Gregory XV, in 1622, to instruct and supervise missionaries, the word propaganda today signifies a one-sided communication designed to influence people’s thinking and action.
The propaganda element of interpretation is widely acknowledged by its practitioners and falls into two general categories. Firstly, the ‘spreading of the message’, generally a conservation-based message and, secondly, promoting a particular organisation or group.
There is, however, an element of propaganda which takes a more covert form, ie without the knowledge of the author. When we consider that a great deal of the interpretive material to be found in the Highlands and Islands is produced from an English-language based perspective, often promoting organisations whose head office is located outwith the area – we become aware that an unintentional subtext is almost inevitable, and that such a subtext can carry inappropriate assumptions.
Many people, probably the majority, when they hear the word ‘interpretation’, think of translation. In a sense, that is precisely what we are discussing. When we interpret any element of a culture for the benefit of another culture, we are translating it and, as we all know, translation has its pitfalls. A few examples should illustrate some of them.
From an Athens hotel
Visitors are expected to complain at the office between the hours of 9 and 11 am daily.
From a German camping site
It is strictly forbidden on our Black Forest camping site that people of different sexes, for instance men and women, live together in one tent unless they are married with each other for that purpose.
From a Roman doctor
Specialist in women and other diseases.
These examples show that, however well you think you know the language(s), you can still make mistakes that mean your message is other than what you intend. It may not seem so, but these three texts were all composed by people who were quite competent in English. Incompetence in another language – and we British excel at it – can produce even more bizarre results, such as the following, which I’ve taken from Bill Bryson’s delightful book Mother Tongue,
When a passenger of the foot heave in sight, tootle the horn. Trumpet at him melodiously at first, but if he still obstacles your passage, then tootle him with vigour
Mother Tongue, Bryson, B
The author of this text, however un-English it may sound, still had a reasonable grasp of the grammar, and consequently we can still understand what is intended. The next (and last) example goes one step further in stretching the bounds of comprehensibility, although even here the grammatical rules stay fairly intact. It is included only to demonstrate that competency in a language operates on a ‘sliding scale’. It is to be found on the packaging of a tool produced in Korea.
TO BE NO HAMMERED MORE THE FINGERS.
1. Introduce the nail in one of the holes lightly inferior to the nail,
which will deep firmly supported in vertical position.
2. Leaf the sharp-pointed extremity of the nail stand out a little from
the base of instrument to receive the nail.
3. Give some beats of hammer in the head of nail in order to obtain one
principle of suitable placing.
4. Finish the nail after having retreated the Guide-nails by simple
pressure in the two provided arms for them.
So much for the perils of translating simple messages. When it comes to dealing with the translation of a culture, we run a much more serious risk of misinterpretation.
Many of the text-books on interpretation stress the fact that good interpretation is about ‘telling a story’. The telling of stories is, in fact, a fundamental aspect of human communication. In a paper entitled The Origin of Selves, Daniel Dennett has this to say,
Our human environment contains not just food and shelter, enemies to fight or flee and conspecifics with whom to mate, but words, words, words. These words are potent elements of our environment that we readily incorporate, ingesting and extruding them, weaving them like spiderwebs into self-protective strings of narrative. Our fundamental tactic of self-protection, self-control, and self-definition is not building dams or spinning webs, but telling stories – and particularly concocting and controlling the story we tell others..and ourselves..about who we are.
The Origin of Selves, Dennett, D, Internet text
Translating stories from one culture for the benefit of another is not a simple matter of transposing words, as anyone knows who has read a book in two language versions or watched a film with subtitles. Dr David Uzzell, one of England’s foremost practitioners of interpretation, has this to say
I was involved in (only) one bilingual project and the two things I learned from that were
1 You can only write half the amount of material that you would have written, because of the duplication of the text, and
2 You cannot do a straight translation from one language to another, because some concepts do not translate exactly. This means that you sometimes need to get the other language text written by a native. (my emphasis)
Uzzell, D (personal communication)
The
Choices we face
Minimal text
It is almost a truism that interpretation, to be effective, should be kept to the necessary minimum. Where more than one language is involved, this is even more important. As an increasing number of sites are selected for interpretation, the interpreter must be more than usually rigorous in deciding what material to discard. A plethora of signs with large blocks of text in many languages will detract from, rather than add to, the visitor experience.
A good example of minimal interpretation is seen in Figure 2 The monument being interpreted here, The Well of the Seven Heads, at Invergarry, is one of the finest examples of multilingual interpretation from the 19th century, incorporating English, Gaelic, French and Latin carved on the four stone faces of the plinth. The question here is whether the interpretive panel, minimal though it is, actually adds anything to the original monument. There is no attempt to interpret the monument in other languages, not even those which occur on the monument itself, so is the sign necessary?
Sometimes the need to convey useful information takes precedence over the other elements of interpretation. Figure 3 is one of a series of signs that inform drivers touring in the Highlands. Here the provision of geographical information is repeated in several major languages, each signalled by the appropriate national flag, a device common throughout Europe and elsewhere.
In cases like this, the provision of Gaelic, aside from the issue of its appearance under the Saltire, is of questionable efficacy or necessity, for the oft-repeated but none-the-less valid reason that the Gaelic language readers already have the English version which in all cases (apart from a very small group of Gaelic-medium school children) is easier to read
On the use of the Saltire –– the fact that this is also the symbol most commonly used to signal the use of the Scots language only adds ambiguity to the purpose of the flag as a marker. The thistle, for long recognised throughout the world as a symbol of Scottishness, could be used to differentiate between Gaelic and Scots in this context.
The argument on grounds of necessity or efficacy applies, as is stated elsewhere, equally to the use of Scots. There is no one who reads Scots more fluently than English and in both cases what is required is the element of ‘additionality’ addressed elsewhere in this paper.
The approach used by Touchstone Heritage Management Consultants in Argyll, in their interpretation of the ‘clearance township’ of Rossal, for the Forestry Commission, involves considerable use of Gaelic, although the majority of the text is produced in English.
In general terms, the approach has been to weave Gaelic into the English text when describing the names of tools, crops, animals, buildings and other day-to-day things, as in Figure 4.
Gaelic will also form the majority of sound stores, to provide short conversations or work-songs, or poetry, with occasional translations or interpretation in English.
Unlike side-by-side Gaelic/English text, where the majority of readers, even those with the ability to read Gaelic, will read the English text first and generally in preference to Gaelic this ‘macaronic’ approach, for long a popular stylistic device in Gaelic literature, forces the reader to engage with unavoidable ‘chunks’ of Gaelic, with accompanying translation into English, in a way which is both entertaining and informative. It also ensures a greater readership for the Gaelic element than would otherwise be the case. The example in figure 5 is one of a series of panels in both Rossal and Leitir Fura that utilise increasingly denser texts in Gaelic up to and including excerpts of the poetry of George Campbell Hay, a native of Argyll who composed in many languages, including a high literary form of Gaelic.
Those who level the accusation of tokenism at the previous example may have less cause to do so with the following:
M’oiteag cheolmhor chaoin teachd deiseil ‘nam bheathaich samhraidh i,
Mo stuirm chuain le dìle cur still ‘s gach alldan domh,
A’ ghaoth tuath le cathadhsneachda nì dreachmhor beanntan domh,
A’ ghaoth tha g’iomain m’fhaloisg earraich ri leathad ghleanntaichean
Ceithir Gaoth na h-Albainn, Deòrsa Mac Iain Deòrsa, Nua Bhardachd Gàidhlig : MacAulay (ed)
This example, taken from Touchstone’s interpretation of Leitir Fura township in Skye, demands a high degree of competence in Gaelic, with the English translation supplied by the author himself.
Another fairly innovative approach to Gaelic/English bi-lingual signage, pioneered by Touchstone, is the reproduction of blank verse texts in a similar visual format. With this approach the original text, in English, is rendered in the same attractive shape in Gaelic, with key words in bold, thus allowing the reader to follow the theme without the necessity of reading the whole text closely – which should always be a consideration with a non-captive audience.
This device would obviously lend itself to use with any two or more languages, although the novelty, and probably the overall efficacy, would decrease as the number of languages increased. It is also possible to envisage an elaboration of the device, incorporating a variety of typographical highlighting techniques (eg bolding, italicising, underlining and different font sizes), not only to streamline the theming, but also to facilitate understanding of the connections of the two texts. While it may not be advisable, or even possible, to transliterate, it could nevertheless assist the understanding and enjoyment of the ‘other’ language if the salient terms (eg noun phrases, verb phrases, etc.) were emphasised in similar formats.
The use of original poetry in Gaelic and Scots is a well-established practice amongst interpreters, although effective translation of poetry is notoriously difficult. This was recognised as far back as the 16th century when the poet James Howell wrote,
Some hold translation not unlike to be
The wrong side of a Turkish tapestry
Familiar Letters, Book I, J Howell
While some of the best translations of verse have been achieved by established poets re-writing a poem in another language, this is a very problematic process, since the rewrite has little chance of capturing all the elements and nuances of the original and even the best of bi- or multi-lingual poets will have difficulty in rendering exactly the same mood or tone as the original verse.
This situation is exacerbated when the verse in question belongs to another epoch, as is frequently the case with Gaelic poetry of the type quoted in interpretation. In such cases the quoted verse has to be understood in its historical context, which requires a more-or-less thorough acquaintance with the history, not only of the context in general, but frequently specific knowledge of both the poet and his geographical, as well as historical, location.
In Figure 6 we have an interpretive panel on the poet Iain Lom (John MacDonald), one of the foremost Gaelic poets of the 17th/18th century. The panel is sited in the location where the poet is thought to have died, in Lochaber. In this piece of interpretation, it appears that the onus has rested with the designer, rather than the interpreter. So much information has been crammed onto the panel, most of it repeated in a variety of European languages, that it is doubtful if it achieves its intention. The elements of brevity and, arguably, entertainment, have been sacrificed in the desire to inform, in such a way as to present an unappealing clutter.
Another issue raised by this particular example is that of appropriateness. Looking at the surrounding area one is struck by the ‘out-of-placeness’ of the panel vis-à-vis the local environment. A more sensitive approach is possible, for example to erect a small cairn of locally collected stone as a frame for the basic biographical details of the poet, perhaps including a single, potent example of his verse (with translation or interpretation in English). It would be doubly effective if the sample bore relevance to the changes which have been wrought on the surrounding locality in the time between that of the poet and the present day; and, in terms of multilingual interpretation, if the text in other languages made links between the events and attitudes reflected in the poetry and those connected, contemporaneous events and attitudes in the home country of the relevant language.
This criticism is equally applicable to many forms of interpretation, an issue that is analysed in further detail elsewhere in this paper.
The most successful interpretive panels include some graphics, but graphics alone cannot get across much information. A study carried out on the Great Barrier Reef suggest that graphics can be confusing for foreign visitors, especially those from the Far East. Possibly this is connected to their use of ideogrammatic languages. But for European and Western visitors, however, a picture is literally ‘worth a thousand words’ and will more than compensate anyone who has difficulty with the English text. The graphic solution can be said to be ‘multicultural’.
In Figure 7, one of a series of interpretive panels sited at various brochs around the Highlands, the graphic element of the sign depicts the building, using an artist’s impression of how it may have been when occupied. The accompanying text in English cogently explains the significance of the site.
The Gaelic text however, a close translation, arguably does not attract the eye. As in so many other cases, the Gaelic text is largely superfluous, since all readers of Gaelic – a very small percentage of the potential visitors, can invariably read the English version. As is so often the case, the inclusion of the Gaelic texts owes more to political correctness – a sop to the Gaelic lobby - than it does to the principles of interpretation.
Returning to Veverka’s basic re-stating of Tilden’s principles of Provoke: Relate: Reveal as a starting point, the obvious questions arise. What kind of reaction does the repetition of English text in Gaelic provoke, and in whom? To what element of everyday life does this relate and for how many? And finally, what does it reveal?
Like so many other instances of the use of Gaelic text in conjunction with English, a good opportunity to engage the Gaelic reader or potential reader has been lost. A more effective approach would have been to convey, in Gaelic, something about the site and its significance to Gaelic society – in the case of the brochs, a vastly under-researched subject – that the English version does not supply.
The interpreter, in this case Historic Scotland, would have been well-advised to find one or two local people with an interest in and knowledge of the brochs and any stories related to them, and used this resource as a basis for a Gaelic original text.
When discussing the issue of appropriateness we are immediately confronted by some of the basic questions facing interpreters; questions more adequately addressed in a number of texts which have a claim to being considered as required reading amongst those involved in the interpretive professions. (see Bibliography and Further Reading
In Interpretive Master Planning, Veverka gives as the two most important questions an (interpretive) planner has to ask as,
1 Why would a visitor want to know that?
2 How do I want the visitors to use the information I am giving them?
Interpretive Master Planning, JA Veverka, Falcon Press Publishing, Montana (1994)
Merely because all things can be interpreted (and all understanding can, indeed, be viewed as a result of a process of interpretation) does not mean that all things should be interpreted.
Figure 8 sets out with, as in the previous example, a great deal of information, to tell the story of the restoration of Gairloch beach, damaged by severe storms. Given the wealth of interpretable material in the Gairloch area (and the fact that, as a topic for interpretation, any beach has a great deal to offer) one is tempted to pose that most daunting of questions faced by the interpreter – so what?
The sign also flouts the basic rule of brevity or succinctness and again, the format, and in this example even the content, seem to have been left to a sign-maker, rather than to an interpreter.
This discussion on multilingualism in interpretation has so far focused on the interpretive panel and written text in different languages. Figure 9 raises the issue of providing text for a group who, while they very probably understand the primary language, may not be able to read the printed word.
It is reasonable to suppose that blind and partially-sighted people will not, in the main, be unaccompanied on a visit to any heritage site or venue. Is it not also reasonable to expect that a significant majority of foreign visitors to any site will also be accompanied or will have in their group/party someone with a reasonable proficiency in English?
Figure 9 also leads us to consider another fundamental aspect of interpretation – that of relating to the audience. In this example, the message to the reader of both written text and braille, is to look, listen, smell and hear the surroundings. This example probably succeeds in relating (remember Tilden’s Provoke, Relate, Reveal) more to the sighted reader, since the blind and partially-sighted have, presumably, no need to be reminded to smell, touch and hear their surroundings, and it can therefore be deemed counter-productive. If the sign in Braille attempted to identify the sounds, smells and tactile sensations available, it would engage the Braille reader’s attention in a more relevant way. It would, in other words, relate the information to the everyday experience of the reader.
Although the Braille example is a special case, the principle is, however, equally applicable in considering bi- or multi-lingual/multi-cultural signage. In providing a translation of any given English original text, the implicit assumption is that the visitor cannot read the original or will have significant difficulty with it. Taking this assumption to be true, what value is there in providing the same information in another language? The probability is high that the reader will have little knowledge of the local context for the information. If he/she does not know the language they cannot know much about the culture nor how it relates to them and their own culture. To relate to the reader of any other language requires a message content relevant to that language and its culture. Figure 9 gives a fine example of this principle in action.
The Gaelic phrase is an acceptable colloquial command, if a bit brusque, with humorous overtones of which the English text is absolutely devoid. A similar pithyness would, in English, require a mild profanity!
Although perhaps particularly applicable to Gaelic/English signs and text, given the former’s reduced status (discussed elsewhere in this paper), the reader of non-English text of any sort would derive much benefit from the application of this principle of additionality and the colloquialness of the language.
Interpretation is, in the main, aimed at visitors, be they from within the locality or from further afield. In the sense that very few people live in an interpreted site, we are all visitors; we are all tourists. And, for the vast majority of visitors in the Highlands one of the main attractions is the scenery. Is the visitor’s experience of the scenery enhanced by interpretation?
Consideration of the increasing numbers of hill-walkers, climbers and touring holidaymakers and their importance to the economy of the Highlands, together with the widespread growth in interest in cultural history, supplemented by the growing demand for genealogical information for diaspora Scots, reinforces the importance of interpretation in conveying the ‘sense of place’ – that complex mix of factual and mythical information and subjective connectedness between people and landscape.
There is plenty of scope for interpretation of the cultural landscape of the Highlands – but is it appropriate to clutter up the landscape itself with interpretive text? Some years ago, shortly after the opening of the Kessock Bridge, one of the finest views newly made available by the bridge was all but obscured by a large sign extolling the virtues of the Highland scenery.
We are now firmly entered into an age where information on practically any topic is available electronically. Is it too much of a flight of fancy to suppose that more and more visitors to the Highlands will have access to the World Wide Web? It is quite possible that in the coming years increasing numbers will have Internet facility in their cars, hotel rooms and even on their mobile phones. All the information they require could easily be made available to them by supplying a simple web address, as Figure 11 illustrates.
Boniface, P, Managing Cultural Tourism, Routledge, London (1995)
Bryson, B, Mother Tongue,
Crystal, D, The Cambridge Encyclopedia of the English, Cambridge University Press, (1995)
Dennett, D The Origin of Selves , Internet text
Deòrsa Mac Iain Deòrsa (Campbell Hay,G): Nua Bàrdachd Gàidhlig: MacAulay, D (ed)
Douglas, S, The Scots Language: European Roots and Local Destiny
Glen, M, Conference, AHI
Howell, J, Familiar Letters, Book I
International Herald Tribune, Cultures in Competition, Tokyo Edition, quoted in Yung Boon-Yeong (18 February 1993)
Kay, B, Scots: The Mither Tongue, Mainstream Publishing, Edinburgh, (1986)
MacIntyre, E, Whose Justice, Which Rationality, Duckworth (1996)
Machlis G E and Field, D R (editors) On Interpretation: Sociology for Interpreters of Natural and Cultural History, Oregon State University Press (1984)
Millburn, T Management Review, (January1997)
Murdoch, S, Language, Politics in Scotland, Aiberdeen Universitie Scots Leid Quorum
Palmer, S, Deloitte and Touche (personal communication)
Tilden, Interpreting our Heritage
Veverka, J A, Interpretive Master Planning, Falcon Press Publishing, Montana (1994)
Wither, C W J, On the geography and social history of Gaelic in Gaelic and Scotland – EUP 1989, W Gillies (editor)
Abercrombie, N, Hill S, Turner B S, The Dominant Ideology Thesis, George Allen and Unwin (1994)
Aldridge, A, Principles of Countryside Interpretation and Interpretive Planning, Countryside Commission, HMSO, (1975)
Cox, The Language of the Ogam Inscriptions of Scotland, The Department of Celtic University of Aberdeen (1999)
Deloitte and Touche Consulting Group, A Survey of Continental European Visitor Attractions (1997)
Dennett D C, The Interpretation of Texts, People and Other Artifacts in Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, Centre for Cognitive Studies, Tufts University (1990)
Fladmark J M (editor), Heritage – Conservation, Interpretation and Enterprise, Donhead Publishing Ltd (1993)
Ham, S H and Sutherland D S, Crossing Borders and Rethinking Craft-Interpretation in Developing Countries: in On Interpretation: Sociology for Interpreters of Natural and Cultural History (revised edition), Corvallis, Oregon: Oregon State University Press, Machlis, D and Field, D (editors)
Ham, S, Sutherland, D and Meganck, R, Environmental Interpretation in Protected Areas in Developing Countries in Environmental Conservation 20(3): 232-242, Harris Qualitative (1997)
Ham, S, Interpreting for Success, (August 1997)
Herbert, D T, (editor), Heritage, Tourism and Society, Mansell Publishing Ltd (1998)
Hunter, J, Last of the Free – A Millennial History of the Highlands and Islands of Scotland, Mainstream Publishing, (1999)
Kim,Y Y and Gudykunst, W B, Theories in Intercultural Communication, Sage Publications, London (1998)
Lash, S and Urry,J, Economies of Sign and Space, Sage Publications, london 1994
Lonie, N, Practice and profile of interpretation in Scotland, Report (1998)
Manfredo, M J (ed), Influencing Human Behaviour: Theory and Applications in Recreation, Tourism and Natural Resource Management, Sagamore Publishing, Champaign, Illinois (1992)
Masters D and Carter J, What Have We Got and Is it any Good – A practical guide on how to survey and assess heritage interpretation, Highland Interpretive Strategy Project (1999)
Moscardo, G, Making visitors mindful: principles for creating sustainable visitor experiences through effective communication, Volume 2, Advances in Tourist Applications Series, Sagamore Publishing, Illinois (1999)
Nicol R and Anderson A, Investigating Perceptions of Environmental Quality – A Phenomenological Approach, Paper presented on 3rd Nordic Scotland Universities Conference
Prince, D R, Evaluating Interpretation: A Discussion, Occasional Papers: No 1
Prince, D R, Countryside Interpretation: A Cognitive Evaluation, Occasional Papers No 3, Centre for Environmental Interpretation, Manchester (1982)
Sarbaugh, L E, Intercultural Communication, Hayden Book Company, USA (1979)
Strauss, A and Corbi, J, Basics of Qualitive Research, Sage Publications (1990)
Thomashow, M, Ecological Identity: Becoming a Reflective Environmentalist, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (1996)
Veverka, J, What can we learn from the USA? Building on the Special Relationship in Interpretation, Proceedings of a one day Seminar, 20 May 1994
Winzler, E R and Cherem, G J, An Interpretive Research Bibliography,
Association of Interpretive Naturalists, Derwood (1978)
Interpretation: Understanding our Surroundings, Proceedings of the seminar held at Malahide, County Dublin April 1981, Foras Eireann/ Carnegie United Kingdom Trust, Foras Eireann, Dublin (1981)
Environmental Education - A Review, Environmental Education - Sources of Information, Department of Education and Science, HMSO, London (1981)
Evaluation of Interpretation, Proceedings of a Conference at the British Museum
Society for the Interpretation of Britain's Heritage, London (1982)
Visitor Attractions – A Development Guide, Scottish Tourist Board
International Marketing Plan, (1999/2000), Scottish Tourist Board
Site Interpretation: A Practical Guide, Scottish Tourist Board (1993)
Interpretation, Conservation and the Travel Industry, Countryside Commission, Centre for Environmental Interpretation, (1991)