Having read an article on BBC News, it is believed that the sign language interpreter employed to convey the content of tributes
at the Nelson Mandela memorial was – in one viewer's words – "signing
rubbish". We are told that the signing conventions required differ from those of any spoken language. So as someone who has always been interested in sign language but can only fingerspell in British Sign Language, I can hardly comment on the accuracy of the video's content.
Though as the news article suggests, repeated signs used to represent completely different words should surely have aroused suspicion from the outset. If the signer can be shown to have been inept, then we can only speculate as to how a seemingly incompetent individual was able to work at such a significant event and stand in front of hundreds of world leader and dignitaries and a global audience of millions. The article quotes a blog editor, Charlie Swinbourne, thus:
"If the accusations that the man was a "fake" turn out to be true, "on a
day when the world saluted a man who fought oppression, a guy stood on
stage and effectively oppressed another minority - deaf people."
I'm a great fan of the Australian comedian Adam Hills, who often employs an interpreter to sign his stand-up shows. I'd even credit him with raising awareness of signing, especially as he raises the subject in a respectful yet light-hearted way. So if he can show such care and attention on a comparatively small scale, why was it not possible to get one of the (few) interpreters in South Africa to effectively 'name their price' and get the job done properly in this case? It matters. People should care.
