This is an intriguing study of the role of interpreters in the Australian legal system, because in addition to comprehensively describing the legal and professional context in which interpreters work, it also offers a re­conceptualisation of that role. Part way through the book, I was struck by the self-conscious use of 'sic' by the authors following a quoted reference to interpreters as 'translators'. Clearly everyday language distinguishes between 'interpreting' and 'translating'. 'Translating' is pre-eminently the rendering of documents and written texts into another language; 'interpreting' is archetypically the immediate translation of spoken words. But I wondered if there was not more to the distinction than that. Weekley's etymological dictionary being handy (in both senses of the word), I soon learnt that 'interpret' harkens back to the Latin for agent or translator, with possible origins in the idea of one who helped make a bargain - the 'pret' suffix suggests 'price'. 'Translate', however, originally meant 'to bear across'. The interpreter then was one who acted as a go-between, helping to strike a bargain, but who remained allied to one party. The translator, perhaps, was more interested in the lofty task of capturing and carrying some idealised meaning.