The result of this study indicates that there are 13 translation techniques used by the interpreter; Established Equivalent (46 times or 20%), Amplification (43 times or 18%), Reduction (31times or 13%), Variation (26 times or 11%), Linguistic Compression (20 times or 9%), Linguistic Amplification (19 times or 8%), Modulation (18 times or 7%), Deletion (12 times or 5%), Pure Borrowing (10 times or 4%), Substitution (6 times or 3%), Generalization (4 times or 1%), Naturalized Borrowing (twice or 0.5%) and Literal Translation (twice or 0.5%). In relation to interpreting quality of accuracy, out of 155 data, 102 data or 65.2% are accurate, 37 data or 24.5% are less accurate and 16 data or 10.3% are inaccurate. It indicates that most of the data are interpreted accurately. In relation to interpreting quality of acceptability, out of 155 data, 116 data or 74% are acceptable, 27 data or 17 % are less acceptable, and 13 data or 9% are unacceptable. It indicates that most data are acceptable. In relation to interpreting quality of fluency, out of 155 data, 108 data or 69% are fluent, 34 data or 22% are less fluent, and 13 data or 9% are not fluent. It shows that most data are fluently transferred. The findings of this study show that technical factors include (first) small room condition which is not really helpful for the interpreting process, (second) too close distance between interpreting participants which made the interpreter uncomfortably sit, and (third) noisy situation due to the visitors or neighbors. Technical factors do influence the interpreter’s performance. Further, the non-technical factors in community-based setting deal with two groups of people who do not share the same language and the interpreter. The communication runs well even the interpreter is not a professional interpreter. The interpreter’s competences lead her to solve problems faced during the visit. Thus, the techniques used by the interpreter end up in different interpreting quality. Besides, the quality of interpretation also depends on the technical and non-technical factors.
Keywords: community interpreting, translation techniques, interpreting quality, technical factors, non-technical factors