Problems in communicating the suspect's rights in interpreted police interviews

Applied Linguistics

Volumn 28, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 87-112

  Nakane, Ikuko ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 34047202711     PISSN: 01426001     EISSN: 1477450X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/applin/aml050     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Anderson, J., J. Hunter and N. S. C. Williams. 2002. The New Evidence Law: Annotations and Commentary on the Uniform Evidence Acts. Sydney: Butterworth.
2. Aronson, M. and J. Hunter. 1998. Litigation: Evidence and Procedure (6th edn). Sydney: Bmterworth.
3. Berk-Seligson, S. 1990. The Bilingual Courtroom: Court Interpreters in the Judicial Process. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
4. Berk-Seligson, S. 2000. 'Interpreting for the police: Issues in pre-trial phases of the judicial process: Forensic Linguistics 7/2: 212-35.
5. Berk-Seligson, S. 2002. The Miranda warnings and linguistic coercion: The role of footing in the interrogation of a limited-English speaking murder suspect' in J. Cotterill (ed.): Language in the Legal Process. New York: Palgrave.
6. Brière, E. J. 1978. 'Limited English speakers and the Miranda rights,' TESOL Quarterly 12/3: 235-45.
7. Coldrey, J. 1987. 'Aboriginals and the criminal courts' in K. M. Hazlehurst (ed.): Ivory Scales: Black Australia and the Law. Sydney: University of New South Wales Press.
8. Cotterill, J. 2000. 'Reading the rights: A cautionary tale of comprehension and comprehensibility,' Forensic Linguistic 7/1: 4-25.
9. Cotterill, J. 2005. '"You do not have to say anything... ": Instructing the jury on the defendant's right to silence in the English criminal justice system,' Multilingua 24/1-2: 7-24.
10. Dam, H. V. 1998. 'Lexical similarity vs. lexical dissimilarity in consecutive interpreting: a product-oriented study of form-based vs. meaning-based Interpreting,' The Translator 4/1: 49-68.
11. Flesh, R. F. 1951. How to Test Readability. New York: Harper.
12. Gibbons, J. 1987, 'Police interviews with people of non-English speaking background: Some problems,' Legal Service Bulletin 12: 183-4.
13. Gibbons, J. 1990. 'Applied linguistics in court/ Applied linguistics 11/3: 229-37.
14. Gibbons, J. 2001. 'Revising the language of New South Wales police procedures: Applied linguistics in action,' Applied Linguistics 22/4: 439-69.
15. Gibbons, J. 2003. Forensic Linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell.
16. Goffman, E. 1967. Interaction Ritual: Essays in Face-to-Face Behavior. Chicago: Aldine Pub. Co.
17. Goffman, E. 1981. Forms of Talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
18. Hale, S. 2002. 'How faithfully do court interpreters render the styles of non-English speaking witnesses' testimonies?: A data-based study of Spanish-English bilingual proceedings,' Discourse Studies 4/1: 25-47.
19. Hale, S. 2004. The Discourse of Court Interpreting. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
20. Hale, S. and J. Gibbons. 1999. 'Varying realities: Patterned changes in the interpreter's representation of courtroom and external realities,' Applied Linguistics 20/2: 203-20.
21. Halliday, M. A. K. 1985. Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Edward Arnold.
22. Hatim, B. and I. Mason. 1990. Discourse and the Translator. London: Longman.
23. Kurzon, D. 1996. "To speak or not to speak": The comprehensibility of the revised police caution (PACE),' International Journal for the Semiotics of Law 9/25: 3-16.
24. Laster, K. and V. L. Taylor. 1994. Interpreters and the Legal System. Sydney: The Federation Press.
25. McRae, H., G. Nattheim and L. Beacroft. 1997. Indigenous Legal Issues. Sydney: Law Book Company.
26. Maynard, S. K. 1986. 'On back-channel behavior in Japanese and English casual conversation/ Linguistics 24: 1079-108.
27. Maynard, S. K. 1997. Japanese Communication: Language and Thought in Context, Hawai'i: University of Hawai'i Press.
28. Miyazawa, S. 1992. Policing in Japan: A Study on Making Crime (F. G. J. Benneti & J. O. Haley, trans.). Albany: State University of New York.
29. Roy, C. B. 2000. Interpreting as a Discourse Process. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
30. Russell, S. 2000. '"Let me put it simply..." the case for a standard translation of the police caution and its explanation,' Forensic Linguistics 7/1:26-48.
31. Russell, S. 2002. "Three's a Crowd": Shifting dynamics in the interpreted interview' in J. Cotterill (ed.): Language in the Legal Process. New York: Palgrave.
32. Sacks, H., E. A. Schegloff and G. Jefferson. 1974. 'A simplest systematics for the organisation of turn-taking for conversation,' Language 50/4: 696-735.
33. Schegloff, E. A. I982. 'Discourse as an international achievement: Some uses of "uh huh" and other things that come between sentences' in D. Tannen (ed.): Analysing Discourse: Text and Talk. Washington: Georgetown University Press, pp. 71-93.
34. Shibatani, M. 1990. The Languages of Japan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
35. Shuy, R. W. 1997. Ten unanswered language questions about Miranda,' Forensic Linguistics 4/2: 175-95.
36. Wadensjö, C. 1998. Interpreting as Interaction. New York: Longman.