Judges' deviations from norm-based direct speech in court

Interpreting

Volumn 10, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 99-127

  Christensen, Tina Paulsen ^a  

^a AARHUS SCHOOL OF BUSINESS   (Denmark)

Author keywords

Court interpreting; Direct speech; Discourse study; Form of address; Guidelines; Indirect speech; Norms

Indexed keywords

EID: 57749127817     PISSN: 13846647     EISSN: 1569982X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1075/intp.10.1.07chr     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Adams, C., Corsellis, A. & Harmer, A. (1995). Basic handbook for trainers of public service interpreters. London: Institute of Linguists
2. Angelelli, C. V. (2004). Revisiting the interpreter's role. A study of conference, court and medical interpreters in Canada, Mexico and the United States. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins
3. Angermeyer, P. S. (2005). Who is 'you'? Polite forms of address and ambiguous participant roles in court interpreting. Target 17 (2), 303-326
4. Berk-Seligson, S. (1990). The bilingual courtroom: Court interpreters in the judicial process. Chicago/London: The University of Chicago Press
5. Chesterman, A. (1993). From "is" to "ought": Laws, norms and strategies in translation studies. Target 5(1), 1-20
6. Chiaro, D. & Nocella, G. (2004). Interpreters' perception of linguistic and non-linguistic factors affecting quality: A survey through the World Wide Web. Meta 49 (2), 278-293
7. Christensen, T. P. (2003). Translation-memory systemer til juridisk oversœttelse. En kritisk analyse af anvendeligheden af TM-systemer til oversœttelsen af selskabsretlige dokumenter. PhD dissertation, University of Southern Denmark
8. Cotterill, J. (2003). Language and power in Court: A linguistic analysis of the O.J. Simpson trial. New York: Palgrave MacMillan
9. Domstolsstyrelsen (2003). Vejledning om tolkning i retten. April 2003. http://www.domstol.dk/om/publikationer/Publikationer/ Vejledning%20om%20tolkning%20i%20retten.pdf (accessed 1 February 2005)
10. Dubslaff, F. & Martinsen, B. (2005). Exploring untrained interpreters' use of direct versus indirect speech. Interpreting 7 (2), 211-236
11. Fenton, S. (1997). The role of the interpreter in the adversarial courtroom. In S. E. Carr, R. Roberts, A. Dufour & D. Steyn (Eds.), The critical link: Interpreters in the community. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 35-54
12. Garzone, G. (2002). Quality and norms in interpretation. In G. Garzone & M. Viezzi (Eds.), Interpreting in the 21st century: Challenges and opportunities. Selected papers from the 1st Forli Conference on Interpreting Studies, 9-11 November 2000. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 107-119
13. Goffman, E. (1981). Forms of talk. Oxford: Basil Blackwell
14. Hale, S. B. (2004). The discourse of court interpreting: Discourse practices of the law, the witness and the interpreter. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins
15. Hale, S. B. (2007). Community Interpreting. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan
16. Harris, B. (1981). Observations on a cause célèbre: Court interpreting at the Lischka trial. In R. Roberts (Ed.), L'Interprétation après des tribuaux. Ottawa: University of Ottawa, 189-201
17. Jansen, P. (1995). The role of the interpreter in Dutch courtroom interaction: The impact of the situation on translational norms. In P. Jansen (Ed.), Translation and the manipulation of discourse: Selected papers of the CERA Research Seminars in Translation Studies 1992-1993. Leuven: The Leuven Research Center for Translation, Communication and Cultures, 133-155
18. Jacobsen, B. (2002). Pragmatic meaning in court interpreting: An empirical study of additions in consecutively interpreted question-answer dialogues. PhD dissertation, Aarhus School of Business
19. Kadric, M. (2001). Dolmetschen bei Gericht. Erwartungen, Anforderungen, Kompetenzen. Wien: WUV-Universitätsverlag
20. Kaiina, S. (2005). Quality in the interpreting process: What can be measured and how? In R. Godijns. & M. Hinderdael (Eds.), Directionality in interpreting - the "retour" or the native? Gent: Communication & Cognition, 27-46
21. Kurz, I. (1989). Conference interpreting - user expectations. In D. L. Hammond (Ed.), Coming of Age: Proceedings of the 30th Annual Conference of the American Translators Association. Medford, NJ: Learned Information, 143-148
22. Marzocchi, Carlo (2005). On norms and ethics in the discourse on interpreting. The Interpreters' Newsletter No. 13, 87-108
23. Mason, I. (2000). Models and methods in dialogue interpreting research. In M. Olohan (Ed.), Intercultural faultlines: Research models in translation studies I. Textual and cognitive aspects. Manchester: St. Jerome, 215-231
24. Mikkelson, H. (2000). Introduction to court interpreting. Manchester: St. Jerome
25. Moser, P. (1996). Expectations of users of conference interpretation. Interpreting 1 (2), 145-178
26. Phelan, M. (2001). The interpreter's resource. Clevedon/Buffalo/Toronto/ Sydney: Multilingual Matters
27. Pöchhacker, F. (2000). Dolmetschen. Konzeptuelle Grundlagen und deskriptive Untersuchungen. Tübingen: Stauffenburg
28. Pöchhacker, F. (2001): Quality assessment in conference and community interpreting. Meta 46 (2), 410-425
29. Pöchhacker, F. (2005). Quality research revisited. The Interpreters' Newsletter, No. 13, 2005, 143-166
30. Pöchhacker, F. (2007). Critical linking up: Kinship and convergence in interpreting studies. In C. Wadensjö, B. Englund Dimitrova & A.-L. Nilsson (Eds.), The Critical Link 4: Professionalisation of interpreting in the community. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 11-26
31. Pöchhacker, F. & Kadric, M. (1999). The hospital cleaner as healthcare interpreter: A case study. The Translator 5 (2), 161-178
32. Pöllabauer, S. (2007). Interpreting in asylum hearings: Issues of saving face. In C. Wadensjö, B. Englund Dimitrova & A.-L. Nilsson (Eds.), The Critical Link 4: Professionalisation of interpreting in the community. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 39-52
33. Schäffner, C. (1999). The concept of norms in translation. In C. Schäffner (Ed.), Translation and norms. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters, 1-8
34. Schweda Nicholson, N. & Martinsen, B. (1997). Court Interpretation in Denmark. In S. E. Carr, R. Roberts, A. Dufour and D. Steyn (Eds.), The Critical Link: Interpreters in the Community. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 259-270
35. Shackman, J. (1984). The right to be understood. Cambridge: National Extension College
36. Shlesinger, M. (1999). Norms, strategies and constraints: How do we tell them apart? In A. A. Lugrís & A. F. Ocampo (Eds.), Anovar/Anosar estudios de traducción e interpretación. Vigo: Universidade de Vigo, 65-77
37. Toury, G. (1980). In search of a theory of translation. Tel Aviv: The Porter Institute for Poetics and Semiotics
38. Wadensjö, C. (1997). Recycled information as a questioning strategy: Pitfalls in interpretermediated talk. In S. E. Carr, R. Roberts, A. Dufour & D. Steyn (Eds.), The critical link: Interpreters in the community. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 35-54
39. Wadensjö, C. (1998). Interpreting as interaction. London/New York: Longman
40. Wadensjö, C. (2007). Foreword: Interpreting professions, professionalisation and professionalism. In C. Wadensjö, B. Englund Dimitrova & A.-L. Nilsson (Eds.), The Critical Link 4: Professionalisation of interpreting in the community. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 1-8