How interpreting influences defendants’ participation: a discursive study of zero renditions and non-renditions in court interpreting

References

Angermeyer, Philipp S. 2005. Who is ‘you’? Polite forms of address and ambiguous participant roles in court interpreting. Target 17(2). 203–226. https://doi.org/10.1075/target.17.2.02ang.Search in Google Scholar

Angermeyer, Philipp S. 2008. Creating monolingualism in the multilingual courtroom. Sociolinguistic Studies 2(3). 385–404. https://doi.org/10.1558/sols.v2i3.385.Search in Google Scholar

Angermeyer, Philipp S. 2009. Translation style and participant roles in court interpreting. Journal of Sociolinguistics 13(1). 3–28. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9841.2008.00394.x.Search in Google Scholar

Angermeyer, Philipp S. 2015. Speak English or what? Codeswitching and interpreter use in New York City courts. New York: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199337569.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Berk-Seligson, Susan. 1990a. The bilingual courtroom: Court interpreters in the judicial process. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Search in Google Scholar

Berk-Seligson, Susan. 1990b. The role of the court interpreter. In Judith N. Levi & Anne Graffam Walker (eds.), Language in the judicial process, 155–202. New York, NY: Plenum Press.Search in Google Scholar

Cheung, Andrew. 2017. Non-renditions in court interpreting: A corpus-based study. Babel 63(2). 174–199. https://doi.org/10.1075/babel.63.2.02che.Search in Google Scholar

Christensen, Tina P. 2008. Judges’ deviations from norm-based direct speech in court. Interpreting 10(1). 99–127. https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.10.1.07chr.Search in Google Scholar

Du, Biyu. 2015. The silenced interpreter: A case study of language and ideology in the Chinese criminal court. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law 28(3). 507–524. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-015-9431-z.Search in Google Scholar

Du, Biyu. 2019. Multilingualism in legal space: The issue of mutual understanding in ELF communication between defendants and interpreters. International Journal of Multilingualism 16(3). 317–335. https://doi.org/10.1080/14790718.2018.1455687.Search in Google Scholar

Du, Biyu. 2021. The mediated voice: A discursive study of interpreter-mediated closing statement in Chinese criminal trials. Target: International Journal of Translation Studies 33(2). 341–367. https://doi.org/10.1075/target.21066.du.Search in Google Scholar

Dynel, Marta. 2011. Revisiting Goffman’s postulates on participant statuses in verbal interaction. Language and Linguistic Compass 5. 454–465. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-818x.2011.00286.x.Search in Google Scholar

Edmondson, Willis. 1986. Cognition, conversing and interpreting. In Juliane House & Shoshana Blum-Kulka (eds.), Interlingual and intercultural communication, 129–138. Tubingen: Gunter Narr.Search in Google Scholar

Fenton, Sabine. 1997. The role of the interpreter in the adversarial courtroom. In Silvana E. Carr, Roda P. Roberts, Aideen Dufour & Dini Steyn (eds.), The critical link: Interpreters in the community, 29–34. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Search in Google Scholar

Gavioli, Laura & Claudio Baraldi. 2011. Interpreter-mediated interaction in healthcare and legal settings: Talk organization, context and the achievement of intercultural communication. Interpreting 13(2). 205–233. https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.13.2.03gav.Search in Google Scholar

Goffman, Erving. 1981. Forms of talk. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.Search in Google Scholar

Hale, Sandra B. 1999. Interpreters’ treatment of discourse markers in courtroom questions. Forensic Linguistics: The International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law 6(1). 57–82. https://doi.org/10.1558/sll.1999.6.1.57.Search in Google Scholar

Hale, Sandra B. 2004. The discourse of court interpreting: Discourse practices of the law, the witness, and the interpreter. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing.10.1075/btl.52Search in Google Scholar

Kesleman, Olga. 2009. Restricting participation: Unaccompanied children in interpreter-mediated asylum hearings in Sweden. Linkoping: Linkoping University dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Keselman, Olga, Ann-Christin Cederborg & Per Linell. 2010. “That is not necessary for you to know!” Negotiation of participation status of unaccompanied children in interpreter-mediated asylum hearings. Interpreting 12(1). 83–104. https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.12.1.04kes.Search in Google Scholar

Levinson, Stephen. 1988. Putting linguistics on a proper footing: Explorations in Goffman’s participation framework. In Paul Drew & Anthony Wootton (eds.), Erving Goffman: Exploring the interaction order, 161–227. Oxford: Polity Press.Search in Google Scholar

Leung, Ester & John Gibbons. 2008. Who is responsible? Participant roles in legal interpreting cases. Multilingual 27(3). 177–191. https://doi.org/10.1515/multi.2008.010.Search in Google Scholar

Leung, Ester & John Gibbons. 2009. Interpreting Cantonese utterance-final particles in bilingual courtroom discourse. Interpreting 11(2). 190–215. https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.11.2.05leu.Search in Google Scholar

Merlini, Raffaela & Roberta Favaron. 2005. Examining the voice of interpreting in speech pathology. Interpreting 7(2). 263–302. https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.7.2.07mer.Search in Google Scholar

Mikkelson, Holly. 1998. Towards a redefinition of the role of the court interpreter. Interpreting 3(1). 21–45. https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.3.1.02mik.Search in Google Scholar

Mikkelson, Holly. 2014. Introduction to court interpreting. London and New York: Routledge.10.4324/9781315760001Search in Google Scholar

Morris, Ruth. 1999. The gum syndrome: Predicaments in court interpreting. Forensic Linguistics: The International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law 6(1). 6–29. https://doi.org/10.1558/sll.1999.6.1.6.Search in Google Scholar

Namakula, Catherine S. 2014. Language and the right to fair hearing in international criminal trials. Switzerland: Springer.10.1007/978-3-319-01451-7Search in Google Scholar

NAJIT (National Association of Judiciary Interpreters and Translators). 2004. NAJIT position paper – direct speech in legal settings. Available at: https://najit.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/DirectSpeech200609.pdf.Search in Google Scholar

Ng, Eva. 2011. A survey of court interpreters’ use of direct versus reported speech in the Hong Kong courts. International Journal of Law, Language and Discourse 1(3). 36–63.Search in Google Scholar

Ng, Eva. 2013. The atypical bilingual courtroom: An exploratory study of the interactional dynamics in interpreter-mediated trials in Hong Kong. Birmingham: Aston University dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Pochhacker, Franz. 2012. Interpreting participation: Conceptual analysis and illustration of the interpreter’s role in interaction. In Claudio Baraldi & Laura Gavioli (eds.), Coordinating participation in dialogue interpreting, 45–69. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/btl.102.03pochSearch in Google Scholar

Roy, Cynthia. 2000. Interpreting as a discourse process. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Sacks, Harvey, Emanuel Schegloff & Gail Jefferson. 1974. A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language. 696–735. https://doi.org/10.2307/412243.Search in Google Scholar

Strani, Katerina & Anna Szczepaniak-Kozak. 2018. Strategies of othering through discursive practices: Examples from the UK and Poland. Lodz Papers in Pragmatics 14(1). 163–179. https://doi.org/10.1515/lpp-2018-0008.Search in Google Scholar

Tajfel, Henri. 1974. Social identity and intergroup behaviour. Social Science Information 13. 65–93. https://doi.org/10.1177/053901847401300204.Search in Google Scholar

Takimoto, Masato & Kenta Koshiba. 2009. Interpreter’s non-rendition behaviour and its effect on interaction: A case study of a multi-party interpreting situation. Translation & Interpreting 1(1). 15–26.Search in Google Scholar

Wadensjö, Cecilia. 1998. Interpreting as interaction. London, UK: Longman.Search in Google Scholar

Whitfort, Amanda. 2006. Right to a fair trial in China: The Criminal Procedure Law of 1996. The Chinese Law and Policy Review 2. 141–151.Search in Google Scholar