Article published In: Australian Review of Applied Linguistics
Vol. 19:1 (1996) ► pp.61–72
Pragmatic considerations in court interpreting
Published online: 1 January 1996
https://doi.org/10.1075/aral.19.1.04hal
https://doi.org/10.1075/aral.19.1.04hal
The question of accuracy of interpretation of foreign language court testimonies is one of utmost importance to the court, to the witness and to the interpreter. The adversarial system uses language as its main weapon in the metaphorical battle, and cases are based on the oral evidence of their witnesses. When witnesses do not speak English, the sole responsibility of making that witness understood to the court rests with the interpreter. In the adversarial system, content of testimony is not the only important issue; delivery, style, register are just as important. This is why the idea of ‘literal’ translation has been the preferred option to the legal profession. However, literal translation does not ensure accuracy of interpretation. This paper aims to emphasise that interpreting accurately means interpreting pragmatically. It points out that although different languages may have semantic or literal equivalents, such equivalents may not have the same connotations or may not be appropriate in the same contexts. Interpreting pragmatically means interpreting in a way that the same intention and the same force of the Source Language (SL) utterance is conveyed in the Target Language (TL) utterance, so that the same reaction is achieved in the listeners of both languages. The paper draws on examples from authentic data taken from interpreted proceedings to illustrate the argument.
References (13)
Akmajian, A., R. Demers, A. Farmer and R. Harnish (1990) Linguistics: An introduction to language and communication. MIT Press, Cambridge.
Blum-Kulka, S. (1982) Learning to say what you mean in a second language: A Study of the speech act performance of Hebrew Second language learners. Applied Linguistics 31:29–59.
Clyne, M. (1975) Intercultural communication breakdown and communication conflict: Towards a linguistic model and its exemplificaiton. In R.W. Schmidt and J.C. Richards (1979) Speech Acts and Second Language Learning. Applied Linguistics 11:129–157.
Koike, D. (1989) Pragmatic competence and adult L2 acquisition: Speech acts in interlanguage”. Modern Language Journal 73, 3: 279 – 289.
Cited by (22)
Cited by 22 other publications
Palma, Janis
Morrison, Louisa, Zoe Given‐Wilson & Amina Memon
Napier, Jemina & Sandra Hale
2023. Exploring mixed methods in interpreting research. In Introducing New Hypertexts on Interpreting (Studies) [Benjamins Translation Library, 160], ► pp. 22 ff.
Orozco-Jutorán, Mariana
2023. Dealing with legal terminology in court interpreting. In Handbook of Terminology [Handbook of Terminology, 3], ► pp. 570 ff.
Crezee, Ineke H.M., Oktay Eser & Fatih Karakaş
Crezee, Ineke H. M., Johanna Hautekiet & Lidia Rura
Du, Biyu (Jade)
Määttä, Simo K. & Mari Wiklund
Shudo, Sachiko
de Pedro Ricoy, Raquel, Rosaleen Howard & Luis Andrade Ciudad
2018. Walking the tightrope. Target. International Journal of Translation Studies 30:2 ► pp. 187 ff.
Liu, Xin & Sandra Hale
Vargas-Urpi, Mireia
Asano, Teruko & Haruka Murai
2016. Chapter 8. Characteristics of the Japanese healthcare system. In Introduction to Healthcare for Japanese-speaking Interpreters and Translators, ► pp. 69 ff.
Crezee, Ineke H.M. & Teruko Asano
Crezee, Ineke H.M., Nawar Gailani & Anna N. Gailani
Crezee, Ineke H.M. & Eva N.S. Ng
Morrone, Michelle Henault
2016. Chapter 3. The culture of Japanese medicine. In Introduction to Healthcare for Japanese-speaking Interpreters and Translators, ► pp. 23 ff.
Crezee, Ineke H.M., Holly Mikkelson & Laura Monzon-Storey
Padilla Cruz, Manuel
Crezee, Ineke H.M.
Crosling, Glenda & Ian Ward
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 14 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
