Cover not available

Article published In: Babel
Vol. 63:2 (2017) ► pp.174–199

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required

Non-renditions in court interpreting

A corpus-based study

 | Hong Kong Polytechnic University
Published online: 31 August 2017
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/babel.63.2.02che
Abstract
By examining the types and frequencies of non-renditions in a 100-hour corpus of court interpreting records from Hong Kong, this study demonstrated that court interpreters actively coordinate communication when carrying out their interpreting duties. Non-renditions are interpreters’ utterances that do not have a corresponding counterpart in the source language, and such renditions are ordinarily used to coordinate interpreter-mediated exchanges. This analysis revealed that in the Hong Kong court setting, non-renditions were less common in English (the court language) than in Cantonese (the main language of the witnesses and defendants). In the Cantonese subsample, interactional non-renditions were more common than textual non-renditions, and most of these utterances were self-initiated rather than prompted by others. In the English subsample, textual non-renditions were more common than interactional non-renditions, and most of them were other-prompted. The skewed distribution of non-renditions, and particularly the tendency to address non-renditions to the lay participants, suggests that court interpreters may not be absolutely impartial.
Résumé
En examinant les types et fréquences des non-restitutions dans un corpus de 100 heures de dossiers d'interprétation judiciaire à Hong Kong, cette étude a montré que les interprètes judiciaires coordonnent activement la communication lorsqu'ils effectuent leurs tâches d'interprétation. Les non-restitutions sont des énoncés formulés par des interprètes qui n'ont pas de contrepartie correspondante dans la langue source, et ces restitutions sont généralement utilisées pour coordonner des échanges induits par l'interprète. Cette analyse a révélé que dans le cadre du tribunal de Hong Kong, les non-restitutions étaient moins fréquentes en anglais (la langue du tribunal) qu'en cantonais (la langue principale des témoins et accusés). Dans le sous-échantillon cantonais, les non-restitutions interactionnelles étaient plus fréquentes que les non-restitutions textuelles et la plupart de ces énoncés étaient formulés du propre chef des interprètes plutôt que dictés par d'autres. Dans le sous-échantillon anglais, les non-restitutions textuelles étaient plus fréquentes que les non-restitutions interactionnelles et la plupart d’entre elles étaient inspirées par d'autres. La répartition inégale des non-restitutions et en particulier la tendance à adresser les non-restitutions aux participants profanes suggèrent que les interprètes judiciaires pourraient ne pas être absolument impartiaux.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Non-renditions in dialogue interpreting
  • 3.Interpreters behavior and the roles of primary participants
  • 4.Non renditions and perceived impartiality
  • 5.Methods and the corpus
  • 6.Findings
    • 6.1Relative frequency of non-renditions
    • 6.2Types of non-renditions: Textual versus interactional
    • 6.3Types of non-renditions: Self-initiated versus other-prompted
  • 7.Extracts of non-renditions
    • 7.1Self-initiated non-renditions
    • 7.2Other-prompted non-renditions
  • 8.Conclusions
  • References
References (45)
References
Angelelli, Claudia; and Osman, Ghada. 2007. “’A Crime in Another Language?’ An Analysis of the Interpreter's Role in the Yousry Case”. Translation and Interpreting Studies, 2 (1): 47–82. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Angermeyer, Philipp Sebastian. 2009. “Translation style and participant roles in court interpreting”. Journal of Sociolinguistics 13 (1): 3–28. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Baraldi, Claudio; and Gavioli, Laura. 2007. “Dialogue interpreting as intercultural mediation: An analysis in healthcare multicultural settings”. In Dialogue and culture, ed. by M. Grein, and E. Weigand, 155–175. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bell, Allan. 1984. “Language style as audience design”. Language in Society 131: 145–204. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Berk-Seligson, Susan. 1990. The bilingual courtroom: Court interpreters in the judicial process. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2002. “The impact of politeness in witness testimony”. In The interpreting studies reader, ed. by F. Pöchhacker, and M. Shlesinger, 278–292. London – New York: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cirillo, Letizia. 2012. “Managing affective communication in triadic exchanges: Interpreters’ zero-renditions and non-renditions in doctor-patient talk”. In Interpreting across genres: Multiple research perspectives, ed. by C. J. K. Bidoli, 102–124. Trieste: EUT Edizioni Università di Trieste.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dam, Helle V. 1996. “Text condensation in consecutive interpreting: summary of a Ph D dissertation”. Hermes 171: 273–281.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dubslaff, Friedel; and Martinsen, Bodil. 2005. “Exploring untrained interpreters’ use of direct versus indirect speech”. Interpreting 7 (2): 211–236. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dueñas González, Roseann; Vásquez, Victoria. F.; and Mikkelson, Holly. 2012. Fundamentals of court interpretation: Theory, policy and practice. Durham: Carolina Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fenton, Sabine. 1997. “The role of the interpreter in the adversarial courtroom”. In The Critical Link: Interpreters in the community: Papers from the First International Conference on Interpreting in Legal, Health, and Social Service Settings (Geneva Park, Canada, June 1–4, 1995), ed. by S. E. Carr, R. Roberts, A. Dufour, and D. Steyn, Vol. 191: 29–34. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gavioli, Laura. 2012. “Minimal responses in interpreter-mediated medical talk”. In Coordinating participation in dialogue interpreting, ed. by C. Baraldi, and L. Gavioli, 201–228. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gavioli, Laura; and Maxwell, Nick. 2007. “Interpreter intervention in mediated business talk”. In Conversation analysis and language for specific purposes, ed. by H. Bowkes, and P. Seehouse, 141–182. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hale, Sandra. 2003. “‘Excuse me, the interpreter wants to speak’ – Interpreter interruptions in the courtroom: why do interpreters interrupt and what are the consequences?” Paper presented at The Critical Link 3: The Complexity of the Profession conference in Montreal, May 2001: 22–26. [URL]
. 2007. Community interpreting. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2008. “Controversies over the role of the court interpreter”. In Crossing borders in community interpreting, ed. by C. Valero-Garcés, and A. Martin, 99–121. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hassen, Ingrid; and Alpers, Lise-Merete. 2010. “Interpreters in intercultural health care settings: Health professionals’ and professional interpreters’ cultural knowledge, and their reciprocal perception and collaboration”. Journal of Intercultural Communication 231. [URL]
Hsieh, Elaine. 2010. “Provider – interpreter collaboration in bilingual health care: Competitions of control over interpreter-mediated interactions”. Patient Education and Counseling 78 (2): 154–159. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jansen, Peter. 1995. “The role of the interpreter in Dutch courtroom interaction: the impact of the situation on translational norms”. In Selected papers of the CETRA research seminars in translation studies 1992–1993, ed. by P. Jansen, 133–155. Leuven: Katholieke Universiteit Leuven.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jacobsen, B. 2004. “Pragmatic meaning in court interpreting: An empirical study of additions in consecutively interpreted question-answer dialogues”. Hermes 321: 237–249.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Laster, Kathy; and Taylor, Veronica. 1994. Interpreters and the legal system. Leichhardt (NSW): The Federation Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lebese, Samuel. 2011. “A pilot study on the undefined role of court interpreters in South Africa”. Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies 29 (3): 343–357. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2011. “A study of facework in interpreter-mediated courtroom examination”. Perspectives 21 (1): 1–18. .Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Li, Y. H. A. 1999. “Plurality in a classifier language”. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 8 (1): 75–99. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mason, M. 2008. Courtroom interpreting. Lanham (Maryland): University Press of America.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
May, Allyson. 2005. “Advocates and truth-seeking in the old bailey courtroom”. The Journal of Legal History 26 (1): 83–90. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Merlini, Raffaela; and Favaron, Roberta. 2005. “Examining the voice of interpreting in speech pathology”. Interpreting 7 (2): 263–302. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Metzger, Melanie. 1999. Sign language interpreting: Deconstructing the myth of neutrality. Washington (D.C.): Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mikkelson, Holly. 2008. “Evolving views on the court interpreter’s role”. In Crossing borders in community interpreting, ed. by Valero-Garcés, and A. Martin, 81–97. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Moeketsi, R. 1999. Discourse in a multilingual and multicultural courtroom: A court interpreter’s guide. Pretoria: J. L. van Schaik.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Morris, Ruth. 1995. “The moral dilemmas of court interpreting”. The Translator 1 (1): 25–46. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ng, Kwai Hang. 2009. “Court interpreters’ office”. In Introduction to crime, law and justice in Hong Kong, ed. by M. S. Gaylord, D. Gittings, and H. Traver, 169–184. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Niska, Helge. 1995. “Just interpreting: Role conflicts and discourse types in court interpreting”. In Translation and the law, ed. by M. Morris, 293–316. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pöllabauer, Sonja. 2004. “Interpreting in asylum hearings. Issues of saving face.” In The Critical Link 4: Professionalisation of interpreting in the community, ed. by C. Wadensjö, B. Englund Dimitrova, and A. -L. Nilsson, 39–52. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rosenberg, Brett Allen. 2002. “A quantitative discourse analysis of community interpreting”. In Translation: New ideas for a new century. Proceedings of the XVI FIT Congress, 222–226. Vancouver: FIT.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Roy, Cynthia. 2000. Interpreting as a discourse process. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schäffner, Christina; Kredens, Krzysztof; and Fowler, Yvonne. 2013. „Interpreting in a changing landscape: Challenges for research and practice”. In Interpreting in a changing landscape: Selected papers from Critical Link 6, ed. by C. Schäffner, K. Kredens, and Y. Fowler, 1–11. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Todorova, Marija. 2014. “Interpreting conflict: Memories of an interpreter”. In Transfiction: Research into the realities of translation fiction, ed. by K. Kaindl, and K. Spitzl: 221–231. Amsterdam – Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wadensjö, Cecilia. 1998. Interpreting as interaction. New York: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (13)

Cited by 13 other publications

Chi, Huidong, Carmen Bestué & Mireia Vargas-Urpí
2025. Interrupciones y « voz propia ». Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada/Spanish Journal of Applied Linguistics 38:2 ► pp. 600 ff. DOI logo
Zhao, Xiao & Jiahui Huang
2025. Interpreter mediation as other-initiated self-repair in court: Effects on the defence in Chinese bilingual criminal trials. Lingua 313 ► pp. 103850 ff. DOI logo
Chi, Huidong
2024. El intérprete como coordinador del intercambio comunicativo: análisis de su voz propia en el proceso judicial. Revista de Llengua i Dret :81 ► pp. 134 ff. DOI logo
Du, Biyu Jade
2024. How interpreting influences defendants’ participation: a discursive study of zero renditions and non-renditions in court interpreting. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 2024:286 ► pp. 185 ff. DOI logo
Bestué, Carme & Mireia Vargas-Urpí
2023. You speak some Spanish? Indicators of interpreters’ (non-) performance in Spanish criminal courts. Revista de Llengua i Dret :79 ► pp. 116 ff. DOI logo
Li, Ruitian, Kanglong Liu & Andrew K. F. Cheung
2023. Interpreter visibility in press conferences: a multimodal conversation analysis of speaker–interpreter interactions. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications 10:1 DOI logo
Pym, Anthony, Judith Raigal-Aran & Carmen Bestué Salinas
2023. Non-standard court interpreting as risk management. In Introducing New Hypertexts on Interpreting (Studies) [Benjamins Translation Library, 160], ► pp. 108 ff. DOI logo
Yi, Ran
2023. Interpreting the Manner of Speech in courts: an overlooked aspect. Frontiers in Psychology 14 DOI logo
ÖZSÖZ, Burak
2023. A Discourse-Oriented Approach to Interpreter’s Non-Rendition Behaviour: A Case Study of An Interpreted Parent-Teacher Talk. Journal of Language Research 7:1 ► pp. 80 ff. DOI logo
Li, Ruitian, Andrew K. F. Cheung & Kanglong Liu
2022. A Corpus-Based Investigation of Extra-Textual, Connective, and Emphasizing Additions in English-Chinese Conference Interpreting. Frontiers in Psychology 13 DOI logo
Zhang, Yifan & Andrew K. F. Cheung
2022. A corpus-based study of modal verbs in Chinese–English governmental press conference interpreting. Frontiers in Psychology 13 DOI logo
Angermeyer, Philipp Sebastian & Bernd Meyer
2021. Forms and functions of non-renditions in community interpreting: a corpus-based study. The Translator 27:1 ► pp. 119 ff. DOI logo
Vargas-Urpi, Mireia
2019. When non-renditions are not the exception. Babel. Revue internationale de la traduction / International Journal of Translation 65:4 ► pp. 478 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 18 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.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue