Justice Under Microscope
Analysing Mandarin Chinese Markers in Virtual Courtroom Discourse
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 5966464 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Ran Yi (0000-0003-1858-3358, The University of New South Wales, Australia, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2024 |
| Volume | 26 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 117-135 |
| Publication date | 2024-02-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Discourse Studies (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1461-4456 • E-ISSN: 1461-7080 |
| Publisher | SAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1177/14614456231197045 |
| OpenAlex | W4387187397 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 11 |
| References cited | 31 |
As codified in professional guidelines, professional interpreters should faithfully interpret everything that has been said exactly as the original speakers. In other words, court interpreters are expected to adequately interpret both the content and the manner of original utterances into their pragmatic equivalence to the best of their knowledge. However, little has been known about the court interpreters’ accuracy in rendering the manner of speech in remote settings in non-European languages. The present paper reports initial findings from a larger experiment research study that assesses Australia-based professional interpreters’ accuracy in interpreting discourse markers and speech style in court-related remote settings. This paper focuses on the way in which discourse markers were used by the Mandarin Chinese-speaking defendant in courtroom examination answers and interpreted by practitioners. Mandarin Chinese markers ‘呗(bēi)’, ‘啦(à)’, ‘啊(a)’, ‘吧(bā)’ and ‘嘛(mà)’ were analysed using a collection of models of markers in Mandarin Chinese. A general disregard for discourse markers was found in remote settings, as reflected by omissions, mistranslation and moderations of illocutionary forces, particularly the use of the monotone in practitioners’ renditions of some attitudinal markers in Mandarin Chinese. Such disregard may have further implications for the accuracy of court interpreting in remote settings. The findings of the present study intend to inform future interpreter education and contribute to interprofessional collaboration between interpreting service users and providers
Discourse marker · Interpreter · Linguistics · Mandarin Chinese · Politeness · Artificial Intelligence in Law · Computer Science · Interpreting and Communication in Healthcare · Legal Education and Practice Innovations · Psychology
Investigating lexical barriers and pedagogical misalignment in legal English learning in Kosovo
Transmitting Minority Languages
Language governance and linguistic justice in digital courts
Reading asymmetry
The right to be seen, heard, and understood
Manner Matters
Advancing linguistic justice in courtroom interpreting
Complaining in historical Chinese criminal trials
Enhancing Sentiment Analysis and Error Prediction in Lawyer Questioning Through Legal NLP Models
Tech-empowered equity
Voices in the shadow of power
The bilingual courtroom
Community Interpreting
The Routledge Handbook of Interpreting
Regularity in Semantic Change
The Discourse of Court Interpreting
Discourse Markers
An Account of Discourse Markers
Interpreting Inexplicit Language during Courtroom Examination
How faithfully do court interpreters render the style of non-English speaking witnesses' testimonies? A data-based study of Spanish—English bilingual proceedings
Coerced Confessions
Translatability of Speech Style in Court Interpreting
The promise of linguistic equity for migrants in Australian courtrooms
Telephone interpreting — seen from the interpreters’ perspective
Does interpreter location make a difference
Discourse markers in free indirect style and interpreting
What a micro-analytical investigation of additions and expansions in remote interpreting can tell us about interpreters' participation in a shared virtual space
| Citations per year | 5.5 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2024 - 2026 (3) |
| Highly cited | No |