CC BY
124
2'2014
Пробелы в российском законодательстве
9.5. THE DISTINGUISHING
characteristics of court interpreting
Gorbatenko Olga Grigorievna, PhD in pedagogies. Position: associate professor. E-mail: [email protected] Place of employment: Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia.
Neda Kameh Khosh, Master student.
Place of study: Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia.
Annotation: The article is dedicated to the distinguishing characteristics of court interpreting. The current interest of the article is that a court proceeding is analyzed from judicial as well as from linguistic points of view. There are cases where court interpreting becomes a necessity. The main priority in court interpreting process is pointed out. The novelty of the article is that great emphasis is laid on court interpreting functions. Much attention is drawn to the role of court interpreters. Ethical codes issues are well reasoned in the article. The theoretical value of the research is that it can be applied as the material for students, lawyers and all those who are interested in judicial settings. The realities which have been considered in the article may be applied in practice. Interpreters may benefit from the article.
Keywords: court interpreting, ethical codes, court proceeding, judicial settings, language proficiency.
ОТЛИЧИТЕЛЬНЫЕ ХАРАКТЕРИСТИКИ СУДЕБНОГО ПЕРЕВОДА
Горбатенко Ольга Григорьевна, канд. пед. наук. Должность: доцент. Подразделение: кафедра иностранных языков. E-mail: [email protected] Место работы: Российский университет дружбы народов.
Неда Камех Хош, студентка магистратуры.
Место учебы: Российский университет дружбы народов.
Аннотация: Статья посвящена отличительным характеристикам судебного перевода. Актуальность статьи заключается в том, что судебный процесс анализируется как с юридической, так и с лингвистической точек зрения. Существуют дела, где необходим судебный перевод. Указан главный приоритет в процессе судебного перевода. Новизна статьи заключается в том, что акцент делается на функциях судебного перевода. Большое внимание уделяется роли судебных переводчиков. В статье затронут вопрос кодекса этики. Теоретическая значимость исследования заключается в том, что она может быть использована как материал для студентов, юристов, лекторов и для всех, кого интересуют вопросы юриспруденции. Реалии, рассмотренные в статье, могут быть применены на практике. Статья может быть полезной для переводчиков.
Ключевые слова: судебный перевод, кодекс этики, судебный процесс, вопросы юриспруденции, языковая компетенция.
There are some most influential matters in court interpreting. In recent years, the necessity of employing qualified, well - experienced and competent interpreters, practically in the judicial settings, has been intensified. The profession of court interpreters is very crucial in serving foreign individuals who have restricted language proficiency and limited communication capability. In fact, court interpreters should protect the constitutional rights of those
groups of people. Attention is drawn to the specific role of court interpreters within the judicial environments. Court interpreters should be equipped with cultural proficiency and linguistic professional skills.
Some jurisdictions categorize the court interpreters' performance into three distinctive functions: proceeding interpreting, witness interpreting and interview or defense interpreting. In a court proceeding, the interpreter interprets for a defendant simultaneously. The interpreter normally sits next to or close to the defendant. In such cases, one defendant will participate in the whole proceeding of the court with the help of the interpreter linguistically and cognitively. At least two interpreters will be necessary to do simultaneous interpretation.
A witness interpreter helps the foreign witness to testify before the court. In some cases, this function of the interpreter is called “record interpreting”, the performance of the court interpreter gives an opportunity to the witness and adjudicating individuals to communicate during the court proceeding. Therefore, the testimony of foreign individuals could be preserved and recorded in the official language of the court. Professor Holly Mickelson, as a leading expert in this field prefers a combination of simultaneous and consecutive modes during court proceedings.
Nevertheless for a defendant on trial who needs interpretation, most of the trial will be interpreted simultaneously.
Simultaneous interpretation is a big mystery to those who have not yet done it, yet for the professional interpreter, it is often easier and preferable to consecutive interpretation. The great amount of concentration you need to hear, listening to all that is said, to catch and repeat every word of it; this involves a very concentrated sort of listening. The next step is simultaneous interpretation where you repeat what the speaker says, with a lag of perhaps 3 to 4 words, now into your other working language, say German. The advantage of simultaneous is that no one has to wait for the interpretation, because it is done immediately. You create, when you do this, a process of transformation. Some writers put great emphasis on analysis and understanding of the message to be transmitted. Most of that concern is the notion of understanding the context and preparing for the case. Stresses should be placed on the importance of not becoming enslaved by the actual words of the speaker. If you stick too close to the words you may lose the idea. As we move into good expression of the idea, we try to move into the cultural context of the target language [1].
One the witness stand, interpretation is generally consecutive. The interpreter waits until the witness has finished a phrase or two, perhaps take notes, and then interprets the statement. It may be necessary to ask the court to ask witnesses and attorneys to speak in short sentences. The process of consecutive interpretation differs from simultaneous, because you have to wait and depend on your notes or memory to transmit the whole message. This waiting means than consecutive may take twice as much time as simultaneous interpreting.
At the witness stand the interpreter should place himself so that both judge and jury can see the witness. When a witness gestures the interpreter should not imitate his gestures.
Attorneys do not always care for consecutive interpretation on the witness stand, because the necessary stops and starts throw them off their rhythm in direct and crossexamination. Also, they feel that the mere presence of the interpreter acts as a buffer, so that reactions are delayed,
288
court interpreting Gorbatenko O.G.
Neda Kameh Khosh
the witness is protected from fast verbal assault, and the jury cannot perceive the true essence of the witness.
Interpreters themselves may favor simultaneous interpretation at the witness stand. They do not like to interrupt witness speech, and they recognize that when the witness has to answer in short phrases, he may feel constrained and not say fully all that he had meant to say. Most uncomfortable for the interpreter is the notion that if he does consecutive on the witness stand, he may forget and thus not transmit an entire phrase or part of a phrase that the witness said. It is this missing of phrases that gives rise to attorney objections when there interpreting from the witness stand. The interpreter's oath is to interpret fully and accurately all that is said. “Full” is sometimes lost in consecutive.
In order to overcome these problems, it possible to do simultaneous from the witness stand, as well as from the defense table. In other words, one could do an entire trial simultaneously. The ability to do simultaneous from the witness stand means that the witness could provide a full, uninterrupted answer, and the interpreter could follow along and provide the full and faithful interpretation that he is sworn to do and prefers to do.
On the witness stand, it is especially helpful to know beforehand what the witness might say, what the general drift of his remarks will be. If you have interpreted for the witness at grand jury, you will have an idea, or if you have been at the jail with him and his attorney, you will also know. Wise trial attorneys try to use the same interpreter for trial that they used at grand jury or at the jail, because then the story has the best chance of being fully and faithfully transmitted. If you are called to work a case at trial and have not previously interpreted for the witness at an earlier stage of the proceedings, you might ask the attorney involved if you may chat with the witness for a while, out of the hearing of the other side of the case. Some attorneys suggest this, and it is an offer that should be accepted. Naturally, whatever you hear you keep secret. As attorneys work with you and learn that you are to be trusted, they are more likely to be forthcoming and to suggest that you talk with the witness. Access depends on the confidence the attorney has in you, and on your general reputation for secrecy and confidentiality. Remember that there is the sensitive issue of whether or not the defendant himself will testify.
Because an English-speaking witness on the stand hears attorney objections raised in open court, so too a non-English-speaking witness should have those objections interpreted to him simultaneously.
At interview interpreter acts as a helping hand for the attorney in building contacts with his/her client shortly before, during or shortly after court proceeding. In a criminal case, this function is commonly applied as “defense interpreting”. The interview of the defense interpreter assists the attorney to exchange information and necessary details with his/her client at the courthouse. This function of interpreting encompasses neither prolonged conversation between a defendant and attorney nor interpreting in an attorney's office [3].
Court interpreters protect practically all types of legal cases which include different age, cultural backgrounds, social status and educational proficiency. That's why they have to reach general apprehension of distinctive cultural factors and comprehensive vocabulary which are categorized from formal constitutional and legitimate language to jargon and colloquialisms. Court interpreters should be able to interpret the utterances accurately and span the
linguistic and cultural breaches of court participants. As the first step, court interpreters have to verify comprehension of legal procedures and be impartial and confidential. Formulating the claims of clients and also accomplishing the interpretation tasks according to specified interpretation ethical codes could guarantee accurate interpretation during court proceedings [5].
If interpreters are fluent in two languages, they will possess the first prerequisite for fulfilling the professional task of interpreting at court proceedings. The main priority in court interpreting process is defined in transmitting the information from the source into target language accurately and precisely. In order to achieve this objective, the interpreters should take into account some substantial elements such as dialect, literacy level, register, geographic difference, style and also specialized or technical terminology. Court interpreters should possess full adequate information about legal settings and structures not only about the country in which the proceeding takes place but also about the country which is the speaker's homeland. In such cases, the interpreter could influence and control the procedure and quality of his/her expression when accomplishing the interpretation task.
Much attention is drawn to cultural insight and appreciation which plays a drastic role in court interpreting. Language and culture are interrelated, because of the existence of the cultural factor in a heart of every linguistic component. It goes without saying that interpreters have always to take this cultural appreciation into account. In fact they should keep themselves bicultural as well as bilingual professionals. Culture is defined as a way of life of people or society, norms of behavior, economic, social and political systems, languages, religion beliefs and law. Therefore, the capability and adequacy of court interpreters will be completed when they perform their tasks with the combination of bicultural and bilingual competencies.
Significant weight is attached to the science of semiotics which is related to the study of sign systems or structures and offers that this science could be as a facilitating science in comprehending the interpreting process at court proceeding. Sings explicit the correlation between form and meaning and this significant correlation could maintain the court interpreter in controlling his/her interpretation. There are several factors which play an important role in improving the court interpreters' efficiency, competency and experience. During court proceedings, the interpreter should concentrate on different characteristics of communication such as tone, intonation variations, facial signals and also gesture usage. In the judicial environments and contexts, non - spoken/oral communication is also cooperating with spoken/oral communication in the interpreting process.
During court proceeding, court interpreters should create one sort of equivalence and balance in their tasks where it is not only restricted to linguistic word for word translating but also it consists of transmitting signs and cultural perceptions. The idea plays a practical role for interpreters who endeavor to perform their task to their best ability. The court interpreter is responsible for the final judgment to some extent and in view of this he/she should possess linguistic competence. It is necessary to be very careful with selecting the words in order to avoid and misunderstanding in interpreting process and that's why, court interpreters must be aware of using linguistic knowledge during interpreting activity in its entirety.
Court interpreters should be attentive to levels of conventionality and forms of addresses which may be applied
289
2'2014
Пробелы в российском законодательстве
in different shapes and manners in the source and target language. The main point in such cases is focused on court interpreter's liability in maintaining speech skills and her/his sticking to style and level of speakers' language in a courtroom. In other words if the court interpreter tends to clear up or edit a witness testimony, it will give rise to an inaccurate oral form of the statement which is submitted for court participants. Court interpreters should be perfectly full-fledged professionals who administer justice in the courtroom. They should master linguistic and cultural issues at court proceedings and apply and accomplish the best and comprehensive interpreting strategies in order to cope with court interpretation complexities and problems [4].
Furthermore court interpreting at legal proceedings with accurate portrait and high quality demands a high adequate level of language proficiency and mastery. Otherwise the court participants may misunderstand the statements and accruing the errors will result in nonauthenticity and non-precision of justice process. Court interpreting is a particular sophisticated process which necessitates comprehensive professional knowledge of minimum two languages as well as passing strict training programs in court interpretation [2].
Literature list:
1. Alicia B. Edward. The Practice of Court Interpreting John Benjamins publishing Company, 1995.
2. Claus, Haydee. “Court Interpreting: Complexities and Misundtestandings.” Alaska Justice Forum, 1997: 7-8.
3. Crabau, M. Charles, and Llewellyn Joseph Gibbons. Protecting the Rights of Linguistic Minorities: Challenges to Court Interpretation. 1996.
4. Issaei, Nadiya Sulaiman. Court Interpreting in the Sultanate Oman. Sharjah, UAE: Faculty of the American University of Sharjah, College of Arts and Sciences, 2007.
5. Keratsa, Antonia. “Court Interpreting: Features, Conflicts and the Future. “Translatum Journal, 2005.
Список литературы:
1. Алисия Б. Эдвард. Практика судебного перевода Джон Бенжамине издательская Компания, 1995.
2. Клаус, Хайди. «Судебный Перевод: Сложности и Недоразумения». Аляска Форум Правосудия, 1997: 78.
3. Крабау, М. Чарлс and Левеллин Джозеф Гиббонс. Защита Прав Лингвистического меньшинства: Проблемы Судебного Перевода. 1996.
4. Иссаи Надия Сулейман. Судебный Перевод в Султанском Омане. Шарья ЮАИ: Факультет Американского Университета Шарья, Колледж Гуманитарных и Естественных наук, 2007.
5. Кератса, Антония. «Судебный Перевод: Свойства, Противоречия и Будущее». Журнал Транслатум, 2005.
6. Горбатенко О.Г. СПЕЦИФИКА РЕЧИ В СУДЕБНОМ ЗАСЕДАНИИ // Бизнес в законе. - 2013. - №6.
290
