Clarification of the issues in language analysis: a rejoinder to Fraser and Verrips


  • Tina Cambier-Langeveld Immigration and Naturalisation Service



language analysis, LADO, guidelines, asylum seekers, speaker origin


Volume 18.1 (2011) of this journal presented two responses to my article ‘The role of linguists and native speakers in language analysis for the determination of speaker origin’, published in volume 17.1 (2010). Both Helen Fraser and Maaike Verrips pick up on eight cases presented in my article, and question whether these cases have any implications for the ‘Guidelines’. The responses compel me to bring forward a direct connection between the eight cases and the ‘Guidelines’. In this rejoinder, the impact of the eight cases on the ‘Guidelines’ is spelled out. Secondly, various arguments relevant to the ‘linguist vs native speaker debate’ are distinguished, in order to increase understanding of the controversy. Finally, this rejoinder reflects on how this debate could have become polarised.

Author Biography

Tina Cambier-Langeveld, Immigration and Naturalisation Service

Tina Cambier-Langeveld studied linguistics and holds a PhD in phonetics. She worked as an expert in forensic speech science at the Netherlands Forensic Institute (NFI) for six years. Since 2005 she is employed by the Dutch Immigration and Naturalisation Service, where she is in charge of language analyses as a means to investigate the claims of asylum seekers on their national/regional origin, ethnicity and language background.




How to Cite

Cambier-Langeveld, T. (2012). Clarification of the issues in language analysis: a rejoinder to Fraser and Verrips. International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law, 19(1), 95–108.