Creating monolingualism in the multilingual courtroom
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1558/sols.v2i3.385Keywords:
courtroom discourse, interpreting, codeswitching, language ideology, us lawAbstract
This paper contributes to research that has identified an institutional bias towards monolingualism in the legal sphere (Eades 2003, Haviland 2003), investigating how this ‘monolingual worldview’ (Ellis 2006) affects interactions between speakers of minority languages and courtroom professionals in New York City Small Claims Court. Drawing on ethnographic fieldwork and a data-set of 40 recorded arbitration hearings that include speakers of Spanish, Russian, Haitian Creole, and Polish, the paper shows that, while the courtroom itself is multilingual, all individuals besides the interpreters are expected to use one language only, even though most are multilingual to some degree. This ideology is evident in the common practice among legal professionals and interpreters to interrupt and discourage any use of English (i.e. codeswitching) by individuals who are accompanied by an interpreter. On the other hand, court users who avoid the use of English are frequently accused of deceit (‘pretending not to speak English’) by the opposing party. The court’s monolingual bias thus forces bilingual participants to act as monolinguals, thereby creating the appearance of monolingualism as the norm. It is argued that these practices inherently disadvantage minority speakers by preventing them from using the full range of their communicative abilities, and by making language choice a factor in the assessment of their credibility.
References
Angermeyer, P. S. (2005) Who is ‘I’? Pronoun choice and bilingual identity in court interpreting Selected Proceedings from NWAV 33 31–44. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics, Volume 11. 2.
Angermeyer, P. S. and Schieffelin, B. B. (2005) Small claims court as a fieldsite for urban sociolinguistics. Workshop presented at NWAV 34, New York University.
Angermeyer, P. S. (2006) ‘Speak English or what?’ Codeswitching and Interpreter Use in New York Small Claims Court. New York University: Ph. D. Dissertation.
Auer, P. (1984) Bilingual Conversation. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins.
Auer, P. (1995) The pragmatics of code-switching: A sequential approach. In L. Milroy and P. Muysken (eds) One Speaker, Two Languages: Cross-disciplinary perspectives on code-switching 115–135. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Berk-Seligson, S. (2000) Interpreting for the police: Issues in pre-trial phases of the judicial process. Forensic Linguistics 7: 212–237.
Blommaert, J. (2003) Commentary: A sociolinguistics of globalization. Journal of Sociolinguistics 7: 607–623.
Bourdieu, P. (1991) Language and Symbolic Power. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
Conley, J. M. (1982) The law. In W. M. O’Barr (ed.) Linguistic Evidence: Language, power and strategy in the courtroom 41–49. New York: Academic Press.
Conley, J. M. and O’Barr, W. M. (1990) Rules versus Relationships: The ethnography of legal discourse. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Conley, J. M. and O’Barr, W. M. (1998) Just Words: Law, language, and power. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Cooke, M. (1996) A different story: Narrative versus ‘question and answer’ in Aboriginal evidence. Forensic Linguistics 3: 273–288.
Coulmas, F. (1987) Why speak English? In K. Knapp, W. Enninger and A. Knapp-Potthoff (eds) Analyzing Intercultural Communication 93–107. Berlin/New York/Amsterdam: Mouton de Gruyter.
D’Hondt, S., Beyens, K., Machiels, B., Meeuwis, M., Blommaert, J. and Verschueren, J. (2004) Interculturele Communicatie in Rechtbanken. Brussels: Politeia.
Davidson, B. (2002) A model of the construction of conversational common ground in interpreted discourse. Journal of Pragmatics 34: 1273–1300.
De Jongh, E. M. (1992) An Introduction to Court Interpreting: Theory and practice. Lanham, Md: University Press of America.
Eades, D. (2003) Participation of second language and second dialect speakers in the legal system. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 23: 113–133.
Ellis, E. (2006) Monolingualism: The unmarked case. Estudios de Sociolingüística 7(2): 173–196.
Hale, S. (2004) The Discourse of Court Interpreting: Discourse practices of the law, the witness and the interpreter. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins.
Harris, B. (1990) Norms in interpretation. Target 2: 115–119.
Haviland, J. B. (2003) Ideologies of language: Reflections on language and U.S. law. American Anthropologist 105: 764–774.
Heller, M. (1982) Negotiations of language choice in Montreal. In J. J. Gumperz (ed.) Language and Social Identity 108–118. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Inghilleri, M. (2003) Habitus, field and discourse: Interpreting as a socially situated activity. Target 15: 243–268.
Kadric, M. (2001) Dolmetschen bei Gericht: Erwartungen, Anforderungen, Kompetenzen. Vienna: WUV, Universitätsverlag.
Lippi-Green, R. (1994) Accent, standard language ideology and discriminatory pretext in the courts. Language in Society 18: 213–234.
Mason, I. (1999) Introduction. The Translator 5: 147–160.
Matsuda, M. J. (1991) Voice of America: Accent, antidiscrimination law, and a jurisprudence for the last reconstruction. Yale Law Journal 100: 1329–1407.
Merry, S. E. (1990) Getting Justice and Getting Even: Legal consciousness among working-class Americans. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Müller, F. E. (1989) Translation in bilingual conversation: Pragmatic aspects of translatory interaction. Journal of Pragmatics 13: 713–739.
National Association of Judiciary Interpreters and Translators (NAJIT) (2006) Modes of interpreting: Simultaneous, consecutive and sight translation. NAJIT Position Paper. Retrieved on 21 July 2008 from http://www.najit.org/documents/Modes_of_Interpreting200609. pdf
Pousada, A. (1979) Interpreting for language minorities in the courts. In J. Alatis and G. R. Tucker (eds) Language in Public Life 186–208. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
Shlesinger, M. (1991) Interpreter latitude vs. due process: Simultaneous and consecutive interpretation in multilingual trials. In S. Tirkkonen-Condit (ed.) Empirical Research in Translation and Intercultural Studies 147–155. Tübingen: Günter Narr.
Silverstein, M. (1996) Monoglot ‘Standard’ in America: Standardization and metaphors of linguistic hegemony. In D. L. Brenneis and R. H. S. Macaulay (eds) The Matrix of Language: Contemporary Linguistic Anthropology 284–306. Boulder, CO: Westview.
Urciuoli, B. (1996) Exposing Prejudice: Puerto Rican experiences of language, race, and class. Boulder: Westview Press.
Wadensjö, C. (1998) Interpreting as Interaction. London/New York: Longman.
