U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

Bilingual Courtroom: Court Interpreters in the Judicial Process

NCJ Number
127577
Author(s)
S Berk-Seligson
Date Published
1990
Length
310 pages
Annotation
Since the late 1960's when the climate engendered by the civil rights movement laid the foundation for growing sensitivity to linguistic minorities, there has been an explosion in the use of foreign language interpreting in American courtrooms.
Abstract
The current driving force behind the trend toward greater use of court interpreting is the Federal Court Interpreters Act of 1978. Although this law is restricted to Federal courts, it has stimulated parallel measures in State and municipal courts. While one major source of problems commonly found in interpreted judicial proceedings stems from contradictory perceptions of the interpreter's role, another important source of difficulty is the general lack of awareness on the part of most interpreters of a field of linguistics called "pragmatics." Professional interpreters overwhelmingly view vocabulary as the number one linguistic problem, and problems of syntax and pragmatic scope are given minimal or no attention. Court interpreting is being conducted in Federal, State, and municipal courts in various languages, although Spanish is the predominant language. In 1987, there were 2,636 court appearances of Spanish interpreters, compared to 607 court appearances for 26 other languages combined. Book chapters explain the duties of court interpreters, why and how language is a critical dimension in court proceedings, the legal rationale behind the growing trend among courts to provide linguistic minorities with court interpreting services, verbal and nonverbal interaction between interpreters and other courtroom participants, ways in which interpreters alter pragmatic elements of attorneys' questions and witnesses' answers, and the impact of linguistic alterations made by interpreters. 171 references, 15 tables, and 4 figures