Court interpreting : the effect of omission, code-switching, and self-generated utterances on interpreter performance

Abstract

This study examines court interpreting from a sociolinguistic point of view. It seeks to understand how interpreters use language in a courtroom involving Tshivenda and English. Court interpreters are viewed to be active and using language choice to cement their new role rather than being conduits. This study uses the participation framework and the agency and role theory as the springboard of this research. Its focus is on studying three sociolinguistic focus areas namely omission, code-switching and self- generated utterances. These focus areas are manifested in a variety of ways, such as explanations, repetitions and responses to questions, to mention a few, and seek to understand their effects on interpreter performance. I argue that court interpreters have started shifting away from being mere conduits and are using language to influence the proceedings in courts, which is signified by several omissions, code-switching and self-generated utterances that are prevalent during communication events. This is an exploratory and heuristic qualitative research which uses both quantitative and qualitative approach in data analysis. It is exploratory because it is intended to investigate human behaviour in the form of language and heuristic since it allows the researcher to discover knowledge by himself. Primarily, the study was conducted in the Thohoyandou High Court, but also proceeded to the Thohoyandou and Vuwani Magistrates’ Courts to ensure the validity of the study. Data were gathered ethnographically by attending court cases where interpreters working from Tshivenda to English and vice versa are involved. Permission to be present and writing was sought and granted by the authorities involved. Using extra-linguistic knowledge of interpreting, the researcher also recorded observed interpreter behaviour to complete spoken speech. Using conversation analysis and tools of analysis, such as the SPEAKING acronym data were interpreted based on the frequency of the occurrences of the three sociolinguistic aspects in question, their types and possible causes. For example, in omission or code-switching, it could be about different interpreters committed and the possible causes. The study concluded that court interpreters were not mere conduits, but were active participants in court proceedings, adding, clarifying, omitting and choosing a language to shape discourse. All 10 court cases produced evidence that interpreters omit, code-switch and generate statements not uttered by the speakers. While most of them were voluntary pickings, some were, albeit few, due to constraints. Omissions seemed to dominate, followed by self-generated utterances, while code-switching was the lowest preferred tool of involvement. The findings were consistent with the springboard of this research and also presented some findings that were never anticipated.