Reverse courts right regarding legal interpreters

lifeandtimes

Hi,

Serious question before anyone goes all 2017 and off the handle.

This may only apply to the the US and/or UK but I feel there are certain places it could have application here in ireland.

If during a court case it was found that a defendant,prosecution or witness spoke a dialect like Ebonics or Cockney English etc and the judge/court could not understand them,Are the court able to higher a person who specialises in this dialect (if there is one) and if there isn't where would this leave the court in the 3 scenarios above?

Thanks

nuac

Matter for parties' solicitors to apply for any necessary translators in criminal cases.

In civil cases it's a matter for the parties

imho neither Ebonics nor Cockney are separate languages.

johnnyskeleton

Yes. Considering that the courts occasionally use Translators for the first national language, there should be no problem getting one for the second national language if required.

Victor

http://www.courts.ie/rules.nsf/0/6b924bdea9b16f0880256d2b0046b3a5?OpenDocument

lifeandtimes wrote: »

Reverse courts right regarding legal interpreters

What does this mean? Why are you changing the court's rights?

The objective of the court is to get to the truth. That can be difficult when there is a language barrier.

"legal interpreters" - they are ordinary interpreters, perhaps with a certain minimum standard, especially in relevant phraseology.

Peregrinus

There;s no clear boundary between languages, dialects and variants. Basically, if the court can't understand what a witness is saying, the services of an interpreter can be used. In a multicultural society, many people have a command of more than one variant/dialect/language, and with a bit of effort and mutual explanations you'll get buy without an interpreter, so it would be unusual to avail of an interpreter for someone using a non-standard English variant. But it could be done.

I recall a case in England years ago, where the judge had the usual background of English High Court judges in the mid-twentieth century, and several of the witnesses were working-class Dubliners. Counsel on both sides had to do a fair amount of informal interpretation. For example, one of the witnesses described a particular person as "a decent class of a man", and it had to be explained to the judge that, in the context, this meant that the witness concerned was saying that that person was entirely honest, but not necessarily very bright.

Marcusm

nuac wrote: »

Matter for parties' solicitors to apply for any necessary translators in criminal cases.

In civil cases it's a matter for the parties

imho neither Ebonics nor Cockney are separate languages.

Dat's becos you is thinking tu norrowly mon! Look to Tha Boord O Ulster Scotch to see how accented dialect can be recognised as a language. See the following extract from a U.K. Government publication.

Dae A need a new aerial?
Gin ye hae guid analogue reception the nou, ye'r like no tae need tae replace yer ruiftap or set-tap aerial for the cheenge-ower – thare nae sic thing as a 'deegital aerial'. But gin ye hae ill analogue reception the nou, ye’ll mebbe need tae replace it.


The BBC has just launched a radio service in Pidgin English serving West Africa.

Peregrinus

The question of whether a particular mode of speech is classed as a distinct language, a distinct dialect or a variant is irrelevant. The only thing that matters, in a court context, is whether it's intelligible. I wouldn't have any difficulty understanding the quoted passage, and I don't think any speaker of Hiberno-English would.

cml387

Didn't the judge in the famous Reynolds v Times Newspapers have tremendous difficulty understanding Willie O'Dea who was a defence witness I believe.

Victor

"A language is a dialect with an army and navy" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_language_is_a_dialect_with_an_army_and_navy

Peregrinus wrote: »

The question of whether a particular mode of speech is classed as a distinct language, a distinct dialect or a variant is irrelevant. The only thing that matters, in a court context, is whether it's intelligible. I wouldn't have any difficulty understanding the quoted passage, and I don't think any speaker of Hiberno-English would.

Listen to some of the quotes from Spud in Trainspotting (I think the character is on speed in one scene) or many people from working class areas of Glasgow.

Peregrinus

Victor wrote: »

Listen to some of the quotes from Spud in Trainspotting (I think the character is on speed in one scene) or many people from working class areas of Glasgow.

Regardless of his accent or dialect, I think that might compromise the probative value of his evidence.

Victor

Peregrinus wrote: »

Regardless of his accent or dialect, I think that might compromise the probative value of his evidence.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OwDmg74rhCw

lifeandtimes

Thanks for all the replies.

Say in the case of a thick accent/dialect and no one could find an interpreter for this (so in the example above,super glaswegian) if this was a defendant would they be given the right to a fair trial if they couldn't testify for themselves as no one could understand. Would the method of having them right things down be sufficient(which would then beg the question what if they cant write)?

nuac

Marcusm wrote: »

Dat's becos you is thinking tu norrowly mon! Look to Tha Boord O Ulster Scotch to see how accented dialect can be recognised as a language. See the following extract from a U.K. Government publication.

Dae A need a new aerial?
Gin ye hae guid analogue reception the nou, ye'r like no tae need tae replace yer ruiftap or set-tap aerial for the cheenge-ower – thare nae sic thing as a 'deegital aerial'. But gin ye hae ill analogue reception the nou, ye’ll mebbe need tae replace it.


The BBC has just launched a radio service in Pidgin English serving West Africa.

`

imho Ulster-Scots is normal English spoken with a broad Ballymena accent.

It has been given equal status with Irish to help the GFA to work

Victor

nuac wrote: »

imho Ulster-Scots is normal English spoken with a broad Ballymena accent.

Scots is the language of Robert Burns.


O wad some Pow'r the giftie gie us
To see oursels as ithers see us!
It wad frae mony a blunder free us,
An' foolish notion:
What airs in dress an' gait wad lea'e us,
An' ev'n devotion!

nuac

Victor wrote: »

Scots is the language of Robert Burns.


O wad some Pow'r the giftie gie us
To see oursels as ithers see us!
It wad frae mony a blunder free us,
An' foolish notion:
What airs in dress an' gait wad lea'e us,
An' ev'n devotion!

Noted,
But I hae me doots about the provenance of much of what is now being touted as Ulster-Scots

Grolschevik

Wow! I understand English, Scots, and Ulster Scots, and can make a good fist of speaking all three!

That means I must be multilingual. That ****'s going on my CV straight away!

Peregrinus

lifeandtimes wrote: »

Thanks for all the replies.

Say in the case of a thick accent/dialect and no one could find an interpreter for this (so in the example above,super glaswegian) if this was a defendant would they be given the right to a fair trial if they couldn't testify for themselves as no one could understand. Would the method of having them right things down be sufficient(which would then beg the question what if they cant write)?

Well, you face issues like this with defendants who are mute, or with defendants whose first language is not the language of the proceedings, and who have some competence in, but not a real mastery of, the language of the proceedings.

Bottom line; yes, you can get someone to interpret. Interpreters dealing with dialect/accept are not fundamentally different from interpreters dealing with language.

Interpreters take their own oath, separate from the witnesses, to interpret faithfully, and obviously you prefer an interpreter who doesn't have connections to either party. But you take what you can get. Here in Australia, it can happen in courts serving remote communities that all the speakers of a particular language are known to one another (and indeed related to one another) so a truly independent interpreter is impossible. In that situation you look for a interpreter of standing in the community.