Language and power
Discursive strategies employed by interpreters in Ghanaian district courts
This article investigates the power dynamics at play in interpreter-mediated discourse interactions in the
district courts in Ghana. Using audio recordings of authentic courtroom proceedings, we analyzed the discursive practices
performed by court actors, especially interpreters, and the ways in which these practices signal their power or the lack thereof.
We also examine the way language is employed by dominant actors to intrude on the liberty of less dominant actors in the courtroom
and how this is sometimes resisted by the latter actors. We couch our analyses in Fairclough’s theory of language and power and
Obeng’s theory of language and liberty. Our analysis shows that interpreters in Ghanaian courts are tacitly imbued with an
inordinate amount of power, which is exercised in the service of the courts. The interpreters in our study employ speech acts such
as questioning, scolding and persuading to control the discursive behavior of lay court users (e.g., litigants, witnesses) in
order to ensure efficient court proceedings. These acts impinge on the liberty of litigants as they are not free to engage the
court in a manner suitable to them. This study raises questions about the interpreter’s neutrality and professionalism and its
findings could be useful to those entities interested in improving legal interpreting standards.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Courtroom interpreting
- 2.1Language and the courts in Ghana
- 2.2Literature review
- 3.Theory and methodology
- 3.1Key concepts
- 3.2Data collection
- 3.3Data analysis
- 4.Analysis
- 4.1Judges co-opt interpreters to help manage and control litigants’ interactional output and tempo
- 4.2Interpreters maintain order in the courtroom
- 4.3Interpreters scold litigants for communicative infractions
- 4.4Interpreters educate lay court users on court protocols and acceptable behavior
- 4.5Interpreters engage in turn initiation and repair
- 4.6Interpreters promote court services to court users
- 5.Discussion and conclusions
- Note
-
References
References (49)
References
Addo-Fening, R. (1990). The native jurisdiction ordinance, indirect rule and the subject’s well-being: The Abuakwa experience from 1899–1912. Research Review
6
(2), 29–44.
Alberts, M. & Mollema, N. (2013). Developing legal terminology in African languages as aid to the court interpreter. Lexikos
23
(1), 29–58.
Ali, S. A. & Algane, M. (2013). The role of forensic translation in courtrooms contexts. Arab World English Journal
4
1, 171–180.
Amissah, A. (1985). Criminal procedure in Ghana. Accra: Sedco.
Angelelli, C. (2004). Medical interpreting and cross-cultural communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Arno, A. (1985). Structural communication and control communication: An interactionist perspective on legal and customary procedures for conflict management. American Anthropologist
87
(1), 40–55.
Berk-Seligson, S. (1990). The bilingual courtroom. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Berk-Seligson, S. (1999). The impact of court interpreting on the coerciveness of leading questions. Forensic Linguistic
6
(1), 30–56.
Berlin, I. (1960). Four essays on liberty. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Central Intelligence Agency World Factbook (2021). Ghana demographics profile. [URL]
Cooke, M. (1995). Interpreting in a cross-cultural cross-examination: An Aboriginal case study. International Journal of the Sociology of Language
113
1, 99–111.
Davidson, B. (2000). The interpreter as institutional gatekeeper: The social-linguistic role of interpreters in Spanish–English medical discourse. Journal of Sociolinguistics
4
1, 379–405.
Davidson, B. (2001). Questions in cross-linguistic medical encounters: The role of the hospital interpreter. Anthropological Quarterly
4
1, 170–178.
Dako, K. & Quarcoo, M. (2017). Attitudes towards English in Ghana. Legon Journal of the Humanities
28
(1), 20–30.
Dakubu, M. E. K. (1988). The languages of Ghana. London: KPI Ltd.
Du Bois, J. W., Schuetze-Coburn, S., Cumming, S. & Paolino, D. (1993). Outline of discourse transcription. In J. A. Edwards & M. D. Lampert (Eds.), Talking data: Transcription and coding in discourse research. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 45–89.
Fairclough, N. (1989). Language and power (Second edition). London/New York: Longman.
Fairclough, N. (2015). Language and power (Third edition). London/New York: Routledge.
Fiva, H. (2006). In other words: A study of interpreting and power in Oslo. Master’s thesis, University of Oslo.
Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison (trans. Alan Sheridan). New York: Pantheon Books.
Ghana Statistical Service. (2013). 2010 population and housing census: National analytic report.
González, R. D., Vásquez, V. F. & Mikkelson, I. (2012). Fundamentals of court interpreting: Theory, policy and practice. Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press.
Lebese, S. (2014). Do justice to court interpreters in South Africa. Stellenbosch Papers in Linguistics Plus
43
1, 183–208.
Lebese, S. (2015). Formulation of court interpreting models: A South African perspective. Stellenbosch Papers in Linguistics Plus
44
1, 61–80.
Mikkelson, H. (2017). Introduction to court interpreting. London/New York: Routledge.
Moeketsi, R. H. (2001). In court with Dell Hymes: Implications for courtroom discourse and court interpreting. South African Journal of African Language
21
(2), 133–147.
Moeketsi, R. & Mollema, N. (2006). Towards perfect practice in South African court interpreting: A quality assurance and quality management model. International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law
13
(1), 76–88.
Moeketsi, R. & Wallmach, K. (2005). From Sphaza to Makoya!: A BA degree for court interpreters in South Africa. International Journal of Speech Language and the Law
12
(1), 77–108.
Morris, R. (1995). The moral dilemmas of court interpreting. The Translator
1
(1), 25–46.
Morris, R. (2009). Taking liberties? Duplicity or the dynamics of court interpreting. In S. Hale & D. Russell (Eds.), Interpreting in legal settings. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press, 1–25.
O’Barr, W. & Conley, J. (1990). Litigant satisfaction versus legal adequacy in small claims court narratives. In J. N. Levi & A. Graffam Walker (Eds.), Language in the judicial process. New York: Springer, 97–131.
O’Barr, W. & O’Barr, J. F. (Eds.). (1976). Language and politics. The Hague: Mouton.
Obeng, S. G. (1999). Grammatical pragmatics: Power in Akan judicial discourse. Pragmatics
9
(2), 199–229.
Obeng, S. G. (2010). Disagreements in Akan juridical discourse. Issues in Intercultural Communication
2
(2), 1–21.
Obeng, S. G. (2018). Conflict resolution in Africa: Language, law and politeness in Ghanaian (Akan) jurisprudence. Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press.
Obeng, S. G. (2020). Grammatical pragmatics: Language, power and liberty in African (Ghanaian) political discourse. Discourse and Society
31
(1), 85–105.
Obeng, S. G. (2022). Language and liberty. Legon Journal of Humanities
33
(1), 138–159.
Rigney, A. C. (1999). Questioning in interpreted testimony. Forensic Linguistics
6
(1), 83–108.
Roy, C. (2000). Interpreting as a discourse process. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Rycroft, R. (2011). Hidden penalties faced by non-English speakers in the UK criminal justice system: An interpreting perspective. In A. Wagner & L. Cheng (Eds.), Exploring courtroom discourse: The language of power and control. Ashgate: Farnham, 209–225.
Wadensjö, C. (1998). Interpreting as interaction. London/New York: Longman.
Wallmach, K. (2015). Africa. In F. Pöchhacker (Ed.), Routledge encyclopedia of interpreting studies. London/New York: Routledge, 8–12.
Zambrano, M. J. (2005). The interpreter’s linguistic power: A new courtroom reality in immigration hearings. Doctoral dissertation, University of Pittsburg.
Cited by (1)
Cited by one other publication
Obeng, Samuel Gyasi & Akua Asantewaa Campbell
2024.
Repair in Ghanaian judicial discourse.
International Journal of Legal Discourse 9:1
► pp. 33 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 20 november 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.