Article published in:
Vol. 17:1 (2015) ► pp. 6490
Amossy, R
(2001) Ethos at the crossroads of disciplines: Rhetoric, pragmatics, sociology. Poetics Today 22 (1), 1–23. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2010) La présentation de soi. Ethos et identité verbale. Paris: PUF. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1991) On rhetoric: A theory of civic discourse. Newly translated with Introduction, Notes, and Appendixes by G.A. Kennedy. New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Atkinson, J.M. & Drew, P
(1979) Order in court: The organization of verbal behaviour in judicial settings. London: Macmillan. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bastow, T
(2008) Defence discourse II: A corpus perspective on routine and rhetoric in defence discourse. In A. Mayer (Ed.), Language and power: An introduction to institutional discourse. London/New York: Continuum, 138–162.Google Scholar
Baumlin, J.S
(2001) Ethos. In T.O. Sloane (Ed.), Encyclopedia of rhetoric. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 263–277.Google Scholar
Berk-Seligson, S
(1990) The bilingual courtroom: Court interpreters in the judicial process. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Braet, A
(2007) Retorische kritiek. Overtuigingskracht van Cicero tot Balkenende. Den Haag: Sdu Uitgevers.Google Scholar
Brown, P. & Levinson, S.C
(1978) Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bucholtz, M
(2000) The politics of transcription. Journal of Pragmatics 321, 1439–1465. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chafe, W
(2007) The importance of not being earnest. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chesterman, A
(1993) From ‘is’ to ‘ought’’: Laws, norms and strategies in translation studies. Target 5 (1), 1–20. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
D’hondt, S
(2009) Good cops, bad cops: Intertextuality, agency, and structure in criminal trial discourse. Research on Language and Social Interaction 42 (3), 249–275. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Diriker, E
(2004) De-/Re-contextualizing conference interpreting: Interpreters in the ivory tower? Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Emmel, B.A
(2005) Some dialogic aspects of monologic argumentation in the courtroom. Studies in Communication Sciences 4 (3), 217–231.Google Scholar
Felton Rosulek, L
(2010) Prosecution and defense closing speeches. In M. Coulthard & A. Johnson (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of forensic linguistics. London: Routledge, 218–230. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Frydman, B
(2007) La contestation du jury populaire. Symptôme d’une crise rhétorique et démocratique. Questions de Communication 121, 103–117. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gallez, E
(2014) Ethos et interprétation judiciaire. Une analyse ethnographique de l’interprétation dans une cour d’assises belge: une étude de cas. PhD dissertation, KU Leuven.
Gallez, E. & Maryns, K
(2014) Orality and authenticity in an interpreter-mediated defendant’s examination. Interpreting 16 (1), 49–81. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gibbons, J
(2003) Forensic linguistics: An introduction to language in the justice system. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Gile, D
(2009) Basic concepts and models for interpreter and translator training. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hale, S.B
(2004) The discourse of court interpreting: Discourse practices of the law, the witness and the interpreter. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2006) Themes and methodological issues in court interpreting research. In E. Hertog & B. van der Veer (Eds.), Taking stock: Research and methodology in community interpreting. Linguistica Antverpiensia 51, 205–228.Google Scholar
(2007) Community interpreting. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Herrick, J.A
(2005) The history and theory of rhetoric: An introduction. Boston: Allyn and Beacon.Google Scholar
Jacobsen, B
(2002) Pragmatic meaning in court interpreting: An empirical study of additions in consecutively interpreted question-answer dialogues. PhD dissertation, The Aarhus School of Business.
Jasinski, J
(2001) Sourcebook on rhetoric: Key concepts in contemporary rhetorical studies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kienpointner, M
(1995) Rhetoric. In J. Verschueren, J.-O. Östman & J. Blommaert (Eds.), Handbook of pragmatics. Manual. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 453–461. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Komter, M
(1998) Dilemmas in the courtroom: A study of trials of violent crime in the Nether­lands. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Lee, J
(2009) Interpreting inexplicit language during courtroom examination. Applied Linguistics 30 (1), 93–114. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Linell, P
(1998) Approaching dialogue: Talk, interaction and contexts in dialogical perspectives. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Maingueneau, D
(2007) Analyser les textes de communication. Paris: Armand Colin. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mason, I. & Stewart, M
(2001) Interactional pragmatics, face and the dialogue interpreter. In I. Mason (Ed.), Triadic exchanges: Studies in dialogue interpreting. Manchester: St. Jerome, 51–70.Google Scholar
Matoesian, G
(2005) Struck by speech revisited: Embodied stance in jurisdictional discourse. Journal of Sociolinguistics 9 (2), 167–193. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Morris, R
(1995) The moral dilemmas of court interpreting. The Translator 1 (1), 25–46. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Plantin, C
(2009) La personne comme ressource argumentative: ethos et résistance à l’autorité. In P. Charaudeau (Ed.), Identités sociales et discursives du sujet parlant. Paris: L’Harmattan, 55–70.Google Scholar
Pöchhacker, F
(2004) Introducing interpreting studies. London/New York: Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Poulakos, J
(2001) Sophists. In T.O. Sloane (Ed.), Encyclopedia of rhetoric. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 732–733.Google Scholar
Pym, A
(1999) Nicole slapped Michelle: On interpreters and theories of interpreting at the O. J. Simpson trial. The Translator 5 (2), 265–283. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rudvin, M
(2006) The cultural turn in community interpreting: A brief analysis of epistemological developments in community interpreting literature in the light of paradigm changes in the humanities. In E. Hertog & B. van der Veer (Eds.), Taking stock: Research and methodology in community interpreting. Linguistica Antverpiensia 51, 21–41.Google Scholar
Rudvin, M. & Tomassini, E
(2011) Interpreting in the community and workplace: A practical teaching guide. London: Palgrave Macmillan. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Saville-Troike, M
(2003) The ethnography of communication: An introduction. London: Blackwell. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Shlesinger, M
(1991) Interpreter latitude versus due process: Simultaneous and consecutive interpretation in multilingual trials. In S. Tirkkonen-Condit (Ed.), Empirical research in translation and intercultural studies. Tübingen: Gunter Narr, 147–155.Google Scholar
Sperber, D. & Wilson, D
(1986/1995) Relevance: Communication and cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Tindale C.W
(2004) Rhetorical argumentation: Principles of theory and practice. Thousand Oaks/London/New Delhi: Sage.Google Scholar
Traest, P
(2001) The jury in Belgium. Revue Internationale de Droit Pénal 72 (1), 27–50. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tulkens, F. & van de Kerchove, M
(1997) Introduction au droit pénal. Aspects juridiques et criminologiques. Bruxelles: Story-Scientia.Google Scholar
Wadensjö, C
(1998) Interpreting as interaction. London/New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Wilson, D
(2005–2006) Online course in relevance theory and pragmatics. University College London. Department of Phonetics and Linguistics.
Cited by

Cited by 2 other publications

Defrancq, Bart & Sofie Verliefde
2017. Interpreter-mediated “paternalistic” interaction in a judge-centered courtroom. Interpreting. International Journal of Research and Practice in Interpreting 19:2  pp. 209 ff. Crossref logo
Guo, Yijun
2021. Contrastive images of journalists and Chinese premiers in interpreter-mediated press conferences: a case study of Chinese ‘xiexie’. Perspectives 29:4  pp. 507 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 15 april 2022. 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.