Intercultural translation of vague legal language: The right to silence in the Northern Territory of Australia
ARDS Aboriginal Corporation | The University of Melbourne
Difficulties have long been observed in communicating legal rights to some Aboriginal people in Australia. In the Northern
Territory, audio translations of the right to silence in Aboriginal languages can be used in police interviews. This study examines two sets
of audio translations in two Aboriginal languages. Also included in each case are front-translations – intermediate English texts used to
facilitate translation – as well as the legal texts that likely informed the translations. The audio translations include far more explicit
information than either legal texts of the right, or oral explanations from police (evidenced in transcripts from police interviews).
Analyses of context and implicature highlight that the legal text of the right is indeterminate: It is unclear what the text is intended to
imply and communicate. Aboriginal translators are better placed than legal communicators to develop informative texts, because of their
audience knowledge and intercultural skill. However, translators can only work with meaning provided or approved by their clients. Legal
authorities, not translators, should be responsible for deciding the information to be communicated about rights, to meet the objectives of
policies about rights. When the challenging and imperfect nature of intercultural legal translation is recognised, translators can use their
insight into legal meaning to greatly improve communication with target audiences.
Police interviews with suspects are an important step in gathering evidence about crimes. In Australia, police are generally required to inform suspects before an interview of their right to remain silent, also called ‘cautioning’. This study examines recorded translations that are designed to communicate this caution to Aboriginal suspects in the Northern Territory of Australia (NT) at the start of a police interview.
2008 “ ‘You Have the Right to Remain Silent… But Only If You Ask for It Just So’: The Role of Linguistic Ideology in American Police Interrogation Law.” International Journal of Speech Language and the Law 15 (1): 1–21.
2016 “Totality of Circumstances and Translating the Miranda Warnings.” In Discursive Constructions of Consent in the Legal Process, edited by Susan Ehrlich, Diana Eades, and Janet Ainsworth, 241–263. New York: Oxford University Press.
2013 “Legal Texts and Canons of Construction: A View from Current Pragmatic Theory.” In Law and Language: Current Legal Issues Volume 15, edited by Michael Freeman and Fiona Smith, 8–33. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
2003 “Translation of EU Legal Texts.” In Crossing Barriers and Bridging Cultures: The Challenges of Multilingual Translation for the European Union, edited by Arturo Tosi, 38–44. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
2000 “Reading the Rights: A Cautionary Tale of Comprehension and Comprehensibility.” International Journal of Speech Language and the Law 7 (1): 4–25.
2001 “Revising the Language of New South Wales Police Procedures: Applied Linguistics in Action.” Applied Linguistics 22 (4): 439–469.
Glanert, Simone, and Pierre Legrand
2013 “Foreign Law in Translation: If Truth Be Told…” In Law and Language: Current Legal Issues Volume 15, edited by Michael Freeman and Fiona Smith, 513–532. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
2010Translation and Relevance: Cognition and Context. 2nd ed. London: Routledge.
Hale, Sandra Beatriz
2004The Discourse of Court Interpreting: Discourse Practices of the Law, the Witness and the Interpreter. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Hale, Sandra Beatriz
2007 “The Challenges of Court Interpreting: Intricacies, Responsibilities and Ramifications.” Alternative Law Journal 32 (4): 198–202.
2000 “A Beginner’s Course in Legal Translation: The Case of Culture-Bound Terms.” ASTTI/ETI 2 (24): 357–369.
2011 “Silence: Civil Right or Social Privilege? A Discourse Analytic Response to a Legal Problem.” Journal of Pragmatics 43 (9): 2308–2316.
Hjort-Pedersen, Mette, and Dorrit Faber
2010 “Explicitation and Implicitation in Legal Translation – A Process Study of Trainee Translators.” Meta 55 (2): 237–250.
2015 “The Revealing Processes of Interpretation: Translating Human Rights Principles into Pintupi-Luritja.” The Australian Journal of Anthropology 26 (3): 428–441.
2006 “Text and Context in Translation.” Journal of Pragmatics 38 (3): 338–358.
1959 “On Linguistic Aspects of Translation.” In On Translation, edited by Reuben Arthur Brower, 232–239. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Joseph, John E.
1995 “Indeterminacy, Translation and the Law.” In Translation and the Law, edited by Marshall Morris, 13–36. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
1999Translating Cultures: An Introduction for Translators, Interpreters and Mediators. Manchester: St Jerome.
2012 “Cultural Approaches to Translation.” In The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics, edited by Carol A. Chapelle, 1–7. Oxford: Blackwell.
2009 “Explicitation.” In Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies, edited by Mona Baker and Gabriela Saldanha, 104–108. London: Routledge.
1996 “To Speak or Not to Speak: The Comprehensibility of the Revised Police Caution (PACE).” International Journal for the Semiotics of Law 9 (1): 3–16.
Laster, Kathy, and Veronica L. Taylor
1994Interpreters and the Legal System. Sydney: Federation Press.
Liddicoat, Anthony J.
2009 “Communication as Culturally Contexted Practice: A View from Intercultural Communication.” Australian Journal of Linguistics 29 (1): 115–133.
Liddicoat, Anthony J.
2016 “Intercultural Mediation, Intercultural Communication and Translation.” Perspectives 24 (3): 354–364.
1992 “Context Contests: Debatable Truth Statements on Tanna (Vanuatu).” In Rethinking Context: Language as an Interactive Phenomenon, edited by Allesandro Duranti and Charles Goodwin, 101–124. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
2017 “ ‘There Are No Words That Are “Clear” in and of Themselves’: Meta-Pragmatic Comments and Semantic Analysis in Legal Interpretation.” International Journal of Legal Discourse 2 (1): 153–170.
1991 “Problems of Intercultural Translation.” Babel 37 (1): 28–35.
1994 “The Language of the Law.” In Language and the Law, edited by John Gibbons, 11–50. London: Pearson.
2011 “Can the Law Imply More Than It Says? On Some Pragmatic Aspects of Strategic Speech.” In Philosophical Foundations of Language in the Law, edited by Andrei Marmor and Scott Soames, 83–104. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
1996Caught in the Caution: Aboriginal Responses to Police Questioning: The Case of Todd, Anthony and Moonlight. MA diss. University of Sydney.
1997 “Redressing the Imbalance Against Aboriginals in the Criminal Justice System.” Criminal Law Journal 21: 7–22.
1999 “Redressing the Imbalance: Aboriginal People in the Criminal Justice System.” Forensic Linguistics 6 (1): 137–160.
1995 “The Moral Dilemmas of Court Interpreting.” The Translator 1 (1): 25–46.
2010 “Images of the Court Interpreter: Professional Identity, Role Definition and Self-Image.” In Profession, Identity and Status: Translators and Interpreters as an Occupation, edited by Rakefet Sela-Sheffy and Miriam Schlesinger. special issue of Translation and Interpreting Studies 5 (1): 20–40.
Mushin, Ilana, and Rod Gardner
2009 “Silence is Talk: Conversational Silence in Australian Aboriginal Talk-in-Interaction.” Journal of Pragmatics 41 (10): 2033–2052.
2007 “Problems in Communicating the Suspect’s Rights in Interpreted Police Interviews.” Applied Linguistics 28 (2): 87–112.
Pavlenko, Aneta, Elizabeth Hepford, and Scott Jarvis
2019 “An Illusion of Understanding: How Native and Non-Native Speakers of English Understand (and Misunderstand) Their Miranda Rights.” International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law 26 (2) 181–207.
de Pedro Ricoy, Raquel, Rosaleen Howard, and Luis Andrade Ciudad
2018 “Walking the Tightrope: The Role of Peruvian Indigenous Interpreters in Prior Consultation Processes.” Target 30 (2): 187–211.
Pirker, Benedikt, and Jennifer Smolka
2017 “Making Interpretation More Explicit: International Law and Pragmatics.” Nordic Journal of International Law 86 (2): 228–266.
2008 “The Labyrinth of Translation: A Tzeltal Version of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.” In Human Rights in the Maya Region: Global Politics, Cultural Contentions, and Moral Engagements, edited by Pedro Pitarch, Shannon Speed, and Xochitl Leyva-Solano, 91–121. Durham: Duke University Press.
Poon, Wai Ye Emily
2005 “The Cultural Transfer in Legal Translation.” International Journal for the Semiotics of Law 18 (3): 307–323.
2007Communicating Rights: The Language of Arrest and Detention. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
2000 “ ‘Let Me Put It Simply…’: The Case for a Standard Translation of the Police Caution and Its Explanation.” International Journal of Speech Language and the Law 7 (1): 26–48.
Shuy, Roger W.
1998The Language of Confession, Interrogation, and Deception. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
1996Explaining Culture: A Naturalistic Approach. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell.
Sperber, Dan, and Deirdre Wilson
1995Relevance: Communication and Cognition. 2nd ed. Malden, MA: Wiley Blackwell.
Sperber, Dan, and Deirdre Wilson
1997 “Remarks on Relevance Theory and the Social Sciences.” Multilingua 16 (2–3): 145–52.
St. Johnston, T. E.
1966 “The Judges’ Rules and Police Interrogation in England Today.” The Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology, and Police Science 57 (1): 85–92.
2004 “Interpreting Legal Language at the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia: Overcoming the Lack of Lexical Equivalents.” The Journal of Specialised Translation 2: 63–75.
2001 “Translating Legal Texts in the EU.” Perspectives 9 (4): 301–311.
Wendland, Ernst R.
1997 “ ‘A Review of “Relevance Theory’ in Relation to Bible Translation in South-Central Africa. Part II.” Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages 23 (1): 83–108.