当前位置: X-MOL 学术Interpreting › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
The effect of interpreting modes on witness credibility assessments
Interpreting ( IF 1.818 ) Pub Date : 2017-01-01 , DOI: 10.1075/intp.19.1.04hal
Sandra Beatriz Hale 1 , Natalie Martschuk 2 , Uldis Ozolins 3 , Ludmila Stern
Affiliation  

Research into court interpreting has shown that interpreters can have an impact on the case in many different ways. However, the extent to which this occurs depends on several factors, including the interpreter’s competence, ethics and specialized training in court interpreting, as well as working conditions. One little explored aspect is whether use of consecutive vs. simultaneous interpreting can impact jurors’ perception of a witness or other interpreted party. This paper reports on the results of a large-scale experimental study, with a simulated trial run in different conditions, involving a total of 447 mock jurors. The aim was to identify any differences in the way jurors in Australian courts might assess the evidence of an accused called as a witness, in a monolingual hearing as well as when interpreted consecutively and simultaneously from Spanish to English. Overall, jurors’ recollection of case facts did not differ significantly for the three conditions, though it was lower for consecutive during the afternoon. Jurors also found consecutive more distracting; on the other hand, the consecutive mode was associated with significantly more favourable perception of the accused’s evidence than simultaneous interpreting or monolingual communication. Although jurors found the prosecution to be less convincing when the accused’s evidence was interpreted consecutively compared to the other proceedings, the interpretation mode made no difference to the verdict.

中文翻译:

口译模式对证人可信度评估的影响

对法院口译的研究表明,口译员可以以多种不同方式对案件产生影响。但是,发生这种情况的程度取决于几个因素,包括口译员的能力,道德规范和法院口译方面的专门培训以及工作条件。一个很少探讨的方面是使用连续传译还是同声传译是否会影响陪审员对证人或其他传译方的理解。本文报告了一项大规模实验研究的结果,并在不同条件下进行了模拟试验,涉及总共447个模拟陪审员。目的是找出澳大利亚法院陪审员评估被告作为证人的证据的方式上的任何差异,在单语听证中,以及从西班牙语到英语的连续和同时翻译时。总体而言,陪审员对案件事实的回忆在这三个条件下并没有显着差异,尽管下午的连续性较低。陪审员还发现,连续不断的注意力分散;另一方面,相较于同声传译或单语沟通,连续模式与被告的证据感知能力明显更好。尽管与其他诉讼程序相比,陪审员在连续解释被告的证据时认为起诉的说服力较弱,但解释方式对判决没有影响。尽管下午连续下降。陪审员还发现,连续不断的注意力分散;另一方面,相较于同声传译或单语沟通,连续模式与被告的证据感知能力明显更好。尽管与其他诉讼程序相比,陪审员在连续解释被告的证据时认为起诉的说服力较弱,但解释方式对判决没有影响。尽管下午连续下降。陪审员还发现,连续不断的注意力分散;另一方面,相较于同声传译或单语交流,连续模式与被告的证据感知能力强得多。尽管与其他诉讼程序相比,陪审员在连续解释被告的证据时认为起诉的说服力较弱,但解释方式对判决没有影响。
更新日期:2017-01-01
down
wechat
bug