Abstract
Rendering equivalency in the translation of apologies is a perennial difficulty for court interpreters, especially given the likely involvement of cross-cultural differences with regard to remorse, since they may or may not imply admissions of guilt. This article discusses translations during the 2009 Japanese trial of an English-speaking defendant that appeared subtly to shift the defendant’s ‘non-apologies’ and ‘semi-apologies’ toward ‘apologies’. The difference between the expression “I felt bad” used by the defendant and the Japanese apologetic expression used by the translator is explained with reference to the pragmatic notions of speech acts, presuppositions, and implicature. Such pragmatically inaccurate translations highlight the difficulty of the court interpreter’s job, and show that judges and attorneys should be sensitive to the judgement calls that interpreters inevitably make and to the possibility that the translations they receive may convey erroneous implications.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Journal | International Journal for the Semiotics of Law |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Accepted/In press - 2019 Jan 1 |
Fingerprint
Keywords
- Apology
- Court interpreting
- Implicature
- Presupposition
- Speech act
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Language and Linguistics
- Law
Cite this
How to Translate Apology and Non-apology in Legal Contexts : A Linguistic Analysis of Potentially Serious “Subtle Mistranslation” in Japan. / Shudo, Sachiko.
In: International Journal for the Semiotics of Law, 01.01.2019.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - How to Translate Apology and Non-apology in Legal Contexts
T2 - A Linguistic Analysis of Potentially Serious “Subtle Mistranslation” in Japan
AU - Shudo, Sachiko
PY - 2019/1/1
Y1 - 2019/1/1
N2 - Rendering equivalency in the translation of apologies is a perennial difficulty for court interpreters, especially given the likely involvement of cross-cultural differences with regard to remorse, since they may or may not imply admissions of guilt. This article discusses translations during the 2009 Japanese trial of an English-speaking defendant that appeared subtly to shift the defendant’s ‘non-apologies’ and ‘semi-apologies’ toward ‘apologies’. The difference between the expression “I felt bad” used by the defendant and the Japanese apologetic expression used by the translator is explained with reference to the pragmatic notions of speech acts, presuppositions, and implicature. Such pragmatically inaccurate translations highlight the difficulty of the court interpreter’s job, and show that judges and attorneys should be sensitive to the judgement calls that interpreters inevitably make and to the possibility that the translations they receive may convey erroneous implications.
AB - Rendering equivalency in the translation of apologies is a perennial difficulty for court interpreters, especially given the likely involvement of cross-cultural differences with regard to remorse, since they may or may not imply admissions of guilt. This article discusses translations during the 2009 Japanese trial of an English-speaking defendant that appeared subtly to shift the defendant’s ‘non-apologies’ and ‘semi-apologies’ toward ‘apologies’. The difference between the expression “I felt bad” used by the defendant and the Japanese apologetic expression used by the translator is explained with reference to the pragmatic notions of speech acts, presuppositions, and implicature. Such pragmatically inaccurate translations highlight the difficulty of the court interpreter’s job, and show that judges and attorneys should be sensitive to the judgement calls that interpreters inevitably make and to the possibility that the translations they receive may convey erroneous implications.
KW - Apology
KW - Court interpreting
KW - Implicature
KW - Presupposition
KW - Speech act
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85071335225&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85071335225&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s11196-019-09643-2
DO - 10.1007/s11196-019-09643-2
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85071335225
JO - International Journal for the Semiotics of Law
JF - International Journal for the Semiotics of Law
SN - 0952-8059
ER -