Interpretação jurídica, surdos e serviço de júri
a Happy Union
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26512/belasinfieis.v8.n1.2019.22638Resumo
Este artigo foi publicado na revista da Associação de Intérpretes de Língua de Sinais no Reino Unido. Ele dá uma visão geral da interpretação legal, e uma questão particularmente atual para a comunidade surda, se eles devem ser autorizados a servir como jurados em tribunais penais com intérpretes. Atualmente, em muitos países, isso não é permitido. Em qualquer país, a interpretação jurídica, e qualquer combinação de idiomas, é um desafio, então eu espero que este artigo seja interessante para essas questões e discussões no Brasil.
Downloads
Não há dados estatísticos.
Referências
BRENNAN, M. BROWN, R. Equality before the law: Deaf people's access to justice. Durham, UK: Deaf Studies Research Unit, University of Durham, 1997.
BRENNAN, M. Signs of injustice. The Translator, 5(2), 1999, pp. 221 - 246.
CHARROW, V. R. CHARROW, R. P. Characteristics of the language of jury instruction. IN: J. E. Alatis & G. R. Tucker (Eds.), Language in public life. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 1979a, pp. 163-185.
CHARROW, V. R., & CHARROW, R. P. Making legal language understandable: A psycholinguistic study of jury instructions. Colombia Law Review, 79, 1979b, pp. 1306-1374.
FARRELL, M. Allowing deaf people to serve as jurors: An Irish perspective. Discrimination Law Association Briefings, 42, 2011, pp. 30-31.
FARRELL, M. Allowing deaf people to serve as jurors: An Irish perspective. Discrimination Law Association Briefings, 42, 2011, pp. 30-31.
FOURNIER, C. Courtroom interpretation for the Deaf in France. Meta, 42(3), 1997, pp. 533-545.
HALE, S. The discourse of court interpreting: Discourse practices of the law, the witness and the interpreter. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2004.
HAUSER, P. HAUSER, A. The Deaf Professional-Designated Interpreter model. IN: P. Hauser, K. Finch & A. Hauser (Eds.) Deaf professionals and interpreters working together: A new paradigm. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press, 2008, pp.3-21.
HEFFERNAN, C. Stop stonewalling deaf jurors. The Guardian newspaper, 20 July 2010.
KURLANDER, K. Walking the fine line. IN: P. Hauser, K. Finch & A. Hauser (Eds.). Deaf professionals and interpreters working together: A new paradigm. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press, 2008, pp.106-130.
LEVI, J. N. Evaluating jury comprehension of Illinois Capital-Sentencing Instructions. American Speech, 68(1), 1993, pp. 20-49.
LSS. Guidelines for trials involving deaf jurors who serve with the assistance of sign language interpreters. Unpublished guidelines. Trenton, New Jersey: Language Services Section, Office of Trial Court Services, 2000.
MATHER, S., & MATHER, R. Court interpreting for signing jurors: Just transmitting or interpreting?. IN: C. Lucas (Ed.), Language and the law in deaf communities. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press, 2003, pp.60-81.
MCCAY, V., & MILLER, K. Linguistic incompetence to stand trial: A unique condition in some deaf defendants. Journal of Interpretation, 2001, pp. 99-120.
MCCAY, V., & MILLER, K. Obstacles faced by deaf people in the criminal justice system. American Annals of the Deaf, 150(3), 2005, pp. 283-291.
MCNAMARA, T. Language Testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000.
MILLER, K. Access to sign language interpreters in the criminal justice system. American Annals of the Deaf, 146(4), 2001, pp. 328-330.
MILLER, K. Signs of prison life: Linguistic adaptations of deaf inmates. Journal of Interpretation, 2003, pp. 129-142.
NAPIER, J. & SPENCER, D. A sign of the times: Deaf jurors and the potential for pioneering law reform. Reform: A journal of national and international law reform, 90, 2007, pp. 35-37.
NAPIER, J. “You get that vibe”: A pragmatic analysis of clarification and communicative accommodation in legal video remote interpreting. IN: Meurant, L., Sinte, A., Van Herreweghe, M. & Vermeerbergen, M. (eds.) Sign language research uses and practices: Crossing views on theoretical and applied sign language linguistics. Nijmegen, The Netherlands: De Gruyter Mouton and Ishara Press, 2013, pp. 85-110.
NAPIER, J. and SHEARIM, G. (no prelo). Walking a fine line: Perceptions of the challenges of interpreting for deaf jurors. Unpublished research report, Macquarie University.
NAPIER, J. Exploring themes in stakeholder perspectives of video remote interpreting in court. IN: C. J. Kellett (Ed.), Interpreting across genres: Multiple research perspectives. Trieste: EUT Edizioni Universtà di Trieste, 2012, pp.219-254.
NAPIER, J. Here or there? An assessment of video remote signed language interpreter-mediated interaction in court. IN: Braun, S. & J. L. Taylor (Eds.) Videoconference and remote interpreting in criminal proceedings. Guildford: University of Surrey, 2011, pp. 145-185. E-Book. Available: http://www.videoconference-interpreting.net/BraunTaylor2011.html
NAPIER, J. LENEHAM, M. “It was difficult to manage the communication”: Testing the feasibility of video remote signed language interpreting in courts in NSW, Australia. Journal of Interpretation, 2011, pp. 53-62.
NAPIER, J. SHEARIM, G. SPENCER, D. (no prelo). Comprehension of courtroom discourse: How do deaf and hearing people compare? Unpublished research report, Macquarie University.
NAPIER, J. SPENCER, D. Guilty or not guilty? An investigation of deaf jurors’ access to court proceedings via sign language interpreting. IN: D. Russell & S. Hale (Eds.), Interpreting in legal settings. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press, 2008, pp.71-122.
NAPIER, J., SPENCER, D. & SABOLCEC, J. A shared responsibility in the administration of justice: A pilot study of sign language interpretation access for deaf jurors. IN S. Hale, H. Slatyer, & L. Stern (Eds.), Quality in Interpreting: A shared responsibility ”“ Proceedings of the 5th International Critical Link Conference. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2009.
NARDI, M. Vulnerable groups - deaf people at official hearings: A perspective of the European Forum of Sign Language Interpreters. IN: H. Keijzer-Lambooy & W. J. Gasille (Eds.). Aequilibrium: Instruments for lifting language barriers in intercultural legal proceedings. Utrecht: ITV Hogeschool voor Tolken en Vertalen, 2005, pp. 69-76.
PRAVDA, D. Understanding the rights of Deaf and Hard of Hearing individuals to meaningful participation in court proceedings. Valparaiso University Law Review, 45(3), 2011, pp. 927-965.
ROBERSON, L. RUSSELL, D. SHAW, R. American Sign Language/English interpreting in legal settings: Current practices in North America. Journal of Interpretation, 21, 2011, pp. 64-79.
RUSSELL, D. HALE, S. Interpreting in legal settings. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press, 2008.
RUSSELL, D. Interpreter Preparation Conversations: Multiple Perspectives. In D. Russell & S. Hale (Eds.), Interpreting in legal settings. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press, 2008, pp. 127-143.
RUSSELL, D. Interpreting in legal contexts: Consecutive and simultaneous interpretation. Burtonsville, MD: Sign Media, 2002.
RUSSELL, D. Interpreting in legal contexts: Consecutive and simultaneous interpretation. Burtonsville, MD: Sign Media, 2002.
STANSFIELD, C. HEWITT, W. Examining the predictive validity of a screening test for court interpreters. Language Testing, 22(4), 2005, pp. 438-462.
STANTON, J. Breaking the sound barriers: How the Americans with Disabilities Act and technology have enabled deaf lawyers to succeed. Valparaiso University Law Review, 45(3), 2011, pp. 1185-1245.
STEVENS, H. Justice must be seen to be done. IN: H. Keijzer-Lambooy & W. J. Gasille (Eds.). Aequilibrium: Instruments for lifting language barriers in intercultural legal proceedings. Utrecht: ITV Hogeschool voor Tolken en Vertalen, 2005, pp. 77-86.
THOMAS, C. Are juries fair? Unpublished research report: Ministry of Justice Research Series, 2010, 1/10. Disponivel em : www.justice.gov.uk/publications/research.htm
TILBURY, N.. Specific attention for vulnerable groups - in particular those with hearing impairments and sign language users - legislation, practical issues and training. IN: H. Keijzer-Lambooy & W. J. Gasille (Eds.). Aequilibrium: Instruments for lifting language barriers in intercultural legal proceedings. Utrecht: ITV Hogeschool voor Tolken en Vertalen, 2005, pp. 61-68.
TRIMBOLI, L. Juror understanding of judicial instructions in criminal trials. Contemporary Issues in Crime & Justice, 119, 2008, pp. 1-16. Disponivel em : http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/agdbasev7wr/bocsar/documents/pdf/cjb119.pdf
TURNER, G. H. BROWN, R. Interaction and the role of the interpreter in court. In F. J. Harrington & G. H. Turner (Eds.), Interpreting interpreting: Studies and reflections on sign language interpreting. Coleford, UK: Douglas McLean, 2001, pp. 152-167.
TURNER, G. The bilingual, bimodal courtroom: A first glance. Journal of Interpretation, 7(1), 1995, pp. 3-34.
BRENNAN, M. Signs of injustice. The Translator, 5(2), 1999, pp. 221 - 246.
CHARROW, V. R. CHARROW, R. P. Characteristics of the language of jury instruction. IN: J. E. Alatis & G. R. Tucker (Eds.), Language in public life. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 1979a, pp. 163-185.
CHARROW, V. R., & CHARROW, R. P. Making legal language understandable: A psycholinguistic study of jury instructions. Colombia Law Review, 79, 1979b, pp. 1306-1374.
FARRELL, M. Allowing deaf people to serve as jurors: An Irish perspective. Discrimination Law Association Briefings, 42, 2011, pp. 30-31.
FARRELL, M. Allowing deaf people to serve as jurors: An Irish perspective. Discrimination Law Association Briefings, 42, 2011, pp. 30-31.
FOURNIER, C. Courtroom interpretation for the Deaf in France. Meta, 42(3), 1997, pp. 533-545.
HALE, S. The discourse of court interpreting: Discourse practices of the law, the witness and the interpreter. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2004.
HAUSER, P. HAUSER, A. The Deaf Professional-Designated Interpreter model. IN: P. Hauser, K. Finch & A. Hauser (Eds.) Deaf professionals and interpreters working together: A new paradigm. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press, 2008, pp.3-21.
HEFFERNAN, C. Stop stonewalling deaf jurors. The Guardian newspaper, 20 July 2010.
KURLANDER, K. Walking the fine line. IN: P. Hauser, K. Finch & A. Hauser (Eds.). Deaf professionals and interpreters working together: A new paradigm. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press, 2008, pp.106-130.
LEVI, J. N. Evaluating jury comprehension of Illinois Capital-Sentencing Instructions. American Speech, 68(1), 1993, pp. 20-49.
LSS. Guidelines for trials involving deaf jurors who serve with the assistance of sign language interpreters. Unpublished guidelines. Trenton, New Jersey: Language Services Section, Office of Trial Court Services, 2000.
MATHER, S., & MATHER, R. Court interpreting for signing jurors: Just transmitting or interpreting?. IN: C. Lucas (Ed.), Language and the law in deaf communities. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press, 2003, pp.60-81.
MCCAY, V., & MILLER, K. Linguistic incompetence to stand trial: A unique condition in some deaf defendants. Journal of Interpretation, 2001, pp. 99-120.
MCCAY, V., & MILLER, K. Obstacles faced by deaf people in the criminal justice system. American Annals of the Deaf, 150(3), 2005, pp. 283-291.
MCNAMARA, T. Language Testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000.
MILLER, K. Access to sign language interpreters in the criminal justice system. American Annals of the Deaf, 146(4), 2001, pp. 328-330.
MILLER, K. Signs of prison life: Linguistic adaptations of deaf inmates. Journal of Interpretation, 2003, pp. 129-142.
NAPIER, J. & SPENCER, D. A sign of the times: Deaf jurors and the potential for pioneering law reform. Reform: A journal of national and international law reform, 90, 2007, pp. 35-37.
NAPIER, J. “You get that vibe”: A pragmatic analysis of clarification and communicative accommodation in legal video remote interpreting. IN: Meurant, L., Sinte, A., Van Herreweghe, M. & Vermeerbergen, M. (eds.) Sign language research uses and practices: Crossing views on theoretical and applied sign language linguistics. Nijmegen, The Netherlands: De Gruyter Mouton and Ishara Press, 2013, pp. 85-110.
NAPIER, J. and SHEARIM, G. (no prelo). Walking a fine line: Perceptions of the challenges of interpreting for deaf jurors. Unpublished research report, Macquarie University.
NAPIER, J. Exploring themes in stakeholder perspectives of video remote interpreting in court. IN: C. J. Kellett (Ed.), Interpreting across genres: Multiple research perspectives. Trieste: EUT Edizioni Universtà di Trieste, 2012, pp.219-254.
NAPIER, J. Here or there? An assessment of video remote signed language interpreter-mediated interaction in court. IN: Braun, S. & J. L. Taylor (Eds.) Videoconference and remote interpreting in criminal proceedings. Guildford: University of Surrey, 2011, pp. 145-185. E-Book. Available: http://www.videoconference-interpreting.net/BraunTaylor2011.html
NAPIER, J. LENEHAM, M. “It was difficult to manage the communication”: Testing the feasibility of video remote signed language interpreting in courts in NSW, Australia. Journal of Interpretation, 2011, pp. 53-62.
NAPIER, J. SHEARIM, G. SPENCER, D. (no prelo). Comprehension of courtroom discourse: How do deaf and hearing people compare? Unpublished research report, Macquarie University.
NAPIER, J. SPENCER, D. Guilty or not guilty? An investigation of deaf jurors’ access to court proceedings via sign language interpreting. IN: D. Russell & S. Hale (Eds.), Interpreting in legal settings. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press, 2008, pp.71-122.
NAPIER, J., SPENCER, D. & SABOLCEC, J. A shared responsibility in the administration of justice: A pilot study of sign language interpretation access for deaf jurors. IN S. Hale, H. Slatyer, & L. Stern (Eds.), Quality in Interpreting: A shared responsibility ”“ Proceedings of the 5th International Critical Link Conference. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2009.
NARDI, M. Vulnerable groups - deaf people at official hearings: A perspective of the European Forum of Sign Language Interpreters. IN: H. Keijzer-Lambooy & W. J. Gasille (Eds.). Aequilibrium: Instruments for lifting language barriers in intercultural legal proceedings. Utrecht: ITV Hogeschool voor Tolken en Vertalen, 2005, pp. 69-76.
PRAVDA, D. Understanding the rights of Deaf and Hard of Hearing individuals to meaningful participation in court proceedings. Valparaiso University Law Review, 45(3), 2011, pp. 927-965.
ROBERSON, L. RUSSELL, D. SHAW, R. American Sign Language/English interpreting in legal settings: Current practices in North America. Journal of Interpretation, 21, 2011, pp. 64-79.
RUSSELL, D. HALE, S. Interpreting in legal settings. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press, 2008.
RUSSELL, D. Interpreter Preparation Conversations: Multiple Perspectives. In D. Russell & S. Hale (Eds.), Interpreting in legal settings. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press, 2008, pp. 127-143.
RUSSELL, D. Interpreting in legal contexts: Consecutive and simultaneous interpretation. Burtonsville, MD: Sign Media, 2002.
RUSSELL, D. Interpreting in legal contexts: Consecutive and simultaneous interpretation. Burtonsville, MD: Sign Media, 2002.
STANSFIELD, C. HEWITT, W. Examining the predictive validity of a screening test for court interpreters. Language Testing, 22(4), 2005, pp. 438-462.
STANTON, J. Breaking the sound barriers: How the Americans with Disabilities Act and technology have enabled deaf lawyers to succeed. Valparaiso University Law Review, 45(3), 2011, pp. 1185-1245.
STEVENS, H. Justice must be seen to be done. IN: H. Keijzer-Lambooy & W. J. Gasille (Eds.). Aequilibrium: Instruments for lifting language barriers in intercultural legal proceedings. Utrecht: ITV Hogeschool voor Tolken en Vertalen, 2005, pp. 77-86.
THOMAS, C. Are juries fair? Unpublished research report: Ministry of Justice Research Series, 2010, 1/10. Disponivel em : www.justice.gov.uk/publications/research.htm
TILBURY, N.. Specific attention for vulnerable groups - in particular those with hearing impairments and sign language users - legislation, practical issues and training. IN: H. Keijzer-Lambooy & W. J. Gasille (Eds.). Aequilibrium: Instruments for lifting language barriers in intercultural legal proceedings. Utrecht: ITV Hogeschool voor Tolken en Vertalen, 2005, pp. 61-68.
TRIMBOLI, L. Juror understanding of judicial instructions in criminal trials. Contemporary Issues in Crime & Justice, 119, 2008, pp. 1-16. Disponivel em : http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/agdbasev7wr/bocsar/documents/pdf/cjb119.pdf
TURNER, G. H. BROWN, R. Interaction and the role of the interpreter in court. In F. J. Harrington & G. H. Turner (Eds.), Interpreting interpreting: Studies and reflections on sign language interpreting. Coleford, UK: Douglas McLean, 2001, pp. 152-167.
TURNER, G. The bilingual, bimodal courtroom: A first glance. Journal of Interpretation, 7(1), 1995, pp. 3-34.
Downloads
Publicado
31-01-2019
Como Citar
NAPIER, Jemina; BARBOSA, Diego Mauricio; MANES, Paulo Roberto Mathias. Interpretação jurídica, surdos e serviço de júri: a Happy Union. Belas Infiéis, Brasília, Brasil, v. 8, n. 1, p. 301–315, 2019. DOI: 10.26512/belasinfieis.v8.n1.2019.22638. Disponível em: https://periodicos.unb.br/index.php/belasinfieis/article/view/22638. Acesso em: 21 dez. 2024.
Edição
Seção
Artigos Traduzidos
Licença
Dado ao acesso público desta revista, os textos são de uso gratuito, com obrigatoriedade de reconhecimento da autoria original e da publicação inicial nesta revista
A revista permitirá o uso dos trabalhos publicados para fins não comerciais, incluindo direito de enviar o trabalho para bases de dados de acesso público. As contribuições publicadas são de total e exclusiva responsabilidade dos autores.
Os autores, ao submeterem trabalhos para serem avaliados pela revista Belas Infiéis, mantêm os direitos autorais e concedem à revista o direito de primeira publicação, sendo o trabalho licenciado sob a Creative Commons Attribution License Atribuição 4.0 Internacional (CC BY 4.0).
