Date of publishing:
15.12.2018
DOI: https://doi.org/10.21104/CL.2018.4.04
The Český lid provides open access to all of its content under licenseCreative Commons Attribution NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International.
Abstract:
In this study, I pay attention to the linguistic means that weaken the effect of an asylum applicant’s speech at the court. I focus on selected words implying doubt, uncertainty, assumption, or presumption. The case study presents the partial results of the ethnographic research that took place at the hearings with the asylum applicants in 2015-2018 at the Regional Court in Bratislava. I pay attention to the linguistic practices which significantly influenced atmosphere of a hearing: the applicant was not aware of the expressions which were adjoined to his speech and weakened his argumentation. These expressions were not part of the official record. I interpret the linguistic means of identity construction at courts in accordance to the anthropological and sociolinguistic works of Diana Eades, Anthony Good, Katrijn Maryns, and Susan Philips. In a broader context, I also make use of Pierre Bourdieu’s theory of production and reproduction of legitimate language.
Keywords
language, court, asylum applicants
Article Text
References
Berk-Seligson, Susan. 2002. The Bilingual Courtroom. Court Interpreters in the Judicial
Process. 2nd ed. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Berti, Daniela – Good, Anthony – Tarabout, Gilles (eds.). 2016. Of Doubt and Proof.
Ritual and Legal Practices of Judgement. London: Routledge.
Blommaert, Jan. 2011. Pragmatics and discourse. In: Rajend Mesthrie (ed.): The Cambridge
Handbook of Sociolinguistics. Cambridge, U. K.: Cambridge University Press: 122–137.
Bourdieu, Pierre. 1991. Language and symbolic power. Harvard University Press.
Briggs, Charles. 1984. Learning how to ask. A sociolinguistic appraisal of the role of the
interview in social science research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Conley, John M. – O’Barr, William M. 2005. Just Words: Law, Language, and Power.
Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Eades, Diana. 2008. Courtroom talk and Neocolonial Control. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Eades, Diana. 2010. Sociolinguistics and the Legal Process. MM Textbooks.
Good, Anthony. 2007. Anthropology and Expertise in the Asylum Courts.
New York: Routledge-Cavendish.
Guldanová, Zuzana. 2013. Problém preložiteľnosti/nepreložiteľnosti v kontexte súdneho
tlmočenia/prekladu. In: Kontexty súdneho prekladu a tlmočenia II.
Ed. Zuzana Guldanová. Bratislava: Univerzita Komenského Bratislava: 51–60.
Guldanová, Zuzana. 2014. Niekoľko pohľadov na činnosť súdneho tlmočníka/prekladateľa
zo súdnej praxe. In: Kontexty súdneho prekladu a tlmočenia III.
Ed. Zuzana Guldanová. Bratislava: Univerzita Komenského Bratislava: 50–67.
Láštic, Erik – Spáč, Samuel (eds.). 2017. Nedotknuteľní. Politika sudcovských kariér
na Slovensku v rokoch 1993–2015. Bratislava: Univerzita Komenského v Bratislave.
Lipovec Čebron, Uršula – Pistotnik, Sara. 2018. (Im)mobile populations and health rights:
accessing the healthcare system in Slovenia. In: Vindrola-Padros, Cecilia (ur.) – Johnson,
Ginger A. (ur.) – Pfister, Anne E. (ur.): Healthcare in motion: immobilities in health service
delivery and access. Worlds in motion, vol. 5. New York – Oxford: Berghahn Books: 53–71.
Maryns, Katrijn. 2006. The Asylum Speaker: Language in the Belgian Asylum Procedure.
1st ed. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing.
458 Český lid 105 4 2018
Mistrík, Jozef. 1985. Štylistika. Bratislava: Slovenské pedagogické nakladateľstvo.
Petrović, Duško. 2018. “Humanitarian exceptionalism. Normalization of suspension
of law in camp and corridor.” In: Bužinkić, Emina – Hameršak, Marijana (eds.):
Formation and Disintegration of the Balkan Refugee Corridor: Camps, Routes and
Borders in Croatian Context. Zagreb – München: Institute of Ethnology and Folklore
Research (Zagreb), Centre for Peace Studies (Zagreb), Faculty of Political Science
University of Zagreb – Centre for Ethnicity, Citizenship and Migration: 43–62.
Philips, Susan U. 1998. Ideology in the Language of Judges. How Judges Practise law,
politics, and Courtroom Control. New York: Oxford University Press.
Šimková, Mária. 2001. O lexikálnom význame častíc. Slovenská reč 66: 37–51.
Štefková, Marketa. 2013. Právny text v preklade. Translatologické aspekty právnej
komunikácie v kombináciách málo rozšírených jazykov. Bratislava: Iura Edition.
Tužinská, Helena. 2015a. Tlmočenie v štátnej správe: deskriptívne a preskriptívne
prístupy. Sociální studia 2: 51–68.
Tužinská, Helena. 2015b. Tlmočenie, migranti, štát: rozpoznanie jazykových registrov.
In: Wachtarczyková, Jana – Satinská, Lucia – Ondrejovič, Slavomír (eds.):
Jazyk v politických, ideologických a interkultúrnych vzťahoch.
Sociolinguistica Slovaca 8. Bratislava: Veda: 243–258.
Tužinská, Helena et al. 2017. Anthropology as necessary unlearning. Examples
from camps, courts, schools and businesses. Etnološka tribina 40, 47: 3–42.
Vrábľová, Júlia. 2018. Specifics of institutional management of the national language
in Slovakia. In: National language institutions and national languages. Contributions to the
EFNIL Conference 2017 in Mannheim. Budapest: Research Institute for Linguistics,
Hungarian Academy of Sciences; 85–99.