Andrea K. Smith | Sign Language Interpreter

Language and Domain: Applications for the Courtroom Interpreter
by Andrea Smith, CI, CT
November 2004

Part III: Trouble with Trios
Despite understanding the lexicon, syntax, and discourse style of legalese, the interpreter will stumble if she does not understand the guiding principle in the development of the language. Precision is an essential element of jurisprudence. Imprecise laws or courtroom procedures can and will lead to inconsistencies in treatment of individual citizens. Since the American public has determined equality and justice to be the golden standard of treatment, it is only natural to see a language developed for legal use that narrowly defines words rather than deals with bulky, imprecise concepts.

The dangers of imprecision are easily illustrated by the simple example sentence "One and one make two." Obviously this sentence omits a necessary limitation: One thing and itself make one thing. So we ought to say, "One thing and another thing make two things." This must mean that the togetherness of one thing with another thing becomes a group of two things. At this stage several difficulties become apparent. The things that have been grouped must have been properly put together to create that group. The grouping of a spark and gunpowder produces an explosion, which is not the same as having two things together in a group. Thus we should say, "The proper sort of togetherness of one thing and another thing produces the sort of group which we call two things."

The other difficulty that arises is one of placement: Anything placed in another situation changes in nature. The statement "One and one make two" assumes that changes in the shift of circumstance are unimportant. Language is never independent of the circumstances under which it is used. The concepts expressed by a language are determined by the environment, activities, and culture of the people who use the language. This example also illuminates the difficulties in reproducing the necessary precision of legalese during interpretation.

The best strategy for an interpreter to use when approaching the courtroom or legal documents is to treat legalese as a third language. Consecutive interpretation may be required instead of simultaneous when the language becomes too dense to adequately parse the concepts. The interpreter's initial learning of vocabulary, reviewing pertinent documents, and study of the language must be combined with a thorough understanding of the courtroom culture.