Journal of Applied Linguistics and Professional Practice, Vol 13, No 1-3 (2016)

Walking a fine line – The legal system and sign language interpreters: Roles and responsibilities

Jemina Napier, Karin Banna
Issued Date: 31 Dec 2018


Legal interpreting as an applied linguistic activity has been explored in the literature, with various explorations of the role of legal interpreters from a discourse perspective. Current thinking in interpreting studies classifies the role of the interpreter as a participant in interaction and co-constructor of meaning. Sign language interpreting as a professional practice typically occurs in legal contexts where the deaf person is the complainant, defendant or witness. However, recent research has begun to explore the provision of sign language interpreting for deaf jurors. Drawing on a corpus of 12 qualitative interviews, and with reference to frameworks of discourse and responsibility, this paper presents analyses of perceptions from two key stakeholder groups - sign language interpreters and lawyers - on the level of professional responsibility that each stakeholder feels that sign language interpreters need to adopt in the legal setting, and their perceptions of the role and responsibilities of sign language interpreters in this context. This study reveals that the legal and moral boundaries of meaning attributed to interpreters' responsibilities are blurred, yet both stakeholder groups have their own clear perceptions of the duties attached to the interpreter's position in court. Thus interpreters need to walk a fine line in how they manage their role and responsibilities according to interpreting studies theory while meeting the linguistic needs of their deaf clients in court and adhering to their responsibilities as perceived by the justice system.

Download Media

PDF (Price: £17.50 )

DOI: 10.1558/japl.31859


Baker, E. and Newnes, C. (2005) The discourse of responsibility. In C. Newnes and N. Rad­cliffe (eds) Making and Breaking Children’s Lives, 30–40. Ross on Wye, UK: PCCS Books.

Banna, K. (2004) The Role of the Interpreter in the Court Room. Unpublished research report, Macquarie University, Sydney.

Brennan, M. and Brown, R. (1997) Equality Before the Law: Deaf People’s Access to Justice. Durham: Deaf Studies Research Unit, University of Durham.

Dean, R. K. (2014) Condemned to repetition? An analysis of problem-setting and problem-solving in sign language interpreting ethics. International Journal for Translation & Interpreting Research 6 (1): 60–75.

Dean, R. K. (2015) Sign Language Interpreters’ Ethical Discourse and Moral Reasoning Patterns. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh.

Dean, R. and Pollard, R. Q. (2005) Consumers and service effectiveness in interpreting work: A practice profession perspective. In M. Marschark, R. Peterson and E. A. Winston (eds) Interpreting and Interpreter Education: Directions for Research and Practice, 259–282. New York: Oxford University Press.

Dean, R. K. and Pollard, R. Q. (2011) Context-based ethical reasoning in interpreting: A demand control schema perspective. Interpreter and Translator Trainer 5 (1): 155–182.

Dean, R. K. and Pollard, R. Q. (2013) The Demand Control Schema: Interpreting as a Practice Profession. North Charleston, SC: CreateSpace.

Eades, D. (2003) Participation of second language and second dialect speakers in the legal system. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 23: 113–133.

Hale, S. (2007) Community Interpreting. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Hale, S. (2011) Interpreter Policies, Practices and Protocols in Australian Courts and Tribunals: A National Survey. Melbourne: Australian Institute of Judicial Administration. Available online:

Hale, S. and Napier, J. (2013) Research Methods in Interpreting: A Practical Resource. London: Bloomsbury.

Hale, S. and Napier, J. (2016) ‘We’re just kind of there’: Working conditions and perceptions of appreciation and status in court interpreting. Target 28 (3): 351–371.

Jolanki, O. (2012) Whose business is it anyway? Distributing responsibility between families and carers. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Professional Practice 9 (3): 319–340.

Krippendorff, K. (2004) Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology (2nd edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Laster, K and Taylor, V. (1994) Interpreters and the Legal System. Sydney: Federation Press.

Lee, J. (2009) Conflicting views on court interpreting examined through surveys of legal professionals and court interpreters. Interpreting 11 (1): 35–56.

Napier, J. (2004) Sign language interpreter training, testing and accreditation: An international comparison. American Annals of the Deaf 149 (4): 350–359.

Napier, J. (2013) Legal interpreting, deaf people and jury service: A happy union? Newsli: Magazine of the Association of Sign Language Interpreters of the UK. December: 6–12.

Napier, J. (2015) Comparing spoken and signed language interpreting. In H. Mikkelson and R. Jourdenais (eds) Routledge Handbook of Interpreting Studies, 129–143. London: Routledge.

Napier, J. and Leeson, L. (2016) Sign Language in Action. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

Napier, J. and McEwin, A. (2015) Do deaf people have the right to serve as jurors in Australia? Alternative Law Journal 40 (15): 23–27.

Nunan, D. (1992) Research Methods in Language Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge Uni­versity Press.

Ozolins, U. (2014) Descriptions of interpreting and their ethical consequences. FITISPoS International Journal 1: 23–41.

Sarangi, S. (2012) Owning responsible actions/selves: Role-relational trajectories in counselling for childhood genetic testing. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Professional Practice 9 (3): 295–318.

Solin, A. and Östman, J. O. (2012) Introduction: Discourse and responsibility. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Professional Practice 9 (3): 287–294.

Tebble, H. (2012) Interpreting or interfering? In C. Baraldi and L. Gavioli (eds) Coordinating Participation in Dialogue Interpreting, 23–44. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Turner, G. H. and Brown, R. K. (2000) Interaction and the role of the interpreter in court. In F. J. Harrington and G. H. Turner (eds) Interpreting Interpreting: Studies and Reflections on Sign Language Interpreting, 152–167. Coleford, UK: Douglas McLean.


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Equinox Publishing Ltd - 415 The Workstation 15 Paternoster Row, Sheffield, S1 2BX United Kingdom
Telephone: +44 (0)114 221-0285 - Email:

Privacy Policy