earticle

영어

This paper examines question types used during courtroom examinations and how they are rendered by interpreters in interpreter-mediated courtroom examinations. This study, which draws on the naturalistic data of courtroom examinations, corroborates earlier findings that closed questions are predominant in Korean courtroom examinations and that different question types are used in examination-in-chief and cross-examination. The analysis of interpreted questions reveals that interpreters deviate from original questions, frequently failing to preserve the pragmatic meaning of the original question and asking more questions than originally asked in order to obtain substantive responses. This paper points out two additional issues in courtroom examination which may influence interpreting, namely indirect questioning and multiple questions. Examiners frequently ask questions indirectly, not addressing the witness in the first person. Examiners ask multiple questions, which makes it difficult for lay witnesses to rebut or respond to propositions and questions contained therein. These phenomena tend to lead interpreters to modify original questions. This paper concludes that court interpreters should be aware of questioning strategies of examiners and the importance of preserving the pragmatic meaning of questions during the examination, and finally calls for legal professionals to reflect on their questioning practices and cooperate with interpreters for better communication in the courtroom.