請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/88662
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | 范家銘 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.advisor | Damien Chiaming Fan | en |
dc.contributor.author | 湯立婷 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.author | Li-Ting Tang | en |
dc.date.accessioned | 2023-08-15T17:16:13Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2023-11-09 | - |
dc.date.copyright | 2023-08-15 | - |
dc.date.issued | 2023 | - |
dc.date.submitted | 2023-08-07 | - |
dc.identifier.citation | Berk-Seligson, S. (2017). The bilingual courtroom: Court interpreters in the judicial process. University of Chicago Press.
Berk-Seligson, S. (1988). The importance of linguistics in court interpreting. La Raza LJ, 2(1), 14-48. Chang, K. C.-c. (2013). Current Practices of Court Interpreting in Taiwan: Challenges and Possible Solutions. Compilation & Translation Review, 6(2), 127-164. Chang, K. C.-c. (2016). Needs analysis for the training of court interpreters. Compilation and Translation Review, 9(2), 93-136. Chien, Yi-Ching (2016). A Preliminary study on the professionalization and professional role identity among legal interpreters in Taiwan: A Case Study of Taiwan Judicial Interpreters Association. [Master’s thesis, National Taiwan Normal University]. Devine, D. J., Clayton, L. D., Dunford, B. B., Seying, R., & Pryce, J. (2001). Jury decision making: 45 years of empirical research on deliberating groups. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 7(3), 622–727. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8971.7.3.622 Erickson, B., Lind, E. A., Johnson, B. C., & O'Barr, W. M. (1978). Speech style and impression formation in a court setting: The effects of “powerful” and “powerless” speech. Journal of experimental social psychology, 14(3), 266-279. Hale, S. (2002). How faithfully do court interpreters render the style of non-English speaking witnesses' testimonies? A data-based study of Spanish—English bilingual proceedings. Discourse Studies, 4(1), 25-47. Hale, S. (2004). The Discourse of Court Interpreting. John Benjamins Publishing Company. Hale, S. (2007). The challenges of court interpreting: Intricacies, responsibilities and ramifications. Alternative Law Journal, 32(4), 198-202. Hayes, A. (2009). A review of Australian judges’ rulings on appeals on the grounds of incompetent interpreting. [Unpublished BA thesis, University of Western Sydney]. Hewitt, W. E. (1995). Court interpretation: Model guides for policy and practice in the state courts. National Center for State Courts Williamsburg, VA. Hsieh, E., Ju, H., & Kong, H. (2010). Dimensions of trust: The tensions and challenges in provider—interpreter trust. Qualitative Health Research, 20(2), 170-181. Huang, C.-J. (2020). A Preliminary Study on Occupational Stress and Coping Strategies among Court Interpreters in Taiwan. [Master’s thesis, National Taiwan Normal University]. Huang, K. C., & Lin, C. C. (2013). Rescuing Confidence in the Judicial System: Introducing Lay Participation in Taiwan. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, 10(3), 542-569. Judicial Yuan of R.O.C., 2013, Code of Conduct for Court Interpreters https://www.judicial.gov.tw/tw/cp-1777-90020-1bac4-1.html Judicial Yuan of R.O.C., 2022, Manual for Court Interpreters https://www.judicial.gov.tw/tw/cp-1779-90026-1abe5-1.html Judicial Yuan of R.O.C., 2022, Mock Trials https://www.judicial.gov.tw/tw/lp-2095-1.html Judicial Yuan of R.O.C (2023, March 1) The court's Mandarin speech recognition system has been officially launched. With the recognition accuracy rate of over 90%, no need to wait for transcripts in court from now on [Press release]. https://www.judicial.gov.tw/tw/cp-1887-819990-872a1-1.html Lambert, W. E., Hodgson, R. C., Gardner, R. C., & Fillenbaum, S. (1960). Evaluational reactions to spoken languages. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 60(1), 44–51. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0044430 Lee, J. (2011). Translatability of Speech Style in Court Interpreting. International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law, 18(1), 1–33. https://doi.org/10.1558/ijsll.v18i1.1 Liu, X., & Hale, S. (2018). Achieving accuracy in a bilingual courtroom: The effectiveness of specialised legal interpreter training. The interpreter and translator trainer, 12(3), 299-321. Loureiro-Rodriguez, V., Boggess, M. M., & Goldsmith, A. (2013). Language attitudes in Galicia: using the matched-guise test among high school students. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 34(2), 136-153. Ministry of the Interior (2023) Interior Affairs Statistical Bulletin for the 16th Week of 2023 https://www.moi.gov.tw/News_Content.aspx?n=9&sms=9009&s=279021 Ministry of Justice (2021, May 21). Briefing of Judicial Reform [Press release] https://www.moj.gov.tw/2832/2833/2844/2845/24802/ Ministry of Justice (2022) Statistics on Corrections – Annual Statistics Report of Ministry of Justice, 2022 https://www.rjsd.moj.gov.tw/RJSDWeb/book/Book_File.ashx?chapter_id=555_8_1 Mizuno, M. (2018). Linguistic Study of Court Interpreting in Lay Judge Trials in Japan. In Hebert, D. (eds), International Perspectives on Translation, Education and Innovation in Japanese and Korean Societies (pp. 207-222). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68434-5_14 National Police Agency (2022, October 19), Police statistics Report, the 42nd week in 2022 [Press Release]. https://www.npa.gov.tw/ch/app/data/doc?module=wg057&detailNo=1031836130347061248&type=s O'barr, W. M. (1982). Linguistic evidence: Language, power, and strategy in the courtroom. Elsevier. Pearson, S. D., & Raeke, L. H. (2000). Patients' trust in physicians: many theories, few measures, and little data. Journal of general internal medicine, 15(7), 509-513. Robb, N. and Greenhalgh, T. (2006), “You have to cover up the words of the doctor”: The mediation of trust in interpreted consultations in primary care, Journal of Health Organization and Management, 20(5), 434-455. https://doi.org/10.1108/14777260610701803 Supreme Court of R.O.C, Criminal Judgement Tai Shen Zi No.2634, 2021 https://judgment.judicial.gov.tw/FJUD/data.aspx?ty=JD&id=TPSM,110%2c%e5%8f%b0%e4%b8%8a%2c2634%2c20210512%2c1 Taiwan Taipei District Court Citizen Judges Act Round 2 4th Mock Trial, panel discussion records https://www.judicial.gov.tw/tw/dl-165134-b5af544280bc4550a1e925b8b9997533.html Taiwan Taipei District Court Mo Jiao Su Zi No.1, 2021 https://www.judicial.gov.tw/tw/dl-140135-527fe54385d046c48107decbf8d03557.html Taiwan Taipei District Court Guo Mo Su Zi No.3, 2022 https://www.judicial.gov.tw/tw/lp-2095-1.html Taiwan Taipei District Court, Civil Ruling Shen Zi No. 249, 2022 https://bit.ly/3WEBFAS Tu, H.-L. (2019). A Study on the Legal Interpreter Training Program—Interpreters’ Perspectives. [Master’s thesis, National Taiwan Normal University] Zou, K. H., Tuncali, K., & Silverman, S. G. (2003). Correlation and simple linear regression. Radiology, 227(3), 617-628. | - |
dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/88662 | - |
dc.description.abstract | 《國民法官法》於2023年1月1日正式施行後,臺灣司法自此進入新紀元。由於臺灣近年來外籍犯罪人數增加,對司法通譯的需求也與日遽增。多數外籍犯罪被告教育程度較低,說話風格可能也有較多閃躲語或停頓等特徵,學者O’Barr將其稱為無力風格(powerless style)。司法通譯和被告的語言風格如有不一致,究竟會對國民法官產生什麼影響,在國民法官新制上路之際,實為值得研究的議題。
本研究旨在了解國民法官如何透過司法通譯來評價被告,以及如通譯的語言風格與被告語言風格不一致時,會如何對國民法官產生影響。本研究採用「假冒配對測試法」(matched guise technique),讓受試者分為無力風格組和有力風格組聆聽模擬法庭錄音。無力風格組聆聽的錄音中,通譯說話時具有較多無力風格,而有力風格組則無此風格。受試者在聽完錄音後,針對他們對被告的智力程度、可信賴度、及證詞可信度做出評分,並給予建議量刑。研究結果顯示,無力風格組的受試者給予被告的可信賴度和證詞可信度評分較有力風格組低,給予被告的平均建議量刑也比有力風格組較重。相關性分析也顯示,受試者給予被告可信賴度和證詞可信度的分數越低,給予被告的建議刑期就越重。另外,兩組受試者在研究訪談中,對通譯的表現普遍感到滿意。有力風格組的受試者多半認為通譯在翻譯時不帶情緒是適合法庭的說話風格,因此給予正面評價,而無力風格組的受試者反而認為通譯能表達出被告的情緒忠實翻譯才是適合法庭的翻譯風格,也因此給予通譯正面評價。顯示受試者在聽不懂源語的情況下,可能基於對司法制度的信任,而傾向信任通譯。 本研究期望透過實驗及訪談研究,了解司法通譯的語言風格是否會對國民法官產生影響。在國民法官制度實施後,本研究希望能對於外籍被告在我國司法制度的人權保障議題拋磚引玉,並能為未來司法通譯制度的完善方向提供指引。 | zh_TW |
dc.description.abstract | With the implementation of the Citizen Judges Act on January 1st, 2023, Taiwan's judicial system entered a new era. As the number of foreign criminal offenders in Taiwan increases, so does the demand for court interpreters. Many foreign defendants have lower education levels and may exhibit speech styles characterized by hedges or hesitations, which O'Barr refers to as “powerless style”. Whether the inconsistency between the speech style of court interpreters and foreign defendants has an impact on citizen judges is now a relevant issue in Taiwan, particularly in light of the new citizen judges system.
This study investigates how citizen judges evaluate defendants through court interpreters and how the inconsistency between the speech styles of court interpreters and defendants impacts citizen judges' perceptions. The matched guise technique was employed, and participants were divided into two groups: the “Powerless Group” and the “Powerful Group”. The Powerless Group listened to mock trial recordings with interpretations featuring more powerless style features, while the Powerful Group listened to interpretations without such features. After listening to the recordings, participants rated the defendant's intelligence, trustworthiness, and convincingness, and provided sentencing recommendations. The results showed that participants in the Powerless Group rated the defendant lower in trustworthiness and convincingness compared to the Powerful Group, and they also suggested harsher sentences on average. Correlation analysis revealed that lower ratings for trustworthiness and convincingness were associated with heavier recommended sentences. In post-experiment interviews, participants expressed overall satisfaction with the interpreters' performance. Participants in the Powerful Group believed that interpreters should be emotionally neutral, as they considered it suitable for the courtroom. On the other hand, participants in the Powerless Group believed that interpreters should faithfully convey the defendant's emotions, also considering it appropriate for the courtroom. This suggests that participants, without understanding the source language, tend to place trust in interpreters based on their confidence in the judicial system. Through experiments and interviews, this study aims to investigate the potential impact of court interpreters' speech style on citizen judges. With the implementation of the citizen judge system, this study hopes to contribute to the human rights protections for foreign defendants within Taiwan's judicial system, while also providing insights for the future enhancement of the court interpreter system. | en |
dc.description.provenance | Submitted by admin ntu (admin@lib.ntu.edu.tw) on 2023-08-15T17:16:13Z No. of bitstreams: 0 | en |
dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2023-08-15T17:16:13Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 | en |
dc.description.tableofcontents | 誌謝 ii
摘要 iii Abstract v Table of Contents vii List of Tables xi Chapter 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Jury Trial 1 1.2 Implications for Taiwan 2 1.3 Speech Style of the court interpreter as a factor impacting juror’s perception 3 1.4 Research Questions 5 Chapter 2 Literature review 6 2.1 Speech in the courtroom 6 2.2 Speech style as a factor impacting jury perception in the courtroom 6 2.2.1 Powerful versus Powerless speech 7 2.2.2 The effect of powerless speech style in a courtroom 9 2.3 Requirements for faithful interpretation 10 2.3.1 Translatability of speech style 11 2.3.2 Attitudes from the court 12 2.3.3 Confusion about the role of court interpreters 14 2.4 Interpreter's speech style as a factor impacting jury perception 15 2.4.1 The research by Berk-Seligson in a bilingual courtroom 15 2.5 The lay judge system in Japan 17 2.5.1 Similarities between the lay judge system in Japan and Taiwan 17 2.5.2 Perception of Citizen Judges on the speech style of court interpreters 18 2.6 Implications for Taiwan 19 2.6.1 Preparation for the new citizen judge system 19 2.6.2 Observations from court hearings 20 Chapter 3 Methodology 22 3.1 Research Design 22 3.1.1 The matched-guise experiments 22 3.2 The text material used in the experiment 23 3.2.1 Adaptation from a mock trial 23 3.2.2 The story of the text material 24 3.2.3 Creating the text material in the powerful and powerless style 26 3.3 Making the experimental material 27 3.3.1 Translating the text material 27 3.3.2 Making the recording for the experiment 28 3.4 Participants 29 3.4.1 Recruiting qualified participants 29 3.4.2 Assigning the recording for participants 30 3.5 Conducting the experiment 31 3.5.1 The pilot study 31 3.5.2 Playing the experimental material 32 3.5.3 The questionnaire 33 3.5.4 Interviewing participants 34 Chapter 4 Results and Analysis 36 4.1 Basic information about the participants 36 4.2 Perceptions of the Defendant 38 4.2.1 Results of the perceptions of the defendant 38 4.3 The decisions of sentencing 40 4.3.1 The connection between perception of the defendant and the sentencing 41 4.4 The Evaluation of the Court Interpreter 44 4.4.1 Participants who rated the interpreter’s performance as positive 44 4.4.1.1 Main reasons given by participants in the Powerful Group 45 4.4.1.2 Main reasons given by participants in the Powerless Group 49 4.4.2 Participants who rated the interpreter’s performance as neutral 51 Chapter 5 Discussion 55 5.1 Perception of the defendant 55 5.1.1 Discussion on the statistical results 55 5.1.2 Discussion on the interviews 56 5.1.2.1 Participants' perceptions of the defendant led to high ratings 56 5.1.2.2 Participants' perceptions of the defendant led to low ratings 58 5.1.3 The dilemma of faithful interpretation 61 5.2 Sentencing considerations 65 5.2.1 Discussion on the statistical results 65 5.2.2 Findings from the interviews of participants’ sentencing considerations 66 5.2.2.1 Reasons that led to a harsher sentence towards the defendant 66 5.2.2.2 Reasons that led to a more lenient sentence for the defendant 68 5.2.3 The connection between perception of the defendant and the sentencing 72 5.3 Expectations of court interpreters 76 5.4 General discussion 80 5.4.1 Specialized interpreting training 80 5.4.2 Trust in the system 82 5.4.3 The future of court interpreting 83 Chapter 6 Conclusion 85 6.1 Summary of findings 85 6.2 Limitations and recommendations for future studies 89 6.2.1 Participants of this study 89 6.2.2 Mock case in the experiment 91 References 95 Appendix I Text material used in the experiment 101 Appendix II Questionnaire 114 | - |
dc.language.iso | en | - |
dc.title | 司法通譯語言風格如何影響國民法官對被告的印象 | zh_TW |
dc.title | How the Speech Style of Court Interpreters Impacts Citizen Judges’ Perceptions of the Defendant | en |
dc.type | Thesis | - |
dc.date.schoolyear | 111-2 | - |
dc.description.degree | 碩士 | - |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 張永健;蔡毓芬 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | Yun-Chien Chang;Yvonne Tsai | en |
dc.subject.keyword | 國民法官,司法通譯,法庭口譯,語言風格,陪審團,量刑, | zh_TW |
dc.subject.keyword | citizen judge,court interpreter,speech style,jury,sentencing, | en |
dc.relation.page | 116 | - |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU202302711 | - |
dc.rights.note | 同意授權(全球公開) | - |
dc.date.accepted | 2023-08-09 | - |
dc.contributor.author-college | 文學院 | - |
dc.contributor.author-dept | 翻譯碩士學位學程 | - |
顯示於系所單位: | 翻譯碩士學位學程 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
ntu-111-2.pdf | 1.69 MB | Adobe PDF | 檢視/開啟 |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。