( 您好!臺灣時間:2023/03/27 08:34
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::


研究生(外文):Chen, Ying-Ting
論文名稱(外文):Working with Court Interpreters in Taiwan—A Survey of Judges, Prosecutors, and Lawyers
指導教授(外文):Chen, Tze-Wei
外文關鍵詞:court interpretersright to an interpreterjustice
  • 被引用被引用:2
  • 點閱點閱:301
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:48
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:1
The right to an interpreter is indispensable for litigants with limited Chinese proficiency. As of the end of 2017, the number of foreign nationals in Taiwan had reached nearly one million and almost two-thirds of lawsuits involving foreign nationals were mediated by certified court interpreters. In such cases, it is imperative that officers of the court who utilize interpreting services understand how best to work with court interpreters. For this study, the author developed a set of recommended guidelines for working with these interpreters based on an examination of court interpreter regulations in Taiwan and guidelines in use by overseas legal institutions. In addition, the author conducted a survey in which 593 legal professionals provided information about their experiences with interpreter-mediated proceedings. Nine of the survey respondents also participated in a semi-structured follow-up interview. The survey and follow-up interviews were conducted in order to investigate guidelines, implemented or proposed, for legal practitioners who work with court interpreters. This study seeks to understand how legal practitioners in Taiwan work with court interpreters, what they think of the study’s recommended guidelines, and how their professional roles influence their views regarding court interpreting. The results suggest that judges, prosecutors, and lawyers are not familiar with pertinent guidelines or regulations. The data demonstrate a certain degree of inconsistency between legal professionals’ attitudes and behaviors, with judges displaying the highest attitude-behavior consistency and lawyers exhibiting the least. With these findings, the study hopes to underscore the strong connection between court interpreting and courtroom justice, as well as encourage cooperation between legal professionals and court interpreters.
誌謝 i
中文摘要 ii
目錄 iv
表目錄 ix

第 1 章 緒論 1
1.1 研究背景 1
1.2 研究目的與問題 1

第 2 章 文獻回顧 3
2.1 翻譯 3
2.1.1 口譯 3
2.1.2 社區口譯 4
2.1.3 會議口譯與社區口譯之異同 5
2.1.4 法庭通譯之起源 7
2.2 溝通與權力 8
2.2.1 法庭中的溝通與權力 9
2.2.2 通譯時的溝通與權力 10
2.3 使用通譯之法源 11
2.4 本國法庭通譯使用現況 13
2.4.1 在臺外籍人士人數 13
2.4.2 在臺外籍人士違法情形 14
2.4.3 法庭通譯使用情形 15
2.4.4 法庭通譯人數與語種 16
2.4.5 法庭通譯資格與培訓 21
2.4.6 法庭通譯評量 21
2.4.7 法庭通譯待遇 22
2.4.8 法庭通譯使用者培訓 23
2.5 通譯倫理 24
2.6 譯文準確 26
2.6.1 事前準備 27
2.6.2 原文接收 28
2.6.3 認知負荷 29
2.7 角色中立 29
2.7.1 通譯的角色定位 30
2.7.2 通譯的服務範圍 31
2.7.3 通譯中立的可能性 32
2.8 通譯制度 33
2.8.1 資格認證 33
2.8.2 評量回饋 35

第 3 章 研究方法 36
3.1 研究對象 36
3.1.1 問卷 36
3.1.2 訪談 38
3.2 研究工具 38
3.2.1 問卷 38
3.2.2 訪談 40
3.2.3 補充 40
3.3 研究資料分析 41
3.3.1 問卷 41
3.3.2 訪談 42

第 4 章 問卷調查結果與討論 43
4.1 背景變項 43
4.1.1 任職地區 43
4.1.2 使用通譯次數與比例 43
4.2 實際開庭經驗 45
4.2.1 譯文準確 47
4.2.2 角色中立 48
4.2.3 通譯制度 49
4.2.4 司法人員與特約通譯 49
4.3 使用通譯的認知 51
4.3.1 譯文準確 54
4.3.2 角色中立 55
4.3.3 通譯制度 56
4.3.4 準備時間與資料 57
4.4 實際開庭經驗與使用通譯的認知 59
4.4.1 身份比較 60
4.4.2 譯文準確 61
4.4.3 角色中立 64
4.4.4 通譯制度 67
4.5 意見補充 67
4.5.1 譯文準確 67
4.5.2 角色中立 68
4.5.3 通譯制度 68

第 5 章 訪談調查結果與討論 70
5.1 選任資格 71
5.2 選任人數 73
5.3 休息時間 74
5.4 事前準備 75
5.5 評量回饋 77
5.6 溝通處理 79
5.6.1 答非所問 80
5.6.2 缺乏對應詞彙或概念 81
5.6.3 潛在文化意涵 82
5.7 使用者培訓 83
5.8 意見補充 85
5.8.1 通譯權 85
5.8.2 語種需求 86
5.8.3 通譯效率 87
5.8.4 通譯培訓 87
5.8.5 通譯待遇 87
5.8.6 使用者參與 88

第 6 章 結論 89
6.1 研究發現與意涵 89
6.2 研究限制 90
6.3 未來研究建議 91

參考文獻 92

附錄 109
1.1 法院「特約通譯傳譯服務情形意見反應表」統計數據 109
1.1.1 背景資料 109
1.1.2 意見反應 110
1.2 研究問卷 111
1.2.1 法官版 112
1.2.2 檢察官版 118
1.2.3 律師版 124
1.2.4 特約通譯版 130
1.3 問卷製程 131
1.3.1 參考資料 131
1.3.2 專家評定 138
1.3.3 預試 141
1.4 訪談大綱 142
1.4.1 研究知情參與同意書 142
1.4.2 訪談提問 143
1.4.3 文件1:法院特約通譯評量表 147
1.4.4 文件2:特約通譯傳譯服務情形意見反應表(法院) 148
1.4.5 文件3:特約通譯傳譯服務情形意見反應表(檢察署) 149
1.4.6 文件4:法院使用通譯作業規定 150
1.4.7 文件5:檢察機關辦理刑事案件使用通譯應行注意事項 151
1.5 背景變項 152
1.5.1 任職地區 152
1.5.2 使用通譯次數與比例 152
1.6 實際開庭經驗 153
1.6.1 譯文準確 153
1.6.2 角色中立 158
1.6.3 通譯制度 161
1.6.4 司法人員與特約通譯 161
1.7 使用通譯的認知 166
1.7.1 譯文準確 167
1.7.2 角色中立 172
1.7.3 通譯制度 175
1.7.4 準備時間 178
1.7.5 準備資料 179
1.8 實際開庭經驗與使用通譯的認知 181
1.8.1 身份比較 182
1.8.2 譯文準確 187
1.8.3 角色中立 209
1.8.4 通譯制度 223
Aiken, R. J. (1959). Let’s not oversimplify legal language. Rocky Mntn. L. Rev, 32, 358.
Alexieva, B. (1997). A typology of interpreter-mediated events. The Translator, 3(2), 153-174. doi:10.1080/13556509.1997.10798996
Anderson, J. E. (2010). Public policymaking (7th ed.). Stamford, CT: Cengage Learning.
Anderson, R. B. W. (2002). Perspectives on the role of interpreter. In F. Pöchhacker & M. Shlesinger (Eds.), The interpreting studies reader (pp. 209-217). London: Routledge.
Angelelli, C. (2000). Interpretation as a Communicative Event: A look through hymes’ lenses. Meta, 45(4), 580–592. doi:10.7202/001891ar
Angelelli, C. V. (2001). Deconstructing the invisible interpreter: A critical study of the interpersonal role of the interpreter in a cross-cultural/linguistic communicative event (Doctoral dissertation, Stanford University).
Angelelli, C. V. (2003a). The interpersonal role of the interpreter in cross-cultural communication (L. Brunette, G. L. Bastin, I. Hemlin, & H. Clarke, Eds.). In The Critical Link 3: Interpreters in the Community (pp. 15-26). Benjamins Translation Library, doi:10.1075/btl.46.06ang
Angelelli, C. (2003b). The visible co-participant: The interpreter’s role in doctor-patient encounters. In M. Metzger, S. D. Collins, V. Dively, & R. Shaw (Eds.), From topic boundaries to omission: New research on interpretation (Vol. 1, pp. 3-26). Washington, D.C.: Gallaudet University Press.
Angelelli, C. V. (2004a). Medical interpreting and cross-cultural communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Angelelli, C. V. (2004b). Revisiting the interpreters role: A study of conference, court, and medical interpreters in Canada, Mexico, and the United States. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Anthonissen, C. (2008). On interpreting the interpreter-experiences of language practitioners mediating for the TRC. Journal of Multicultural Discourses, 3(3), 165-188. doi:10.1080/17447140802376284
Baigorri-Jalón, J. (2005). Conference interpreting in the first international labor conference (Washington, D. C., 1919). Meta, 50(3), 987-996. doi:10.7202/011609ar
Baker, A. J. (1998). A model statute to provide foreign-language interpreters in the ohio courts. U. Tol. L. Rev., 30, 593.
Barsky, R. F. (1996). The interpreter as intercultural agent in convention refugee hearings. The Translator, 2(1), 45-63. doi:10.1080/13556509.1996.10798963
Bastin, G. L. (2011). Latin American tradition. In M. Baker & G. Saldanha (Eds.), Routledge encyclopedia of translation studies (pp. 486-476). London: Routledge.
Benmaman V. (1997). Legal interpreting by any other name is still legal interpreting (S. E. Carr, R. P. Roberts, A. Dufour, & D. Steyn, Eds.). In The Critical Link: Interpreters in the Community (pp. 179-190). Amsterdam: J. Benjamins.
Berk-Seligson, S. (1990). The bilingual courtroom court interpreters in the judicial process. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Bourdieu, P., & Thompson, J. B. (1982). Language and symbolic power. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Braun S. (2011). Assessment of video-mediated interpreting in the criminal justice system. AVIDICUS 2. Action 3. Guide to video-mediated interpreting in bilingual proceedings. Retrieved from: http://wp.videoconference-interpreting.net/
Brown, H. D., & Lee, H. (2015). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy. White Plains, NY: Pearson Education.
Bühler, H. (1986). Linguistic (semantic) and extra-linguistic (pragmatic) criteria for the evaluation of conference interpretation and interpreters. Multilingua, 5(4), 231-235. doi:10.1515/mult.1986.5.4.231
Chan, S. (2004). A dictionary of translation technology. Hong Kong: Chinese University Press.
Chan, A. H., & Lee, P. S. (2005). Intelligibility and preferred rate of Chinese speaking. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 35(3), 217-228. doi:10.1016/j.ergon.2004.09.001
Cheung, A. K. (2012). The use of reported speech by court interpreters in Hong Kong. Interpreting, 14(1), 73-91. doi:10.1075/intp.14.1.04che
Colin, J., & Morris, R. (1996). Interpreters and the legal process. Hook: Waterside Press.
Conley, J. M., O’Barr, W. M., & Riner, R. C. (2005). Just words: Law, language, and power. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Corsellis, A. (2008). Public service interpreting: The first steps. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Crystal, D., & Davy, D. (1969). Investigating English style. Ndiana University Press.
Curtis, B. R. (Ed.). (2002). A memoir of benjamin robbins curtis, ll.d.: Memoir (Vol. 1). New Jersey: The Lawbook Exchange.
Diriker, E. (2004). De-/re-contextualizing conference interpreting: Interpreters in the ivory tower? Amsterdam: J. Benjamins.
Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methodologies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dragsted, B., & Hansen, I. G. (2009). Exploring translation and interpreting hybrids. The case of sight translation. Meta, 54(3), 588. doi:10.7202/038317ar
Dye, T. R. (2012). Understanding public policy (14th ed.). London: Pearson Education.
Edwards, A. B. (1995). The practice of court interpreting (Vol. 6). Amsterdam: J. Benjamins Pub.
Ekvall, R. B. (1960). Faithful echo. New Haven, CT: College & University Press.
Erasmus, M., & Mathibela, L. (1999). Liaison interpreting in the community. Pretoria: Van Schaik.
Fenton S. (1997). The role of the interpreter in the adversarial courtroom (S. E. Carr, R. P. Roberts, A. Dufour, & D. Steyn, Eds.). In The Critical Link: Interpreters in the Community (pp. 29-34). Amsterdam: J. Benjamins.
Fowler Y. (2007). Formative assessment: Using peer and self-assessment in interpreter training (C. Wadensjö, B. E. Dimitrova, & A. L. Nilsson, Eds.). In The Critical Link 4: Professionalisation of Interpreting in the Community (pp. 253-262). Amsterdam: J. Benjamins.
Frishberg, N., & Barnum, M. (1990). Interpreting: An introduction. Silver Spring, MD: RID Publications.
Gaiba, F. (1998). The Origins of simultaneous interpretation: The Nuremberg trial. Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press.
Garber, N. (2000). Community interpretation: A personal view (R. P. Roberts, S. E. Carr, D. Abraham, & A. Dufour, Eds.). In The Critical Link 2: Interpreters in the Community (pp. 9-20). Amsterdam: J. Benjamins.
Garzone, G., & Viezzi, M. (Eds.). (2002). Interpreting in the 21st century: Challenges and opportunities. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Gentile, A. (1997). Community interpreting or not? Practices, standards and accreditation (S. E. Carr, R. P. Roberts, A. Dufour, & D. Steyn, Eds.). In The Critical Link: Interpreters in the Community (pp. 109-118). Amsterdam: J. Benjamins.
Gentile, A., Ozolins, U., Vasilakakos, M., & Ko, L. (1996). Liaison interpreting: A handbook. Victoria: Melbourne University Press.
Gile, D. (1995a). Basic concepts and models for interpreter and translator training. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Gile, D. (1995b). Fidelity assessment in consecutive interpretation: An experiment. Target, 7(1), 151-164.
Gile, D. (1997). Conference interpreting as a cognitive management problem. Applied Psychology, 3, 196-214.
Gile, D. (1999). Testing the effort models’ tightrope hypothesis in simultaneous interpreting-A contribution. Hermes, 12(23), 153-172.
Gile, D. (2009). Interpreting studies: A critical view from within. MonTi: Monografías De Traducción E Interpretación, (1), 135-155. doi:10.6035/monti.2009.1.6
Goffman, E. (1961). Encounters: Two studies in the sociology of interaction. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill.
González, R. D., Mikkelson, H., & Vásquez, V. F. (2012). Fundamentals of court interpretation: Theory, policy, and practice. Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press.
Hager, J. W. (1959). Let’s not oversimplify legal language. Rocky Mntn. L. Rev, 32, 74.
Hale, S. B. (2004). The discourse of court interpreting: Discourse practices of the law, the witness, and the interpreter (Vol. 52). Amsterdam: J. Benjamins.
Hale, S. B. (2007a). The challenges of court interpreting: Intricacies, responsibilities and ramifications. Alternative Law Journal, 32(4), 198-202.
Hale, S. B. (2007b). Community interpreting. Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.
Hale, S. B. (2011). Interpreter policies, practices and protocols in australian courts and tribunals. A national survey. Melbourne: Australasian Institute of Judicial Administration Incorporated.
Hale, S. B. (2014). Interpreting culture. Dealing with cross-cultural issues in court interpreting. Perspectives, 22(3), 321-331. doi:10.1080/0907676x.2013.827226
Hall, E. T. (1959). The silent language (Vol. 3). New York: Doubleday.
Hall, S., & Burdett, R. (2018). The SAGE handbook of the 21st century city. London: SAGE Publications.
Herbert, J. (1952). The interpreter’s handbook: How to become a conference interpreter. Librairie de l’Université.
Hewitt W. E. (1995). Court interpretation: Model guides for policy and practice in the state courts. Virginia: National Center for State Courts.
Hill, M., & Hupe, P. (2010). Implementing Public Policy: Governance in Theory and in Practice. Los Angeles: SAGE.
Hlavac, J. (2013). A Cross-National Overview of Translator and Interpreter Certification Procedures. Translation and Interpreting, 5(1), 32-65. doi:10.12807/ti.105201.2013.a02
Hrehovčík, T. (2009). Teaching Community Interpreting: A New Challenge? In Language, literature and culture in a changing transatlantic world: International conference proceeding (pp. 160-164). Prešov: Prešovská Univerzita.
International Civil Aviation Organization (2016). Annex 6 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation.Operation of Aircraft. International Civil Aviation Organization.
International Civil Aviation Organization (2018). Doc 9859, Safety Management Manual. International Civil Aviation Organization.
Jensen, E. (2005). Teaching with the brain in mind, revised (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Johnston S. (2007). Interpreter internship program: Forging employer and community partnerships (C. Wadensjö, B. E. Dimitrova, & A. L. Nilsson, Eds.). In The Critical Link 4: Professionalisation of Interpreting in the Community (pp. 263–271). Amsterdam: J. Benjamins.
Judicial Council on Cultural Diversity (2016). Australian National Standards for Working with Interpreters in Courts and Tribunals. Public Consultation Draf-June 2016. Consultation Paper. Australia: Judicial Council on Cultural Diversity.
Kelly, A. M. (2000). Cultural parameters for interpreters in the courtroom (R. P. Roberts, S. E. Carr, D. Abraham, & A. Dufour, Eds.). In The Critical Link 2: Interpreters in the Community (pp. 131-148). Amsterdam: J. Benjamin.
Knapp, K., & Knapp-Potthoff, A. (1987). Instead of an introduction: Conceptual issues in analyzing intercultural communication. In K. Knapp, A. Knapp-Potthoff, & W. Enninger (Eds.), Analyzing intercultural communication (pp. 1-14). Berlin, New York and Amsterdam: Mouton de Gruyter.
Kohn, K., & Kalina, S. (1996). The strategic dimension of interpreting. Meta, 41(1), 118-138. doi:10.7202/003333ar
Koomen, J. (2014). Language work at international criminal courts. International Feminist Journal of Politics, 16(4), 581-600. doi:10.1080/14616742.2014.947732
Kotler, P., Armstrong, G., & Opresnik, M. O. (2017). Principles of marketing (7th ed.). Harlow, England: Pearson.
Kurz, I. (1993). Conference interpretation: Expectations of different user groups. The Interpreters’ Newsletter, 5.
Kurz, I. (2001). Conference Interpreting: Quality in the Ears of the User. Meta, 46(2), 394-409. doi:10.7202/003364ar
Laster, K., & Taylor, V. L. (1994). Interpreters and the legal system. Sydney: Federation Press.
Law Society of New South Wales. (1996). Guide to best practice: Lawyers, interpreters, translators: Lawyers working with interpreters & translators in a legal environment. Sydney: Law Society of New South Wales.
Le Féal, D. (1990). Some thoughts on the evaluation of simultaneous interpretation. In D. Bowen & M. Bowen (Eds.), Interpreting: Yesterday, today, and tomorrow (pp. 154-160). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Leanza, Y. (2008). Community interpreter’s power. The hazards of a disturbing attribute. Curare, 31(2-3), 211-220.
Lee, J. (2009). Conflicting views on court interpreting examined through surveys of legal professionals and court interpreters. Interpreting, 11(1), 35-56. doi:10.1075/intp.11.1.04lee
Lee, J. (2015). Court interpreting. In R. Jourdenais & H. Mikkelson (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of interpreting (pp. 186-201). London: Routledge.
Lee, J. (2018). Feedback on feedback: Guiding student interpreter performance. Translation & Interpreting, 10(1), 152-170. doi: 10.12807/ti.110201.2018.a09
Llewellyn-Jones, P., & Lee, R. G. (2014). Redefining the role of the community interpreter: The concept of role-space. Carlton-le-Moorland, Lincoln, Lincolnshire: SLI Press.
Maley, Y., Candlin, C. N., Crichton, J., & Koster, P. (1995). Orientations in lawyer-client interviews. Forensic Linguistics, 2(1), 42-55. doi:10.1558/ijsll.v2i1.42
Martinsen, B., & Dubslaff, F. (2010). The cooperative courtroom: A case study of interpreting gone wrong. Interpreting, 12(1), 21-59. doi:10.1075/intp.12.1.02mar
Marzocchi, C. (2005). On norms and ethics in the discourse on interpreting. The Interpreters’ Newsletter, 13, 87-107.
Mason, I., & Ren, W. (2014). Power in face-to-face interpreting events (C. Angelelli, Ed.). The sociological turn in translation and interpreting studies benjamins current topics, 115-133. doi:10.1075/bct.66.08mas
Mellinkoff, D. (2004). The language of the law. Eugene, OR: Resource Publications.
Mikkelson, H. (1994). Text analysis exercises for sight translation (P. W. Krawutschke, Ed.). Vistas: Proceedings of the Thirty-First Annual Conference of the American Translators Association (pp. 381-390).
Mikkelson, H. (1996). Community interpreting: An emerging profession. Interpreting, 1(1), 125-129. doi:10.1075/intp.1.1.08mik
Mikkelson, H. (2000). Introduction to court interpreting. Manchester,. UK & Northampton MA: St. Jerome Publishing.
Mikkelson, H. (2008). Evolving views of the court interpreter’s role: Between Scylla and Charybdis. In C. V. Garcés & A. Martin (Eds.), Crossing borders in community interpreting: Definitions and dilemmas (pp. 81-97). Philadelphia: J. Benjamins Pub. doi:10.1075/btl.76.05mik
Minnesota Court Interpreter Program (2012). Bench card: Courtroom interpreting. Minnesota: Minnesota Judicial Branch.
Morris, R. (1993). The interlingual interpreter? Cypher or intelligent participant? International Journal for the Semiotics of Law, 6(3), 271-291. doi:10.1007/bf01099836
Morris, R. (1995). The moral dilemmas of court interpreting. The Translator, 1(1), 25-46. doi:10.1080/13556509.1995.10798948
Moser-Mercer, B. (2008). Skill Acquisition in Interpreting. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 2(1), 1-28. doi:10.1080/1750399x.2008.10798764
Moser-Mercer, B., Künzli, A., & Korac, M. (1998). Prolonged turns in interpreting: Effects on quality, physiological and psychological stress (Pilot study). Interpreting, 3(1), 47-64. doi:10.1075/intp.3.1.03mos
National Association of Judiciary Interpreters and Translators (2007). NAJIT position paper. Team interpreting in the courtroom. Washington: National Association of Judiciary Interpreters and Translators.
National Consortium of Interpreter Education Centers (2012). Fact sheet. The use of interpreting teams in the courtroom. National Consortium of Interpreter Education Centers.
Ng, B. C. (1992). End users’ subjective reaction to the performance of student interpreters. The Interpreters’ Newsletter, 1, 35-41.
O’Barr, W. M. (1982). Linguistic evidence: Language, power, and strategy in the courtroom. New York: Academic Press.
Ochs, E. (1979). Planned and Unplanned Discourse in Discourse and Syntax. Syntax and Semantics Ann Arbor, Mich., 12, 51-80.
Phelan, M. (2001). The interpreter’s resource. Multilingual Matters.
Pöchhacker, F. (1999). ‘Getting organized’: The evolution of community interpreting. Interpreting, 4(1), 125-140. doi:10.1075/intp.4.1.11poc
Pöchhacker, F. (2001). Quality assessment in conference and community interpreting. Meta, 46(2), 410-425. doi:10.7202/003847ar
Pöchhacker, F. (2016). Introducing interpreting studies. Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.
Pym, A., Grin, F., Sfreddo, C., & Chan, A. L. (2012). Studies on translation and multilingualism. The status of the translation profession in the European Union. Final report (pp. 15-38, Rep.). European Commission.
Ramaprasad, A. (1983). On the definition of feedback. Behavioral Science, 28(1), 4-13. doi:10.1002/bs.3830280103
Reddy, M. J. (2002). The conduit metaphor: A case of frame conflict in our language about language. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (pp. 284-310). Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.
Roberts R. P. (1997). Community interpreting today and tomorrow (S. E. Carr, R. P. Roberts, A. Dufour, & D. Steyn, Eds.). In The Critical Link: Interpreters in the Community (pp. 7-26). Amsterdam: J. Benjamins.
Roberts, R. P. (2002). Community interpreting: A profession in search of its identity. In E. Hung (Ed.), Teaching translation and interpreting 4: Building bridges (pp. 157-175). Amsterdam: J. Benjamins.
Roberts-Smith, L. (2009). Forensic interpreting: Trial and error (L. Roberts-Smith, U. Ozolins, & L. Stern, Eds.). In The Critical Link 5: Quality in Interpreting - a Shared Responsibility (pp. 13-35). doi:10.1075/btl.87.03rob
Roy, C. B. (2000). Interpreting as a discourse process. New York: Oxford University Press.
Russell, D. (2008). Interpreter preparation conversations: Multiple perspectives. In S. B. Hale & D. Russell (Eds.), Interpreting in legal settings (Vol. 4, pp. 123-147). Washington: Gallaudet University Press.
Russell, S. (2000). ‘Let me put it simply’: The case for a standard translation of the police caution and its explanation. Forensic Linguistics, 7(1), 26-48. doi:10.1558/sll.2000.7.1.26
Russell, S. (2002). ‘Three’s a crowd’: Shifting dynamics in the interpreted interview. Language in the legal process, 111-126. doi:10.1057/9780230522770_7
Salama-Carr, M. (2011). Interpretive approach. In M. Baker & G. Saldanha (Eds.), Routledge encyclopedia of translation studies (pp. 145-146). London: Routledge.
Sarat, A., & Felstiner, W. L. (1986). Law and strategy in the divorce lawyers office. Law & Society Review, 20(1), 93-134. doi:10.2307/3053414
Šarčević, S. (2000). New approach to legal translation. The Hague: Kluwer Law International.
Schwan, A. & Shapiro, S. (2011). How to read Foulcaul’s “Discipline and punish”. Pluto Press.
Seleskovitch, D. (1986). Comment: Who should assess an interpreter’s performance. Multilingua, 5(4), 236.
Shlesinger, M. (1989). Simultaneous interpretation as a factor in effecting shifts in the position of texts on the oral-literate continuum (Master’s thesis). Tel-Aviv University, Department of poetics and comparative literature.
Shlesinger, M., & Pöchhacker, F. (2010). Doing justice to court interpreting. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Pub.
Snelling, D. (1997). On media and court interpreting. In D. Gile, Y. Gambier, & C. Taylor (Eds.), Conference interpreting: Current trends in research (pp. 187-206). John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Spivak, G. C., & Harasym, S. (2014). The post-colonial critic interviews, strategies, dialogues. New York: Routledge.
Tseng, J. (1992). Interpreting as an emerging profession in Taiwan-A sociological model (Unpublished master’s thesis). Fu Jen Catholic University.
Turner, R. H. (1962). Role-taking: Process versus conformity. In A. M. Rose (Ed.), Human behavior and social processes: An interactionist approach (pp. 20-40). Boston: H. Mifflin.
United Nations International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals (2017, October 2). ICTY Language Services Receives 2017 Hieronymus Prize. Retrieved from http://www.icty.org/en/press/icty-language-services-receives-2017-hieronymus-prize
United Nations International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals (2018a). The Cost of Justice. Retrieved from http://www.icty.org/en/about/tribunal/the-cost-of-justice
United Nations International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals (2018b). Courtroom Technology. Retrieved from http://www.icty.org/en/about/registry/courtroom-technology
United Nations International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals (2018c). Translation and Interpretation. Retrieved from http://www.icty.org/en/about/registry/translation-and-interpretation
United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (1976). International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Retrieved from https://www.ohchr.org/EN/pages/home.aspx
United Nations General Assembly (1948). Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Retrieved from http://www.un.org/en/index.html
Venuti, L. (1992). Rethinking translation: Discourse, subjectivity, ideology. London u.a.: Routledge.
Venuti, L. (2000). Translation, community, utopia. In L. Venuti (Ed.), The translation studies reader (pp. 468-488). London: Routledge.
Vidal, M. (1997). New study on fatigue confirms need for working in teams. Proteus, 6(1), 1.
Viseur-Sellers, P. (2005). The other voices: Interpreters and investigators of sexual violence in international criminal prosecutions. In H. Durham & T. Gurd (Eds.), Listening to the silences: Women and war (pp. 155-164). Leiden: Nijhoff.
Wadensjö, C. (1998). Interpreting as interaction: Language in social life series. London & New York: Longman, 1998.
Wadensjö, C. (2017). Dialogue interpreting and the distribution of responsibility. Hermes, 8(14), 111-129. doi:10.7146/hjlcb.v8i14.25098
Walker, A. G. (1990). Language at Work in the Law. Language in the judicial process, 203-244. doi:10.1007/978-1-4899-3719-3_7
Wisconsin Director of State Courts Interpreter Program (2015). A handbook for court interpreters working in teams. Wisconsin: Wisconsin Director of State Courts Interpreter Program.
Yockey, R. D. (2010). SPSS demystified: A step-by-step approach. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
王德威(譯)(1993)。知識的考掘(原作者:Foucault M.)。臺北市:麥田。(原著出版年:1969)。
林鴻銘(發行)(2018)。完善通譯制度 特約通譯服務意見表外語版 歡迎利用。司法週刊,1883。
司法院行政訴訟及懲戒廳(2015年2月6日)。行政訴訟收容新制順利上路 收容聲請制度進入正軌運作。司法院最新動態。取自:http://jirs.judicial.gov.tw/GNNWS/NNWSS001.asp?classFlag=y&Search=y
吳政峰(2018年5月25日)。檢察署「去法院化」 今日全數更名完畢。自由時報。取自:http://www.ltn.com.tw/
法務部(2012)。公民與政治權利國際公約 經濟社會文化權利國際公約 一般性意見。臺北:法務部。
陳雅齡(2017b)。法庭視譯的文本語言分析策略。Journal of Literature and Art Studies,7(3)。319-331。
監察院(2016年10月5日)。外籍漁工勞動權益遭漠視 監察院糾正農委會及漁業署。監察院。取自https://www.cy.gov.tw/mp.asp?mp=1
劉北成、楊遠嬰(譯)(1992)。瘋癲與文明(原作者:Foucault M.)。臺北市:桂冠。(原著出版年:1961)。
曾美惠(2006年3月15日)。建立翻譯師制度 各界尋求共識。臺灣英語網。取自http://www.english.com.tw/
註: 此連結為研究生畢業學校所提供,不一定有電子全文可供下載,若連結有誤,請點選上方之〝勘誤回報〞功能,我們會盡快修正,謝謝!
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top