Volume 10, Issue 1
  • ISSN 1878-9714
  • E-ISSN: 1878-9722
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



Police interview interpreting is a complex task, as interpreters make difficult choices under pressure and time constraints. The main dilemma of the interpreter is whether to remain faithful to the original text, with the risk of rendering non-idiomatic translations, or to give preference to more idiomatic versions that may entail an addition or an omission from the original text. This article presents an analysis of Spanish-English bilingual police interviews in California. The analysis is based on the discrepancies found between an interpreter present in the interrogation and a control interpreter who translates the whole interview post-hoc. This is an original methodology that can be used for future research in this and other contexts. The results show different types of inaccuracies in the interpretation, which can be attributed to contextual pressures and overall challenges of interpreting and to challenges related to typological differences between the two languages involved.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Alexieva, Bistra
    1997 “A Typology of Interpreter-Mediated Events”. The Translator3(2): 153–174. 10.1080/13556509.1997.10798996
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13556509.1997.10798996 [Google Scholar]
  2. Alonso, Amado
    1964 [1935] “Noción, emoción, acción y fantasía en los diminutivos”. InEstudios Lingüísticos. Temas españoles, 195–229. Madrid: Gredos.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Aske, Jon
    1989 “Path predicates in English and Spanish: A closer look”. Proceedings of the Fifteenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 15, 1–14. 10.3765/bls.v15i0.1753
    https://doi.org/10.3765/bls.v15i0.1753 [Google Scholar]
  4. Berk-Seligson, Susan
    1983 “Sources of Variation in Spanish Verb Construction Usage: The Active, the Dative and the Reflexive Passive”. Journal of Pragmatics7: 145–168. 10.1016/0378‑2166(83)90050‑4
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(83)90050-4 [Google Scholar]
  5. 1990The Bilingual Courtroom: Court Interpreters in the Judicial Process. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. 2009Coerced Confessions: The Discourse of Bilingual Police Interrogations. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110213492
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110213492 [Google Scholar]
  7. 2011 “Negotiation and Communicative Accommodation in Bilingual Police Interrogations: A critical Interactional Sociolinguistic Perspective”. International Journal of the Sociology of Language207: 29–58.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Berman, Ruth, and Dan I. Slobin
    (eds.) 1994Relating Events in Narrative: A Crosslinguistic Developmental Study. Hillsdale, N. J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Biagini, Marta, Elena Davitti, and Annalisa Sandrelli
    2017 “Participation in Interpreter-mediated Interaction: Shifting along a Multidimensional Continuum”. Journal of Pragmatics107: 87–90. 10.1016/j.pragma.2016.11.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2016.11.001 [Google Scholar]
  10. Braun, Sabine
    2017 “What a Micro-analytical Investigation of Additions and Expansions in Remote Interpreting Can Tell us About Interpreters’ Participation in a Shared Virtual Space”. Journal of Pragmatics107: 165–177. 10.1016/j.pragma.2016.09.011
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2016.09.011 [Google Scholar]
  11. Cadierno, Teresa
    2017 “Thinking for Speaking about Motion in a Second Language. Looking Back and Forward”. InMotion and Space across Languages. Theory and Applications, ed. byIraide Ibarretxe-Antuñano, 279–300. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/hcp.59.12cad
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.59.12cad [Google Scholar]
  12. Curcó, Carmen
    1998 “¿No me harías un favorcito? Reflexiones en torno a la expresión de la cortesía verbal en el español de México y en el español peninsular”. Diálogos Hispánicos de Amsterdam22: 129–171.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Davidson, Brad
    2000 “The Interpreter as Institutional Gatekeeper: The Social-Linguistic role of Interpreters in Spanish-English Medical Discourse”. Journal of Sociolinguistics4(3): 379–405. 10.1111/1467‑9481.00121
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9481.00121 [Google Scholar]
  14. Félix-Brasdefer, J. César
    2006 “Linguistic Politeness in Mexico: Refusal Strategies among Male Speakers of Mexican Spanish”. Journal of Pragmatics38: 2158–2187. 10.1016/j.pragma.2006.05.004
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2006.05.004 [Google Scholar]
  15. Filipović, Luna
    2007 “Language as a Witness: Insights from Cognitive Linguistics”. International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law14(2): 245–267. 10.1558/ijsll.v14i2.245
    https://doi.org/10.1558/ijsll.v14i2.245 [Google Scholar]
  16. 2011 “Speaking and Remembering in One or Two Languages: Bilingual vs. Monolingual Lexicalisation and Memory for Motion Events”. International Journal of Bilingualism15(4): 466–485. 10.1177/1367006911403062
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1367006911403062 [Google Scholar]
  17. 2013 “Constructing Causation in Language and Memory: Implications for Access to Justice in Multilingual Interactions”. International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law20(1): 1–19. 10.1558/ijsll.v20i1.1
    https://doi.org/10.1558/ijsll.v20i1.1 [Google Scholar]
  18. 2016 “May vs. Might in Native vs. Non-native English: Implications for Inference and Judgement in Legal and Educational Contexts”. Applied Linguistics Review7(2): 181–201. 10.1515/applirev‑2016‑0008
    https://doi.org/10.1515/applirev-2016-0008 [Google Scholar]
  19. 2017a “Applied Language Typology: Applying Typological Insights in Practice”. Languages in Contrast17(2): 255–278. 10.1075/lic.17.2.05fil
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lic.17.2.05fil [Google Scholar]
  20. 2017b “Applying Language Typology: Practical Applications of Research on Typological Contrasts between Languages”. InMotion and Space across Languages. Theory and Applications, ed. byIraide Ibarretxe-Antuñano, 399–418. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/hcp.59.16fil
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.59.16fil [Google Scholar]
  21. Filipović, Luna, and Alberto Hijazo-Gascón
    2018 “Interpreting Meaning in Police Interviews: Applied Language Typology in a Forensic Linguistics Context”. Vigo International Journal of Applied Linguistics VIAL15: 67–103.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Gile, Daniel
    1997 “Conference Interpreting as a Cognitive Management Problem”. InCognitive Processes in Translation and Interpreting, ed. byJoseph H. Danks, Gregory M. Shreve, Stephen B. Fountain and Michael McBeath, 96–214. London: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Hale, Sandra Beatriz
    2007Community Interpreting. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/9780230593442
    https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230593442 [Google Scholar]
  24. Huang, Yan
    2007Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Ibarretxe-Antuñano, Iraide
    2012 “Placement and Removal Events in Basque and Spanish”. InThe events of putting and taking. A crosslinguistic perspective, ed. byAnetta Kopecka and Bhuvana Narasinhan, 123–143. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.100.10ant
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.100.10ant [Google Scholar]
  26. Ibarretxe-Antuñano, Iraide, and Luna Filipović
    2013 “Lexicalisation patterns and Translation”. InCognitive Linguistics and Translation, ed. byAna Rojo and Iraide Ibarretxe-Antuñano, 253–284. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110302943.251
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110302943.251 [Google Scholar]
  27. Jacobsen, Bente
    2002 Pragmatic Meaning in Court Interpreting: An Empirical Study in Consecutively Interpreted Question-Answer Dialoguers. Unpublished PhD Thesis. The Aarhus School of Business.
  28. Krouglov, Alexander
    1999 “Police Interpreting: Politeness and Sociocultural Context”. The Translator5(2): 285–302. 10.1080/13556509.1999.10799045
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13556509.1999.10799045 [Google Scholar]
  29. López Morales, Humberto
    2005 “Sociolingüística del tabú”. Interlingüística16(1): 7–20.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Rojo, Ana, and Paula Cifuentes-Férez
    2017 “On the Reception of Translations: Exploring the Impact of Typological Differences on Legal Contexts”. InMotion and Space across Languages. Theory and Applications, ed. byIraide Ibarretxe-Antuñano, 367–398. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/hcp.59.15roj
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.59.15roj [Google Scholar]
  31. Russell, Debra
    2002Interpreting in Legal Contexts: Consecutive and Simultaneous Interpretation. Burtonsville, Md.: Linstok Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Slobin, Dan I.
    1991 “Learning to Think for Speaking. Native Language, Cognition and Rhetorical Style”. Pragmatics1: 7–29. 10.1075/prag.1.1.01slo
    https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.1.1.01slo [Google Scholar]
  33. 1996a “From ‘thought and language’ to ‘thinking for speaking’”. InRethinking linguistic relativity, ed. byJohn J. Gumperz and Stephen C. Levinson, 70–96. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. 1996b “Two Ways to Travel: Verbs of Motion in English and Spanish”. InGrammatical constructions. Their form and meaning, ed. byMasayoshi Shibatani and Sandra A. Thompson, 195–220. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. 1997 “Mind, Code and Text”. InEssays on language functions and language type. Dedicated to T. Givón, ed. byJoan Bybee, John Haiman, and Sandra A. Thompson, 437–467. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/z.82.24slo
    https://doi.org/10.1075/z.82.24slo [Google Scholar]
  36. Slobin, Dan I., and Nini Hoiting
    1994 “Reference to Movement in Spoken and Signed Languages: Typological Considerations”. Proceedings of the Twentieth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society20: 487–503. 10.3765/bls.v20i1.1466
    https://doi.org/10.3765/bls.v20i1.1466 [Google Scholar]
  37. Song, Jae Jung
    2010The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Typology. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199281251.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199281251.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  38. Talmy, Leonard
    1988 “Force Dynamics in Language and Cognition”. Cognitive Science12: 49–100. 10.1207/s15516709cog1201_2
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1201_2 [Google Scholar]
  39. 1991 “Path to Realisation: A Typology of Event Conflation”. Proceedings of the Seventeenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society17: 480–519. 10.3765/bls.v17i0.1620
    https://doi.org/10.3765/bls.v17i0.1620 [Google Scholar]
  40. 2000Toward a cognitive semantics. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Vermeer, Hans J.
    1998 “Starting to Unmask what Translatology is about”, Target10(1): 41–68. 10.1075/target.10.1.03ver
    https://doi.org/10.1075/target.10.1.03ver [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error