Australian Review of Applied Linguistics. Supplement Series - Volume 5, Issue 1, 1990

This paper discusses aspects of the intercultural communication processes involved in the quasi-legal presentation of claims to traditional land by Aboriginal people in the Northern Territory before the Aboriginal Land Commissioner. The findings are documented by means of selected extracts from the transcripts of proceedings. Although the proceedings took place predominantly in English, there was some use of interpreters, liberal use of words from Aboriginal languages, and even considerable usage of nonverbal gestures. Most of the Aboriginal witnesses spoke some form of non-standard English influenced by Kriol and traditional Australian languages. The most salient features of their non-standard English are described here. Aboriginal witnesses accommodated their language toward Standard English. Some of their non-standard utterances were clarified by others for the record. The court also accommodated somewhat to Aboriginal styles and forms of speech. Nevertheless there were numerous instances of communication failure, which had various specific causes but were not aided by the culturally alien general legal procedure of question-and-answer elicitation of information.

Aboriginal languages are still widely used in most parts of the Northern Territory, particularly in isolated communities. These languages and their associated patterns of communication and socio-cultural systems are very different from those of the mainstream Australian society. The contact between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal groups is characterized by extensive communication failure and by differences in status. Language related problems of intercultural contact exist within the formal education system and in general communication situations, giving rise to a variety of needs for education and training for both non-Aboriginal and Aboriginal groups.

This paper cites instances which point to the conclusion that speakers of non-literary languages have an innate feel for the need of different styles to be used for oral versus written modes. One implication of this is the necessity of starting literacy programs early in the life of a translation project, so that emerging mother tongue writers and editors have time to develop an acceptable written style, which can then be reflected in the translation. However it is also true that the majority of speakers of minority languages in the Third World are basically oral communicators, and in many cases are indifferent to or even resistant to literacy. But the answer does not seem to lie in considering oral versus written styles, but asking how we can best combine oral and written modes to communicate most effectively to our audience(s).

This paper is mainly concerned with the ongoing development of training in translation principles and methodology for Aboriginal and Islander translators. One of the main questions to ask in developing courses is: where do we pitch our expectations? Both Aboriginal and white expectations are addressed, followed by comments on the question: who is an independent translator anyway? The latter part of the paper is concerned with the factors that make for effective training in translation.