Translation in superdiverse legal contexts

Joanna Drugan, Krzysztof Kredens

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

In the Introduction, we explain why translation matters in legal contexts, provide definitions of key terms and ideas and summarise important developments which are impacting on translation in UK legal contexts at the same time as superdiversity. In the section on Historical Perspectives, we present a critical account of existing research on translation in legal contexts, and of training for translators and interpreters who will work in these contexts. We argue that both research and training have been slow to consider superdiversity and its effects. In Core Issues and Topics, we focus on the effects of superdiversity for four important areas: the logistics of translation in legal contexts, translation quality, translation ethics and policy issues. We draw on research and direct experience of translation and interpreting practice (our own and others’) to consider how superdiversity affects the conduct and impact of translation and interpreting. Then, in New Debates, we explain some challenges for those researching translation in superdiverse legal contexts, summarise recent and emerging work and consider the implications of superdiversity for translation studies and translator training. In the Conclusion, we link superdiversity and translation in legal contexts to broad principles of justice and fairness, point to some new research directions and suggest further reading.

Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationThe Routledge Handbook of Language and Superdiversity
Subtitle of host publicationAn Interdisciplinary Perspective
PublisherRoutledge
Pages411-425
Number of pages15
ISBN (Electronic)9781315696010
ISBN (Print)9781138905092
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 6 Mar 2018

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • General Arts and Humanities
  • General Social Sciences

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Translation in superdiverse legal contexts'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this