An analysis of linguistic errors in translations of complainants’ sworn statements

Abstract

In South Africa, English remains the official language of record. Sworn statements made by complainants in any of the other official languages are translated by police officers into English to be used as evidence in court. Police personnel are not sworn translators or interpreters. This holds major implications for the legal process and the complainant. As court evidence, a sworn statement supersedes any oral story, so translation inaccuracies have profound consequences. Linguistic errors resulting from such translations potentially lead to discrepancies between oral and written testimonies, tampering with the accuracy of the statement. Methodologically, this article employs existing data derived from ongoing forensic linguistic research. Drawing on Error Analysis as the analytical framework, the study sought to unearth the linguistic errors that emanate in written records of police interviews and sworn statements. Error Analysis underpins this study with a view to unpacking the effects of the dominance of English in the legal setting, and the extent to which errors in translations of sworn statements could lead to reduced readability and understanding of the intended meaning. The findings of this study suggest that identifiable linguistic errors could potentially result in miscarriages of justice, a lack of access to justice or both.