Language disadvantage in Malaysian litigation and arbitration

Based on extensive observations of courtroom proceedings and more limited observations of arbitration practice, this study compares how each system approaches language disadvantage. In Malaysian common law the usual constraints on courtroom discourse, institutionalised by de jure rules of speaking a...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Hashim, A.
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Blackwell Publishing 2011
Subjects:
Online Access:http://eprints.um.edu.my/8653/1/Language_Disadvantage_in_Malaysian_Litigation_and_Arbitration.pdf
http://eprints.um.edu.my/8653/
http://translating-cultures-networking-development.com/img/upload/390/documents/Language%20disadvantage%20in%20Malaysian%20litigation%20and%20arbitration_1332355925326.pdf
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Institution: Universiti Malaya
Language: English
id my.um.eprints.8653
record_format eprints
spelling my.um.eprints.86532013-12-16T07:51:40Z http://eprints.um.edu.my/8653/ Language disadvantage in Malaysian litigation and arbitration Hashim, A. PE English PR English literature Based on extensive observations of courtroom proceedings and more limited observations of arbitration practice, this study compares how each system approaches language disadvantage. In Malaysian common law the usual constraints on courtroom discourse, institutionalised by de jure rules of speaking and reinforced by professional practice, are supplemented by a language policy, enshrined in the constitution, statutes and judicial directives, which requires the use of Malay while also allowing English where deemed in the interests of justice. The result is a bilingual system, with all other languages admissible only through interpretation. In the fast-growing alternative dispute sector, however, there are few hard and fast rules governing either code choice or discourse. With most Malaysian arbitrations involving commercial disputes, English is the dominant medium, but as in the courts, English-Malay code-switching is common. Ways of speaking are generally more relaxed than in the courts, but with a majority of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) advocates coming from common law, many discursive practices are carried over. While the more relaxed atmosphere of ADR seems to encourage freer discourse than in the courts, there are some indications that current practice may be underestimating the needs of participants who are less proficient in English. The stricter rules imposed on courtroom discourse may inhibit free discussion but they do reveal a high awareness of the problems of language disadvantage. Blackwell Publishing 2011 Article PeerReviewed application/pdf en http://eprints.um.edu.my/8653/1/Language_Disadvantage_in_Malaysian_Litigation_and_Arbitration.pdf Hashim, A. (2011) Language disadvantage in Malaysian litigation and arbitration. World Englishes, 30 (1). pp. 92-105. ISSN 0883-2919 http://translating-cultures-networking-development.com/img/upload/390/documents/Language%20disadvantage%20in%20Malaysian%20litigation%20and%20arbitration_1332355925326.pdf
institution Universiti Malaya
building UM Library
collection Institutional Repository
continent Asia
country Malaysia
content_provider Universiti Malaya
content_source UM Research Repository
url_provider http://eprints.um.edu.my/
language English
topic PE English
PR English literature
spellingShingle PE English
PR English literature
Hashim, A.
Language disadvantage in Malaysian litigation and arbitration
description Based on extensive observations of courtroom proceedings and more limited observations of arbitration practice, this study compares how each system approaches language disadvantage. In Malaysian common law the usual constraints on courtroom discourse, institutionalised by de jure rules of speaking and reinforced by professional practice, are supplemented by a language policy, enshrined in the constitution, statutes and judicial directives, which requires the use of Malay while also allowing English where deemed in the interests of justice. The result is a bilingual system, with all other languages admissible only through interpretation. In the fast-growing alternative dispute sector, however, there are few hard and fast rules governing either code choice or discourse. With most Malaysian arbitrations involving commercial disputes, English is the dominant medium, but as in the courts, English-Malay code-switching is common. Ways of speaking are generally more relaxed than in the courts, but with a majority of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) advocates coming from common law, many discursive practices are carried over. While the more relaxed atmosphere of ADR seems to encourage freer discourse than in the courts, there are some indications that current practice may be underestimating the needs of participants who are less proficient in English. The stricter rules imposed on courtroom discourse may inhibit free discussion but they do reveal a high awareness of the problems of language disadvantage.
format Article
author Hashim, A.
author_facet Hashim, A.
author_sort Hashim, A.
title Language disadvantage in Malaysian litigation and arbitration
title_short Language disadvantage in Malaysian litigation and arbitration
title_full Language disadvantage in Malaysian litigation and arbitration
title_fullStr Language disadvantage in Malaysian litigation and arbitration
title_full_unstemmed Language disadvantage in Malaysian litigation and arbitration
title_sort language disadvantage in malaysian litigation and arbitration
publisher Blackwell Publishing
publishDate 2011
url http://eprints.um.edu.my/8653/1/Language_Disadvantage_in_Malaysian_Litigation_and_Arbitration.pdf
http://eprints.um.edu.my/8653/
http://translating-cultures-networking-development.com/img/upload/390/documents/Language%20disadvantage%20in%20Malaysian%20litigation%20and%20arbitration_1332355925326.pdf
_version_ 1643688350148722688