Loading…

Language rights, intercultural communication and the law in South Africa

This article seeks to explore the present language scenario in courts of law. The article makes use of section 6 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa (1996), as a point of departure. At face value this section seems to entrench the language rights of individuals. This would mean that...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:South African Journal of African Languages 2004-01, Vol.24 (4), p.252-261
Main Authors: Kaschula, Russell H, Ralarala, Monwabisi K
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c259t-2ab0f9503e561cc7f98ade265f102a4d40477eaa9ad9fad88a559806a5d3b2193
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c259t-2ab0f9503e561cc7f98ade265f102a4d40477eaa9ad9fad88a559806a5d3b2193
container_end_page 261
container_issue 4
container_start_page 252
container_title South African Journal of African Languages
container_volume 24
creator Kaschula, Russell H
Ralarala, Monwabisi K
description This article seeks to explore the present language scenario in courts of law. The article makes use of section 6 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa (1996), as a point of departure. At face value this section seems to entrench the language rights of individuals. This would mean that individuals could request trials to be held in their mother tongues, with fluent and competent speakers of that mother tongue sitting on the bench. However, this has not materialised. Contrary to popular opinion, the article argues that individual language rights are to some extent entrenched in the Constitution, but there are no mechanisms to secure such rights in the public domain. The article argues that it is often only language privileges that are preserved in institutions such as the justice system. Legally speaking, there is an obligation on the State to provide interpreters to facilitate access to all eleven official languages in courts of law. This in itself presents numerous challenges. The article argues further that the corollary to this is that there is very little space for intercultural communication in courts of law (as defined by Ting-Toomey, 1999, and Gibson, 2002). There has been little or no capacity building in this regard. It is English, to some extent Afrikaans, and the western cultural paradigm, which prevails. The result is further communication breakdown and language intolerance. In this article, the notion of language rights in courts of law is explored against the backdrop of existing theories of intercultural communication.
doi_str_mv 10.1080/02572117.2004.10587242
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_1080_02572117_2004_10587242</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>36471155</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c259t-2ab0f9503e561cc7f98ade265f102a4d40477eaa9ad9fad88a559806a5d3b2193</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkMFKAzEQhoMoWKuvIDl5cmuS3exujqWoFQoe1HOYZpM2kk1qkqX07d1Se_Y0MPP9M8yH0D0lM0pa8kQYbxilzYwRUo0t3jasYhdowkrCC0q5uESTI1QcqWt0k9I3IbRkLZ2g5Qr8ZoCNxtFutjk9YuuzjmpweYjgsAp9P3irINvgMfgO563GDvYjhz_CkLd4buI4v0VXBlzSd391ir5enj8Xy2L1_vq2mK8KxbjIBYM1MYKTUvOaKtUY0UKnWc0NJQyqriJV02gAAZ0w0LUtcC5aUgPvyjWjopyih9PeXQw_g05Z9jYp7Rx4HYYky7pqxp_5CNYnUMWQUtRG7qLtIR4kJfIoTp7FyaM4eRY3BuenoPUmxB72IbpOZji4EE0Er-x45Z8dv3xAdOs</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>36471155</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Language rights, intercultural communication and the law in South Africa</title><source>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</source><source>EBSCOhost MLA International Bibliography With Full Text</source><source>Taylor &amp; Francis</source><creator>Kaschula, Russell H ; Ralarala, Monwabisi K</creator><creatorcontrib>Kaschula, Russell H ; Ralarala, Monwabisi K</creatorcontrib><description>This article seeks to explore the present language scenario in courts of law. The article makes use of section 6 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa (1996), as a point of departure. At face value this section seems to entrench the language rights of individuals. This would mean that individuals could request trials to be held in their mother tongues, with fluent and competent speakers of that mother tongue sitting on the bench. However, this has not materialised. Contrary to popular opinion, the article argues that individual language rights are to some extent entrenched in the Constitution, but there are no mechanisms to secure such rights in the public domain. The article argues that it is often only language privileges that are preserved in institutions such as the justice system. Legally speaking, there is an obligation on the State to provide interpreters to facilitate access to all eleven official languages in courts of law. This in itself presents numerous challenges. The article argues further that the corollary to this is that there is very little space for intercultural communication in courts of law (as defined by Ting-Toomey, 1999, and Gibson, 2002). There has been little or no capacity building in this regard. It is English, to some extent Afrikaans, and the western cultural paradigm, which prevails. The result is further communication breakdown and language intolerance. In this article, the notion of language rights in courts of law is explored against the backdrop of existing theories of intercultural communication.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0257-2117</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2305-1159</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1080/02572117.2004.10587242</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Taylor &amp; Francis Group</publisher><subject>African studies ; Communication ; Courts ; Intercultural communication ; Justice ; Language ; Law ; Rights ; South Africa</subject><ispartof>South African Journal of African Languages, 2004-01, Vol.24 (4), p.252-261</ispartof><rights>Copyright Taylor &amp; Francis Group, LLC 2004</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c259t-2ab0f9503e561cc7f98ade265f102a4d40477eaa9ad9fad88a559806a5d3b2193</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c259t-2ab0f9503e561cc7f98ade265f102a4d40477eaa9ad9fad88a559806a5d3b2193</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27903,27904,33203</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Kaschula, Russell H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ralarala, Monwabisi K</creatorcontrib><title>Language rights, intercultural communication and the law in South Africa</title><title>South African Journal of African Languages</title><description>This article seeks to explore the present language scenario in courts of law. The article makes use of section 6 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa (1996), as a point of departure. At face value this section seems to entrench the language rights of individuals. This would mean that individuals could request trials to be held in their mother tongues, with fluent and competent speakers of that mother tongue sitting on the bench. However, this has not materialised. Contrary to popular opinion, the article argues that individual language rights are to some extent entrenched in the Constitution, but there are no mechanisms to secure such rights in the public domain. The article argues that it is often only language privileges that are preserved in institutions such as the justice system. Legally speaking, there is an obligation on the State to provide interpreters to facilitate access to all eleven official languages in courts of law. This in itself presents numerous challenges. The article argues further that the corollary to this is that there is very little space for intercultural communication in courts of law (as defined by Ting-Toomey, 1999, and Gibson, 2002). There has been little or no capacity building in this regard. It is English, to some extent Afrikaans, and the western cultural paradigm, which prevails. The result is further communication breakdown and language intolerance. In this article, the notion of language rights in courts of law is explored against the backdrop of existing theories of intercultural communication.</description><subject>African studies</subject><subject>Communication</subject><subject>Courts</subject><subject>Intercultural communication</subject><subject>Justice</subject><subject>Language</subject><subject>Law</subject><subject>Rights</subject><subject>South Africa</subject><issn>0257-2117</issn><issn>2305-1159</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2004</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>8BJ</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkMFKAzEQhoMoWKuvIDl5cmuS3exujqWoFQoe1HOYZpM2kk1qkqX07d1Se_Y0MPP9M8yH0D0lM0pa8kQYbxilzYwRUo0t3jasYhdowkrCC0q5uESTI1QcqWt0k9I3IbRkLZ2g5Qr8ZoCNxtFutjk9YuuzjmpweYjgsAp9P3irINvgMfgO563GDvYjhz_CkLd4buI4v0VXBlzSd391ir5enj8Xy2L1_vq2mK8KxbjIBYM1MYKTUvOaKtUY0UKnWc0NJQyqriJV02gAAZ0w0LUtcC5aUgPvyjWjopyih9PeXQw_g05Z9jYp7Rx4HYYky7pqxp_5CNYnUMWQUtRG7qLtIR4kJfIoTp7FyaM4eRY3BuenoPUmxB72IbpOZji4EE0Er-x45Z8dv3xAdOs</recordid><startdate>20040101</startdate><enddate>20040101</enddate><creator>Kaschula, Russell H</creator><creator>Ralarala, Monwabisi K</creator><general>Taylor &amp; Francis Group</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20040101</creationdate><title>Language rights, intercultural communication and the law in South Africa</title><author>Kaschula, Russell H ; Ralarala, Monwabisi K</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c259t-2ab0f9503e561cc7f98ade265f102a4d40477eaa9ad9fad88a559806a5d3b2193</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2004</creationdate><topic>African studies</topic><topic>Communication</topic><topic>Courts</topic><topic>Intercultural communication</topic><topic>Justice</topic><topic>Language</topic><topic>Law</topic><topic>Rights</topic><topic>South Africa</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Kaschula, Russell H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ralarala, Monwabisi K</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><jtitle>South African Journal of African Languages</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Kaschula, Russell H</au><au>Ralarala, Monwabisi K</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Language rights, intercultural communication and the law in South Africa</atitle><jtitle>South African Journal of African Languages</jtitle><date>2004-01-01</date><risdate>2004</risdate><volume>24</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>252</spage><epage>261</epage><pages>252-261</pages><issn>0257-2117</issn><eissn>2305-1159</eissn><abstract>This article seeks to explore the present language scenario in courts of law. The article makes use of section 6 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa (1996), as a point of departure. At face value this section seems to entrench the language rights of individuals. This would mean that individuals could request trials to be held in their mother tongues, with fluent and competent speakers of that mother tongue sitting on the bench. However, this has not materialised. Contrary to popular opinion, the article argues that individual language rights are to some extent entrenched in the Constitution, but there are no mechanisms to secure such rights in the public domain. The article argues that it is often only language privileges that are preserved in institutions such as the justice system. Legally speaking, there is an obligation on the State to provide interpreters to facilitate access to all eleven official languages in courts of law. This in itself presents numerous challenges. The article argues further that the corollary to this is that there is very little space for intercultural communication in courts of law (as defined by Ting-Toomey, 1999, and Gibson, 2002). There has been little or no capacity building in this regard. It is English, to some extent Afrikaans, and the western cultural paradigm, which prevails. The result is further communication breakdown and language intolerance. In this article, the notion of language rights in courts of law is explored against the backdrop of existing theories of intercultural communication.</abstract><pub>Taylor &amp; Francis Group</pub><doi>10.1080/02572117.2004.10587242</doi><tpages>10</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0257-2117
ispartof South African Journal of African Languages, 2004-01, Vol.24 (4), p.252-261
issn 0257-2117
2305-1159
language eng
recordid cdi_crossref_primary_10_1080_02572117_2004_10587242
source International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS); EBSCOhost MLA International Bibliography With Full Text; Taylor & Francis
subjects African studies
Communication
Courts
Intercultural communication
Justice
Language
Law
Rights
South Africa
title Language rights, intercultural communication and the law in South Africa
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-27T16%3A01%3A55IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Language%20rights,%20intercultural%20communication%20and%20the%20law%20in%20South%20Africa&rft.jtitle=South%20African%20Journal%20of%20African%20Languages&rft.au=Kaschula,%20Russell%20H&rft.date=2004-01-01&rft.volume=24&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=252&rft.epage=261&rft.pages=252-261&rft.issn=0257-2117&rft.eissn=2305-1159&rft_id=info:doi/10.1080/02572117.2004.10587242&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E36471155%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c259t-2ab0f9503e561cc7f98ade265f102a4d40477eaa9ad9fad88a559806a5d3b2193%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=36471155&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true