Abstract This article investigates interpreter-mediated “manner of speech” as a site of language governance and linguistic justice in digitally mediated courts serving migrants from the Global South. Drawing on 3,250 min (102,500 words) of Mandarin–English remote-court interpreting by fifty certified practitioners, it examines how direction, mode, and condition affect the conservation of discourse markers, hedges, and hesitations. Quantitative patterns show higher pragmatic accuracy in defendant answers ( M = 77.1) than lawyer questions ( M = 69.7), and in consecutive over simultaneous mode. Micro-analyses demonstrate how omissions or upgrades of stance cues reshape illocutionary force and credibility, altering fairness perceptions. Bridging critical sociolinguistics, educational linguistics, and forensic discourse analysis, the paper advances a pedagogy of pragmatic accuracy linking rights literacy, digital competence, and redistributive training design, reframing interpreter education as a mechanism of language governance and institutional legitimacy in post-colonial, migration-affected judicial systems.
Yi et al. (Sun,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: