Comments on: Five language myths about refugee credibility

By: Meet the JLS author: Trust at the border: reality TV, securitization and the construction of (in)credibility | Journal of Law and Society

Wed, 11 Dec 2024 07:28:18 +0000

[…] of travellers’ credibility, much like those used in other migration processes, such as the assessment of asylum claims. We find that different individuals are unequally positioned to construct a trustworthy identity […]

By: Trust and suspicion at the airport – Language on the Move

Trust and suspicion at the airport – Language on the Move — Mon, 09 Dec 2024 11:29:36 +0000

By: Intercultural communication in migration law practice – Language on the Move

Mon, 03 Jul 2023 06:40:41 +0000

[…] Processes are also linguistically demanding: making sense of the law itself and then navigating the application process requires a very high level of proficiency in written, legal English, and strong computer literacy. Depending on the type of application, individuals may also need to attend an interview and discuss personal and sensitive parts of their life in great detail, as a way to prove their credibility. […]

By: Laura

Laura — Mon, 11 May 2020 22:34:42 +0000

In reply to Rizwan Ahmad.

Thanks, Rizwan, for these fantastic examples.

These myths are so normalized within legal settings that fully overcoming them would require some fairly fundamental shifts in procedures. But yes you are right – linguists have a valuable role to play in drawing attention to and addressing these types of issues.

By: Laura

Laura — Mon, 11 May 2020 22:29:07 +0000

In reply to Gegentuul.

Thanks Gegentuul 🙂

Yes – while I was looking at one particular context, you are right in saying that these types of myths are widespread and can have equally problematic outcomes in other settings.

By: Gegentuul

Gegentuul — Thu, 07 May 2020 05:30:49 +0000

Thanks Laura for debunking these language myths, which are so wide-spread in many forms of communication and so obdurately etched onto the mind of those condescending power holders.
Really enjoyed reading it!

By: Rizwan Ahmad

Rizwan Ahmad — Wed, 06 May 2020 13:03:06 +0000

Thanks for sharing these insights about language, which have practical and often painful consequences on people. Regarding your point #2 and #3 , I wanted to add that the semantic categorization and distinctions that exist in English may not exist (or may be marked usage) in all languages. For example, in Urdu spoken in North India, people use the word ‘haath’ meaning ‘hand’ and ‘pair’ meaning ‘foot’ to refer to ‘arm’ and ‘leg’ as well. Similarly, the word ‘nashta’ is used for ‘breakfast’ and ‘snack’ both. Urdu speakers may know, for example, different words for ‘hand’ and ‘arm’ in English, but in stressful interview situations, they may not stick to one. Based on your research this could be seen as ‘evidence’ of deception and could lead to rejection of their application.
I wonder how on earth people making such life-changing decisions can remain blissfully unaware of complexities of language, its structure, and the its cultural anchoring. These committees should be required to have linguists on them.