The Appeals Tribunal as a Contradiction Platform. Contesting Language Analysis for Determination of Origin in Asylum Procedures
Textgrundlage
Matras, Yaron. 2018. Duly verified? Language analysis in UK asylum applications of Syrian refugees. International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law 25(1), 53 – 78.
Matras, Yaron. 2021. Process, tools and agenda in LADO: A rejoinder. International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law 28 (2), 233 – 250.
Weiterführende Literatur
Blommaert, Jan. 2009. Language, asylum and the national order. Current Anthropology 50(4), 415 – 441.
Craig, Sarah, Karin Zwaan. 2019. Legal aspects of LADO from a European perspective: struggling with the burden of proof? In Patrick, Peter L., Monika S. Schmid & Karin Zwaan (eds.) Language Analysis for the Determination of Origin: Current Perspectives and New Directions, 213 – 232. Cham: Springer.
Gal, Susan, Judith T. Irvine. 2019. Signs of Difference: Language and Ideology in Social Life. Cambridridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hoskin, Jim, Tina Cambier – Langeveld & Paul Foulkes. 2020. Improving objectivity, balance and forensic fitness in LAAP: a response to Matras. International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law 26(2), 257 – 277.
Maryns, Katrijn. 2004. Identifying the asylum speaker: reflections on the pitfalls of language analysis in the determination of national origin. International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law 11(2), 240 – 260.
Patrick, Peter. 2012. Language analysis for determination of origin: objective evidence for refugee status determination. In Solan, Lawrence M., Peter M. Tiersma (eds.) The Oxford Handbook of Language and Law, 533 – 546. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Language and national Origin Group. 2004. Guidelines for the use of language analysis in relation to questions of national origin in refugee cases. International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law 11(2), 261 – 266.
Verrips, Maaike. 2010. Language analysis and contra – expertise in the Dutch asylum procedure. International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law 17(2), 279 – 294.