Page 310 - Handbooks of Applied Linguistics Communication Competence Language and Communication Problems Practical Solutions

288 Diana Eades

ume on intercultural training). This lawyers’ handbook gave this advice about
silence:

Do not interpret silence as an Aboriginal speaker’s admission of guilt or ignorance,
or even as evidence of a communication breakdown. Remember that silence is often
used positively by Aboriginal people to think about things and to get comfortable
with the social situation.
Eades 1992: 46

Research in a country town in the mid 1990s found that some lawyers were able
to wait comfortably for their clients to provide an answer, while others were not.
Example 1 below comes from a sentencing hearing in District (intermediate)
Court in the case of an Aboriginal defendant who has pleaded guilty to assault.
In answering questions which can help to establish grounds for minimizing the
severity of his sentence, he is invited by his lawyer to show remorse for his ac-
tions to the judge:

(1)
29. DC: And do you tell His Honour that you know you shouldn’t- and that
you’re sorry for having done that?
30. W: Uh well – yeah – I am – sorry (6.7) when we’re not – oh sorry – when
we’re not drinkin’ you know – we don’t even fight or nothin’ – you
know – when we’re drinking it’s a bit of a problem – it’s one of them
things – drinking.

The witness answers with a formulaic apology, and the very long 6.7 silence
which follows would not be allowed by many lawyers. But the power of the wit-
ness’s silence, which is not interrupted by the lawyer (or judge), is evident, as it
is followed by a personal, honest-sounding explanation which can be helpful to
a typical defence strategy of suggesting that the most appropriate sentencing
should include alcohol rehabilitation rather than a prison sentence.
In intercultural communication workshops with lawyers I have explained
that a misunderstanding of Aboriginal ways of using silence can lead to lawyers
interrupting an Aboriginal person’s answer. Of course, we customarily define
interruption as involving a second person starting to talk before the first speaker
has finished talking. But if we accept that the first part of an Aboriginal answer
often starts with silence, then to start the next question before the Aboriginal in-
terviewee has had the time to speak, is in effect to interrupt the first part of the
answer.
It seems obvious that lawyers, magistrates and judges need to be made
aware of such cultural differences in communicative style. And in fact, in my
experience, many legal professionals are excited to learn about this aspect of in-
tercultural communication. A clear example of this comes from a 1992 hearing