Vocal Dischords

Lawrence Abu Hamdan, artist and writer on the political uses of voice analysis;

• Aural Contract audio archive - a tracklist (systems of simultaneous trasmutation / forensic listening)
• Contemporary politics of listening - site in which a voice is heard, what is the necessity of announcing the law, why only after it is heard can it be said to take effect?
• United States - Supreme Court OYEZ OYEZ OYEZ - an judicial amplifier?
• OYEZ = The interjection is also traditionally used by town criers to attract the attention of the public to public proclamations
• what about the voice allows one to ENACT justice?
• fanatical typists - testing their word per minute - a group which meets up to test their speeds on court transcripts - different systems of Stenography
• Stenographers - the interview lawrence did after with "richard" one of the stenographers - he reports that in order to do his job he has to enter a special zone - removing himself from the subject - no meaning, just thinking of another architectural features - blocking out the meaning in the process of recording but only recording the phoemes - the tension between speech and sound / speech and language / splitting of speech and sound (this reminds me of Sophie's talk about how people deal with delayed speech feedback by becoming flatter)
• Recent developments in UK: No more stenography in UK today in legal system. now they record and outsource it to india to be transcribed! What is happening to the legal voice? What is happening to british law then? What is India's relationship with UK and the judiciary? Who are we testifying to then?
• Outsourcing voices. Telemarketers who have been outsourced. Indian Call centres in australia. Man who demands the name of his prime minister to indian call worker. Belonging to different jurisdiction. Who is the voice accountable to? Citizenship test.
• Audio Documentary - "The freedom of speech itself" - http://www.forensic-architecture.org/exhibitions/aural-contract-2/
• Accent Test - Language analysis testing of asylum applicants - why does a specific sound define syrian citizenship - See https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/257177/language-analysis.pdf
• The way of saying tomato... was used to test for palestinian / lebanon
• The right to silence / Miranda Rights / the right to avoid being misheard? minute shifts in accent have terrible impacts on people's lives - political interventions on OUR speech
• Gagging monologue recordings - the sonic quality of speech - the laws of listening?
• Not just about the right to speak freely but to be heard properly under the right conditions - a contract of listening

• James Bridle did a project about transcription factories and the discrepancies - is there slippage of language and meaning - inaudibles

Language analysis testing of asylum applicants

From https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/257177/language-analysis.pdf:

In the course of piloting LA in the UK, LA was routinely permitted for applicants claiming to be Afghan, Eritrean, Kuwaiti, Palestinian and Somali, for whom Removal and Return Agreements (RRA) were available (but only where there was no Eurodac hit). (Eurodac is a large database of fingerprints of applicants for asylum and illegal immigrants found within the EU) Other nationalities were language tested, but only where it was strongly suspected the applicant had claimed a false identity. Such suspicions might arise from the individual providing contradictory documentation, statements or evidence, where they cannot speak the primary language (or are inconsistent in that tongue) and if they have a lack of knowledge about their claimed nationality. Independent pilots on LA were also conducted by Greece, Ireland, Malta and Turkey.

The UK Border Agency used LA as part of a range of tools to combat those who seek to abuse the asylum system

LA has historically been carried out for the UK Border Agency by Sprakab, a Swedish company that has carried out over 40,000 LA reports in ten years of existence. The interview is carried out over the telephone with a Sprakab analyst who speaks the language of the country for which the applicant claims to be a national. The 20- to 30-minute interview is recorded and the applicant is asked a variety of questions designed to obtain information that will help the analyst make a judgement. A preliminary result is communicated to the UK Border Agency within 15 minutes and a written report and transliteration is available at a later date (usually in electronic form within 72 hours with a hard copy to follow). The language report will include a detailed analysis of phonological, morphological and lexical phenomena. If there are doubts about the country of origin a second linguist will review the interview. The analyst‘s experience and qualifications are also included in the report.

The final report from Sprakab gives five possible outcomes relating to the country/area the applicant claims to be from.

• Applicant speaks language X found with certainty not in the country/area they claim to be from.
• Applicant speaks language X found with certainty in the country/area.
• Applicant speaks language X found most likely in the country/area.
• Applicant speaks language X found likely in the country/area.
• Applicant speaks language X found possibly in the country/area.

The report will also state the extent of the applicant‘s knowledge of the country, culture and habits. The next stage of the process is the substantive interview with the applicant where any inconsistencies in the LA are put to them and applicants have an opportunity to explain these. This aids the case owner to make an initial decision and LA may be used in any appeals that are made later on.