1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Interpreting
  4. Volume 21, Issue 1
  5. Article
Volume 21, Issue 1
  • ISSN 1384-6647
  • E-ISSN: 1569-982X
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This paper investigates the negotiation of interpersonal relations by interpreters in Chinese government press conferences – a major instrument for the promotion of public diplomacy in China. Drawing on the theory of linguistic modality in systemic functional grammar (SFG) and the concept of explicitation (Englund Dimitrova 1993), we present a corpus-based discourse analysis of interpreters’ explicitation of modality and connect it to their participation in negotiating interpersonal relations in such a setting. Quantitative results indicate a noticeable trend of explicit use of modal expressions in target speeches in both interpreting modes, i.e., consecutive and simultaneous. Data from qualitative analysis illustrate the various explicitations that manifest interpersonal relations on different levels between interactants on the scene. We conclude by underlining the role of government press conference interpreters as active co-participants in public diplomatic settings, discussing the contributions of this work to empirical research on interpreters’ agency and its limitations, and suggesting new directions towards which further research might be carried out.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/intp.00018.fu
2019-03-13
2024-10-12

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/intp.00018.fu
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. AIIC
    AIIC (1984) Random selection from reports and notes on the Brussels seminar. AIIC Bulletin12 (1), 21.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Al-Zahran, A.
    (2007) The consecutive conference interpreter as intercultural mediator: A cognitive-pragmatic approach to the interpreter’s role. PhD thesis, University of Salford.
  3. Angelelli, C. V.
    (2001) Deconstructing the invisible interpreter: A critical study of the interpersonal role of the interpreter in a cross-cultural/linguistic communicative event. PhD thesis, Stanford University.
  4. (2004) Revisiting the interpreter’s role: A study of conference, court, and medical interpreters in Canada, Mexico, and the United States. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.55
     https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.55 [Google Scholar]
  5. Baker, M.
    (1993) Corpus linguistics and translation studies: Implications and applications. InM. Baker, G. Francis & E. Tognini-Bonelli (Eds.), Text and technology: In honour of John Sinclair. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 233–250. 10.1075/z.64.15bak
     https://doi.org/10.1075/z.64.15bak [Google Scholar]
  6. Baumgarten, N., Meyer, B. & Ozcetin, D.
    (2008) Explicitness in translation and interpreting: A critical review and some empirical evidence (of an elusive concept). Across Languages and Cultures9 (2), 177–203. 10.1556/Acr.9.2008.2.2
     https://doi.org/10.1556/Acr.9.2008.2.2 [Google Scholar]
  7. Beaton, M.
    (2007) Interpreted ideologies in institutional discourse: The case of the European parliament. The Translator13 (2), 271–296. 10.1080/13556509.2007.10799241
     https://doi.org/10.1080/13556509.2007.10799241 [Google Scholar]
  8. Blum-Kulka, S.
    (1986/2000) Shifts of cohesion and coherence in translation. InL. Venuti (Ed.), The translation studies reader, 298–313. London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Butler, C. S.
    (1988) Politeness and the semantics of modalised directives in English. InJ. Benson, M. J. Cummings, & W. S. Greaves (Eds.), Linguistics in a systemic perspective. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing, 119–154. 10.1075/cilt.39.07but
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.39.07but [Google Scholar]
  10. Cooper, C. L., Davies, R. & Tung, R. L.
    (1982) Interpreting stress: Sources of job stress among conference interpreters. Multilingua1 (2), 97–107. 10.1515/mult.1982.1.2.97
     https://doi.org/10.1515/mult.1982.1.2.97 [Google Scholar]
  11. Danielsson, P.
    (2003) Automatic extraction of meaningful units from corpora. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics8 (1), 109–127. 10.1075/ijcl.8.1.06dan
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.8.1.06dan [Google Scholar]
  12. D’Hooghe, I.
    (2007) The rise of China’s public diplomacy. clingendael.info/publications/2007/20070700_cdsp_paper_hooghe.pdf (accessed25 July 2016).
  13. Diriker, E.
    (2004) De-/re-contextualizing conference interpreting: Interpreters in the ivory tower?Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.53
     https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.53 [Google Scholar]
  14. (2013) Simultaneous and consecutive interpreting in conference situations. InC. Millán & F. Bartrina (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of translation studies. London: Routledge, 363–376.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Eggins, S.
    (2004) An introduction to Systemic Functional Linguistics. London/New York: Continuum.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Englund Dimitrova, B.
    (1993) Semantic change in translation – a cognitive perspective. InY. Gambier & J. Tommola (Eds.), Translation and knowledge. Turku: University of Turku, 285–297.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Fu, R. B.
    (2016) Comparing modal patterns in interpreted and translated discourses in diplomatic setting: A systemic functional approach. Babel60 (1), 104–121. 10.1075/babel.62.1.06fu
     https://doi.org/10.1075/babel.62.1.06fu [Google Scholar]
  18. Gile, D.
    (2009) Basic concepts and models for interpreter and translator training. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.8
     https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.8 [Google Scholar]
  19. Goffman, E.
    (1981) Forms of talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Gumul, E.
    (2006) Explicitation in simultaneous interpreting: A strategy or a by-product of language mediation?Across Languages and Cultures7 (2), 171–190. 10.1556/Acr.7.2006.2.2
     https://doi.org/10.1556/Acr.7.2006.2.2 [Google Scholar]
  21. Halliday, M. A. K.
    (1978) Language as social semiotic: The social interpretation of language and meaning. London: Edward Arnold.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. (1994) An introduction to functional grammar. 2nd edition. London: Arnold.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Halliday, M. A. K. & Hasan, R.
    (1989) Language, context, and text: Aspects of language in a social-semiotic perspective. 2nd edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Halliday, M. A. K. & Matthiessen, C.
    (2004) An introduction to functional grammar, 3rd edition. London: Arnold.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Halliday, M. A. K. & McDonald, E.
    (2004) Metafunctional profile of the grammar of Chinese. InA. Caffarel, J. R. Martin & M. I. M. Matthiessen (Eds.), Language typology: A functional perspective. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 305–396. 10.1075/cilt.253.08hal
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.253.08hal [Google Scholar]
  26. Holly, W.
    (1995) Secondary orality in the electronic media. InU. M. Quasthoff (Ed.), Aspects of oral communication, Berlin: De Gruyter, 340–363. 10.1515/9783110879032.340
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110879032.340 [Google Scholar]
  27. Kenny, D.
    (2011) Translation unit and corpora. InA. Kruger, K. Wallmach & J. Munday (Eds.), Corpus-based translation studies: Research and applications. London: Continuum, 76–102.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Klaudy, K.
    (2011) Explicitation. InM. Baker & G. Saldanha (Eds.), Routledge encyclopedia of translation studies. London: Routledge, 104–108.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Knapp-Potthoff, A. & Knapp, K.
    (1986) Interweaving two discourses: The difficult task of the non-professional interpreter. InJ. House & S. Blum-Kulka (Eds.), Interlingual and intercultural communication. Tübingen: Gunter Narr, 151–168.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Kopczyński, A.
    (1994) Quality in conference interpreting: Some pragmatic problems. InM. Snell-Hornby, F. Pöchhacker & K. Kaindl (Eds.), Translation studies ‒ an interdiscipline. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 189–198. 10.1075/btl.2.24kop
     https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.2.24kop [Google Scholar]
  31. Kusztor, M.
    (2000) Darstellung von Kohärenz in Original und Verdolmetschung. InS. Kalina, S. Buhl & H. Gerzymisch-Arbogast (Eds.), Dolmetschen: Theorie – Praxis – Didaktik, St. Ingbert: Röhrig Universitätsverlag, 19–44.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Lian, S. N.
    (2010) Contrastive studies of English and Chinese, 2nd edition. Beijing: Higher Education Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Lü, S. X.
    (1979) On grammatical analysis of Chinese. Beijing: The Commercial Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Lyons, J.
    (1977) Semantics (Vol. 1 & Vol. 2). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Nida, E. A.
    (1964) Towards a science of translating. Leiden: E. J. Brill.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Ma, L. Y. & Li, X. K.
    (2011) Public diplomacy at early stage. www.chinadaily.com.cn/cndy/2011-03/03/content_12106167.htm (accessed25 July 2016)
  37. Ma, Q. Z.
    (1992) The Chinese verb and verbal constructions. Beijing: Beijing Language University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Matthiessen, C.
    (2004) Descriptive motifs and generalizations. InA. Caffarel, J. R. Martin & M. I. M. Matthiessen (Eds.), Language typology: A functional perspective. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 537–566. 10.1075/cilt.253.12mat
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.253.12mat [Google Scholar]
  39. Metzger, M.
    (1999) Sign language interpreting: Deconstructing the myth of neutrality. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Nuyts, J.
    (2001) Epistemic modality, language and conceptualization: A cognitive-pragmatic perspective. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 10.1075/hcp.5
     https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.5 [Google Scholar]
  41. Palmer, F. R.
    (1986/2001) Mood and modality, 1st & 2nd edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Parsons, H. M.
    (1978) Human factors approach to simultaneous interpretation. InD. Gerver & H. W. Sinaiko (Eds.), Language interpretation and communication. New York: Plenum Press, 315–321. 10.1007/978‑1‑4615‑9077‑4_27
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-9077-4_27 [Google Scholar]
  43. Peng, L. Z.
    (2007) A study of modality in modern Chinese. Beijing: China Social Sciences Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Pöchhacker, F.
    (2004) Introducing interpreting studies. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203504802
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203504802 [Google Scholar]
  45. (2009) Conference interpreting: Surveying the profession. Translation and Interpreting Studies4 (2), 172–186. 10.1075/tis.4.2.02poc
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tis.4.2.02poc [Google Scholar]
  46. (2011) Conference interpreting. InK. Malmkjær & K. Windle (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of translation studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 307–324.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G. & J. Svartvik
    (1985) A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Ren, X. P.
    (2000) Flexibility in diplomatic interpretation (in Chinese). Chinese Translators Journal21 (5), 40–44.
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Roy, C.
    (2000) Interpreting as a discourse process. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Schjoldager, A.
    (1995) An exploratory study of translational norms in simultaneous interpreting: Methodological reflections. InP. Jansen (Ed.), Selected papers of the CERA research seminars in translation studies 1992–1993. Leuven: Katholieke Universiteit, 227–245.
     [Google Scholar]
  51. Séguinot, C.
    (1988) Pragmatics and the explicitation hypothesis. TTR1 (2), 106–114. 10.7202/037024ar
     https://doi.org/10.7202/037024ar [Google Scholar]
  52. Setton, R.
    (2011) Corpus-based interpreting studies (CIS): Overview and prospects. InA. Kruger, K. Wallmach & J. Munday (Eds.), Corpus-based translation studies: Research and applications. London: Continuum, 33–75.
     [Google Scholar]
  53. Setton, R. & Dawrant, A.
    (2016) Conference Interpreting: A complete course. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.120
     https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.120 [Google Scholar]
  54. Setton, R. & Guo, L. L.
    (2011) Attitudes to role, status and professional identity in interpreters and translators with Chinese in Shanghai and Taipei. InR. Sela-Sheffy & M. Shlesinger (Eds.), Identity and status in the translational professions. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 89–117. 10.1075/bct.32.07set
     https://doi.org/10.1075/bct.32.07set [Google Scholar]
  55. Shlesinger, M.
    (1994) Intonation in the production and perception of simultaneous interpretation. InS. Lambert & B. Moser-Mercer (Eds.), Bridging the gap: Empirical research in simultaneous interpretation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 225–236. 10.1075/btl.3.17shl
     https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.3.17shl [Google Scholar]
  56. Straniero Sergio, F.
    (2012) Studying interpreting through corpora: An introduction. InF. Straniero Sergio & C. Falbo (Eds.), Breaking ground in corpus-based interpreting studies. Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 9–52. 10.3726/978‑3‑0351‑0377‑9
     https://doi.org/10.3726/978-3-0351-0377-9 [Google Scholar]
  57. Sun, T. T.
    (2014) Interpreting China: Interpreters’ mediation of government press conferences in China. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  58. Sweetser, E.
    (1990) From etymology to pragmatics: Metaphorical and cultural aspects of semanticstructure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511620904
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620904 [Google Scholar]
  59. Tang, F.
    (2018) Explicitation in consecutive interpreting. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.135
     https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.135 [Google Scholar]
  60. U.S. Department of State
    U.S. Department of State (1987) Dictionary of international relations terms. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Library.
     [Google Scholar]
  61. Wadensjö, C.
    (1998) Interpreting as interaction. London/New York: Longman.
     [Google Scholar]
  62. White, P.
    (2003) Beyond modality and hedging: A dialogic view of the language of intersubjective stance. Text23 (2), 259–284. 10.1515/text.2003.011
     https://doi.org/10.1515/text.2003.011 [Google Scholar]
  63. Xu, Y. N.
    (2000) Features of and requirements for diplomatic interpretation and translation (in Chinese). Chinese Translators Journal21 (3), 35–38.
     [Google Scholar]
  64. Zhang, Q. F.
    (2009) Explicitation in Chinese-English consecutive interpreting: A case study (in Chinese). Chinese Translators Journal30 (5), 77–81.
     [Google Scholar]
  65. Zhang, W.
    (2013) Self-perceived professional identity of conference interpreters: A survey (in Chinese). Chinese Translators Journal34 (2), 17–25.
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/intp.00018.fu
Loading
Negotiating interpersonal relations in Chinese-English diplomatic interpreting
Interpreting 21, 12 (2019); https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.00018.fu
/content/journals/10.1075/intp.00018.fu
/content/journals/10.1075/intp.00018.fu
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): conference interpreting; corpus; explicitation; modality; role

Most Cited

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error