Su búsqueda retornó 3 resultados.

Resumen: This paper aims to look closely at the achievement of coherence in interpreting through the prism of metadiscourse, a set of grammatical resources instrumental in organizing a discourse, guiding the recipients towards an author/speaker's preferred interpretation while taking account of their needs and expectation. Despite a general consensus on the role of the umbrella term, opinions vary on what falls under it. Further, while the conception sets an illuminating framework for empirical endeavors to delve into the way in which meaning is negotiated and represented at discoursal level, its discussion is often confined to the analysis of written text in specific genre (e.g. academic treatise), leaving its role in oral discourse scarcely explored. In this paper, we propose an adapted taxonomy for the analysis of devices as such in interpretation and relate them to the building of coherence in interpreted events. Qualitative analysis of instances from real-life situations is then presented to show that successful communication in interpreting does not only come as a result of rendering the propositional message, but also involves a process of skillfully managing various metadiscoursal devices in reconstructing intertextual and intratextual conherences, both of which serve the same communicative goal with neither enjoying precedence over the other. The proposed taxonomy of metadiscourse may have some pedagogical and practical implications.

Resumen: This paper aims to look closely at the achievement of coherence in interpreting through the prism of metadiscourse, a set of grammatical resources instrumental in organizing a discourse, guiding the recipients towards an author/speaker's preferred interpretation while taking account of their needs and expectation. Despite a general consensus on the role of the umbrella term, opinions vary on what falls under it. Further, while the conception sets an illuminating framework for empirical endeavors to delve into the way in which meaning is negotiated and represented at discoursal level, its discussion is often confined to the analysis of written text in specific genre (e.g. academic treatise), leaving its role in oral discourse scarcely explored. In this paper, we propose an adapted taxonomy for the analysis of devices as such in interpretation and relate them to the building of coherence in interpreted events. Qualitative analysis of instances from real-life situations is then presented to show that successful communication in interpreting does not only come as a result of rendering the propositional message, but also involves a process of skillfully managing various metadiscoursal devices in reconstructing intertextual and intratextual conherences, both of which serve the same communicative goal with neither enjoying precedence over the other. The proposed taxonomy of metadiscourse may have some pedagogical and practical implications.

Resumen: Recent research on liaison interpreting shows that the interpreters' role in communicative events includes language facilitator and intercultural mediator. Being empowered with more coordinating functions rather than regarded as invisible conduits, however, how do interpreters with different professional experiences perceive their own role in business settings? And what are the actual expectations on them from their clients? This paper tries to answer the questions through a questionnaire-based survey of three groups of respondents: professional interpreters, student interpreters and clients, with each group including 30 respondents. Chesterman's (2001) four models of ethics, together with the hypothetical no ethics model, were designed as answers to the questionnaire (17 closed questions) and translation versions to two interpreting samples. The frequencies of responses to the questions and the evaluation scores of the translation versions are collected and analyzed, revealing the following findings: All three groups acknowledge the constraints translation ethics place on the freedom of action; and all three groups agree that interpreters simultaneously shoulder the tasks of translating and coordinating, with the "ethics of communication" being the most widely acknowledged one. However, there are discrepancies between and within the groups, and even attitudinal inconsistencies and contradictions in individual participants. These findings, by re-describing the interpreter's power in interlingual and intercultural interactions, will help improve professional standards and interpreting training.