Article published In:
BabelVol. 62:1 (2016) ► pp.104–121
Comparing modal patterns in Chinese-English interpreted and translated discourses in diplomatic setting
A systemic functional approach
This paper, with an eye to the interpersonal component in translational activities, adopts a systemic functional approach to the examination and comparison of modal patterns in interpreted and translated discourses of Chinese Premier’s press conferences and his reports on the work of the government from 2008 to 2012. Following a comprehensive analysis of modality in terms of type, orientation and value, the study shows that, despite their differences in translational mode (i.e. written and spoken) and temporal constraint (i.e. prepared and impromptu), interpreted and translated diplomatic discourses share some common trends in modal distribution. In particular, the massive use of modulation and the favorite collocation of first person pronouns with volitive modal verbs such as will are classic in discourses as such. Additionally, only a minimal number of low-valued modality is used in both translation and interpretation. Given the political sensitivity and policy orientation of diplomatic translation and the institutional identity of diplomatic translators, it is argued that an effective manipulation of modality is essential to their fulfillment of the capacity of “policy endorsers” in reproducing interpersonal connotations embedded in the source language. The paper may also shed some light on the research on translator/interpreters’ role.
References
Bao, Gang
2005 Introducing Theories in Interpreting Studies. Beijing: China Translation & Publishing Corporation.
Biber, Douglas et al.
(ed) 1999 Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. London: Longman Publications Group.
Givón, Talmy
Gotti, Maurizio
2003 “Shall and Will in Contemporary English: A Comparison with Past Uses”. In Modality in Contemporary English, ed. by Roberta Facchinetti, Frank Palmer, and Manfred Krug, 267–300. Berlin and New York: de Gruyter Mouton. 
Halliday, M.A.K
1978 Language as Social Semiotic: The Social Interpretation of Language and Meaning. London: Edward Arnold.
2004 An Introduction to Functional Grammar (3rd ed.). London: Edward Arnold.
Hu, Zhuanglin
1994 Cohesion and Coherence in Discourses. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
Ji, Hongqin
2011 “The Interpersonal Meaning of Modality in Biblical Language”. Foreign Language Teaching and Research 43 (2): 230–238.
Jiang, Ting, and Wen Jin
2012 “Exploring Translation of Modal Verbs in Chinese Legislative Language: A Corpus-Based Approach”. Journal of Southwest University for Nationalities 11: 195–199.
Klaudy, Kinca
2001 “Explicitation”. In Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies, ed. by Mona Baker, 80–84. London and New York: Routledge.
Kneževi, Božana, and Irena Brdar
2011 “Modals and Modality in Translation: A Case Study Based Approach”. Jezikoslovlje 12 (2): 117–145.
Leech, Geoffery
2003 “Modals on the Move: The English Modal Auxiliaries 1961–1992”. In Modality in Contemporary English, ed. by Roberta Facchinetti, Frank Palmer, and Manfred Krug, 223–240. Berlin and New York: de Gruyter Mouton.
Li, Ji’an
1999 “Modality and Meanings of Modal Auxiliaries”. Journal of Foreign Languages 41: 19–23.
Li, Kexing
2007 “Function of Modal Verbs in Legal Documents and their Translation”. Chinese Translators Journal 61: 54–60.
Millar, Neil
2009 “Modal Verbs in TIME: Frequency Changes 1923–2006”. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 14 (2): 191–220.
Munday, Jeremy
(ed) 2009 The Routledge Companion to Translation Studies (Revised Edition). Oxon: Routledge.
Palmer, Frank Robert
1986 Mood and Modality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Smith, Nicholas
2003 “Changes in Modals and Semi-modals of Strong Obligation and Epistemic Necessity in Recent British English”. In Modality in Contemporary English, ed. by Roberta Facchinetti, Frank Palmer, and Manfred Krug, 241–266. Berlin and New York: de Gruyter Mouton.
Steiner, Erich
2002 “Grammatical Metaphor in Translation: Some Methods for Corpus-Based Investigations”. In Information Structure in a Cross-Linguistic Perspective, ed. by Hilde Hasselgard, Stig Johansson, Bergljot Behrens, and Cathrine Fabricius-Hansen, 213–228. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Wang, Hongyang, and Chunsong Chen
2007 “A Contrastive Study of Modality in English Political and Academic Speeches”. Foreign Languages and Their Teaching 51: 21–24.
Wang, Zhenhua
2004 “Power in Cross-examination: A Modality Analysis of a Segment of Courtroom Discourse of O. J. Simpson Case”. Foreign Language Research 31: 51–59.
Xu, Yanan
2000 “Characteristics of and Requirements on Diplomatic translation”. Chinese Translators Journal 31: 35–38.
Yang, Mingxing
2012 “The Principles and Tactics on Diplomatic Translation: A Chinese Perspective”. Babel 58 (1): 1–18.
Cited by
Cited by 15 other publications
Bendazzoli, Claudio
2018. Corpus-based Interpreting Studies: Past, Present and Future Developments of a (Wired) Cottage Industry. In Making Way in Corpus-based Interpreting Studies [New Frontiers in Translation Studies, ], ► pp. 1 ff. 
Chen, Shukun, Aiping Mo & Shu Yang
2023. ‘We should have a deep understanding’: reinstantiating cognitive processes in the translation of Chinese political discourse. Perspectives ► pp. 1 ff.
Chen, Shukun, Winfred Wenhui Xuan & Hailing Yu
2022. Applying systemic functional linguistics in translation studies. Babel. Revue internationale de la traduction / International Journal of Translation 68:4 ► pp. 517 ff.
Fu, Rongbo & Jing Chen
2019. Negotiating interpersonal relations in Chinese-English diplomatic interpreting. Interpreting. International Journal of Research and Practice in Interpreting 21:1 ► pp. 12 ff.
Fu, Rongbo & Kefei Wang
2022. Hedging in interpreted and spontaneous speeches: a comparative study of Chinese and American political press briefings. Text & Talk 42:2 ► pp. 153 ff.
Gu, Chonglong
2019. Interpreters caught up in an ideological tug-of-war?. Translation and Interpreting Studies 14:1 ► pp. 1 ff.
Gu, Chonglong
2019. (Re)manufacturing consent in English. Target. International Journal of Translation Studies 31:3 ► pp. 465 ff.
Gu, Chonglong
2020. Concordancing China’s Friend, Foe and Frenemy: A Corpus-based CDA of Geopolitical Actors (Re)presented at China’s Interpreter-mediated Political Press Conferences. In Corpus-based Approaches to Grammar, Media and Health Discourses [The M.A.K. Halliday Library Functional Linguistics Series, ], ► pp. 197 ff.
Kecskes, Istvan & Monika Kirner-Ludwig
2017. “It Would Never Happen in My Country I Must Say”: A Corpus-Pragmatic Study on Asian English Learners’ Preferred Uses of Must and Should. Corpus Pragmatics 1:2 ► pp. 91 ff.
Li, Yang & Sandra L. Halverson
Pan, Feng & Binhua Wang
2021. Is interpreting of China’s political discourse becoming more target-oriented?. Babel. Revue internationale de la traduction / International Journal of Translation 67:2 ► pp. 222 ff.
Wang, Jiayu & Mingfeng Yang
2023. Interpersonal-function topoi in Chinese central government’s work report (2020) as epidemic (counter-)crisis discourse. Journal of Language and Politics 22:2 ► pp. 185 ff.
Xin, Li
2018. Mediation through modality shifts in Chinese-English government press conference interpreting. Babel. Revue internationale de la traduction / International Journal of Translation 64:2 ► pp. 269 ff.
Yu, Hailing & Nan Wang
2023. What happened to the modal expressions? Modality in translating Chinese texts into English. Lingua 294 ► pp. 103606 ff.
Zhang, Chenxia, Muhammad Afzaal, Abdulfattah Omar & Waheed M. A. Altohami
2023. A corpus-based analysis of the stylistic features of Chinese and American diplomatic discourse. Frontiers in Psychology 14
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 27 march 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.