Cover not available
Article published In:
Translation, Cognition & Behavior
Vol. 2:2 (2019) ► pp.263–282
Thematic section

The negotiation of meaning in dialogue interpreting

On the effects of the verbalization of interpreters’ inferences

| Université de Mons
| Université de Mons

The objective of this study is to contribute to a better understanding of the negotiation of meaning between the participants of a bilingual interpreter-mediated interaction by analysing the effects of the verbalization of the inferences by the interpreter. The conceptual tools of Relevance Theory were applied to three interpreted excerpts of Russian-French psychotherapeutic interactions. The results suggest that, by verbalizing inferences, the interpreter co-creates a shared cognitive environment, reinforces intra- and inter-discursive coherence, diminishes the cognitive efforts of the recipient, and encourages primary parties to cooperate. The analysis of the cognitive processes at work in the excerpts tends to show that what has so far been treated as the interpreter’s “additions” or “expanded renditions” enables the latter to exercise cooperative coordination of interaction, and could therefore be more precisely called collaborative renditions.

Keywords: dialogue interpreting, Relevance Theory, cognitive processing, verbalization of inferences, collaborative renditions, cooperative coordination of the interaction
Article outline
  • 1.Objective of the study
  • 2.The Relevance Theory framework
  • 3.Analysis: Inferential processes and negotiation of meaning
    • 3.1Presentation of discursive data
    • 3.2 Excerpt I (EnTh5 / 39: 24–40: 36)
    • 3.3 Excerpt II (EnTh4–11: 12–16: 47)
    • 3.4 Excerpt III (EnTh7 / 39: 25–48: 50)
  • 4.Discussion
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 6 September 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/tcb.00029.del
References
Albl-Mikasa, Michaela
2016 “Notation Language and Notation Text: a Cognitive-linguistic model of consecutive interpreting”. In Consecutive Notetaking and Interpreter Training. Edited by Y. Someya, 71–117. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Amossy, Ruth
2008 “Argumentation et analyse du discours : Perspectives théoriques et découpages disciplinaires [Argumentation and discourse analysis: theoretical perspectives and disciplinary boundaries]”. Argumentation et Analyse du Discours 11: 2–15.Google Scholar
Baraldi, Claudio, and Laura Gavioli
eds. 2012 Coordinating Participation in Dialogue Interpreting. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2014 “Are Close Renditions the Golden Standard? Some thoughts on translating accurately in healthcare interpreter-mediated interaction”. In Dialogue Interpreting in Practice: Bridging the Gap between Empirical Research and Interpreter Education. Edited by E. Davitti and S. Pasquandrea, special issue of The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 8 (3): 336–353.Google Scholar
Carston, Robyn
2002 Thoughts and Utterances: The Pragmatics of explicit communication. Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Delizée, Anne
2018 Du rôle de l’interprète en santé mentale: analyse socio-discursive de ses positions subjectives au sein de la triade thérapeute-patient-interprète [on the interpreter’s role in mental health settings: socio-discursive analysis of the interpreter’s subjective positions within the triad therapist-patient-interpreter]. PhD Thesis, University of Mons.Google Scholar
Delizée, Anne, and Christine Michaux
2017 “Discussion critique interprétée & stratégies argumentatives et discursives : analyse du positionnement intersubjectif de l’interprète [Interpreted critical discussion & discursive and argumentative strategies: an analysis of the interpreter’s intersubjective positioning]”. In Public Service Interpreting: The Interpreter’s Discourse and its Influence on the Interpersonal Relationship. Discursive and argumentative approaches. Edited by E. Gallez, A. Delizée, S. Vogeleer, Ch. Michaux, and A. Al-Laithy, special issue of Dragoman 5 (7): 86–110.Google Scholar
In press. “Les représentations mentales de l’interprète de dialogue : de la pertinence locale à la cohérence discursive globale [Dialogue interpreter’s mental representations: from local relevance to global discursive coherence]”. In Déverbaliser-reverbaliser Edited by S. Vogeleer and L. Béghin 169 94 Louvain Presses universitaires
Englund Dimitrova, Birgitta, and Elisabet Tiselius
2016 “Cognitive Aspects of Community Interpreting. Toward a process model”. In Reembedding Translation Process Research. Edited by R. Muñoz, 195–214. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gallez, Emmanuelle
2014 Ethos et interprétation judiciaire: Une étude de cas [Ethos and interpreting in court proceedings: a case study]. PhD Diss., University of Leuven.Google Scholar
Grosz, Barbara J., and Candace L. Sidner
1986 “Attention, Intentions, and the Structure of Discourse”. Computational Linguistics 12 (3): 175–204.Google Scholar
Gutt, Ersnt-August
1991 Translation and Relevance: Cognition and Context. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Jefferson, Gail
2004 “Glossary of Transcript Symbols with an Introduction”. In Conversation Analysis: Studies from the First Generation. Edited by G. H. Lerner, 13–31. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mason, Ian
2006a “On Mutual Accessibility of Contextual Assumptions in Dialogue Interpreting”. Journal of Pragmatics 381: 359–73. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2006b “Ostension, Inference and Response: Analysing participant moves in community interpreting dialogues”. In Taking Stock: Research and Methodology in Community Interpreting. Edited by Eric Hertog and B. van der Veer, special issue of Linguistica Antverpiensia (5): 103–20.Google Scholar
2012 “Gaze, Positioning and Identity in Interpreter-mediated Dialogues”. In Coordinating Participation in Dialogue Interpreting. Edited by C. Baraldi and L. Gavioli, 177–199. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Moeschler, Jacques, et Nina de Spengler
1981 “Quand même: de la concession à la réfutation” [ Quand même: from concession to refutation]. Cahiers de linguistique française 21: 93–112.Google Scholar
Peirce, Charles Sanders
1931 Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce. Lectures on Pragmatism. Volume VI1. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Penn, Claire, and Jennifer Watermeyer
2012 “Cultural Brokerage and Overcoming Communication Barriers: A case study from aphasia”. In Coordinating Participation in Dialogue Interpreting. Edited by C. Baraldi and L. Gavioli, 269–295. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pérez González, Luis
2006 “Interpreting Strategic Recontextualization Cues in the Courtroom: Corpus-based Insights into the Pragmatic Force of Non-restrictive Relative Clauses”. Journal of Pragmatics 38 (3): 390–417. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sacks, Harvey
1992 Lectures on Conversation (1964–1972). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Setton, Robin
1999 Simultaneous Interpretation: A Cognitive and Pragmatic Analysis. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sperber, Dan, and Deirdre Wilson
1986 Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
1989 La Pertinence. Communication et cognition. Paris: Éditions de Minuit.Google Scholar
1990 “Forme linguistique et pertinence” [Linguistic form and relevance]. Cahiers de linguistique française 111: 13–35.Google Scholar
Stivers, Tanya
2008 “Stance, Alignment, and Affiliation During Storytelling: When nodding is a token of affiliation”. Research on Language & Social Interaction 41 (1): 31–57. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Eemeren, Frans H., and Rob Grootendorst
1996 La nouvelle dialectique [New dialectics]. Paris: Editions Kimé.Google Scholar
Eemeren, Frans H. van, and Peter Houtlosser
2006 “Strategic Manoeuvering: A Synthetic Recapitulation”. Argumentation 201: 381–392. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vianna, Branca
2005 “Simultaneous Interpreting: A Relevance-theoretic Approach”. Intercultural Pragmatics 2 (2): 169–90. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vogeleer, Svetlana
In press. “Le modèle vertical du processus de traduction, la question du transfert et la place des représentations mentales” [Vertical model of translation, the transfer and mental representations issues]. In Déverbaliser-reverbaliser Edited by S. Vogeleer and L. Béghin Presses universitaires de Louvain 217 47
Wadensjö, Cecilia
1998 Interpreting as Interaction. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Weber, David J.
2005 “A Tale of Two Translation Theories”. Journal of Translation 1 (2): 35–74.Google Scholar
Апресян, Валентина Юрьевна
2005 “Трехвалентные уступительные слова” [Trivalent concessive words]. In Труды международного семинара Диалог 2005 по компьютерной лингвистике и ее приложениям, 34–38. Moscow. [URL] Accessed 1 October 2015.
Ефремова, Татьяна Фёдоровна
2000 Толковый словарь Ефремовой Т.Ф. [Dictionary by T. F. Efremova] Moscow: Russian language.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 2 other publications

Defrancq, Bart & Sofie Verliefde
2023. A Dutch discourse marker in interpreter-mediated police interviewing with drafting: A corpus-based approach to dialogue interpreting. Research in Corpus Linguistics 11:2 ► pp. 50 ff. DOI logo
Weber, Orest, Jonathan Klemp, Florian Chmetz, Argyro Daliani, Esther-Amélie Diserens & Florence Faucherre
2023. Interpreter-mediated psychiatric assessments: Metacommunication as key. Transcultural Psychiatry 60:4 ► pp. 626 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 9 june 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.