Article published In: Interpreting
Vol. 21:1 (2019) ► pp.12–35
Negotiating interpersonal relations in Chinese-English diplomatic interpreting
Explicitation of modality as a case in point
Published online: 13 March 2019
https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.00018.fu
https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.00018.fu
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, B. (1993). Semantic change in translation – a cognitive perspective. In Y. Gambier & J. Tommola (Eds.), Translation and knowledge. Turku: University of Turku, 285–297.), 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.
Keywords: conference interpreting, role, explicitation, modality, corpus
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Research background
- 2.1Ambiguous personas of conference interpreters
- 2.2Government press conference interpreting as a site of public diplomacy
- 3.Theoretical framework
- 4.Corpus data
- 5.Quantitative analysis
- 6.Qualitative analysis
- 7.Conclusion
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
References
References (65)
AIIC. (1984). Random selection from reports and notes on the Brussels seminar. AIIC Bulletin 12 (1), 21.
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.
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.
(2004). Revisiting the interpreter’s role: A study of conference, court, and medical interpreters in Canada, Mexico, and the United States. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Baker, M. (1993). Corpus linguistics and translation studies: Implications and applications. In M. Baker, G. Francis & E. Tognini-Bonelli (Eds.), Text and technology: In honour of John Sinclair. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 233–250.
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 Cultures 9 (2), 177–203.
Beaton, M. (2007). Interpreted ideologies in institutional discourse: The case of the European parliament. The Translator 13 (2), 271–296.
Blum-Kulka, S. (1986/2000). Shifts of cohesion and coherence in translation. In L. Venuti (Ed.), The translation studies reader, 298–313. London: Routledge.
Butler, C. S. (1988). Politeness and the semantics of modalised directives in English. In J. Benson, M. J. Cummings, & W. S. Greaves (Eds.), Linguistics in a systemic perspective. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing, 119–154.
Cooper, C. L., Davies, R. & Tung, R. L. (1982). Interpreting stress: Sources of job stress among conference interpreters. Multilingua 1 (2), 97–107.
Danielsson, P. (2003). Automatic extraction of meaningful units from corpora. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 8 (1), 109–127.
D’Hooghe, I. (2007). The rise of China’s public diplomacy. [URL] (accessed 25 July 2016).
Diriker, E. (2004). De-/re-contextualizing conference interpreting: Interpreters in the ivory tower? Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
(2013). Simultaneous and consecutive interpreting in conference situations. In C. Millán & F. Bartrina (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of translation studies. London: Routledge, 363–376.
Englund Dimitrova, B. (1993). Semantic change in translation – a cognitive perspective. In Y. Gambier & J. Tommola (Eds.), Translation and knowledge. Turku: University of Turku, 285–297.
Fu, R. B. (2016). Comparing modal patterns in interpreted and translated discourses in diplomatic setting: A systemic functional approach. Babel 60 (1), 104–121.
Gile, D. (2009). Basic concepts and models for interpreter and translator training. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Gumul, E. (2006). Explicitation in simultaneous interpreting: A strategy or a by-product of language mediation? Across Languages and Cultures 7 (2), 171–190.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1978). Language as social semiotic: The social interpretation of language and meaning. London: Edward Arnold.
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.
Halliday, M. A. K. & Matthiessen, C. (2004). An introduction to functional grammar, 3rd edition. London: Arnold.
Halliday, M. A. K. & McDonald, E. (2004). Metafunctional profile of the grammar of Chinese. In A. Caffarel, J. R. Martin & M. I. M. Matthiessen (Eds.), Language typology: A functional perspective. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 305–396.
Holly, W. (1995). Secondary orality in the electronic media. In U. M. Quasthoff (Ed.), Aspects of oral communication, Berlin: De Gruyter, 340–363.
Kenny, D. (2011). Translation unit and corpora. In A. Kruger, K. Wallmach & J. Munday (Eds.), Corpus-based translation studies: Research and applications. London: Continuum, 76–102.
Klaudy, K. (2011). Explicitation. In M. Baker & G. Saldanha (Eds.), Routledge encyclopedia of translation studies. London: Routledge, 104–108.
Knapp-Potthoff, A. & Knapp, K. (1986). Interweaving two discourses: The difficult task of the non-professional interpreter. In J. House & S. Blum-Kulka (Eds.), Interlingual and intercultural communication. Tübingen: Gunter Narr, 151–168.
Kopczyński, A. (1994). Quality in conference interpreting: Some pragmatic problems. In M. Snell-Hornby, F. Pöchhacker & K. Kaindl (Eds.), Translation studies ‒ an interdiscipline. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 189–198.
Kusztor, M. (2000). Darstellung von Kohärenz in Original und Verdolmetschung. In S. Kalina, S. Buhl & H. Gerzymisch-Arbogast (Eds.), Dolmetschen: Theorie – Praxis – Didaktik, St. Ingbert: Röhrig Universitätsverlag, 19–44.
Lian, S. N. (2010). Contrastive studies of English and Chinese, 2nd edition. Beijing: Higher Education Press.
Ma, L. Y. & Li, X. K. (2011). Public diplomacy at early stage. [URL] (accessed 25 July 2016)
Ma, Q. Z. (1992). The Chinese verb and verbal constructions. Beijing: Beijing Language University Press.
Matthiessen, C. (2004). Descriptive motifs and generalizations. In A. Caffarel, J. R. Martin & M. I. M. Matthiessen (Eds.), Language typology: A functional perspective. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 537–566.
Metzger, M. (1999). Sign language interpreting: Deconstructing the myth of neutrality. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.
Nuyts, J. (2001). Epistemic modality, language and conceptualization: A cognitive-pragmatic perspective. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Palmer, F. R. (1986/2001). Mood and modality, 1st & 2nd edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Parsons, H. M. (1978). Human factors approach to simultaneous interpretation. In D. Gerver & H. W. Sinaiko (Eds.), Language interpretation and communication. New York: Plenum Press, 315–321.
(2009). Conference interpreting: Surveying the profession. Translation and Interpreting Studies 4 (2), 172–186.
(2011). Conference interpreting. In K. Malmkjær & K. Windle (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of translation studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 307–324.
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G. & J. Svartvik. (1985). A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.
Ren, X. P. (2000). Flexibility in diplomatic interpretation (in Chinese). Chinese Translators Journal 21 (5), 40–44.
Schjoldager, A. (1995). An exploratory study of translational norms in simultaneous interpreting: Methodological reflections. In P. Jansen (Ed.), Selected papers of the CERA research seminars in translation studies 1992–1993. Leuven: Katholieke Universiteit, 227–245.
Setton, R. (2011). Corpus-based interpreting studies (CIS): Overview and prospects. In A. Kruger, K. Wallmach & J. Munday (Eds.), Corpus-based translation studies: Research and applications. London: Continuum, 33–75.
Setton, R. & Dawrant, A. (2016). Conference Interpreting: A complete course. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Setton, R. & Guo, L. L. (2011). Attitudes to role, status and professional identity in interpreters and translators with Chinese in Shanghai and Taipei. In R. Sela-Sheffy & M. Shlesinger (Eds.), Identity and status in the translational professions. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 89–117.
Shlesinger, M. (1994). Intonation in the production and perception of simultaneous interpretation. In S. Lambert & B. Moser-Mercer (Eds.), Bridging the gap: Empirical research in simultaneous interpretation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 225–236.
Straniero Sergio, F. (2012). Studying interpreting through corpora: An introduction. In F. Straniero Sergio & C. Falbo (Eds.), Breaking ground in corpus-based interpreting studies. Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 9–52.
Sun, T. T. (2014). Interpreting China: Interpreters’ mediation of government press conferences in China. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Sweetser, E. (1990). From etymology to pragmatics: Metaphorical and cultural aspects of semanticstructure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Tang, F. (2018). Explicitation in consecutive interpreting. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
U.S. Department of State. (1987). Dictionary of international relations terms. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Library.
White, P. (2003). Beyond modality and hedging: A dialogic view of the language of intersubjective stance. Text 23 (2), 259–284.
Xu, Y. N. (2000). Features of and requirements for diplomatic interpretation and translation (in Chinese). Chinese Translators Journal 21 (3), 35–38.
Cited by (18)
Cited by 18 other publications
Cheng, Shi
Gu, Chonglong & Dechao Li
Li, Yang & Ewa Gumul
Gao, Fei & Jeremy Munday
2023. Interpreter ideology. Interpreting. International Journal of Research and Practice in Interpreting 25:1 ► pp. 1 ff.
Gu, Chonglong
Gu, Chonglong
Liu, Nannan
2023. Speaking in the first-person singular or plural. Interpreting. International Journal of Research and Practice in Interpreting 25:2 ► pp. 239 ff.
Wang, Binhua & Chonglong Gu
Xu, Jun & Yuxiao Liang
Fu, Rongbo & Kefei Wang
Gao, Fei
Gumul, Ewa & Magdalena Bartłomiejczyk
2022. Interpreters’ explicitating styles. Interpreting. International Journal of Research and Practice in Interpreting 24:2 ► pp. 163 ff.
Zhang, Yifan & Andrew K. F. Cheung
Gumul, Ewa
2021. Explicitation and cognitive load in simultaneous interpreting. Interpreting. International Journal of Research and Practice in Interpreting 23:1 ► pp. 45 ff.
Gumul, Ewa
Li, Xin & Ranran Zhang
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.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 12 december 2025. 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.
