Cover not available

Discussion published In: Target
Vol. 14:2 (2002) ► pp.353–360

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required
Discussion

Pragmatic analysis as a methodology

A reply to Gile’s review of . 1999. Simultaneous interpretation:A cognitive-pragmatic analysis. Amsterdam—Philadelphia: John Benjamins.   Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar

 | Université de Genève
Published online: 19 June 2003
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/target.14.2.08set
A few years ago I proposed a new ‘cognitive-pragmatic’ approach to understanding simultaneous interpretation (. 1999. Simultaneous interpretation:A cognitive-pragmatic analysis. Amsterdam—Philadelphia: John Benjamins.   Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar) which has, gratifyingly, been acknowledged in several reviews, including one in these pages (Target 13:1 (2001, 177–183). The editor has kindly let me use it as an opportunity to clear up some misunderstandings, respond to some stimulating challenges, and try to develop some recent ideas on how to operationalise the paradigm.
Article outline
  • Presentation of the literature
  • Epistemological issues
  • ‘Operationalising’ the cognitive-pragmatic analysis
  • The importance of pragmatics
  • References
References (19)
References
Anderson, Linda. 1979. Simultaneous interpretation: Contextual and translation aspects. Montreal: Concordia University. [Unpublished master’s thesis.]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Blakemore, Diane. 1987. Semantic constraints on relevance. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Carston, Robyn. Forthcoming. “Relevance theory and the saying/implicating distinction”. Laurence R. Horn and Gregory Ward, eds. Handbook of pragmatics. Oxford: Blackwell.  
Chafe, Wallace L. 1987. “Cognitive constraints on information flow”. Russell S. Tomlin, ed. Coherence and grounding in discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1987. 21–51.   Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gerver, David and H. Wallace Sinaiko, eds. 1978. Language interpreting and communication. New York and London: Plenum Press.   Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gile, Daniel. 1990. “Scientific research vs. personal theories in the investigation of interpretation”. Laura Gran and Christopher Taylor, eds. Aspects of applied and experimental research on conference interpretation. Udine: Campanotto, 1990. 28–41.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1995. Regards sur la recherche en interprétation de conférence. Lille: Presses Universitaires de Lille.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1999. “Testing the effort models’ tightrope hypothesis in simultaneous interpreting—Acontribution”. Hermes: Journal of linguistics 231. 153–172.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2001. Review of Setton (1999). Target 13:1. 177–183.   Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Isham, William P. 1994. “Memory for sentence form after simultaneous interpretation: Evidence both for and against deverbalization”. Sylvie Lambert and Barbara Moser-Mercer, eds. Bridging the gap: Empirical research in simultaneous interpretation. Amsterdam—Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 1994. 191–211.   Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jackendoff, Ray. 1990. Semantic structures. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lederer, Marianne. 1978. “Simultaneous interpretation: Units of meaning and other features”. Gerver and Sinaiko 1978: 323–332.   Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Matsui, Tomoko. 1998. “Assessing a scenario-based account of bridging reference assignment”. Robyn Carston and Uchida Seiji, eds. Relevance theory: Applications and implications. Amsterdam—Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 1998. 123–160.   Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Moser, Barbara. 1978. “Simultaneous interpretation: a hypothetical model and its practical application”. Gerver and Snaiko 1978. 353–368.   Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sperber, Dan and Deirdre Wilson. 1986/1995. Relevance: Communication and cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tommola, Jorma and Pekka Niemi. 1986. “Mental load in simultaneous interpreting: An online pilot study”. I. Evensen, ed. Nordic research in text linguistics and discourse analysis. Trondheim: Tapir, 1986. 171–184.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wilss, Wolfram. 1978. “Syntactic anticipation in German-English simultaneous interpretation”. Gerver and Sinaiko 1978: 335–343. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Zhu, Xuelian & Vahid Aryadoust
2022. A Synthetic Review of Cognitive Load in Distance Interpreting: Toward an Explanatory Model. Frontiers in Psychology 13 DOI logo
Yan, Jackie Xiu, Jun Pan, Hui Wu & Ying Wang
2013. Mapping interpreting studies: The state of the field based on a database of nine major translation and interpreting journals (2000–2010). Perspectives 21:3 ► pp. 446 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 4 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.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue