The Pragmatics of The Pragmatics of Dialogue InterpretingDialogue Interpreting

Ian MasonIan Mason

Heriot Watt UniversityHeriot Watt University

Modes of interpretingModes of interpreting

Interpreting

Monologue Dialogue

Consecutive Spoken Whisper Signing

simultaneous

consecutive

Simultaneous

simultaneous simultaneous

Dialogue interpretingDialogue interpreting

Face-to-faceFace-to-face SpontaneousSpontaneous Three-way exchangeThree-way exchange Consecutive (mostly)Consecutive (mostly)

StylesStyles

Courtroom: Courtroom: the non-personthe non-person

Triadic Exchanges: Triadic Exchanges: negotiation of negotiation of roles and meaningroles and meaning

Att.Att. What is the name of the airline? What is the name of the airline?

Int.Int. [ [What is the name of the airline?What is the name of the airline?]]

Wit.Wit. [[It’s TACAIt’s TACA]]

Int. Int. It’s TACAIt’s TACA

Att. Att. Could you repeat that? And spell it Could you repeat that? And spell it please?please?

Wit.Wit. [[TACATACA]]

Int.Int. [ [Can you spell it?Can you spell it?]]

Wit.Wit. [[T-A-C-KT-A-C-K]]

Int.Int. T-A-C-K T-A-C-K

O.J. Simpson trialO.J. Simpson trial

Interpreter role expectationsInterpreter role expectations

Establish common ground between Establish common ground between participantsparticipants

Act as intercultural mediatorAct as intercultural mediator

PragmaticsPragmatics

The Co-operative PrincipleThe Co-operative Principle MaximsMaxims

– QUANTITY (‘Be as informative as QUANTITY (‘Be as informative as required; do not be more informative required; do not be more informative than required’)than required’)

– QUALITY (‘Do not say what you believe QUALITY (‘Do not say what you believe to be false’)to be false’)

– RELATION (‘Be relevant’)RELATION (‘Be relevant’)– MANNER (‘Be clear, be orderly’)MANNER (‘Be clear, be orderly’)

ImplicatureImplicature

Where a maxim appears to be Where a maxim appears to be ‘flouted’, seek an ‘flouted’, seek an inferenceinference..

Inference = unexpressed meaning Inference = unexpressed meaning supposed by hearer.supposed by hearer.

An example: QUANTITY, MANNERAn example: QUANTITY, MANNER

IOIO “That immigration officer would “That immigration officer would ask you some questions”.ask you some questions”.

– Seems to be a statement, not a question.Seems to be a statement, not a question.– Seems to state the obviousSeems to state the obvious– So, it flouts the maxim of QUANTITYSo, it flouts the maxim of QUANTITY– Inference = It’s a question Inference = It’s a question – Also flouts the maxim of MANNER (vague)Also flouts the maxim of MANNER (vague)– Inference = answer to specific questions.Inference = answer to specific questions.

An example: QUALITYAn example: QUALITY TV “So [Name] and NATO after all. TV “So [Name] and NATO after all.

After so many years under the After so many years under the communist regime, communist regime, in NATO’s lapin NATO’s lap Mr Mr Ambassador?”Ambassador?”

INT “A very important question, Your INT “A very important question, Your Excellency. After so many years Excellency. After so many years being a part of the Warsaw Pact being a part of the Warsaw Pact under communist rule, how do you under communist rule, how do you feel about feel about accessing NATOaccessing NATO?”?”

– Seferlis (2006)Seferlis (2006)

An example: QUALITYAn example: QUALITY

Objectively, a country cannot be “in Objectively, a country cannot be “in the lap of” a military alliance.the lap of” a military alliance.

So, the TV host’s expression appears So, the TV host’s expression appears to flout the maxim of quality.to flout the maxim of quality.

Implicature: the country is Implicature: the country is subordinate to NATO.subordinate to NATO.

Inference by interpreter: an insult.Inference by interpreter: an insult. The interpreter avoids the The interpreter avoids the

implicature in his version.implicature in his version.

Interpreter behaviourInterpreter behaviour

Compensation for lossesCompensation for losses Accommodation to hearerAccommodation to hearer Protection of their own imageProtection of their own image Assumptions about ‘knowledge state’ Assumptions about ‘knowledge state’

of participantsof participants

‘‘Knowledge’ and ‘assumptions’Knowledge’ and ‘assumptions’

““All a speaker has to go on when All a speaker has to go on when treating something as given or treating something as given or ‘shared’ is what s/he assumes the ‘shared’ is what s/he assumes the hearer assumes” hearer assumes”

– Prince (1981: 232) Prince (1981: 232)

Relevance TheoryRelevance Theory

‘‘mutual cognitive environment’mutual cognitive environment’ Assumptions ‘mutually manifest’Assumptions ‘mutually manifest’

Mutual manifestnessMutual manifestness

A: “Do you want some coffee?”A: “Do you want some coffee?”

B: “Coffee would keep me awake”B: “Coffee would keep me awake”

– (How are the speaker and hearer to (How are the speaker and hearer to distinguish the assumptions they share distinguish the assumptions they share from those they do not share?)from those they do not share?)

ContextContext

““The set of premises used in The set of premises used in interpreting an utterance”interpreting an utterance”

““A subset of the hearer’s A subset of the hearer’s assumptions about the world”assumptions about the world”

– Sperber & Wilson (1986: 15)Sperber & Wilson (1986: 15)

The culture-specific nature of The culture-specific nature of contextual assumptionscontextual assumptions

““I must caution you, you do notI must caution you, you do not

have to say anything but it mayhave to say anything but it may

harm your defence if you do notharm your defence if you do not

mention when questionedmention when questioned

something you later rely on insomething you later rely on in

court”court”

(Sperber & Wilson 1986)(Sperber & Wilson 1986)

““To communicate is to claim an To communicate is to claim an individual’s attention hence, to individual’s attention hence, to communicate is to imply that the communicate is to imply that the information communicated is relevant”information communicated is relevant”

SO…SO…

Relevance TheoryRelevance Theory

Greatest possible Greatest possible contextual effectcontextual effect in in exchange for the smallest possible exchange for the smallest possible processing effortprocessing effort

Principle of RelevancePrinciple of Relevance

Contextual effectContextual effect = any modification or = any modification or improvement to our assumptions brought improvement to our assumptions brought about by an act of communication.about by an act of communication.

ST “At the Feyziyeh seminary my ST “At the Feyziyeh seminary my own small child Mostafa drank water; own small child Mostafa drank water; they cleansed the jar. That was they cleansed the jar. That was because I used to teach philosophy”.because I used to teach philosophy”.

[DRINK] [CLEAN] [TEACH [DRINK] [CLEAN] [TEACH PHILOSOPHY]PHILOSOPHY]

An exampleAn example

TT TT “At the Feyziyeh seminary my own “At the Feyziyeh seminary my own small child Mostafa [a son who small child Mostafa [a son who subsequently died in Iraq while Khomeini subsequently died in Iraq while Khomeini was exiled there], drank water; they was exiled there], drank water; they cleansed the jar [meaning that his son cleansed the jar [meaning that his son was considered to be religiously unclean]. was considered to be religiously unclean]. That was because I used to teach That was because I used to teach philosophy”.philosophy”.

‘‘New’/’old’ informationNew’/’old’ information

““Relevance of new information to an Relevance of new information to an individual is to be assessed in terms individual is to be assessed in terms of the improvements it brings to his of the improvements it brings to his representation of the world”representation of the world”

– Sperber & Wilson (1986: 103)Sperber & Wilson (1986: 103)

‘‘New’/’old’ informationNew’/’old’ information

Connexion of new and old Connexion of new and old information creates a information creates a contextual contextual effecteffect through: through:– creating a new contextual implicationcreating a new contextual implication– strengthening a previous assumptionstrengthening a previous assumption– abandonment of previous assumptionabandonment of previous assumption

Adjustments to improve Adjustments to improve relevancerelevance

Immigration interviewsImmigration interviews

– IOIO That immigration officer would ask That immigration officer would ask you some questions.you some questions.

– INTINT The official asked you two questions. The official asked you two questions. What did you say to him? Why did you What did you say to him? Why did you come here?come here?

RT account of this moveRT account of this move

Interpreter has adjusted her output Interpreter has adjusted her output in order to preserve the balance in order to preserve the balance between between contextual effectscontextual effects and and processing effortprocessing effort in a different in a different cognitive environment.cognitive environment.

IMM (in Polish)IMM (in Polish) That is I had eight hours That is I had eight hours mop, and two hours Hyde Park.mop, and two hours Hyde Park.

INT (in Polish)INT (in Polish) But from ten till six here at But from ten till six here at the hotel?the hotel?

IMM (in Polish) IMM (in Polish) YesYes

INT (in English) Right, I worked nights at the INT (in English) Right, I worked nights at the hotel from 10-6 in the morning, and then hotel from 10-6 in the morning, and then from 6-8 I was picking up rubbish in Hyde from 6-8 I was picking up rubbish in Hyde Park.Park.

ProblemProblem

What are the limits to the What are the limits to the interpreter’s adjustments for the interpreter’s adjustments for the sake of relevance? sake of relevance?

‘‘Interpretive resemblance’Interpretive resemblance’

As a As a producer-orientedproducer-oriented guarantee guarantee Gutt (2000: 37), following Sperber & Wilson (1986: Gutt (2000: 37), following Sperber & Wilson (1986:

226-237)226-237)

Extent of resemblance?Extent of resemblance?

““only in those respects that can be only in those respects that can be expected to make it adequately expected to make it adequately relevant to the receptor language relevant to the receptor language audience”audience”

““It should be expressed in such a It should be expressed in such a manner that it yields the intended manner that it yields the intended interpretation without putting the interpretation without putting the audience to unnecessary processing audience to unnecessary processing effort”effort”

– Gutt (2000: 107)Gutt (2000: 107)

Problem:Problem:

How can monolingual participants How can monolingual participants know the know the extentextent of the interpretive of the interpretive resemblance that has been applied resemblance that has been applied by the translator?by the translator?

IO IO How is it that you’re still in this country?How is it that you’re still in this country?

INT (in Polish) INT (in Polish) Why are you still here?Why are you still here?

IMM (in Polish) IMM (in Polish) Because I wanted to go to school Because I wanted to go to school here, till now I've managed to, I had to earn here, till now I've managed to, I had to earn money to go to schoolmoney to go to school because school is quite because school is quite expensive.expensive.

INT (in English) I had to, my intention was to INT (in English) I had to, my intention was to attend an English course here, but I didn't attend an English course here, but I didn't have enough money, so I had to earn have enough money, so I had to earn the the money in order to pay for the course. money in order to pay for the course.

……

IMM (in Polish) IMM (in Polish) And I still go to school, I did go And I still go to school, I did go to school once a week, unfortunately.to school once a week, unfortunately.

INT (in English) And I have been attending an INT (in English) And I have been attending an English course once a week.English course once a week.

IOIO What were you doing before that in What were you doing before that in Poland?Poland?

INT (in Polish) INT (in Polish) And what were you doing in And what were you doing in Poland before coming here to England?Poland before coming here to England?

IMM (in Polish) IMM (in Polish) I was learning at schoolI was learning at school..

INT (in Polish)INT (in Polish) As a student?As a student?

IMM (in Polish)IMM (in Polish) No, a car mechanic. No, a car mechanic.

INT (in English) Right, he was attending a INT (in English) Right, he was attending a course, a car mechanics course.course, a car mechanics course.

IO (English)IO (English) What did they say?What did they say?

INTINT (Polish)(Polish)And what did they say?And what did they say?

IMMIMM (Polish)(Polish)That we’ll travel to work in That we’ll travel to work in England.England.

INT (Polish)INT (Polish)What does it mean ‘we’ll travel’? What does it mean ‘we’ll travel’? Because there were more?Because there were more?

IMMIMM (Polish)(Polish)YesYes

INTINT (English) Yes, they said they’d go and (English) Yes, they said they’d go and work in England because apparently he work in England because apparently he wasn’t the only one, there were several wasn’t the only one, there were several people involved.people involved.

ConclusionsConclusions

Interpreter motivated by RelevanceInterpreter motivated by Relevance

Tends to be receiver-oriented (Gutt’s Tends to be receiver-oriented (Gutt’s guideline)guideline)

Common ground between participants Common ground between participants may be reduced.may be reduced.