Between connectivity and modality

Johnen, Thomas; Meyer, Bernd

doi:10.1075/hsm.5.22joh

Cited by 8 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In actual practice, studies have shown that interpreters, both professional and novice, often deviate from the direct speech convention (Angermeyer 2009;Bot 2005;Cheung 2012;Dubslaff & Martinsen 2005;Johnen & Meyer 2007;Takimoto & Koshiba 2009;van de Mieroop 2012). It has even been argued that interpreter neutrality suffers less when reported speech is used, since the use of direct speech implies that the interpreter identifies more closely with what is being said (Wallmach 2002).…”

Section: Direct Speech Vs Reported Speechmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…In this case, disambiguating the authorship of the interpreted utterance can serve to emphasize its official status (Johnen & Meyer 2007). This authority-enhancing function may be particularly important if the interpreter finds it necessary to increase the illocutionary force of the rendition (Cheung 2012), reinforcing attribution (i.e., the message that the interpreted utterances originate with the speaker) and giving the addressees reason to evaluate them accordingly.…”

Section: Direct Speech Vs Reported Speechmentioning

confidence: 96%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The use of reported speech and the perceived neutrality of court interpreters

Cheung

2014

INTP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A mock trial, with two-way consecutive interpreting between Cantonese and English, was used to test perceptions of a court interpreter’s neutrality when interpreting into Cantonese in reported rather than direct speech. Monolingual Cantonese speakers played the part of witnesses using the interpreter. Three groups were created: a control group (16 participants), receiving interpretation of all English utterances into Cantonese in direct speech; and two experimental groups (17 participants each). The experimental groups received interpretation with occasional switches to reported speech. These were introduced by third person pronouns (e.g., “he said”) for one group (the ‘pronoun group’), and by professional titles (e.g., “the judge said”) for the other group (the ‘title group’). Participants afterwards completed a questionnaire, assessing neutrality and alignment on a 5-point Likert scale. The title group not only perceived the interpreter to be aligned with the English speakers, but also gave a significantly different assessment of neutrality from the control group. The pronoun group perceived the interpreter to be aligned with them, but did not differ significantly from the control group in their perception of neutrality. Use of pronouns or professional titles in the reporting clauses thus affected the interpreter’s perceived neutrality differently.

show abstract

Section: Direct Speech Vs Reported Speechmentioning

confidence: 94%

Section: Direct Speech Vs Reported Speechmentioning

confidence: 96%

The use of reported speech and the perceived neutrality of court interpreters

Cheung

2014

INTP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is used to perform social actions through which goal-directed behaviors such as request or refusal are performed [23]. Reported speech can assist conversational participants in establishing interactional coherence by connecting previous linguistic action with their respective actors [24]. The reported speech is expressed either directly or indirectly.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring (Im)Politeness Strategies in Indirect Reports in Persian across Genders

Nikpoo,

Allami

2024

Education Research International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Politeness and impoliteness strategies create a vital social practice in our daily and professional interactions. Being once an issue in the code of conduct protocols, (im)politeness nowadays marks an interdisciplinary scientific field. Regarding this importance, this study explored the politeness and impoliteness strategies used in changing direct speech to indirect speech among male and female Persian speakers. Eighty Iranian Persian speakers (36 males and 44 females) were given a discourse completion task. Brown and Levinson’s taxonomy of politeness strategies and Culpeper’s impoliteness taxonomy were used to analyze the sample. The findings revealed that the propositional content of a direct speech was maintained in the indirect speech in Persian with different attitudinal manners. The results also demonstrated a significant difference between the male and female participants in terms of impoliteness indirect strategies; however, there was no significant difference between them on the output strategies. Additionally, the results revealed that the most frequent politeness strategies used by Persian speakers included positive politeness, negative politeness, off-record, and bold on-record, respectively. The implications of the current research may lead to a deeper and greater understanding of the role of politeness strategies applied in language learning and teaching in EFL contexts.

show abstract

Reported Speech: A Clinical Pragmatic Perspective

Cummings

2016

Perspectives in Pragmatics, Philosophy &Amp; Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Between connectivity and modality

Cited by 8 publications

References 0 publications

The use of reported speech and the perceived neutrality of court interpreters

The use of reported speech and the perceived neutrality of court interpreters

Exploring (Im)Politeness Strategies in Indirect Reports in Persian across Genders

Reported Speech: A Clinical Pragmatic Perspective

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About