Home Translating like a conduit? A sociosemiotic analysis of modality in Chinese government press conference interpreting
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Translating like a conduit? A sociosemiotic analysis of modality in Chinese government press conference interpreting

  • Rongbo Fu EMAIL logo
Published/Copyright: February 28, 2018

Abstract

This paper is a corpus-based sociosemiotic inquiry into the translation of linguistic modality in government press conferences in the Chinese context, with an eye to its indication of interpreter’s identity. Viewing translation (including interpreting) as a process of social semiosis, the paper draws on theoretical insights from Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) and applies them to the analysis of modality in both English and Chinese – the language pair that concerns the present research. Results of the study show that, while modality distribution in the two languages are basically maintained at the same level, interchangeable uses between volitive and obligatory subtypes of modality plus the general increase of modality value in interpreted vis-à-vis source speeches indicate that interpreters are not deprived of mediating latitude which is believed to contradict their prescriptive stereotypes. Also, exemplary parallel concordance analysis of modality reveals that interpreters adopt various solutions to translating the same modal element. Further, the paper proposes a taxonomy for the analysis of modality shifts in interpreter-mediated encounters, with illustrative cases of each subclass examined and discussed. The findings are expected to shed light on the interpreter’s identity in political institutional settings.

Funding statement: K.C.Wong Magna Fund in Ningbo University, The Humanities and Social Sciences Project of the Ministry of Education of the People’s Republic of China, (Grant/Award Number: 16YJC740016).

References

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. Stanford University Unpublished PhD dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Chandler, D. 2002. Semiotics: The basics. London: Routledge.10.4324/9780203166277Search in Google Scholar

Danielsson, P. 2003. Automatic extraction of meaningful units from corpora. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 8(1). 109–127.10.1075/ijcl.8.1.06danSearch in Google Scholar

Drennan, G. & L. Swartz. 1999. A concept over-burdened: Institutional roles for psychiatric interpreters in post-apartheid South Africa. Interpreting 4(2). 169–198.10.1075/intp.4.2.03dreSearch in Google Scholar

Eco, U. 1976. A theory of semiotics. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.10.1007/978-1-349-15849-2Search in Google Scholar

Eggins, S. 2005. An introduction to systemic functional linguistics. London: Continuum.Search in Google Scholar

Fu, R. B. 2015. Negotiating interpersonal relations in Chinese-English interpreting for publicity: Modality usage as a case in point. Xiamen University Unpublished PhD dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Gorlée, D. 1994. Semiotics and the problem of translation. Amsterdam: Rodopi.10.1163/9789004454750Search in Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. 1978. Language as social semiotic: The social interpretation of language and meaning. London: Arnold.Search in Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. 1994. An introduction to functional grammar, 2nd edn. London: Arnold.Search in Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. 2001. Literacy and linguistics: Relationships between spoken and written language. In A. Burns & C. Coffin (eds.), Analyzing English in a global context: A reader. 181–193. London: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. & R. Hasan. 1989. Language, context, and text: Aspects of language in a social semiotic perspective, 2nd edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K & C. M. I. M. Matthiessen. 2004. An introduction to functional grammar, 3rd edn. London: Arnold.Search in Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. & E. McDonald. 2004. Metafunctional profile of the grammar of Chinese. In A. Caffarel, J. R. Martin & C. M. I. M. Matthiessen (eds.), Language typology: A functional perspective, 305–396. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/cilt.253.08halSearch in Google Scholar

Hodge, R. & G. Kress. 1988. Social semiotics. Cambridge: Polity Press.Search in Google Scholar

Jesperson, O. 1924. The philosophy of grammar. London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd.Search in Google Scholar

Kaufert, J. M. & W. W. Koolage. 1984. Role conflict among “culture brokers”: The experience of native Canadian medical interpreters. Social Science & Medicine 18(3). 283–286.10.1016/0277-9536(84)90092-3Search in Google Scholar

Kenny, D. 2011. Translation unit and corpora. In A. Kruger, K. Wallmarch & J. Munday (eds.), Corpus-based translation studies: Research and applications, 76–102. London & New York: Continuum.Search in Google Scholar

Klaudy, K. 2001. Explicitation. In M. Baker (ed.), Routledge encyclopedia of translation studies, 80–84. London & New York: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

Lian, S. N. 2002. Contrastive studies of English and Chinese, 2nd edn. Beijing: Higher Education Press.Search in Google Scholar

Lü, S. X. 1979. On grammatical analysis of Chinese. Beijing: The Commercial Press.Search in Google Scholar

Lyons, J. 1977. Semantics (Vol. 1 & Vol. 2). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Ma, L. Y. & X. K. Li. 2011. Public diplomacy at early stage. http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/cndy/2011–03/03/content_12106167.htm (accessed 20 December 2015).Search in Google Scholar

Ma, Q. Z. 1992. The Chinese verb and verbal constructions. Beijing: Beijing Language University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Newmark, P. 1988. A textbook of translation. Hertfordshire: Prentice Hall International.Search in Google Scholar

Nida, E. A. 1993. Language, culture, and translating. Shanghai: Shanghai Education Press.Search in Google Scholar

Nuyts, J. 2001. Epistemic modality, language, and conceptualization. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/hcp.5Search in Google Scholar

Oakes, M. P. 2012. Describing a translational corpus. In M. P. Oakes & M. Ji (eds.), Quantitative methods in corpus-based translation studies, 115–148. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/scl.51.05oakSearch in Google Scholar

Palmer, F. R. 1986. Mood and modality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Peng, L. Z. 2007. A study of modality in modern Chinese. Beijing: China Social Sciences Press.Search in Google Scholar

Peng, X. W. 2000. A comprehensive comparison between English and Chinese texts. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.Search in Google Scholar

Perkins, M. R. 1983. Modal expressions in English. New Jersey: ABLEX.Search in Google Scholar

Pöchhacker, F. 2004. Introducing interpreting studies. London: Routledge.10.4324/9780203504802Search in Google Scholar

Quirk, R., S. Greenbaum, G. Leech & J. Svartvik (eds.). 1985. A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.Search in Google Scholar

Ren, X. P. 2000. Flexibility in diplomatic interpretation. Chinese Translators Journal 21(5). 40–44.Search in Google Scholar

Roy, C. 2002. The problem with definitions, descriptions, and the role metaphors of interpreters. In F. Pöchhacker & M. Shlesinger (eds.), The interpreting studies reader, 345–353. London: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

Saussure, F. 1983. Course in general linguistics, R. Harris (trans.). London: Duckworth.Search in Google Scholar

Setton, R. 2011. Corpus-based interpreting studies (CIS): Overview and prospects [A]. In A. Kruger, K. Wallmarch & J. Munday (eds.), Corpus-based translation studies: Research and applications, 33–75. London: Continuum.Search in Google Scholar

Shi, Y. H. 2007. What makes a good diplomatic interpreter? Chinese Translators Journal 28(3),57–60.Search in Google Scholar

Sun, D. J. 1996. The scope of Chinese auxiliary verbs. In M. Y. Hu (ed.), Investigating Chinese word classes, 286–307. Beijing: Beingjing Language and Culture University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Sweetser, E. 1990. From etymology to pragmatics: Metaphorical and cultural aspects of semantic structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511620904Search in Google Scholar

Toury, G. 1986. Translation: A cultural-semiotic Perspective. In T. A. Sebeok (ed.), Encyclopedic dictionary of semiotics, 1111–1124. New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar

Tymoczko, M. 2003. Ideology and the position of the translator: In what sense is a translator “in between”? In M. C. Pérez (ed.), Apropos of ideology: Translation studies on ideology – ideologies in translation studies, 181–201. Manchester: St. Jerome.Search in Google Scholar

Venuti, L. (ed.). 2000. The translation studies reader. London & New York: Routledge.10.4324/9780203446621Search in Google Scholar

Venuti, L. 2005. Local contingencies: Translation and national identities. In S. Bermann & M. Wood (eds.), Nation, language, and the ethics of translation, 177–202. Princeton: Princeton University Press.10.1515/9781400826681.177Search in Google Scholar

Wadensjö, C. 2002. The double role of a dialogue interpreter. In F. Pöchhacker & M. Shlesinger (eds.), The interpreting studies reader, 355–370. London: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

Xu, Y. N. 2000. Features of and requirements for diplomatic interpretation and translation. Chinese Translators Journal 21(3). 35–38.Search in Google Scholar

Yang, M. X. 2012. The principles and tactics on diplomatic translation: A Chinese perspective. Babel 58 (1). 1–18.10.1075/babel.58.1.01minSearch in Google Scholar

Zhang, Y. 2013. A study on language style of press spokesperson’s speeches. Beijing: China Social Sciences Press.Search in Google Scholar

Zhao, Q. Z. 2006. Promoting China’s image through the mechanism of press conferences. In X. M. Wang & X. G. Li (eds.), Fifteen lectures for government spokesperson, 33–44. Beijing: Tsinghua University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Zhu, D. X. 1982. An introduction to Chinese grammar. Beijing: The Commercial Press.Search in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2018-2-28
Published in Print: 2018-3-26

© 2018 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Downloaded on 24.9.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/sem-2015-0035/html
Scroll to top button