This allows us to reconcile the hearer's impression that the interpreter's voice is suppressed with research in interpreting studies which shows that interpreters are in reality both visible and active co-participants in these exchanges.Īuditory neural myelination (ANM) as evaluated by auditory brainstem evoked response (ABR) during the neonatal period has been used as a surrogate outcome for long-term neurodevelopment. We apply Blakemore's (2010) account of discourse markers in FIS to data from interpreter mediated police interviews where renditions include discourse markers added by the interpreter to develop an alternative relevance theoretic account. We ask whether this approach can accommodate FIS representations and interpreters’ renditions which contain perspective dependent discourse markers, and in particular whether it captures the role played by these expressions in encouraging the reader/hearer to think that s/he has direct access to the thoughts of fictional characters/original speakers. Within relevance theory, it has been argued that FIS and interpreting are cases of attributive use: FIS representations and interpreters’ renditions are representations of the author's/interpreter's thoughts about attributed thoughts.
This paper contributes to the discussion of how free indirect style (FIS) and interpreter's renditions are accommodated in a relevance theoretic approach to communication. Thus, the interpreter's ‘interference’ may (paradoxically) contribute to the impression of the interpreter's invisibility required by public institutions. While the addition of discourse markers might be regarded as evidence for a mediating interpreter, and hence as contrary to public authorities’ Codes of conduct, such additions are justified by the aim of providing a rendition that achieves relevance by increasing the sense of mutuality between hearer and original speaker. In particular, renditions may include discourse markers not found in the original but which are understood as attributed to the original speaker. My data from interpreter-mediated police interviews shows that interpreting practice is variable with respect to the inclusion of discourse markers. However, the role of discourse markers in the representation of a point of view that is not the interpreter's shows that this account must be modified in order to explain how interpreters suppress their voices to maintain an impression of mutuality between hearer and original speaker.
Interpreting is analysed within relevance theory as a special case of attributive use (cf.
In this paper, I apply Blakemore, 2010, Blakemore, 2011 relevance-theoretic analysis of the role of discourse markers in free indirect thought representations to the use of similar expressions by police interpreters.
0 kommentar(er)
