TY - JOUR
T1 - But, but me no buts
T2 - A Corpus-Driven Comparison of Contrastive Markers in Interpreted and Non-Interpreted Policy Speeches in English
AU - Pan, Jun
N1 - The study also forms a pilot study for the project under the support of the General Research Scheme (GRF) of the Research Grants Council (12623122). The corpora data employed in the study was developed under the support of the Early Career Scheme (ECS) of the Research Grants Council (22608716), the Digital Scholarship Grant of the Hong Kong Baptist University; and the Faculty Research Grant of the Hong Kong Baptist University (FRG2/17-18/046).
PY - 2023/3
Y1 - 2023/3
N2 - The rendition of political speeches and political interpreting usually involves the employment of high-level pragmatic competence. In this regard, the appropriate use and rendition of contrastive markers (CMs), i.e., the linguistic indicator that may signal propositions unfavourable or contrastive to people’s presuppositions, form part of an important pragmatic strategy. Nevertheless, little empirical evidence has been provided as to how CMs are and should be rendered in political speeches and their interpreting. This study, therefore, aims to investigate and compare the employment of two frequently used CMs, however and but, in interpreted and non-interpreted policy speeches in English. Datasets in the Chinese/English Political Interpreting Corpus (CEPIC), consisting of speeches delivered by top government officials in or interpreted into English, were employed for the purpose of the study. Findings of the study suggest that the use of the two CMs displays different patterns in interpreter speeches and politician speeches, and in speeches delivered in a monologue mode and a dialogue mode. The pragmatic implications and possible triggers were further explored through examining the top collocates of the CMs. Findings of the study shed new light on issues relating to representativeness and sanction, or authority and acceptability of political speeches.
AB - The rendition of political speeches and political interpreting usually involves the employment of high-level pragmatic competence. In this regard, the appropriate use and rendition of contrastive markers (CMs), i.e., the linguistic indicator that may signal propositions unfavourable or contrastive to people’s presuppositions, form part of an important pragmatic strategy. Nevertheless, little empirical evidence has been provided as to how CMs are and should be rendered in political speeches and their interpreting. This study, therefore, aims to investigate and compare the employment of two frequently used CMs, however and but, in interpreted and non-interpreted policy speeches in English. Datasets in the Chinese/English Political Interpreting Corpus (CEPIC), consisting of speeches delivered by top government officials in or interpreted into English, were employed for the purpose of the study. Findings of the study suggest that the use of the two CMs displays different patterns in interpreter speeches and politician speeches, and in speeches delivered in a monologue mode and a dialogue mode. The pragmatic implications and possible triggers were further explored through examining the top collocates of the CMs. Findings of the study shed new light on issues relating to representativeness and sanction, or authority and acceptability of political speeches.
UR - https://library.hkbu.edu.hk/record/?ID=alma991025919221503409&T=PC
M3 - Journal article
SN - 1027-8559
VL - 107
SP - 41
EP - 77
JO - Translation Quarterly
JF - Translation Quarterly
ER -