A Dutch discourse marker in interpreter-mediated police interviewing with drafting: A corpus-based approach to dialogue interpreting
Abstract
This study systematically analyses the use of a Dutch discourse marker (dus) by nine interpreters assisting in 12 police interviews. It is an attempt to approach dialogue interpreting with the analytical framework of corpus-based linguistics and a data collection that can stand the comparison with existing corpora of mostly simultaneous interpreting. In terms of frequencies, the results show that interpreters do not seem to divert from general usage patterns for spoken Dutch. However, their use of dus is mostly disconnected from the speech they are interpreting. While explicitation seems to be at play in a certain number of cases, the bulk of instances serves interaction coordination purposes. A substantial number of instances with a filler function are also found, where interpreters struggle to understand the source speech or to articulate their interpretation. Finally, some interesting cases of so-called discursive control enforced by dus are observed, further confirming the special relationship interpreting holds with drafting of written records during the interview.
Downloads
Metrics
References
Ainsworth, Janet. 2018. Anatomy of a false confession: The linguistic and pyschological characteristics of a false confession. In Girolamo Tessuto, Vhijay Bhatia and Jan Engberg eds. Frameworks for Discursive Actions and Practices of the Law. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars, 23–39.
Amon, Marri. 2006. Cohérence dans le discours: Quelques remarques sur les difficultés et les stratégies des interprètes. In Kjersti Fløttum ed. Phénomènes Linguistiques et Genres Discursifs. Rodskild University: Rodskild University Digital Archive. http://ojs.ruc.dk/index.php/congreso/article/download/5265/2868
Angelelli, Claudia. 2017. Can ethnographic findings become corpus-studies data? A researcher’s ethical, practical and scientific dilemmas. The Interpreters’ Newsletter 22: 1–16.
Angermeyer, Philipp S. 2015. ‘Speak English or what?’: Codeswitching and Interpreter Use in New York City Small Claims Court. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Anthony, Laurence. 2014. AntConc (Version 3.2.4). Tokyo: Waseda University. https://www.laurenceanthony.net
Bakti, Mária and Judit Bóna. 2014. Source language-related erroneous stress placement in the target language output of simultaneous interpreters. Interpreting 16/1: 34–48.
Baraldi, Claudio and Laura Gavioli. 2012. Introduction: Understanding coordination in interpreter-mediated interaction. In Claudio Baraldi and Laura Gavioli eds. Coordinating Participation in Dialogue Interpreting. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1–22.
Bastin, Georges. 2003. Les marqueurs de cohérence en interprétation consecutive. The Interpreters’ Newsletter 12: 176–187.
Bendazzoli, Claudio. 2017. Editorial: A dialogue on dialogue interpreting (DI) corpora. The Interpreters’ Newsletter 22: VII–XVII.
Berk-Seligson, Susan. 1990. The Bilingual Courtroom. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Biber, Douglas. 1993. Representativeness in corpus design. Literary and Linguistic Computing 8/4: 243–257.
Blakemore, Diane and Fabrizio Gallai. 2014. Discourse markers in free indirect style and interpreting. Journal of Pragmatics 60: 106–120.
Buysse, Lieven. 2017. English so and Dutch dus in a parallel corpus: An investigation into their mutual translatability. In Karin Aijmer and Diana Lewis eds. Contrastive Analysis of Discourse-pragmatic Aspects of Linguistic Genres. Cham: Springer, 33–60.
Crystal, David. 1995 The Cambridge Encyclopaedia of the English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Davitti, Elena. 2013. Dialogue interpreting as intercultural mediation: Interpreters’ use of upgrading moves in parent-teacher meetings. Interpreting 15/2: 168–199.
Defrancq, Bart. 2016. Well, interpreters… A corpus-based study of a pragmatic particle used by simultaneous interpreters. In Gloria Corpas Pastor and Miriam Seghiri Dominguez eds. Corpus-based Approaches to Translation and Interpreting: From Theory to Applications. Bern: Peter Lang, 105–128.
Defrancq, Bart and Sofie Verliefde. 2018. Interpreter-mediated drafting of written records in police interviews: A case study. Target 30/2: 212–239.
Defrancq, Bart and Camille Collard. 2019. Using data from simultaneous interpreting in contrastive linguistics. In Renata Enghels, Bart Defrancq and Marlies Jansegers eds. New Approaches to Contrastive Linguistics: Empirical and Methodological Challenges. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 159–182.
Defrancq, Bart, Koen Plevoets and Cédric Magnifico. 2015. Connective markers in interpreting and translation: Where do they come from? In Jesus Romero Trillo ed. Corpus Pragmatics in Translation and Contrastive Studies. Singapore: Springer, 195–222.
Degand, Liesbeth. 2001. Form and Function of Causation: A Theoretical and Empirical Investigation of Causal Constructions in Dutch. Leuven: Uitgeverij Peeters.
Degand, Liesbeth. 2011. Connectieven in de rechterperiferie: Een contrastieve analyse van dus en donc in gesproken taal. Nederlandse Taalkunde 16/3: 333–348.
Degand, Liesbeth and Geertje van Bergen. 2018. Discourse markers as turn transition devices: Evidence from speech and instant messaging. Discourse Processes 55/1: 47–71.
Delizée, Anne and Christine Michaux. 2019. The negotiation of meaning in dialogue interpreting: On the effects of the verbalization of interpreters’ inferences. Translation, Cognition and Behavior 2/2: 263–382.
Evers-Vermeul, Jacqueline. 2010. ‘Dus’ vooraan of in het midden? Over vorm-functierelaties in het gebruik van connectieven. Nederlandse Taalkunde 15: 149–175.
Filipović, Luna. 2022. The tale of two countries: Police interpreting in the UK vs. in the US. Interpreting 24/2: 254–278.
Gallai, Fabrizio. 2013. Understanding Discourse Markers in Interpreter-mediated Police Interviews. Salford: University of Salford dissertation.
Gallai, Fabrizio. 2017. Pragmatic competence and interpreter-mediated police investigative interviews. The Translator 23/2: 177–196.
Gamal, Muhammad. 2017. Police interpreting: The facts sheet. Semiotica 216: 297–316.
Gao, Fei and Binhua Wang. 2017. A multimodal corpus approach to dialogue interpreting studies in the Chinese context: Towards a multi-layer analytic framework. The Interpreters’ Newsletter 22: 17–38.
Gavioli, Laura and Claudio Baraldi. 2011. Interpreter-mediated interaction in healthcare and legal settings: Talk organization, context and the achievement of intercultural communication. Interpreting 13/2: 205–233.
Götz, Andrea. 2020. Discourse markers and connectives in interpreted Hungarian discourse: A corpus-based investigation of discourse properties and their interdependence. Beszédtudomány – Speech Science 2020: 259–284.
Gumul, Ewa and Magdalena Bartłomiejczyk. 2022. Interpreters’ explicitating styles: A corpus study of material from the European Parliament. Interpreting 24/2: 164–191.
Hale, Sandra. 2004. The Discourse of Court Interpreting. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Halliday, Michael. 1985. An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Arnold.
Jacobsen, Bente. 2002. Pragmatic Meaning in Court Interpreting: An Empirical Study of Additions in Consecutively Interpreted Question-Answer Dialogues. Aarhus: Aarhus School of Business dissertation.
Jefferson, Gail. 2004. A glossary of transcript symbols. In Gene Lerner ed. Conversation Analysis: Studies from the First Generation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 13–31.
Komter, Martha. 2005. Understanding problems in an interpreter-mediated police interrogation. In Stacy Burns ed. Ethnographies of Law and Social Control. Bingley: Emerald, 203–224.
Komter, Martha. 2006. From talk to text: The interactional construction of a police record. Research on Language and Social Interaction 39/3: 201–228.
Komter, Martha. 2022. Institutional and academic transcripts of police interrogations. Frontiers in Communication 7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2022.797145
Kredens, Krzysztof. 2017. Making sense of adversarial interpreting. Language and Law/Linguagem e Direito 4/1: 17–33.
Krouglov, Alex. 1999. Police interpreting. Politeness and sociocultural context. The Translator 5/2: 285–302.
Lederer, Marianne. 1980. La Traduction Simultanée: Fondement Théoriques. Lille: Université de Lille.
Liu, Xin and Sandra Hale. 2017. Facework strategies in interpreter-mediated cross-examinations: A corpus-assisted approach. The Interpreters’ Newsletter 22: 57–78.
Määttä, Simo. 2017. English as a Lingua Franca in telephone interpreting: Representations and linguistic justice. The Interpreters’ Newsletter 22: 39–56.
Mason, Marianne. 2008. Courtroom Interpreting. Lanham: University Press of America.
McEnery, Tony and Andrew Wilson. 1996. Corpus Linguistics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Mead, Peter. 2012. Consecutive interpreting at a literature festival. In Cynthia Kellett-Bidoli ed. Interpreting across Genres: Multiple Research Perspectives. Trieste: University of Trieste, 171–183.
Monteoliva-García, Eloisa. 2017. The Collaborative Construction of the Stand-by Mode of Interpreting in Police Interviews with Suspects. Edinburgh: Heriot-Watt University dissertation.
Nakane, Ikuko. 2014. Interpreter-mediated Police Interviews: A Discourse-pragmatic Approach. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Oostdijk, Nelleke. 2000. The Spoken Dutch Corpus: Overview and first evaluation. In Maria Gravilidou, George Carayanni, Stella Markantonatou, Stelios Piperidis and Gregory Stainhaouer eds. Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation. Paris: ELRA Language Resources Assocation, 887–893.
Pander Maat, Henk and Liesbeth Degand. 2001. Scaling causal relations and connectives in terms of speaker involvement. Cognitive Linguistics 12/3: 211–245.
Park, Joseph and Mary Bucholtz. 2009. Public transcripts: Entextualisation and linguistic representation in institutional contexts. Text & Talk 29/5: 485–502.
Pöchhacker, Franz and Waltraub Kolb. 2009. Interpreting for the record: A case study of asylum review hearings. In Sandra Hale, Uldis Ozolins and Ludmila Stern eds. Quality in Interpreting – A Shared Responsibility. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 119–134.
RusseLl, Sonia. 2001. ‘Let me put it simply…’: The case for a standard translation of the police caution and its explanation. Forensic Linguistics 7/1: 26–48.
Shlesinger, Miriam. 1995. Shifts in cohesion in simultaneous interpreting. The Translator 1/2: 193–214.
Shlesinger, Miriam. 1998. Corpus-based interpreting studies as an offshoot of corpus-based translation studies. Meta 43/4: 486–493.
Sinclair, John. 2005. Corpus and text – Basic principles. In Martin Wynne ed. Developing Linguistic Corpora: A Guide to Good Practice. Oxford: Oxbow Books, 1–16.
Smets, Lotte and Paul Ponsaers. 2011. Het proces-verbaal van een verdachtenverhoor: een bron van informatie? Diverse formats van geschreven communicatie tussen politie en parket. Cahiers Politiestudies 21/4: 123–144.
Spinzi, Cinzia. 2017. Using corpus linguistics as a research and training tool for Public Service Interpreting (PSI) in the legal sector. The Interpreters’ Newsletter 22: 79–100.
Stukker, Ninne, Ted Sanders and Arie Verhagen. 2009. Categories of subjectivity in Dutch causal connectives: A usage-based analysis. In Ted Sanders and Eve Sweetser eds. Causal Categories in Discourse and Cognition. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 119–171.
Tipton, Rebecca. 2021. ‘Yes I understand’: Language choice, question formation and code-switching in interpreter-mediated police interviews with victim-survivors of domestic abuse. Police Practice and Research 22/1: 1058–1076.
Van Besien, Fred. 1999. Anticipation in simultaneous interpreting. Meta 44/2: 250–259.
Verliefde, Sofie. 2022. Interpreting-mediated Police Interviewing cum Drafting. Ghent: Ghent University dissertation.
Verliefde, Sofie and Bart Defrancq. 2022. Interpreter-mediated access to the written record in police interviews. Perspectives 31: 519–547
Wadensjö, Cecilia. 1998. Interpreting as Interaction. London: Longman.
Copyright (c) 2023 Research in Corpus Linguistics
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
