Cover not available
Article published In:
FORUM
Vol. 1:2 (2003) ► pp.103–122

Discourse Analysis of Speeches Through Pragmatic Perspectives

Understanding Functional Constraints in Communication for Conference Interpretation

| Hansei University |
Keywords: speech, communicative activities, pragmatic approach, functional analysis
Published online: 1 October 2003
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/forum.1.2.05kim
References
Angelelli, C.
(2000) Interpretation as a communicative event: A look through Hymes’ lenses. Meta, 451, 580–592. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Austin, J. L.
(1962) How to do things with words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Brown, H. D.
(1994) Principles of language learning and teaching. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice HallGoogle Scholar
Okolo, B. A.
(1996) Incongruency in discourse: A violation of the “cooperative principle”? Meta, 411, 378–388. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dore, J.
(1979) Conversational acts and the acquisition of language. In E. Ochs & B. Schieffelin (Eds.), Developing pragmatics (pp. 347–360). NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Duranti, A. & Goodwin, C.
(1992) Rethinking context: Language as an interactive phenomenon. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gauker, C.
(1998) What is a context of utterance? Philosophical Studies 91, 149–172. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gazdar, G.
(1981) Speech act assignment. In Joshi, A. K., Webber, B. L., Sag, I.A. (Eds.), Elements of discourse understanding. pp. 64–83. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gentile, A.
(1991) The application of the theoretical constructs from a number of disciplines for the development of a methodology of teaching in interpreting and translating. Meta, 361, 344–351. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Glassgold, P.
(1987) Translation: Culture’s driving wedge. Translation Review, 231, 18–21. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gile, D.
(1991) The processing capacity issues in conference interpreting. Babel, 37-11, 15–27. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1995) Basic concepts and models for interpreter and translator training. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goffman, E.
(1971) Relations in public. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Grice, H. P.
(1975) Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J. L. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and semantics. Vol. 31, speech acts. pp. 41–58. NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Halliday, M.
(1973) Explorations in the functions of language. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Hall, J. K.
(1995) (Re)creating our worlds with words: A sociohistorical perspective of face-to-face interaction. Applied Linguistics. 21, 206–232. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hatch, E.
(1978) Discourse analysis and second language acquisition. Rowley, MA: Newbury House Publishers.Google Scholar
Hymes, D.
(1972) On communicative competence. In J. B. Pride & J. Holmes (Eds.), Sociolinguistics. pp. 269–293. UK: Watson & Viney Ltd.Google Scholar
(1974) Foundations in sociolinguistics: An ethnographic approach. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Kalina, S.
(1992) Discourse processing and interpreting strategies-An approach to the teaching of interpreting. In C. Dollerup & A. Loddegaard (Eds.), Teaching translation and interpreting-Training, talent and experience. Papers from the first language international conference, Elsinore, Denmark, 31 st May-2 nd June, 1991, Amsterdam, Benjamins (pp. 251–257). DOI logo
Kohn, K.
(1990) Translation as conflict. In P. H. Nelde (Ed.), conflict ABLA papers(Association Belge de linguistique appliquee). No. 14. (pp. 105–113).Google Scholar
Kohn, K. & Kalina, S.
(1996) The strategic dimension of interpreting. Meta, 411, 118–138. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lee, T. H.
(2002) Ear voice span in English into Korean simultaneous interpretation. Meta, 471, 596–606. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levinson, S.
(1983) Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Linell, P.
(1997) Interpreting a s communication. In Gambier, Gile & Taylor (Eds.), Conference interpreting: Current trends in research. Proceedings of the international conference on interpreting: What do we know and how? Turku, Finland, August, 25-27, DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mey, J. L.
(2003) Context and (dis) ambiguity: A pragmatic view. Journal of Pragmatics.351, 331–347. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nida, E.
(1976) A framework for the analysis and evaluation of theories of translation. In R. W. Brislin (Ed.), Translation, applications and research (pp. 47–91). NY: Gardner Press.Google Scholar
Okolo, B. A.
(1996) Incongruency in discourse: A violation of the “cooperative principle”? Meta, XLI, 3, 378–388. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pratt, M. L.
(1977) Toward a speech act theory of literary discourse. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University press.Google Scholar
Rohler, L. E. & Cook, R.
(1993) Great speeches for criticism and analysis. Greenwood, IN: Alistair Press.Google Scholar
Roy, C.
(1989) A sociolinguistic analysis of the interpreter’s role in the turn exchanges of an interpreted event. Unpublished Ph. D. Dissertation. Georgetown University, Washington, D. C.Google Scholar
Savignon, S.
(1983) Communicative competence: Theory and classroom practice. MA: Addison WesleyGoogle Scholar
Sbisa, M.
(2002) Speech acts in context. Language & Communication. 221, 421–436. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Seleskovitch, D.
(1978) Interpreting for international conferences. NY: Pen and Booth.Google Scholar
Smith, D. R. & Williamson, L. K.
(1977) Interpersonal Communication. Iowa: William C. Brown & Company Publishers.Google Scholar
Stalnaker, R.
(1999) Context and content. Oxford: Oxford University press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thomas, J.
(1995) Meaning in interaction: An introduction to pragmatics. London: LongmanGoogle Scholar
Van EK, J. A. & Alexander, L. G.
(1975) Threshold level English. Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Yule, G.
(1998) Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar