Kylie Martin

Communication Across Cultures: Interpreting and translating

I nterpreting and translating involves rendering information and ideas from one language to another. Interpreters are concerned with the spoken word. Translators are concerned with the written word. TYPES OF INTERPRETING There are three main types of interpreting used in the world: Simultaneous interpreting , typically used at international conferences where personal headphones are used, and interpreting is conducted into numbers of languages simultaneously, each with a different interpreter. In such circumstances, delegates often present prepared papers and these can sometimes be made available to the interpreters ahead of time to assist in their preparation. However this is not always the case. Simultaneous translation is not used very often in Australia. Chuchotage , a term used to refer to the kind of interpretation where an interpreter ‘whispers’ simultaneous translation to a single client. Sequential translation , the type of translation most widely used for community and business purposes. In all types of interpreting, the interpreter is expected to represent what the speaker says and to speak in the first person, for example I went to the city , not He says that he went to the city . PRIMACY OF THE MOTHER TONGUE Best practice suggests that translators and interpreters should preferably translate into their mother tongue. For example, if you want something translated from English to Mandarin, a native speaker of Mandarin would probably be better for the job, whereas if you wanted something translated from Mandarin to English a native English speaker would probably be better; all other things being equal.

Communication Across Cultures: Towards successful intercultural communication

R esearch involving participants from different cultures, who are engaged in natural communication in a language that is not a first language to any of the speakers, shows that individuals can develop ways to construct common ground and avoid many of the problems inherent in intercultural communication. In this chapter we report the findings of two research studies (Bowe 1995; Neil 1996) conducted in multicultural workplaces in Australia that show that individuals engaged in intercultural communication can draw on creative discourse strategies to circumvent some aspects of potential miscommunication. We also briefly discuss the Giles (1977:322) notion of accommodation , and Sharifians notion of conceptual renegotiation (Sharifian forthcoming); two further perspectives which seek to explain how individuals adapt to the challenges of intercultural communication. THE ELABORATION OF REPETITION AS A CREATIVE STRATEGY TO HELP AVOID MISCOMMUNICATION Using similar methodology to that developed by Clyne (1994), Heather Bowe examined discourse between migrant workers in the automotive industry. This study, conducted mainly on the factory floor, used tape-recorded samples of communication between supervisors and operators who were almost all immigrants to Australia. Spoken communication between supervisors and operators typically involves messages concerning health and safety in the factory, productivity, quality control, training and staff organisation, as well as general communication of a more personal nature which functions to maintain rapport. In many cases, supervisors are carrying out tasks originating from production meetings and quality control reports.

Communication Across Cultures: Speech acts and politeness across cultures

I n this chapter we build on the ideas presented in Chapters 2 and 3 and examine some of the growing body of research on the inter-relatedness between direct and indirect speech acts and politeness in different cultural contexts . One approach to research in this area involves the comparison of speech acts used by native speakers of one language with those used by native speakers of other languages in a range of parallel contexts. The CCSARP project, which examined Cross-Cultural Speech Act Realization Patterns in eight languages (Blum-Kulka, House & Kasper 1989) is a major study of this kind and is based on discourse completion tests conducted with native speakers of each language. This approach is exemplified below from parts of the CCSARP project, and also research conducted by Suszczynska (1999). Other research has involved language learners acquiring a second language, and has examined the extent to which their use of the second language may contain pragmatic features of their first language, or failure to comprehend pragmatic features of the second language. This area of research, which began as a branch of second language research, now forms part of the growing body of research known as Interlanguage Pragmatics (e.g. Kasper & Blum-Kulka 1993; Trosborg 1994). The terms Intercultural Pragmatics and Intercultural Communication are being increasingly used to refer to both research involving native speakers and competent second language users, and also research involving participants from different cultures engaged in natural intercultural communication in a language that is not a first language to any of the speakers.

Communication Across Cultures: The analysis of conversation

G reetings and leave-takings are aspects of conversation that we may never think about because they are such an integral part of our everyday lives, yet they can be quite complex. In this chapter we will look at some of the complexity inherent in greetings and leave-takings, and examine some cultural variation. Humour and laughter are widely used to establish and maintain rapport, yet these are also aspects of communication which are often not contemplated. Some of the similarities and differences between cultures in the way they incorporate humour and laughter will be discussed in this chapter. We will begin by examining some of the features of turn-taking in conversation, drawing on the field of research known as Conversational Analysis and provide some examples of how turn-taking can be managed by speakers from different cultures. TURN-TAKING IN CONVERSATION Sacks, Schegloff and Jefferson (1974), in their seminal work on turn-taking, observed the following three key features in the organisation of turn-taking in conversation: one party talks at a time transitions are finely coordinated for speaker change utterances are constructed in such a way as to show coordination of turn transfer and speakership. Sacks, Schegloff and Jefferson identified adjacency pairs as a key feature of conversation. They pointed out that most conversation is composed of pairs of utterances, with the prototypical example being a question–answer sequence. There is a sense in which the question ‘requires’ the answer as the second part of the adjacency pair.

Communication Across Cultures: Naming and addressing: Expressing deference, respect, and solidarity

F irst names, middle names, last names, nicknames, pronouns and other terms of address all identify individuals in a society. Such address forms can contribute to a persons sense of identity and can characterise ‘an individuals position in his family and in society at large; it defines his social personality’ (Mauss 1974:134). Kinship and other terms indicating relationships are also important as terms of address in certain cultures. Appel and Muysken (1987:13) suggest that personal identity can be defined as ‘the self feeling in relation to the group’. Braun (1988) outlines some basic concepts in his theory of terms of address. According to Braun, address denotes a speakers linguistic reference to his/her collocutors (1988:7). Words and phrases such as second-person pronouns, names, kinship terms and titles, reflect the relationship between the individual and their social context. Braun (1988:13) suggests that: … address behavior is the way individual speakers or groups of speakers use the repertory of address variants available to them. From a sociolinguistic point of view, address behavior is meaningful whenever speakers have to choose between several variants … Address behavior is further influenced by a speakers social and linguistic background. PRONOUNS OF ADDRESS Pronouns are markers of personal identity in relation to the group. Thus, pronouns of address serve to identify individuals within a given society and their daily usage reinforces personal and social identity .