Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

A corpus-driven multi-dimensional analysis of interpreted discourses in political settings

  • Bing ZOU*
  • , Binhua WANG
  • *Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Book Chapters | Papers in Conference ProceedingsBook ChapterResearchpeer-review

Abstract

The study explores typical linguistic features of interpreted discourses in political settings. Previous studies have focused on norms in interpreting, interpreting strategies, and translation universals, but there is a lack of investigation about linguistic features that are typical of interpreted discourses and that can make interpreted discourses distinct from non-interpreted discourses. In order to identify typical features of interpreted political discourses, the study employed the corpus-driven multi-dimensional approach proposed by Douglas Biber (1988) in analysing a comparable interpreting corpus of about 400,000 English words. The corpus was POS-tagged by Treetagger and annotated with 67 linguistic features. Three factors and dimensions were found to be of much help to differentiate oral from literate political discourses, interpreted from non-interpreted political discourses, and planned from unplanned political discourses. In comparison with Biber’s study, the genres and text types that the four types of political discourses are closest to were identified. It was found that the interpreted political discourses are more likely to be categorised into the genre of professional letters rather than oral speeches.
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationEmpirical Studies of Translation and Interpreting: The Post-Structuralist Approach: The Post-Structuralist Approach
EditorsCaiwen WANG, Binghan ZHENG
PublisherTaylor and Francis AS
Chapter8
Pages156-178
Number of pages23
Edition1
ISBN (Electronic)9781000389814
ISBN (Print)9780367856106
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2021
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'A corpus-driven multi-dimensional analysis of interpreted discourses in political settings'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this