El uso de atenuantes retóricos en la interpretación telefónica en la asistencia en carretera
DOI
https://doi.org/10.25267/Pragmalinguistica.2022.i30.21Info
Authors
- Carmen Pena Díaz (ES) Universidad de Alcalá https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2329-756X
Abstract
Researchers studying communication (Barrow et al., 1989; Frey et al., 2000, among others) have proposed that communication competence enhances understanding and explanation of the interactive nature of communication. Of course, some linguistic behaviours are more effective than others when trying to convey meaning in an utterance and an example of this could be the frequent use of hedges in medical language. Hedges are markers of euphemisms which are used in both spoken and written language either intentionally or unintentionally to mitigate and lessen the impact of an utterance. They thus allow speakers and writers to communicate more accurately. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the use of hedges in telephone interpreting road assistance conversations to study whether it influences linguistic accuracy and communicative function.
The purpose of this paper is to analyze the use of hedges in telephone interpreting road assistance conversations to study whether it influences linguistic accuracy and communicative function.
Keywords
Downloads
How to Cite
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Carmen Pena Díaz
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
References
BABROW, A. S., KASCH, C. R. y FORD, L. A. (1998): “The many meanings of uncertainty in illness: toward a systematic accounting”, Health Communication, 10(1), pp.1-23. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327027hc1001_1
BROWN, P. y LEVINSON, C. (1987): Politeness: Some universals in language usage, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
CLEMEN, G. (1997): “The concept of hedging: Origins, approaches and definitions”, Markkanen, R. y Schröder, H. (eds.): Hedging and Discourse Approaches to the Analysis of a Pragmatic Phenomenon in Academic Texts, Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 235-248.
DEMIR, C. (2018): “Hedging and academic writing: An analysis of lexical hedges”, Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 14(4), pp. 74-92.
FRASER, B. (2010): “Pragmatic competence: The case of hedging”, Kaltenböck, G., Mihatsch, W. y Schneider, S. (eds.): New approaches to hedging, UK: Bingley, pp. 15-34.
FREY, L. R., BOTAN, C. H. y KREPS, G. L. (2000): Investigating Communication: An Introduction to Research Methods. 2nd Edition, Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
KELLEY, H. H. (1973): “The processes of causal attribution”, American Psychologist, 28, pp. 107-128.
JOHANSEN, S. H. (2020): “A Contrastive Approach to the Types of Hedging Strategies Used in Norwegian and English Informal Spoken Conversations”, Contrastive Pragmatics, 2(1), pp. 81-105.
LAKOFF, G. (1972): “Hedges: A study in meaning criteria and the logic of fuzzy concepts”, Peranteau, P. M., Levi, J. N. y Phares, G. C. (eds.): Papers from the Eighth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society, pp. 183-228. [Reprint 1973 in Journal of Philosophical Logic 2(4), pp. 458-508].
LÁZARO, R. (2021): “Aspectos éticos de los protocolos de actuación en interpretación telefónica”, Verba Hispanica, 29, pp. 137-156.
MARKKANEN, R. y SCHRÖDER, H. (1997): Hedging and discourse: Approaches to the analysis of a pragmatic phenomenon in academic texts, Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
MORALES, O. A., CASSANY, D., ILICH MARÍN-ALTUVE, E. y GONZÁLEZ-PEÑA, C. (2007): “La atenuación en el discurso odontológico: casos clínicos en revistas hispanas”, Círculo de lingüística aplicada a la comunicación, 34.
MORALES, O. A., CASSANY, D., OLIVER DEL OLMO, S., GONZÁLEZ-PENA, C. y MARÍN-ALTUVE, E. (2010): “¿Es la escritura académica odontológica hispanoamericana un discurso matizado?: Estudio de la atenuación en artículos de investigación”, Revista de lenguas para fines específicos, 15-16, pp. 135-157.
OVIATT, S. L., COHEN, P. R., FONG, M. W. y FRANK, M. P. (1992): “A rapid semiautomatic simulation technique for investigating interactive speech and handwriting”, Ohala, J. (ed.): Proceedings of the International Conference on Spoken Language Processing, vol. 2, Alberta, Canada: University of Alberta Press, pp. 1351-1354.
PRINCE, E. F., FRADER, J. y BOSK, C. (1980): On hedging in physician-physician discourse, University of Pennsylvania.
PROKOFIEVA, A. y HIRSCHBERG, J. (2014): “Hedging and Speaker Commitment”, Proceedings of the 5th International Workshop on Emotion, Social Signals, Sentiment & Linked Open Data (ES3LOD 2014), Reykjavik, Iceland, pp. 10-13.
SALAGER-MEYER, F. (1994): “Hedges and textual communicative function in medical English written discourse”, English for Specific Purposes 13(2), pp. 149-170.
SALAGER-MEYER, F., DEFIVES, G. y HAMELYNCK, M. (1996): “Epistemic modality in 19th and 20thcentury medical English written discourse: a principal component analysis. Interface”, Journal of Applied Linguistics, 10(2), pp. 163-199.
VARTTALA, T. (1999): “Remarks on the Communicative Functions of Hedging in Popular Scientific and Specialist Research Articles on Medicine”, English for Specific Purposes, 18(2), pp. 177-200.