Pragmatics Of Discourse Markers In Interpreting Quality Assessment

This thesis, being qualitative as well as quantitative, aims to testify the relationship between utilization of discourse markers and audience's perception of interpreting quality (C-E consecutive interpreting quality in particular in this thesis) and the priorities of audience when assessing it.Within the framework of relevance theory, this research discusses discourse markers' cognitive effects, their contribution to logic coherence and facilitation in audience's interpretation in interpreting as an ostensive-inferential process. With regard to interpreting quality assessment, there have always been debates concerning who should be the rater of interpreting quality and what should be listed among the criteria of it, with interpreting analysts or trainers and information completeness lined on one side and audience and delivery on the other.On the basis of previous studies, the author raised two research hypotheses as (1) Audience takes fluency and clarity as priorities of interpreting quality assessment; (2) Due to their cognitive effects, discourse markers will affect audience's perception of interpreting quality.In order to validate these hypotheses, a survey and an interview on consecutive interpreting quality assessment are carried out among the nineteen foreign teachers in Guangdong University of Foreign Studies and one officer of a certain overseas university, who are all native speakers of English. During the survey process, two different versions of the same Chinese to English consecutive interpreting discourse are played to the subjects on the spot, i.e. one version with discourse markers, the other without. Analyzed in a quantitative way, it is found that utilization of discourse markers will contribute to a more logically coherent discourse though fluency of interpreting is impaired because speaking speed slows down. Also the data suggest audience tends to take quality of delivery as assessing priority.This thesis concludes that in audience's perception, discourse markers with different degrees and levels of cognitive effects influence interpreting quality on different layers with diverse extents and interpreting trainers should consider more from audience's priorities to strengthen interpreting quality. The final objective is to call due attention from the interpreting teachers on discourse markers and on audience's demands with the hope to enhance training of interpreters.