| Discourse markers have recently been a heated issue in both Discourse Analysis and Pragmatics at home and abroad (Brinton, 1996; Juckerand Ziv, 1998). Since the 1970s, discourse markers have aroused heated discussion amidst pragmatists. Despite their different perspectives, they have all shed some light on discourses and functions of discourses. However, limited papers were contributed to studying the role of discourse markers in translation, still less in interpreting. This paper discusses discourse markers and their role in the process of consecutive interpreting from the perspective of relevance theory. Hopefully, it makes contributions to the efficient transfer of information in the process.The author believes that verbal communication involves coordinating efforts of both addressers and addressees in a certain context. The efforts refer to interaction between new and old information in the process of communication.When input is processed in a context of available assumptions, it may yield some contextual effects, by modifying or recognizing these assumptions (He Ziran, 2006: 240). New information may provide further evidence for, and therefore strengthen, old assumptions; or it may provide evidence against, and perhaps lead to the abandonment of old assumptions (Sperber and Wilson, 2001:109). In a certain context, an addresser often employs some discourse markers to convey his or her intended meaning. Discourse markers help to guide addressees to get the most relevant meaning of addressers with the least processing efforts. In the process of consecutive interpreting, discourse markers are often used by interpreters as a way of restriction or guiding pragmatic reasoning in the construction of a discourse or text. In the light of interactive function and contextual relevance, this paper probes into discourse markers, discuss how the consecutive interpreting proceed in a dynamic context and study dynamic features of the process. |
