Politeness Strategies in Biblical Hebrew and West African Languages

Q1 Arts and Humanities
Andy Warren-Rothlin
{"title":"Politeness Strategies in Biblical Hebrew and West African Languages","authors":"Andy Warren-Rothlin","doi":"10.54395/jot-t933r","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Most languages have a wide variety of strategies for communicating politeness, however these are always highly culture-specific and relate closely to broader cultural norms that affect the application of Grice’s maxims, for example. Focus strategies include the use of greetings, modal particles, and various forms of participant reference. Typical initial greetings may take the form of wishes or blessings in biblical Hebrew but questions in West African languages (which reserve wishes and blessings for leave-taking and thanking); therefore, more literal translations may invite misunderstanding. Pragmatic particles in biblical Hebrew are often misunderstood. West African languages may lack these altogether, and so they have to resort to longer idiomatic expressions. Participant reference in biblical Hebrew may involve metaphors from service or kinship terminology; these may combine with special uses of grammatical person in honorific addressee-reference and deprecating self-reference. Some of these observations may shed light on features of the Psalms which have traditionally been read more as poetics than as pragmatics. Indirection strategies may be employed in the form of euphemisms or Indirect Speech Acts, the most common form of which in biblical Hebrew is the rhetorical question, which may have a range of pragmatically-defined functions, though the forms may differ from those of West African languages. The two primary biblical Hebrew verbal conjugations also have special pragmatically-defined functions, including the restriction of deontic use of qāṭal (the ‘precative perfect’) to human address of God, restriction of deontic use of yiqṭōl (the ‘preceptive imperfect’) to divine address of humans, and the use of yiqṭōl in questions. West African languages may need to resort to a wide variety of strategies to express such modal nuances. These notes raise questions as to the extent to which translators may “Africanize” the speech of actants in biblical narratives.","PeriodicalId":38669,"journal":{"name":"SKASE Journal of Translation and Interpretation","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2007-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SKASE Journal of Translation and Interpretation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54395/jot-t933r","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

Most languages have a wide variety of strategies for communicating politeness, however these are always highly culture-specific and relate closely to broader cultural norms that affect the application of Grice’s maxims, for example. Focus strategies include the use of greetings, modal particles, and various forms of participant reference. Typical initial greetings may take the form of wishes or blessings in biblical Hebrew but questions in West African languages (which reserve wishes and blessings for leave-taking and thanking); therefore, more literal translations may invite misunderstanding. Pragmatic particles in biblical Hebrew are often misunderstood. West African languages may lack these altogether, and so they have to resort to longer idiomatic expressions. Participant reference in biblical Hebrew may involve metaphors from service or kinship terminology; these may combine with special uses of grammatical person in honorific addressee-reference and deprecating self-reference. Some of these observations may shed light on features of the Psalms which have traditionally been read more as poetics than as pragmatics. Indirection strategies may be employed in the form of euphemisms or Indirect Speech Acts, the most common form of which in biblical Hebrew is the rhetorical question, which may have a range of pragmatically-defined functions, though the forms may differ from those of West African languages. The two primary biblical Hebrew verbal conjugations also have special pragmatically-defined functions, including the restriction of deontic use of qāṭal (the ‘precative perfect’) to human address of God, restriction of deontic use of yiqṭōl (the ‘preceptive imperfect’) to divine address of humans, and the use of yiqṭōl in questions. West African languages may need to resort to a wide variety of strategies to express such modal nuances. These notes raise questions as to the extent to which translators may “Africanize” the speech of actants in biblical narratives.
圣经希伯来语和西非语言中的礼貌策略
大多数语言都有各种各样的礼貌交流策略,然而,这些策略总是高度文化特异性的,并且与影响格赖斯格言应用的更广泛的文化规范密切相关。焦点策略包括问候语、情态助词和各种形式的参与者引用的使用。典型的最初问候可能采用圣经希伯来语的祝愿或祝福的形式,但西非语言的问题(这些语言将祝愿和祝福保留在离别和感谢中);因此,更多的直译可能会引起误解。圣经希伯来语中的语用助词经常被误解。西非语言可能完全缺乏这些,因此他们不得不求助于更长的习惯表达。圣经希伯来语中的参与者指称可能涉及服务或亲属术语的隐喻;这可能与敬称指代和贬抑性自我指代中语法人称的特殊用法相结合。其中一些观察可能会揭示诗篇的特征,这些特征传统上被更多地视为诗学而不是语用学。间接策略可能以委婉语或间接言语行为的形式使用,圣经希伯来语中最常见的形式是反问句,它可能具有一系列语用定义的功能,尽管其形式可能与西非语言不同。圣经中两个主要的希伯来语动词变位也有特殊的语用定义功能,包括限制道义上使用qāṭal(“预防完成”)来称呼上帝,限制道义上使用yiqṭōl(“感知不完成”)来称呼人类,以及在疑问中使用yiqṭōl。西非语言可能需要采用各种各样的策略来表达这种情态的细微差别。这些注释提出了一个问题,即翻译人员可能在多大程度上“非洲化”圣经叙事中演员的讲话。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
SKASE Journal of Translation and Interpretation
SKASE Journal of Translation and Interpretation Arts and Humanities-Literature and Literary Theory
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信