The aim of the paper is to examine common Irish English stereotypes in cinematographic representations of Irish English with special reference to pragmatic features and sociopragmatic norms. After giving an overview of some of the ways in which the concepts of ‘stereotype’ and ‘stereotyping’ are defined and used in sociolinguistics and sociopragmatics, selected features of the Irish English pragmalect (the use of pragmatic markers, the performance of speech acts such as requests, compliment responses and thanks minimizers) will be discussed and contrasted with the (highly stereotypical) representation of Irish English in the films Intermission and The Guard.
The aim of the present paper is to explore the difficulties translators have to face when translating discourse markers in general, and reformulation markers in particular. In the first part of the paper I will attempt to answer the question of why discourse markers are notoriously difficult to translate. Next, I will look at some of the genre-specific features pertaining to the translation of scripted discourse and subtitles. In the second part of the paper, after providing an overview of previous research into reformulation and reformulation markers, I will present the results of a case study of the translation of the English reformulation markers I mean and actually into Hungarian. By way of concluding, I will argue that a wider repertoire of translation strategies is needed in order to achieve dynamic equivalence in the target text.
The present paper will analyse manifestations of the journey metaphor from a critical discourse analytical perspective in order to observe how the journey metaphor is used as a discourse strategy in mediatized political speeches and interviews whereby political actors manipulate the second-frame interactional participants (the audience) into sharing a (spurious) sense of solidarity with them. There are three hypotheses that will be tested in the course of the analysis: the first is that a wide-variety of realjourney elements are exploited for the political metaphor of journey, and there is a concrete correspondence between journey vehicles and political scenarios. The second hypothesis is that journey metaphors that are used in political speeches, celebrity interviews and confrontational political interviews are of different types and complexity. The third hypothesis is that the manipulative intent behind the use of metaphors is exposed in the latter types of mediatized political discourse to varying degrees as a result of the different degrees of pragmatic accountability adhered to in the two subgenres. We argue that the first two hypotheses are confirmed on the basis of the qualitative analysis presented in the paper, whereas the third hypothesis is not borne out by the data.