Interpreter’s subjectivity in Business English Negotiations
Abstract
The effectiveness and quality of business negotiations has become vitally important as international business becomes increasingly pervasive in the era of economic globalization. Interpreters, as information transmitters, play an influential role in business negotiations. Business interpreters perform multiple functions and carry various purposes during business negotiations, for example, bridging language barriers and relieving tension so as to help clients achieve desirable negotiating results. The quality of business interpreting is not only judged by outstanding language capabilities but also adaptability and flexibility in tackling problems. In the process of negotiating, interpreters, based on faithfulness, deviate from the original language, for instance, grammar, form or expression to obtain an optimal communicative result. They do this by omitting and altering discourses that might bring unfavorable loss to transactions so as to promote the trading success.
Most researchers have been focusing on the interpretation skills and strategies applied to foreign business negotiations. This study is to extend a micro study of translator's subjectivity during business negotiations. The paper intends to equip interpreters with awareness that helps detect power disparity impolite expressions and other inappropriateness in language and their subjectivity to alleviate tension and promote harmonious atmosphere so as to contribute to the effectiveness and quality of business negotiations.
Keywords: interpreter’s subjectivity, critical discourse analysis, business negotiation
1. Introduction
Business negotiation is a dialogue aimed at attaining an agreement and mutually beneficial results for all the parties involved. To resolve the differences, a certain degree of concessions and compromises are needed. Besides, a successful business negotiation requires well-qualified participants, which refers to both the negotiator and the interpreter. As involved participants often come from different cultures and represent distinguishing interests, various discrepancies exist beside language barriers. Therefore, the interpreter does not merely translate language itself, but also serves as a secretary, striving to fulfill the interests for his or her client. To promote a smooth dialogue, the interpreter is encouraged to take the initiative by involving himself in the negotiation.
In any business negotiations that include parties of diverse linguistic background, the interpreters play a significant role. In actual sense, the quality of business negotiations has become increasingly pervasive in this era of economic globalization. Thus, interpreters as information transmitters, play an influential role in business negotiations especially when it comes to bridging language barriers as well as relieving the tension between the parties so as to promote a favorable environment for successful results (Meyer 43). It should be noted that that the quality of business interpreting is not only judged by outstanding language capabilities but also adaptability and flexibility in tackling the problems that may arise. During the process of negotiating, interpreters, based on faithfulness, deviate from the original language, for instance, grammar, form or even expression to obtain optimal communicative results. They deviate from original language by omitting and altering discourses that might bring unfavorable loss to the transactions, hence success of the trading.
Purpose of the study
The purpose of the dissertation is to identify interpreter subjectivity in business English negotiations. Interpreters should be aware of linguistic and non-linguistic factors that lead to subjectivity. Non-linguistic factors such as politics and power disparity are sources of subjectivity. Further, the inappropriateness of language is viewed in terms of linguistic factors that lead to a high level of subjectivity in interpretation. The findings of the study should be of great help to interpreters so that they can alleviate tension and promote harmonious atmosphere so as to contribute to the effectiveness and quality of business negotiations.
2. Literature Review
Interpreter subjectivity in business English negotiations is an issue that is attracting the interest of researchers. This research aims at critically assessing interpreter subjectivity in international business negotiations. It has been known over time that interpretation in cases of parties that constitute different linguistic backgrounds is quite important. This is particularly indispensable in international trade negotiations. The negotiations are supposed to make a particular transaction fruitful. Thus, if the interpretation fails due to other challenges, then that transaction is bound to fail miserably. This is where the issue of interpreter subjectivity comes in. According to Meyer and Rachel (11), business negotiation negotiators engage in an interaction to attain their set specific exchange goals. Although several researches have been carried out in the international business field, there is rarely a study that focuses on subjectivity. This marks the primary focus of this thesis.
2.1 Business interpreting
The word interpretation has a number of different meanings, and these depend on various contexts the term is used accordingly. Language interpretation or translation refers to the processing of primary language into another form that can be understood for purposes of communication.
Interpretation is no way similar to translation per se. Interpretation refers the conversion of one language to the most appropriate form, word or vocabulary ensuring that the intended message is conveyed.
Business interpreting covers a broad range of languages that range from most popular ones like Italian, Spanish, and French to the rarer of languages like Swahili and Thai.
It is of particular importance to understand the concept of business interpreting, especially to the potential international managers. Management is all about getting the necessary things done right through an employment of other people to do the job. This is a fact that finds its application world over. For this to be realized, all that is required is knowing the right thing to be done, and knowing the right people for the job. For such a move, the step will require an understanding of the people hired for the job, details which involve an understanding of their background, which will also make it easier for the negotiator to predict both the present and future behavior of the people participating in the negotiation process (Tangas & Pericles, 15).
The nature of human interpretation unlike machine which is normally full of ambiguity and has subtitles and makes sure that there is a proper reception of the intended message despite the difficulties caused by errors of omission. Business interpreting at a community level is relatively difficult compared to the one done in a conference setting. Community business interpretation takes place on a relatively small scale and is often less formal. Besides interpreting speeches, these interpreters characteristically interpret between a few groups of people. Examples of known business interpreting settings include;
Evaluation of a hotel, restaurant that contains between 2 to 3people
Training of Insurance Agents who usually comprise of between 8 to 10 groups of individuals intended to reach the foreign markets
Training for professionals meant to teach technical engineers, usually comprising of groups of persons between 3 and 10 to be deployed in the foreign branches of the company in question.
With today’s technological advancement and globalized market, business interpreting in China and other non-English speaking economic powers has a major role that increasingly play an imperative part in the success of any successful business that trades internationally. Business interpreting is usually useful in the following settings:
Business meetings
Business liaisons
Foreign audits
International trade
Foreign country corporate visits
Training and seminars
With such rapid technological advancements, hence changes in the fore, one thing is certain, and that is interpretation. This, therefore, calls for efficient and competent interpreters who not only pride in language proficiency but also in general knowledge of the cultural source and the respective intricate meanings of the cultural significance and references.
In practice, interpreting a language is not a walk in the park. This is an aggravating task especially when Arabic and English languages are involved. When culturally bound expressions are involved in an interpretation process and the interpreter may lose some important messages that ought to reach the negotiator.
Modes of business interpretation
There are several modes of business interpretation. Thus, the interpreter’s subjectivity may exhibit itself depending the on the mode. These modes include:
Consecutive business interpretation
Simultaneous business interpretation
Relay business interpretation
Liaison business interpretation
Whispered business interpretation
Consecutive business interpretation refers to those used in courts and is mostly preferred as they convey accurate information. It consequently influences the business interpretation of the information word by word, paragraph by paragraph, or even phrase by phrase and this is due to the demand and the urgency of the information. In this business interpretation, the interpreters based their interpretations once the speaker pauses. It helps the business interpreters to have strong language abilities and interpersonal skills, and this could transform legal and business environment. On the other hand, Simultaneous business interpretation is one of the global elite language forms; here the language is interpreted as it is spoken to religious leaders, politicians, promising business managers and the journalists. The audience targets the language for the purpose of effective communication and decision-making process. They then pass the interpreted message via microphones.
Whispering business interpretation is a technique in which the business interpreter will directly translate them and produce a summary of was being said related to the business approach through speech (Wels, Harry, 2015).The speaker conveys his message while the interpreter interprets the same. This is most preferred for a team of at least two people (Irazábal & Clara, 19).
Liaison business interpreting involves communicating the message by the speaker while the interpreter delivers the same to a group of individuals. In a rather conclusive manner, it would be of great importance to have an interpreter as they are required in almost every aspect of today's business deals.
2.2 Researches on interpreter's subjectivity in business negotiations
Presently, the number and volume of research conducted in the English language towards the interpreter's subjectivity in negotiations in business have grown to a new lot of heights. Very few of the researchers working in the field, however, spell out in their approach and methodology the impacts of having someone to interpret or translate certain languages in research projects. There are very few available literature materials touching on the interpreters and their involvement in business research works such interviews (Clark, 7).
In the subject of subjectivity in the business interpretation and negotiation, commercial interactions, exchange and corporation as they frequently occur in any business fulguration and interpretation. Various lessons can be drawn from interpretation literature; which implies that there is not any single interpretation that can be deemed correct. From a subjective point of view, an interpreter is bound to fit in and make certain compromises if the deal has to realize fruition. From a subjective point of view, interpreters and negotiators have to make certain key decisions that might see them compromise of certain aspects of the negotiations. This includes one's beliefs which constitute culture. The culture of a country is a representation of set values, goals, and assumptions that are acquired from the elders and passed on to subsequent generations. The cultures so referred to result in several other different codes of conducts that control and modify the behavior of people at all times (Irazábal & Clara 21).
Communication plays an immense role in cross-cultural management in such places as negotiations and interpretation. Communication, either in the form of speech, listening and or writing is critically important in any business negotiations. A businessperson who can communicate effectively breaking through cultural differences and other barriers is a sure leader who can see the business to greater heights of success (Poškienė 11).
It is through communication that negotiators coordinate their activities and motivate their subordinates to deliver on the mandate of the organization. In a cross-cultural setting, such as the one in which this research is based, subordinates may not well understand some of the information passed from the negotiator and this is a sure error that arises between the receiver and the sender of the information.
The cultural variables that surround cross-cultural communication include roles, attitude, social organizations, thought patterns, time and nonverbal communication. A deeper understanding of the variables as mentioned earlier is but a sure way of minimizing on the cultural disparities that hinder communication. This is where interpretation breaks the impasse (Apple 14).
International business negotiators either have a good background in the local language or must call for an interpreter. There are cases where certain direct translations are hogwash. For instance, in Asia, the word the use of the word ‘yes' may mean that the listener did not quite agree with the context of the negotiation.
The other aspect of interpreted communication is non-verbal communication which has been established to account for nearly between 65 and 90 percent of the process. The non-verbal aspect of interpreted communication can be categorized as paralanguage, polemics, object language and kinesics behavior (Fang, Tony 31).
Interpretation and Bilingualism
. As such, a liaison interpreter is faced with the challenging task of sitting between such cultures vis-a-vis his/her subjective approach. One behavior used by one party to achieve certain effect or result may be in itself inappropriate to the other party. In some cases it may be perceived entirely offensive or even a sign of one being deliberately incorporative. Thus, it is difficult for the interpreter to cope unless they also form a bicultural setting (Clarke 37).
.
As part of cultural sensitivity, interpreters must know about the negotiator and the message must in all dimensions be encoded in a manner that is best understood by the receiver of the information (Kim, et. al 18). In negotiations that involve making plans and strategies for a new business or a continued business operation, interpreters ought to observe the necessary procedures required in the interpretation process. They should also make it a priority to observe the kind of demands that the other negotiation partner is likely to bring across. He should also know the composition of the negotiating team from the other party as well as the authority they command. This is necessary for the sake of preparedness.
There should also be a proper channel that creates room for relationship building. This is done by creating a first impression and changing a few courtesy formalities and having contact details before the business discussions are held. The other bit that the interpreter should take note of is the idea of sharing a brief overview of the business to be discussed and as such, relevant information for the talk can be drawn. This will involve both parties presenting their views as pertain the negotiations and followed by their plans of pursuing the same. The next in line is the Q-A session where the interested parties hold discussions concerning the available alternatives (Fang, Tony 31).
The last stage that the interpreter is expected to exploit is the persuasion where either party bargain and attempt to front their dominant opinions that are geared towards suppressing the opinions of the other parties involved. Cultural values play a significant aspect of interpretation in so far as business negotiations are concerned. For instance, Americans hold contracts as serious issues while the Russians hold them with little regard. The Japanese on the other hand view contracts as a waste of both time and money and only wish to engage real understanding of the negotiation aspect.
The interpreters must also adequately put the other negotiating parties into consideration if the negotiation has to bear fruits. That is to say; the interpreter must understand the other side should they amicably reach the intended business deal.
It should be noted that the kind of relationship that exists between the parties working on a common goal should always be made clear and known and carefully addressed in the negotiation process (Apple 14). It has been documented that a successful negotiation has its interpreter taking into account, a wide variety of options and only chooses from the best and pays proper attention to the communicator.
3.0. Interpreter role in business negotiation interpreting.
The active role of the interpreter is to be in a position of understanding the primary demands of the language source, he/ she targets the understanding of language and come up with inductive reasoning on the business plans or strategies. Interpreters are the go-betweens who bridge the gap between the two negotiating parties. It is because of interpreters that international businesses have seen a remarkable increase in recent years. Being that they are not only gifted with communication skills but also the understanding of the subject matter. The details herein include both local and international or global sense. It is through these interpreters that services from a wide scope of business ventures are sought, especially in striking critical deals that also involve states.
These people play crucial roles in the fields of finance, marketing, and economics among others. An interpreter will have the base of knowledge in such fields as they will be able to work on translation documents that touch on financial statements, regulatory statements, and mutual funds statements among others (Tangas & Pericles 15).
3.1 The importance of interpreter’s subjectivity
With reference to Skopos, which is mainly based on the aim of the target text or the communicative purpose which base its functionality to the negotiators and the interpreter’s agreement, Solipsism refers to an understanding of one individual which is sometimes determined by the values of that particular person, beliefs that govern his or her life (Yan, Dong, 2015). Certain rules and personality functions shape an individual's approach to life, and so is the force on whose behavior is determined. The interpretation of any work is often motivated by a universally accepted wish of validating at least some feelings of oneself through making a discovery of themselves through others. This is often achieved by some feelings that are motivated by the negotiating skills of comparison. This, therefore, implies that certain interpreters validate their responses based on their social viability. That is, only paying tribute to those communally agreed responses articulate of their social held subjective norms and feelings (Baker & Freebody, 10).
3.2 Restrictive factors in interpreting business negotiations
Leaving aside the stringent governmental regulations, landmark regulations as well as zoning rules, one would imagine that business owners could easily lease their holdings freely to the highest bidder as well as the most attractive tenants. Besides, one would imagine that the said business owners would easily grant signage rights to the tenants who help in facilitating their confirmation of the deal. This is not always the case.
The restrictive factors that hamper any business negotiations have to do with competition. Some regulations prohibit entering into a deal for sale with a perceived competitor. The other fearing factor that could hinder the negotiation is the misconception on either party. Another factor is that the owner of the deal may opt to derogate from the deal altogether. In such a case, the deal will not hold, and the negotiations will be deemed done. The other bit is when the business is seen to be an arm’s length, whereas there are chances that negotiations might be getting into a stall (Knights, David & Glenn Morgan 8).
3.3 Tactics of realizing subjectivity
Any business requires an employment of a wealth of expertise and experience. As a negotiator, it is only prudent that you employ tact and carefully thought submissions into the process of what matters in the long run, is the win-win situation for both parties. Time and money could be wasted having a stalled negotiation in the long term (Guang-Qi 19). For such successful business negotiations to be realized, one has to come to terms with the fact that a great compromise must be made.
Challenges often hamper the process of finding the right people for any of the high profile jobs. Just like propaganda, the skill of realizing that someone has employed the principle of subjectivity includes the following:
Use of selective points or stories that are often offered are viewed as wide-covering and thus objective. Another fact will be established by the fact that the negotiator uses partial facts or applying partial historical contexts about some known facts. If the negotiator tends to reinforce reasons and motivations so as to act in line with the threats on matters of security of the said individual (Kim et al. 18).In a political context, the mainstream media characteristically interview the retired war generals for some conflict-related issues, or even treating government sources as verified facts, yet they should ascertain their authenticity or get things verified and thoroughly researched.
One would realize subjectivity in a negotiation process by applying his or her wit acquired in the process of learning such skills. Besides, he or she can employ scientific models that guide of decision-making and analytics. This will help in judging between supple planning and other emergent adaptations to different circumstances (Tangas & Pericles 15).
Interpreter Subjectivity in Business English negotiations
Negotiations in English business are between any two parties. In the process, dialogue is necessary for discussing interpreter subjectivity. Loke (209) argues that analysis is often based on word choices, speech style, and tone which affect interpreter subjectivity. Word choices, speech style, and tone have a contribution to the outcome of any negotiation process and are therefore relevant to language itself. In any negotiation, dialogue is used so that a collective agreement is reached between two or more parties. Inghilleri (69) adds that international negotiations are an example of how business English is necessary for parties that need an agreement that is binding. It should be noted that the primary concern is not the language factor used in the negotiation process, but the need to identify important interpretation factors that lead to subjectivity so that the negotiation process achieves effective and efficient results.
Lack of understanding in business English, especially international negotiations or diplomatic dialogue has led to ineffectiveness (Rytkonen 34). Negotiations and diplomatic relations have a better chance of improving relations between two or more parties. Embargoes and military control is not likely to achieve similar results. As a result, international relations benefits from negotiations. Interpreter subjectivity originates from various sources. Sources include politics, religion, economic ties, and agenda for the negotiation process(Lee and Park 245). The efficiency of the negotiation process as part of business English is affected by political and religious views.
According to Yu, Kersten, and Vahidov (233), interpreter subjectivity arises from framing whereby new words are created or the interpreter alters definitions of words. Subjectivity arises because of ambiguity in words. When interpreting, ambiguity as a source of subjectivity leads to adoption of a phrase or a word that has more than one meaning. In most cases, the meanings may not be compatible thereby leading to subjectivity in the process of interpreting a text.
Fenwick(162) asserts that subjectivity in the negotiation process also arises because of differences in native languages. Diplomatic negotiations often involve making agreements with person from different native languages and culture. Variables such as speech style, choices of word, nuances, metaphors, as well as analogies impose challenges to the interpreter. Morrison and Morrison (5) also report that difficulties arising from interpretation lead to subjectivity which may be known or not known to the interpreter. Language factors therefore have a role in altering the meaning of a discussion, speech, sentence, and word in an argument. Altered meanings are part of subjectivity that arises in business English contexts such as international diplomacy and relations. Furthermore, words and phrases used by negotiators when developing treaties are likely to affect the outcome or reduce the chance of reaching an agreement.
Framing as a technique used by negotiators and interpreters may be effective in certain circumstances. However, framing causes misunderstanding and subjectivity when making negotiations (People and Chinese 3). For example, when a negotiator changes one term in the negotiation process, a change in attitude (subjectivity) may be developed towards the countries involved in the negotiation process. For example, subjectivity in international relations is evident through terms such as ‘rogue nations’ which is used to refer to ‘states of concern’. Subjectivity in business English arises from choice of words. However, such choices of words are based on political, ideological, and religious views about another country in the negotiation process. New words and phrases may not change the fact that countries such as North Korea, Iraq, and Iran are rogue or unstable and threatening to the peace of the world (Morrison and Morrison 12). However, adopting a new phrase or eliminating the notion of a ‘rogue nation’ eliminates subjectivity and attitudes during the negotiation process. New phrases therefore signal the possibility of reaching an agreement with a country viewed as unfriendly and threatening to the negotiation process.
Bertolino (119) argue that subjectivity can be eliminated through addition of words or introducing new definitions. Introduction of new definitions enables negotiators to exercise control over the negotiation process so that they introduce new approaches on how the audience should think about the issue under negotiation. Kristiansen, Garrett, and Coupland (9) write that the development of new words and introduction of new definition relates to creating a new reality. A ‘third world’ state as a term is altered so that the negotiator adopts a word that does not lead to subjectivity. In this case, third world may be subjective leading to an interpretation that the negotiators have no ability to engage in high profile negotiations. However, new words may affect the reception especially when the parties involved in the negotiation process are not aware of intended use of the new word. Furthermore, new words present new challenges to interpreters thereby leading to subjectivity as a challenge in negotiations.
Ambiguity encompasses several issues while engaging ion diplomatic relations as part of business English. Subjectivity can only be avoided when the interpreter can tolerate ambiguity and uncertainty. The negotiators can also avoid subjectivity when they exercise open-mindedness so that own assumptions and opponent intentions can be related (Lund 739). Ambiguity leads to the possibility of two or more possible senses or ways. When ambiguity arises, a high level of awareness is necessary so that the interpreter avoids subjective interpretation. Ambiguity arises from syntax, especially when a sentence has two or more possible meanings. Another form of ambiguity that is less often relates to cross-textual ambiguity which is prevalent in legal documents (Mellor and Shilling 275).
An example of subjectivity in business English relates to blurring lines in favour of another perspective. In President Obama's negotiations on nuclear production with the United Nations Security Council, statements have been made about never launching attacks on ‘rogue’ countries that produce nuclear weapons. In such a case, subjectivity arises from the definition of a ‘rogue’ nation with nuclear weapons. Even though the rogue nation has nuclear weapons, they should not be attacked. According to Semnani-Azad and Adair(64), Subjectivity in the approach taken by the United States can be viewed in terms of the word used. However, when it comes to nuclear power production in the United States, words such as ‘scientific, technical, and engineering capabilities’ is used to describe America’s ability to use nuclear power. Loke (217) asserts that during negotiations, subjectivity arises when nuclear power generation in the case of the United States is not viewed as ‘rogue’ and unfriendly to the peace of the world.
Subjectivity in business English also arises from inter-language differences that lead to interpretation issues. Negotiations always take place among parties from different native languages. In particular, differences in native languages lead to inefficiencies and problems that lead to high level of subjectivity (Inghilleri 72). Factors such as differences in culture, religion, and political ideologies affect phrases and the word used in the negotiation process (Rytkonen 43). Lee and Park (249) assert that when negotiators are from two or more cultural backgrounds, they should avoid subjectivity through the formulation of outcomes that respect differences in culture. However, when cultural tolerance and acceptance is not considered, the world grows non-tolerant and non-educated about differences in cultures of the world.
One of the challenges encountered when negotiating in the international markets relates to the ability of the interpreter to discern the ideas in relation the message, as well as intention of the words used by other parties (Yu, Kersten, and Vahidov 253). Without an understanding of ideas in relation to messages and intentions, the interpreter cannot avoid being subjective. It should be noted that correct understanding of a message is achieved through an understanding of similarity but not the identity that holds between the intention of the other party and the meaning attributed by the interpreter or the receiver of the message (Fenwick 174).
Several factors affect the negotiator’s ability to receive the intended message or meaning. Researchers have identified challenges that arise when different cultures are present in the negotiation process. According to Morrison and Morrison(6), innate cultural differences lead to differences in meaning of a word. The Cultural meaning, therefore, leads to subjectivity in meanings shared by parties from other cultural groups. Katz (7) states that in the negotiation process, parties have interests, perceptions, attitudes, and beliefs that guide interpretation of experiences. Each culture has a different interpretation that is not present in conventional dictionaries. As a result, subjectivity arises because of differences in culture.
McLauchlan (24) present the argument that the metaphorical nature of language affects interpretations. The processing of concept varies depending on the metaphorical language used during negotiations. Conceptualization of perceptions by diplomats leads to subjective interpretations. Metaphors used in the negotiation process can only achieve desired results when interpreters share a common understanding with other parties in the negotiation process. When negotiators process messages with different metaphorical understanding, relations and issues can be affected. In particular, communication becomes a challenge when metaphorical language is allowed to influence the understanding of concepts and issues. Translating metaphors is a primary source of subjectivity especially when the interpreter has no understanding of the metaphors used by other negotiating parties.
Apart from metaphors, another factor that causes subjectivity in interpretation is idiomatic expressions. Reithofer (143) argues that idiomatic expressions are culture specific. In particular, idiomatic expressions lose meaning when negotiators adopt literal translation. Subjectivity should be avoided by eliminating any literal translation as part of interpretation process. In some cases, the interpreter is not aware that a phrase is an idiomatic expression in a foreign language. In the process of interpreting the idiomatic expression, the interpreter adopts a literal translation into the native language.
Semnani-Azad and Adair (71) argue that subjectivity from the interpreter also arises from categorization. Categorization is necessary so that certain words become meaningful thereby leading to ease of interpretation. Quantity and diversity of information result in challenges in processing so that interpreters avoid subjectivity. To avoid subjectivity, mental processes should achieve a high level of efficiency so that features in a certain field are organized into relevant and meaningful clusters and categories. It should be noted that categorization is based on human interaction with the surrounding (environment). As a result, differences exist among interpreters based on their cultural backgrounds and an environment.
Language barriers that lead to subjectivity in interpretation can be solved through various approaches. The first approach involves the interpreter knowing two languages. However, knowing the two languages involved is not sufficient when the negotiation process involves more than two parties from different native languages (Mellor and Shilling 278). Furthermore, speaking another language is not a guarantee that intentions of messages can be translated effectively. The second approach is to locate a neutral language that can be used by all parties. However, diplomats may possess working knowledge of the language which may not be sufficient for interpretation. No approach to language differences can be accepted by diplomats as interpreters in the international context, based on the complexities of language acquisition settings and challenges for adults (Lund 742).
Interpretations, as opposed to literal translation, are widely used to solve challenge relating to differences in language. In diplomacy, it is necessary to use interpretation since politicians may not speak a foreign language. However, ambiguity is a challenge since knowing a language is not a guarantee that interpretations or translation can lead to desirable results (Kristiansen, Garrett, and Coupland 14). Bertolino(121) reports that strict adherence to literal interpretation can lead to challenges in understanding the intended message. On the contrary, it is possible that interpreters engage in too much interpretation. When too much interpretation takes place, statements are considered entirely subjective. As a result, the basis for any agreement or memorandum of understanding may not be achieved. Negotiation is affected when there is too much focus on constant questioning and interpretation.
Apart from linguistic factors that lead to subjectivity, it is important to note that power differences in the negotiation process lead to subjectivity. For instance, anarchy leads to differences in power among parties at the negotiation table(Fenwick 169). The dominant power views the less dominant as ineffective in achieving common agreements or memorandum of understanding. In the process, interpreters adopt different approaches based on powers allocated to their employers. In the process, subjectivity arises based on the urge to depict the other party in the negotiation process as inconsiderate to the ‘thought patterns” of the dominant force (Morrison and Morrison 14).
Conclusion
The presence of international business has resulted in the need to have language interpretation in Business for purposes of communication. With countries such as China and Japan attracting various interests from the global market and especially the western world, it, therefore, goes without saying that language barrier can be ameliorated provided there exists diverse cultures and language potentials. Therefore, business interpreting has made it possible for the corporate world to marry in on ideas and intentions of business from across the world. The Critical Discourse Analysis together with the contemporary has transformed the business regarding negotiation and interpreters. Information prevalence’s and the data analysis with compromising business stability are enhanced. Simply put, the phenomenon this thesis has been studying has not been in existence. Despite there being several researches on business negotiations, specific research based on interpreter subjectivity have not been conducted in detail. Also there was limited sample of negotiations used in the research. This is because most negotiations are usually confidential. All in all, business negotiations incorporated (between Chinese people and those of Western decent) yielded the desired responses for this study.
Works Cited
Apple, M., W. 1996 Cultural Politics in Business, Teachers College Press, New York. Print
Baker, C., D. Freebody P 1989. Children's First Schoolbooks, Basil Blackwell, Oxford.
Print
Bertolino, Elisabetta. “The Politics of Subjectivity in the Women, Law and Development Discourse.” Australian Feminist Law Journal 25.1 (2014): 119–139. Web. 19 Mar. 2016.
Clark, U. Studying Language: English in Action. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007.Print
Fang, Tony. Chinese business negotiating style. Sage, 1999. Print
Fenwick, Tara J. “Lady, Inc.: Women Learning, Negotiating Subjectivity in Entrepreneurial Discourses.” International Journal of Lifelong Education 21.2 (2002): 162–177. Web. 19 Mar. 2016.
Guang-Qi, Z. "Strategies on resolving deadlocks in Sino-German business negotiation."
European Journal of Language, Linguistics and Literature 2.1 (2014): 9-21.Print
Hui-ying, Y. A. N. G. "Jef. Verschueren's Theory of Pragmatic Adaptation and
ChoiceMaking for the Purpose of Adaptation in Translating Process [J]." Journal of Lanzhou University (Social Sciences) 2 (2012): 013. Print
Irazábal, Clara. "Realizing planning's emancipatory promise: learning from regime theory to
strengthen communicative action." Planning Theory 8.2 (2009): 115-139. Print
Katz, Lothar. “Negotiating International Business - China.” March (2008): 1–10. Print.
Kim, Peter H., Robin L. Pinkley, and Alison R. Fragale. "Power dynamics in negotiation."
Academy of Management Review 30.4 (2005): 799-822. Print
Knights, David, and Glenn Morgan. "Corporate strategy, organizations, and subjectivity: A
critique." Organization Studies 12.2 (1991): 251-273. Print
Kristiansen, Tore, Peter Garrett, and Nikolas Coupland. “Introducing Subjectivities in Language Variation and Change.” Acta Linguistica Hafniensia 37.1 (2005): 9–35. Web. 19 Mar. 2016.
Lee, Youngmin, and Kyonghwan Park. “Negotiating Hybridity: Transnational Reconstruction of Migrant Subjectivity in Koreatown, Los Angeles.” Journal of Cultural Geography 25.3 (2008): 245–262. Web. 19 Mar. 2016.
Loke, Beverley. “Conceptualising the Role and Responsibility of Great Power: China’s Participation in Negotiations toward a Post-Second World War Order.” Diplomacy & Statecraft 24.2 (2013): 209–226. Web. 19 Mar. 2016.
Lund, Emma. “Environmental Diplomacy: Comparing the Influence of Business and Environmental NGOs in Negotiations on Reform of the Clean Development Mechanism.” Environmental Politics 22.5 (2013): 739–759. Web. 19 Mar. 2016.
McLauchlan, David. “Contract Interpretation: What Is It About ?” Sydney Law Review 31.5
Meyer, Rachel S. "Fluid subjectivities: Intertextuality and women's narrative performance
In North India." Journal of American Folklore (2000): 144-163. Print
(2008): 51. Print.
Mellor, Philip A., and Chris Shilling. “Re-Conceptualising the Religious Habitus: Reflexivity and Embodied Subjectivity in Global Modernity.” Culture and Religion 15.3 (2014): 275–297. Web. 19 Mar. 2016.
Morrison, Caitlin, and Caitlin Morrison. “Man vs . Machine : Interpreting the Ambiguities in Diplomatic Negotiations.” (2010): n. pag. Print.
Poškienė, Audronė. "International Business Negotiations in Small and Medium
Organizations." Engineering Economics 42.2 (2015): 53-61. Print
Reithofer, Karin. “English as a Lingua Franca vs. Interpreting: Battleground or Peaceful Co-Existence?” The Interpreters’ Newsletter 15 (2010): 143–157. Print.
Rytkonen, Marja. “Narrating Female Subjectivity in the Autobiographical Texts of Elena Bonner, Emma Gerstejn and Maija Pliseckaja.” NORA - Nordic Journal of Feminist and Gender Research 7.1 (1999): 34–46. Web. 19 Mar. 2016.
Semnani-Azad, Zhaleh, and Wendi L. Adair. “Watch Your Tone Relational Paralinguistic Messages in Negotiation.” International Studies of Management and Organization 43.4 (2013): 64–89. Web. 19 Mar. 2016.
Tangas, Pericles. "The dynamic communicator: strategies for effective performance in
business settings." Proceedings–Akten–Actes (2011): 69. Print
Wels, Harry. "Whispering empathy: transdisciplinary reflections on research methodology."
What Makes Us Moral? On the capacities and conditions for being moral. Springer: Netherlands, 2013. 151-165. Print
Wodak, Ruth and Fairclough, Norman. Social Research Methods: A Reader. London: Sage,
1997. Print.
Yan, Dong. "On Interpreting Paradigms and the Interpretive Theory." Foreign Language
Education 2 (2012): 024. Print
Yu, Bo, Gregory E. Kersten, and Rustam Vahidov. “Traders’ Subjective Appraisals: Comparison of Negotiations and Auctions.” Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce 25.3 (2015): 233–261. Web. 19 Mar. 2016.
