Goffman’ın Etkileşim Düzeni ile Toplum Çevirmenliğinde Sözlü Çeviri Etkileşimi Arasındaki Benzerlikler
Yelda ArkanÇeviribiliminde sosyolojik dönüşüm olarak adlandırılan paradigma değişimi, farklı disiplinlerden yöntemsel ve kuramsal yaklaşımların entegre edilmesine olanak sağlamıştır. Bu çalışmada, Amerikalı sosyolog Erving Goffman’ın etkileşim düzenine dayalı sosyolojik yaklaşımının, toplum çevirmenliği sürecindeki sözlü çeviri etkileşimi ile ne ölçüde kesiştiğini betimleyici bir şekilde tespit etmeye çalışılmıştır. Çalışmanın merkezinde yüz yüze etkileşim olgusu yer almakta olup, odak noktası ise sosyal yapılar ve sosyal bir durum, yani belirli bir ortamda gerçekleşen bireysel davranışlardır. Goffman’nın etkileşim düzeninin uygulanmasına ilişkin genel bir anlayış sağlamak amacıyla, hem etkileşim düzeni kavramını hem de sözlü çeviri etkileşiminde yer alan durum, kurum ve etkileşim kavramlarını belirli noktalarda ele alarak açıklanacaktır. Goffman’ın yüz yüze etkileşim üzerine sunduğu bulguların,etkileşim sosyolojisi perspektifinden,toplum çevirmenliğinde gerçekleşen sözlü çeviri etkileşiminin kavramsallaştırılmasıyla benzerlik gösterdiği varsayılmaktadır. Bu bağlantı noktaları, sözlü çeviri sürecini kapsayan karmaşık sosyal-kurumsal çerçeveyi ve bu çerçevenin katılımcılar üzerindeki etkilerini daha iyi anlamaya katkıda bulunabilir. Sözlü çeviri, aynı zamanda bir sosyal birey olarak çevirmen, ’sözde’ toplumsal olarak belirlenmiş rolü, değer ve norm anlayışları ile sosyal yeterliliği sayesinde konuşmanın akışını sürdürme becerisi bağlamında, ampirik araştırmaların odağına yerleşmektedir. Bu çalışma, katılımcıların sözlü çeviri ortamında, sosyal gerçekliğin nasıl inşa edildiğine odaklanarak, bu süreçteki karmaşık dinamiklerin, derinlemesine araştırılmasına uygun bir bakış açısı sağlayacaktır.
Parallelen zwischen der Interaktionsordnung von Goffman zur Dolmetschinteraktion beim Kommunaldolmetschen
Yelda ArkanDer Paradigmenwechsel, der allgemein auf eine „soziale Wende“ in der Translationswissenschaft zurückgeführt werden kann, hat zu einer verstärkten Integration methodischer und theoretischer Ansätze aus verschiedenen Disziplinen geführt. Diese Ansätze haben die Dol metschforschung signifikant bereichert, indem sie die wissenschaftliche De batte durch die Einführung neuer Perspektiven maßgeblich vorangetrieben haben. Infolgedessen implizieren diese theoretischen und methodologis chen Fragestellungen, die Relevanz der Dolmetschinteraktion, in unter schiedlichen sozialen und kulturellen Kontexten, neu zu beleuchten und somit auch aus einem interaktionssoziologischen Ansatz zu analysieren. Diese Arbeit soll deskriptiv aufzeigen, inwiefern der interaktionssoziol ogische Ansatz der Interaktionsordnung, des amerikanischen Soziologen Erving Goffmans, Berührungspunkte zur Dolmetschinteraktion beim Kom munaldolmetschen aufweist. Im Mittelpunkt dieser Arbeit steht dabei das Phänomen der ‚„Face-to-Face-Interaktion‘, wobei der Fokus, auf soziale Strukturen und individuellem Handeln, in einer sozialen Situation, sprich Setting, liegt. Um ein globales Verständnis in der Anwendung der Goff manischen Interaktionsordnung, darstellen zu können, werden punktuell die Begriffe Situation, Institution und Interaktion, die sowohl im Konzept der Interaktionsordnung als auch in der Dolmetschinteraktion eingebettet sind, expliziert. Das Dolmetschen findet nicht allein als sprachliche und kul turelle Vermittlung Akzeptanz, sondern der Dolmetscher, als soziales Indi viduum, rückt entsprechend seiner ‚angeblich‘ sozial determinierten Rolle, seinen Wert- und Normvorstellungen und seiner sozialen Kompetenz, den Gesprächsverlauf aufrechtzuerhalten, in den Vordergrund empirischer Stu dien
Parallels Between Goffman’s Interaction Order and Interpreting Interaction in Community Interpreting
Yelda ArkanThe aim of this paper is to descriptively show to what extent the interaction sociological approach of the interaction order, developed by the American sociologist Erving Goffman, has points of contact with interpreter interaction in community interpreting. The focus of this work is on the phenomenon of ‘face-to-face interaction’, with an emphasis on social structures and individual actions within a social situation or setting. To provide a global understanding of the application of Goffman’s interactional order, the terms situation, institution and interaction, which are embedded both in the concept of interactional order and in interpreter-mediated interaction, are explicated selectively. It is assumed that the findings on the face-to-face situation according to Goffman, as presented from the perspective of interaction sociology, reveal similarities to the conceptualisation of interpreter-mediated interaction in community interpreting. It seems that these points of connection can contribute to a better understanding of the complex socio-institutional framework that encompasses the interpreting process and its effects on the actors involved. Consequently, this work can provide encouragement for more work on ethnomethodological case studies in interpreting research.
The paradigm shift, which can generally be attributed to a "social turn" in translation studies, has led to the increased integration of methodological and theoretical approaches from various disciplines such as communication studies, psychology, sociology, and cultural studies. These approaches have significantly enriched interpreting research by advancing the scholarly debate by introducing new perspectives. Consequently, these theoretical and methodological inquiries imply the need to re-examine the relevance of interpreter-mediated interactions in various social and cultural contexts and analyse them from a sociological interactional approach.
This paper aims to descriptively demonstrate the extent to which the interactional sociological approach of the inter- action order, as proposed by American sociologist Erving Goffman, intersects with interpreter-mediated interactions in community interpreting. At the core of this study is the phenomenon of "face-to-face interaction," with a focus on social structures and individual actions within a social situation or setting.
To provide an understanding of the application of Goffman’s interaction order, a summary of his approaches to the analysis of interactions in specific situations is presented. Goffman seeks to describe both the regularities and disruptions that emerge from the situation in which actors are in a reciprocal relationship. The actors involved in the interaction process can draw upon different evaluations when assessing the given social situation, despite established norms and explicit expectations. Since much of Goffman’s work is based on theoretical statements about the interactional order, this paper does not highlight specific studies by Goffman. Instead, it incorporates the analysis of the interactional order according to Goffman to show how this analysis can be integrated into the dynamic interaction process of community interpretation. As such, the terms situation, institution, and interaction, which are embedded both in the concept of the interactional order and in interpreter-mediated interaction, are explained.
It is important to emphasise the relevance of the actions of all actors involved in interpreter-mediated communication in public institutions, who operate within the tension between different goals and expectations and are influenced by institutional contextual conditions. A perspective on interpreter-mediated interaction that focuses solely on the cognitive, linear, communicative, or linguistic dimension would fail to capture the fundamental importance of human communication.
Goffman’s effort to investigate face-to-face communication in a social situation by examining the mutual influence of actors on their actions is also a fundamental part of interpreting research. Interpreting is not only accepted as linguistic and cultural mediation, but the interpreter, as a social individual, comes to the fore of empirical studies due to their "allegedly" socially determined role, value and normative perceptions, and social competence in maintaining the flow of conversation.
In conclusion, the insights into face-to-face interaction from Goffman’s interactional sociological perspective reveal commonalities with the conceptualisation of interpreter-mediated interaction in community interpreting. These points of connection can help to better understand the complex socio-institutional framework surrounding the interpreting process and to analyse its effects on the involved actors from a new perspective. Moreover, it is emphasised that in a specific situation, it is the participants themselves who (re)negotiate and continuously reshape the communicative structure. This establishes a relevant reference point for a more in-depth focus on the overall situation in the interpreting process, with an emphasis on the mutual involvement of the actors—thus, the co-construction of social reality—by incorporating both linguistic and nonverbal cues in a key interaction. This underscores the importance of field studies, which provide detailed insights into the natural behaviour of participants in their respective social situations.
