Translation Two：From Conversation to Text
Taylor and his colleagues posit that the relationship between conversation and text is a reciprocal and recursive one. Thus, to fully understand these concepts, a second (ongoing and simultaneous) translation process is necessary. Taylor et al. (1996) call this the “textualization of the conversation,” or the translation from conversation to text. To explain this translation, Taylor again harkens back to classic theory in communication, this time to the notion if framing and bracketing that we considered in our discussion of the Palo Alto school of theorizing on relational development.That is, in order to make sense of the flow of interaction in a conversation, the hearer must bracket or frame and his colleagues believe that hearers largely interpret conversations in narrative fashion, that is, in a manner that gives the conversational content a beginning, a development, and an argue, “This is not the conversation any more, but a summary of it,(a text),recalled in retrospect”. For example, in our consideration of the worker who calls his boss, both boss and worker will bracket this conversation to make sense of it as an event or a text.This bracketing might also be textualized in a more formal manner, perhaps as a memo or note in the in the workers proformance file.
- 1 decade agoFavorite Answer
Taylor和他的同事認為會話和主題的關係是相輔相成(互補)的。首先應該要完全瞭解這些概念，之後在轉換的過程上中這是很重要的。Taylor et al. (1996) 稱這是會話的轉化或是會話到主題的翻譯。如何解釋這樣的翻譯，Taylor再次認為必須從溝通中尋找基本的理論，這次從Palo Alto學校的理論是否有相關發展上做討論。為了使對話中所產生的互動更有效果，聽眾必須按著步驟，而他的同事相信大多數的聽眾將對話轉化成一個比較狹窄既定的模式，因此一開始或辯論下規定談話的內容，那這在也不是所謂的會話。而這在章節那也稱: in retrospect&rdquo。例如:在我們一般的認知中，如果員工叫他的老闆，相對的，員工和老闆兩人會將這樣的對話侷限為是個事件或主題討論。而這樣局限的方式會使的對話比較正式，也就跟員工表現的細節有關。Source(s): 我 。。~~哈哈~如果你提供你唸什麼科目我會跟好翻~請笑納~~
- 1 decade ago
- 1 decade ago
好長阿 這英文不是我可以回答出來的 難Source(s): 都沒回答 哪來的資料