Integrating the proximization theory in cognitive approach of critical discourse study with Hatim and Mason’s concept of intertextuality, this study offers a new perspective on investigating interpreters’mediation role in diplomatic interpreting setting. Based on the nuanced analysis of two interpreters’ performance at China-US high-level strategic dialogue,the findings reveal that (a)both interpreters employ extensive elements inside their deitic center (IDCs) to reinforce institutional legitimacy and cultivate a positive self-image, utilizing lexical and grammatical devices that spatially, axiologically, and temporally favor their respective narratives,while,Concurrently, delegitimizing opposing perspectives by framing adversarial actions as existential threats to IDCs' interests.(b)Target text(TT) divergences from the source text (ST) are observed in both interpretations. The Chinese interpreter demonstrates:(i) Strategic adaptation of cultural references to enhance cross-cultural coherence and project a favorable national image.(ii) Elaboration of contextual adaptation to clarify China's stance or provide ostensibly objective event descriptions while preserving ST intentionality.(iii) Insertion of pragmatic markers emphasizing consequences for U.S. containment policies.While the American interpreter exhibits:(iv) Prolific incorporation of pragmatic references to assert U.S. dominance while reframing China as a global destabilizer ("great concern").(v) Selective omission of pragmatic reference when rhetorically expedient for U.S. interests.This study demonstrated the efficacy of combining the cognitive approach with intertextuality as a framework to explore interpreters’ mediation role and to gain a better understanding of the complex and nuanced aspects of diplomatic interpreting.
Yangjie Wei (Fri,) studied this question.