During the Korean War, Korean and American interpreters and translators carried out their duties with a great deal of responsibility for communication. However, their stories have yet to receive attention not only from military historians, but also from the field of translator studies. This study th...
During the Korean War, Korean and American interpreters and translators carried out their duties with a great deal of responsibility for communication. However, their stories have yet to receive attention not only from military historians, but also from the field of translator studies. This study therefore seeks to analyze the roles and identities of military interpreters from the perspective of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA).
The discursive conceptions about identity are interrelated with the use of language. When identity is seen as a process of construction through social interaction, language plays a vital role in constructing identities. It is for this reason that this study focuses on the linguistic features that reflect identities in discourse, especially through the language mediations of interpreters and translators. The act of interpreting and translating political and ideological terms is likely to have a decisive effect on the construction of collective identities. This study explores the roles of military interpreters, who must take a clear position on the ideological issues arising from conflict situations.
There are three research questions related to the roles and identities of military interpreters. (1) Why did Korean society need so many interpreters after being liberated from the Japanese occupation? By understanding the historical context, it is possible to determine the roles of military interpreters, who emerged as a powerful group in Korean society. (2) What were the roles of military interpreters during the Korean war? As the war progressed, the US military suffered from an acute shortage of linguistic mediators. In light of those circumstances, this study aims to explain how they worked as messengers to remove language barriers. (3) How were collective identities constructed in the Panmunjom negotiations mediated by interpreters and translators? This study seeks to determine how military interpreters contributed to the construction of collective identities.
Before delving into the analysis, it is first necessary to introduce the theoretical framework of this study, which consists of three factors. First, adopting CDA is useful to analyze discourse in terms of identifying the roles and identities of military interpreters. The analytical methods proposed by van Leeuwen and van Dijk provide insight into the understanding of the roles of language mediators. In addition, their linguistic features in discourse can be linked to the construction of identities from the perspective of CDA. Second, the Qualitative Data Analysis (QDA) strategy is used to collect and classify large amounts of data. The initial process in organizing data is to code it such that it can be easily categorized. The QDA method provides methodological ways of trimming down the data collected from news reports, memoirs and the minutes of the Korean armistice talks. Third, corpus data from two crucial minutes of the Korean armistice talks can support the results generated through QDA. By using WordSmith Tools, the corpus can provide data on “interpreters” and “translation” in the form of a concordance and word lists.
This study consists of three levels for the purpose of contextual analysis. It starts at the macro-level (i.e., analyzing historical documents), which is useful in understanding the causes of the increasing demands placed on military interpreters. Coding data from news reports can be useful to find out what exactly they did and how they were treated as a valuable human resource. Then, it moves on to the meso-level of analyzing social and situational contexts. This level is twofold. The first layer is to focus on the memoirs of the military interpreters because their experience in the linguistic profession provides clues about their missions and roles as a bridge between the Korean and American militaries. The second layer is to focus on the Korean armistice negotiation. Considering the importance of the armistice talks, the language skills of the interpreters are likely to have affected the outcome of the negotiations. Under these circumstances, the linguistic experts may play a vital role for doing their duties as a soldier. Finally, the micro-level focuses on an analysis of the translated text. By adopting the CDA framework into the text, this study aims to explain the interrelation between language and identity. The approach to social actors, as proposed by van Leeuwen, provides an analytical framework through which to examine social representation. The approach to social cognition proposed by van Dijk gives us insight into understanding the discursive legitimation of exercising power.
As a result, this study reaches the following conclusions.
First, the analysis of news reports reveals that the group of Korean military interpreters and translators had social influence due to the language ability after the establishment of the United States Army Military Government in Korea (USAMGIK). The US military government occupied the Korean peninsula after its liberation from Japanese colonial rule. As there is a language barrier between the US army and the Koreans, the USAMGIK was thoroughly reliant on the services of Korean military interpreters in conducting its administrative duties. But the US army faced a lack of qualified interpreters because many Koreans couldn’t speak English. That is why the group of military interpreters and translators treated as valuable human resources. As the U.S. military interpreters influenced the public through this administrative work, they enjoyed a high social status.
Second, the analysis of the memoirs of the military interpreters who served in the Korean and US armies provides a lens for understanding their role in the Korean war. They acted as a bridge between the ROK and US forces in the course of conducting their missions. According to the memoirs of the military interpreters, they translated documents for military education while simultaneously making interpretations for American commanders. This also proves their acumen as military interpreters.
Third, analyzing the minutes of the Korean armistice talks shows that the military interpreters involved in the talks were mediators, watchers, and editors. The mediator role included not only cultural, but also linguistic mediation to explain the differences between Korean and English. Another role of the military interpreters was to check and correct the interpretations of the enemy interpreters. The military interpreters were not only translating the armistice agreement; they also edited the translated agreement and gave their feedback on the translation. Furthermore, this study analyzed their roles from the perspective from CDA proposed by van Leeuwen. The approach to legitimation of authority can help to illustrate how they conducted their roles by using their authorities such as expert authority, personal authority, and custom authority.
Fourth, CDA, as proposed by van Leeuwen and van Dijk, aided this study’s efforts to explain the roles and identities of military interpreters in the Panmunjom negotiations.
van Leeuwen explained the way of representing social actors in discourse. This study investigated how the participants of the negotiations could be represented in the translated discourse. During the negotiation, U.N. interpreters intervened to correct interpretation of the Communist interpreter. From the perspective of CDA, this study explained the intervention as the act of constructing collective identities by using the various ways of representing social actors. By analyzing the minutes of the Korean armistice talks, this study revealed that the military interpreters used the act of interpretation and translation to construct collective identities by representing social actors as the polarized groups of “foe or friend”.
While the theoretical framework of social actors provides a way of analyzing the collective identities, Sociocognitive approach, as proposed by van Dijk, contributed to the discourse analysis for explaining the interrelation between ideology and translation. van Dijk suggested discursive strategies that legitimate social power and dominance. In case of the talks for the translation of the draft armistice, both U.S. and Communist delegations used a discursive strategy of legitimation and justification to persuade or influence the other party. The analysis of the strategy reveals that the act of translating words could be used for delivering ideological ideas by adopting the strategy of legitimation and justification for their translation. More importantly, the military interpreters in the Korean armistice talks are likely to play a crucial role by suggesting translation of terms. In addition, the collective identities of the interpreters could affect the process of translation to deliver their ideological position.
During the Korean War, Korean and American interpreters and translators carried out their duties with a great deal of responsibility for communication. However, their stories have yet to receive attention not only from military historians, but also from the field of translator studies. This study therefore seeks to analyze the roles and identities of military interpreters from the perspective of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA).
The discursive conceptions about identity are interrelated with the use of language. When identity is seen as a process of construction through social interaction, language plays a vital role in constructing identities. It is for this reason that this study focuses on the linguistic features that reflect identities in discourse, especially through the language mediations of interpreters and translators. The act of interpreting and translating political and ideological terms is likely to have a decisive effect on the construction of collective identities. This study explores the roles of military interpreters, who must take a clear position on the ideological issues arising from conflict situations.
There are three research questions related to the roles and identities of military interpreters. (1) Why did Korean society need so many interpreters after being liberated from the Japanese occupation? By understanding the historical context, it is possible to determine the roles of military interpreters, who emerged as a powerful group in Korean society. (2) What were the roles of military interpreters during the Korean war? As the war progressed, the US military suffered from an acute shortage of linguistic mediators. In light of those circumstances, this study aims to explain how they worked as messengers to remove language barriers. (3) How were collective identities constructed in the Panmunjom negotiations mediated by interpreters and translators? This study seeks to determine how military interpreters contributed to the construction of collective identities.
Before delving into the analysis, it is first necessary to introduce the theoretical framework of this study, which consists of three factors. First, adopting CDA is useful to analyze discourse in terms of identifying the roles and identities of military interpreters. The analytical methods proposed by van Leeuwen and van Dijk provide insight into the understanding of the roles of language mediators. In addition, their linguistic features in discourse can be linked to the construction of identities from the perspective of CDA. Second, the Qualitative Data Analysis (QDA) strategy is used to collect and classify large amounts of data. The initial process in organizing data is to code it such that it can be easily categorized. The QDA method provides methodological ways of trimming down the data collected from news reports, memoirs and the minutes of the Korean armistice talks. Third, corpus data from two crucial minutes of the Korean armistice talks can support the results generated through QDA. By using WordSmith Tools, the corpus can provide data on “interpreters” and “translation” in the form of a concordance and word lists.
This study consists of three levels for the purpose of contextual analysis. It starts at the macro-level (i.e., analyzing historical documents), which is useful in understanding the causes of the increasing demands placed on military interpreters. Coding data from news reports can be useful to find out what exactly they did and how they were treated as a valuable human resource. Then, it moves on to the meso-level of analyzing social and situational contexts. This level is twofold. The first layer is to focus on the memoirs of the military interpreters because their experience in the linguistic profession provides clues about their missions and roles as a bridge between the Korean and American militaries. The second layer is to focus on the Korean armistice negotiation. Considering the importance of the armistice talks, the language skills of the interpreters are likely to have affected the outcome of the negotiations. Under these circumstances, the linguistic experts may play a vital role for doing their duties as a soldier. Finally, the micro-level focuses on an analysis of the translated text. By adopting the CDA framework into the text, this study aims to explain the interrelation between language and identity. The approach to social actors, as proposed by van Leeuwen, provides an analytical framework through which to examine social representation. The approach to social cognition proposed by van Dijk gives us insight into understanding the discursive legitimation of exercising power.
As a result, this study reaches the following conclusions.
First, the analysis of news reports reveals that the group of Korean military interpreters and translators had social influence due to the language ability after the establishment of the United States Army Military Government in Korea (USAMGIK). The US military government occupied the Korean peninsula after its liberation from Japanese colonial rule. As there is a language barrier between the US army and the Koreans, the USAMGIK was thoroughly reliant on the services of Korean military interpreters in conducting its administrative duties. But the US army faced a lack of qualified interpreters because many Koreans couldn’t speak English. That is why the group of military interpreters and translators treated as valuable human resources. As the U.S. military interpreters influenced the public through this administrative work, they enjoyed a high social status.
Second, the analysis of the memoirs of the military interpreters who served in the Korean and US armies provides a lens for understanding their role in the Korean war. They acted as a bridge between the ROK and US forces in the course of conducting their missions. According to the memoirs of the military interpreters, they translated documents for military education while simultaneously making interpretations for American commanders. This also proves their acumen as military interpreters.
Third, analyzing the minutes of the Korean armistice talks shows that the military interpreters involved in the talks were mediators, watchers, and editors. The mediator role included not only cultural, but also linguistic mediation to explain the differences between Korean and English. Another role of the military interpreters was to check and correct the interpretations of the enemy interpreters. The military interpreters were not only translating the armistice agreement; they also edited the translated agreement and gave their feedback on the translation. Furthermore, this study analyzed their roles from the perspective from CDA proposed by van Leeuwen. The approach to legitimation of authority can help to illustrate how they conducted their roles by using their authorities such as expert authority, personal authority, and custom authority.
Fourth, CDA, as proposed by van Leeuwen and van Dijk, aided this study’s efforts to explain the roles and identities of military interpreters in the Panmunjom negotiations.
van Leeuwen explained the way of representing social actors in discourse. This study investigated how the participants of the negotiations could be represented in the translated discourse. During the negotiation, U.N. interpreters intervened to correct interpretation of the Communist interpreter. From the perspective of CDA, this study explained the intervention as the act of constructing collective identities by using the various ways of representing social actors. By analyzing the minutes of the Korean armistice talks, this study revealed that the military interpreters used the act of interpretation and translation to construct collective identities by representing social actors as the polarized groups of “foe or friend”.
While the theoretical framework of social actors provides a way of analyzing the collective identities, Sociocognitive approach, as proposed by van Dijk, contributed to the discourse analysis for explaining the interrelation between ideology and translation. van Dijk suggested discursive strategies that legitimate social power and dominance. In case of the talks for the translation of the draft armistice, both U.S. and Communist delegations used a discursive strategy of legitimation and justification to persuade or influence the other party. The analysis of the strategy reveals that the act of translating words could be used for delivering ideological ideas by adopting the strategy of legitimation and justification for their translation. More importantly, the military interpreters in the Korean armistice talks are likely to play a crucial role by suggesting translation of terms. In addition, the collective identities of the interpreters could affect the process of translation to deliver their ideological position.
※ AI-Helper는 부적절한 답변을 할 수 있습니다.