Structure and management issues of the emerging ornamental fish trade in Eritrea

Following independence from Ethiopia in 1993, Eritrea resumed exploiting Red Sea and Arabian fish species for the ornamental trade in 1995 as a means to earn foreign exchange from sparsely exploited marine resources. This paper describes the findings of research conducted in 1997, in collaboration with the Eritrean Ministry of Fisheries. The capture, transport and export of aquarium fish were reviewed and potential impacts and the status of management were investigated through liaison with stakeholders and researchers. From 1995 to 1997 two companies exported approximately 60,000 fish per year, mainly to the USA, worth US$65,000 (export value). Seventyfive species (from 22 families) were exported. Damselfishes made up two-thirds of total exports but more valuable families (angelfishes and butterflyfishes) were more economically significant. To earn revenue for Eritrea, a 20% export tax was imposed, although this was calculated from declarations by the operators. The emerging nature of the trade allowed detailed monitoring by the Ministry of Fisheries. However, management efforts were constrained by a lack of capacity for enforcement and baseline research. Several potential effects of the trade exist but other, land-based impacts may be more pressing concerns for Eritrea’s reefs. Research priorities for management are discussed as well as the implications of mariculture of Eritrean species by other nations

How Factors Related to Social Control Might Contribute to Juvenile Delinquency Among African American and Caucasian Females

This study examined how social control factors might contribute to delinquent behavior (status and criminal offenses) among African American and Caucasian females using Hirschi’s 1969 model of social control. Secondary data was used from the Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods (PHDCN). Data were used for African American and Caucasian girls from Wave I, resulting in a sample of 837. The results indicated that the social control variables did not decrease status offenses with the exception of involvement, which had a negative statistically significant relationship. There were no differences among the races. When looking at criminal offenses, results indicated that there was a statistically significant relationship for attachment and commitment, but not in the predicted direction. Involvement and belief were the only statistically significant variables and they were in the predicted negative direction. An interaction was detected between race-by-belief, race-by-involvement, and race-by- commitment, but only race-by-involvement was in the predicted direction. Further research is needed testing this model

Paths to politeness: Exploring how professional interpreters develop an understanding of politeness norms in British Sign Language and English

BerlinRachel Mapson - ORCID 0000-0003-0400-6576 https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0400-6576This chapter explores how bimodal bilinguals acquire and develop their awareness of politeness in British Sign Language (BSL). Drawing on data collected through semi-structured group discussions involving eight highly experienced BSL/English interpreters the chapter focuses on how the participants learned about linguistic politeness in BSL and how this contrasts with their acquisition of English politeness norms. The data indicate how different paths to the acquisition of linguistic politeness might affect understanding of it. The experience of interpreters from Deaf family backgrounds, who acquired BSL as their first language, contrasts with those who learned BSL formally, as an additional language, as adults. Although both groups of participants acquired knowledge of politeness in similar arenas, the languages they were exposed to in these environments differed and intra-group experiences were heterogeneous. The data highlight the difficulty of learning politeness norms in an L2, with participants reporting a lack of explicit focus on politeness in BSL classes and interpreter training programmes. This may reflect the lack of literature on politeness in signed language, and on BSL in particular. Both groups of interpreters reported experiences involving the negative transfer of L1 politeness norms. Data indicate that the different modalities of BSL and English may facilitate transferability rather than restrict it, with one affordance being the ‘blended transfer’ of non-manual politeness features associated with BSL which may be performed simultaneously with spoken English.caslpub4749pu

Im/politeness and interpreting

Rachel Mapson - ORCID 0000-0003-0400-6576 https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0400-6576In this chapter on the interpretation of politeness and impoliteness (im/politeness), im/politeness is considered as a discursive concept that exists in the way language is perceived and evaluated. This facet of pragmatics is therefore integral to the building and maintenance of interpersonal relationships but can present a significant challenge for interpreters because evaluations of im/politeness vary between different languages and cultures. Key perspectives and common themes within translation and interpreting studies literature are explored, including the affordance of familiarity with clients and context on the way im/politeness is interpreted. One theme relates to the degree of directness or indirectness involved, which may result in interpreters employing a variety of strategies, including hedges, prosody, toning down face threatening acts (FTAs) and use of third person. The influence of interpreters’ personal identity is another theme, which in some situations may manifest through use of particular terms of address. The chapter highlights the need for a greater focus on im/politeness and rapport management within interpreter training and continuous professional development (CPD), and the value of more explicit connections between translation and interpreting studies and the theoretical foundations within cross-cultural and intercultural im/politeness research.https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315205564pubpu

Polite appearances: How non-manual features convey politeness in British Sign Language

This paper explores how non-manual features are key to conveying linguistic politeness in British Sign Language (BSL). Data were collected through five semi-structured interviews incorporating the elicitation of two speech acts commonly associated with research on linguistic politeness: requests and apologies. The data from this exploratory study suggest that nonmanual features (including specific mouth gestures and movements of the head and upper body) are more crucial for linguistic politeness than manual signs. The data indicate a degree of commonality between the features used for politeness in BSL and those previously identified in American Sign Language (Roush 1999; Hoza 2001, 2007). While non-manual features convey both linguistic and paralinguistic meaning in signed language (Sandler and Lillo-Martin 2006), their use in politeness highlights the complexity of the interaction between these two functions and illuminates an aspect of politeness frequently overlooked in much research: the use of intonation. Analysis of the use of nonmanual features for politeness also problematizes the categorization of politeness strategies using existing frameworks developed on spoken languages, such as the internal modifications outlined by Blum-Kulka et al. (1989).caslAmbady, Nalini, Jasook Koo, Fiona Lee & Robert Rosenthal. 1996. More than words: Linguistic and nonlinguistic politeness in two cultures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 70(5). 996-1011. Arndt, Horst & Richard W. Janney. 1987. Intergrammar: Towards an integrative model of verbal, prosodic and kinetic choices in speech. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Attride-Stirling, Jennifer. 2001. Thematic networks: An analytic tool for qualitative research. Qualitative Research 1. 385-405. Baker-Shenk, Charlotte. 1982. A microanalysis of the non-manual components of questions in American Sign Language. Berkeley, CA: University of California PhD dissertation. Beebe, Leslie M., Tomoko Takahashi & Robin Uliss-Weltz. 1990. Pragmatic transfer in ESL refusals. In Robin Scarcella, Elaine Anderson & Stephen Krashen (eds.), Developing Communicative Competence in a Second Language, 55-73. New York: Newbury House. Billmyer, Kristine & Manka Varghese. 2000. Investigating instrument-based pragmatic variability: Effects of enhancing discourse completion tests. Applied Linguistics 21(4). 517-552. Blum-Kulka, Shoshana. 1982. Learning how to say what you mean in a second language: A study of speech act performance of learners of Hebrew as a second language. Applied Linguistics 3(1). 29-59. Blum-Kulka, Shoshana, Juliane House & Gabriele Kasper (eds.). 1989. Cross-cultural pragmatics: Requests and apologies, Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing. Blum-Kulka, Shoshana and Elite Olshtain. 1984. Requests and apologies: A cross-cultural study of speech act realization patterns (CCSARP). Applied Linguistics 5(3). 196-213. 182 Rachel Mapson DE GRUYTER MOUTON Boyes Braem, Penny. 1999. Rhythmic temporal patterns in the signing of deaf early and late learners of Swiss German sign language. Language and Speech 42(2/3). 177-208. Braun, Virginia & Victoria Clarke. 2006. Using thematic analysis in Psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology 3(2). 77-101. Brennan, Mary. 1992. The Deaf community and its language. In David Brien (ed.), Dictionary of British Sign Language/English. London: Faber and Faber Ltd. Brentari, Diane, Carolina Gonzlez, Amanda Seidl & Ronnie Wilbur. 2011. Sensitivity to visual prosodic cues in signers and nonsigners. Language and Speech 54(1). 49-72. Brown, Penelope & Stephen Levinson. 1987. Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Cokely, Dennis, & Charlotte Lee Baker-Shenk. 1980. American Sign Language: A teacher's resource text on curriculum, methods, and evaluation. Silver Spring, MD: TJ Publishers. Culpeper, Jonathan, Derek Bousfield & Anne Wichmann. 2003. Impoliteness revisited: With special reference to dynamic and prosodic aspects. Journal of Pragmatics 35(10). 1545-1579. Culpeper, Jonathan. 2005. Impoliteness and entertainment in the television quiz show: The Weakest Link. Journal of Politeness Research 1(1). 35-72. Culpeper, Jonathan. 2012. The prosody of im/politeness. Paper presented at LIAR III, Experimental and empirical approaches to politeness and impoliteness, Urbana, University of Illinois, 29-31 August. Dachovsky, Svetlana 2008. Facial expression as intonation in ISL: The case of conditionals. In Joseph Quer (ed.), Leading research in Sign Language, 61-82. Hamburg: Signum Press. Dachovsky, Svetlana & Wendy Sandler. 2009. Visual intonation in the prosody of a Sign Language. Language and Speech 52(2/3). 287-314. De Vos, Connie, Els Van Der Kooij & Onno Crasborn. 2009. Mixed signals: Combining linguistic and affective functions of eyebrows in questions in Sign Language of the Netherlands. Language and speech 52(2/3). 315-339. Eelen, Gino. 2001. A critique of politeness theories. Manchester: St Jerome Publishing Ltd. Ekman, Paul, & Wallace V. Friesen. 1978. Facial action coding system: A technique for the measurement of facial movement. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. Flix-Brasdefer, Csar. 2009. Pragmatic variation across Spanish(es): Requesting in Mexican, Costa Rican, and Dominican Spanish. Intercultural Pragmatics 6(4). 473-51. Fenlon, Jordon. 2010. Seeing sentence boundaries: The production and perception of visual markers signaling boundaries in Signed Languages. London: University College London PhD thesis. Ferreira Brito, Lucinda. 1995. Por uma Gramtica de L_nguas de Sinais [For a grammar of sign language]. Tempo Brasileiro. George, Johnny. 2011. Politeness in Japanese Sign Language (JSL): Polite JSL expression as evidence for intermodal language contact influence. Berkeley, CA: University of California dissertation. Goffman, Erving. 1967. Interactional ritual: Essays on face-to-face behaviour. Garden City, NY: Anchor Books. Golato, Andrea. 2003. Studying compliment responses: A comparison of DCTs and recordings of naturally occurring talk. Applied Linguistics 24(1). 90-121. Harris, Raychelle, Heidi Holmes & Donna Mertens. 2009. Research ethics in sign language communities. Sign Language Studies 9(2). 104-131. DE GRUYTER MOUTON Politeness in British Sign Language 183 Hoza, Jack. 2001. The mitigation of face threatening acts in interpreted interaction: Requests and rejections in American Sign Language and English. Boston, MA: Boston University dissertation. Hoza, Jack. 2007. It's not what sign, it's how you sign it: Politeness in American Sign Language. Washington DC: Gallaudet University Press. Jefferson, Gail. 1984. Transcription notation. In J. Maxwell Atkinson & John Heritage (eds.), Structures of social interaction: Studies in conversational analysis, 134-162. New York: Cambridge University Press. Johnston, Trevor & Adam Schembri. 2007. Australian Sign Language: An introduction to Sign Language linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Kasper, Gabriele. 2006. When once is not enough: Politeness of multiple requests in oral proficiency interviews. Multilingua 25(3). 323-350. Kyle, Jim & Bencie Woll. 1985. Sign Language. The study of deaf people and their language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Leech, Geoffrey. 1983. Principles of pragmatics. Vol. 1. No. 9. London: Longman. Liddell, Scott. 1978. An introduction to relative clauses in ASL. In Patricia Siple (ed.), Understanding language through sign language research, 59-90. New York: Academic Press. Liddell, Scott. 1980. American Sign Language syntax. The Hague: Mouton. Liddell, Scott & Robert Johnson. 1989. American Sign Language: The phonological base. Washington DC: Gallaudet University Press. Loveday, Leo. 1981. Pitch, politeness and sexual role: An exploratory investigation into the pitch correlates of English and Japanese politeness formulae. Language and Speech 24(1). 71-89. Mapson, Rachel. 2012. Politeness in British Sign Language: The effects of language contact. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the British Association for Applied Linguistics. University of Southampton, 6-8 September. Mindess, Anna. 2006. Reading between the signs: Intercultural communication for Sign Language. Boston MA: Intercultural Press. Mitchell, Ross & Michael Karchmer. 2004. Chasing the mythical ten percent: Parental hearing status of deaf and hard of hearing students in the United States. Sign Language Studies 4(2). 138-163. Monetta, Laura, Henry Cheang & Marc Pell. 2008. Understanding speaker attitudes from prosody by adults with Parkinson's disease. Journal of Neuropsychology 2(2). 415-530. Nespor, Marina & Wendy Sandler. 1999. Prosody in Israeli sign language. Language and Speech 42(2-3). 143-176. Ofuka, Etsuko, J. Denis McKeown, Mitch Waterman & Peter Roach. 2000. Prosodic cues for rated politeness in Japanese speech. Speech Communication 32(3): 199-217. Ogiermann, Eva. 2009. Politeness and in-directness across cultures: A comparison of English, German, Polish and Russian requests. Journal of Politeness Research 5(2). 180-216. Roush, Daniel. 1999. Indirectness strategies in American Sign Language: Requests and refusals. Washington DC: Gallaudet University MA dissertation. Roush, Daniel. 2011. Language between bodies: A cognitive approach to understanding linguistic politeness in American Sign Language. Sign Language Studies 11(3). 329-373. Sandler, Wendy & Diane Lillo-Martin. 2006. Sign Language and linguistic universals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 184 Rachel Mapson DE GRUYTER MOUTON Scollon, Ron & Suzanne Wong Scollon. 2001. Intercultural communication: A discourse approach. Maldon MA: Blackwell. Spencer-Oatey, Helen (ed.). 2008 [1st edn. published 2000]. Culturally speaking: Culture, communication and politeness theory. London: Continuum. Stone, Christopher & Donna West. 2012. Translation, representation and the Deaf -voice'. Qualitative Research 12(6). 645-665. Sutton-Spence, Rachel & Donna West. 2011. Negotiating the legacy of hearingness. Qualitative Inquiry 17(5). 422-432. Sutton-Spence, Rachel. 1999. The influence of English on British Sign Language. International Journal of Bilingualism 3(4). 363-394. Sutton-Spence, Rachel & Bencie Woll. 1999. The linguistics of British Sign Language: An introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Thompson, Susan. 1995. Teaching intonation on questions. ELT Journal 49(3). 235-243. Trees, April & Valerie Manusov. 1998. Managing face concerns in criticism: Integrating nonverbal behaviours as a dimension of politeness in female friendship dyads. Human Communication Research 24(4). 564-583. Van der Kooij, Els, Onno Crasborn & Wim Emmerik. 2006. Explaining prosodic body leans in Sign Language of the Netherlands: Pragmatics required. Journal of Pragmatics 38(10). 1598-1614. Vermeerbergen, Myriam, Lorraine Leeson & Onno Crasborn. 2007. Simultaneity in signed languages: A string of sequentially organised issues. In Myriam Vermeerbergen, Lorraine Leeson & Onno Crasborn (eds.), Simultaneity in Signed Languages: Form and function, 1-26. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Watts, Richard. 2003. Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Wichmann, Anne. 2004. The intonation of please-requests: A corpus based study. Journal of Pragmatics 36(9). 1521-1549. Wilbur, Ronnie. 1999. Stress in ASL: Empirical evidence and linguistic issues. Language and Speech 42(2-3). 229-250. Wilbur, Ronnie & Cynthia Patschke. 1998. Body leans and the marking of contrast in American Sign Language. Journal of Pragmatics 30(3). 275-30. Woodfield, Helen & Maria Economidou-Kogetsidis. 2010. -I just need more time-: A study of native and non-native students' requests to faculty for an extension. Multilingua 29(1). 77-118. Young, Alys & Jennifer Ackerman. 2001. Reflections on validity and epistemology in a study of working relations between Deaf and Hearing professionals. Qualitative Health Research 11(2). 179-189. Zeshan, Ulrike. 2004. Interrogative constructions in Signed Languages: Crosslinguistic Perspectives. Language 80(1). 7-39.10pub4753pub

Interpreting for deaf children in healthcare settings: An exploration of challenges and strategies

Rachel Mapson - ORCID: 0000-0003-0400-6576 https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0400-6576Good health literacy enables individuals to look after their health and well-being. However, deaf adults are seven times more likely to experience poor health literacy then their hearing counterparts, leading to poorer health outcomes. To improve health literacy levels in the deaf community, researchers emphasise the need for deaf children to access health-related information. When a child attends healthcare appointments, a qualified sign language interpreter is therefore essential. However, interpreting in this environment is a complex phenomenon. This qualitative study adopts an emic perspective to explore the challenges encountered by interpreters and some of the strategies adopted. Ten registered sign language interpreters with experience of working with deaf children in healthcare settings were selected to be involved in the research. Semi-structured interviews were carried out with each participant and reflexive thematic analysis was used to identify themes in the data. This study illustrates that, in addition to linguistic skills, an interpreter needs to possess interpersonal skills to conduct themselves in a professional manner and work in collaboration with the healthcare practitioner, child and parents. Additionally, the research shows that in this environment, interpreters may experience intrapersonal demands, highlighting the need for them to manage their emotions and look after their own well-being.inpressinpres

Intercultural im/politeness: Influences on the way professional British Sign Language/English interpreters mediate im/polite language

Rachel Mapson - ORCID 0000-0003-0400-6576 https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0400-6576https://benjamins.com/catalog/pbns.311.07mappubpu