4.2 The role of the rhematic components in comprehending and interpreting oral
messages
Semantics of oral discourse has also to do with the notions of the theme and the rheme. The theme is treated as the “subject” (the “known” part) of the message while the rheme describes “what happens to the theme” and thus ensures that “new information” is constantly being “fed” into the discourse. Any word (phrase) in the utterance may make up either the theme or the rheme. Usually the thematic or rhematic nature of words (phrases) is determined by the word order, definite or indefinite articles, adjectives or intonation, e.g. A girl (the rheme) waved at us (the theme) asking for a lift. The girl (the theme) was rather pretty (the rheme), so our driver agreed. Normally rhematic elements are placed at the end of utterances, however if they occupy unusual front position as a result of the speaker’s desire to make greater emphasis upon them, they may become a serious problem for simultaneous interpreters who will have to wait untill the utterance is completed before they may start interpreting it. This often happens in the consecutive and simultaneous interpreting from Ukrainian and Russian into English, e.g. Другим після цього закону у нас був прийнятий Трудовий кодекс; Автобазу має він свою, проте не дають йому роботи.
Practice shows that having understood the theme of the message, the interpreter starts to look for the new, rhematic information in the message, which has to do with processes, actions and their evaluation as well as for the information about intents of the speaker. It being so, the rhematic part of the utterance, which is also called the “informational focus” [Чернов 1987: 166-178], becomes essential for interpreting.
Thus, the semantic structure of the message Evenings may be very cold in Scotland can be graphically represented as follows [see also Максiмов 2006: 100-1011]:
UTTERANCE
PROPOSITION
I warn you
that evenings may be very cold in
Scotland
PRAGMATIC COMPONENT
THEME
RHEME
PROPOSITION
Deictic elements (markers of person, space and time), as shown on the scheme, are parts of both pragmatic component and components of the proposition, while elements of modal and evaluative components may be only parts of the proposition. In other words, pragmalinguistics assumes that modality and evaluation cannot be parts of the pragmatic component and that words must, strongly or настійно in phrases like I must warn you that…; We strongly recommend you that… ; Ми настійно вам рекомендуємо, щоб ви ... are emotional intensifiers but not markers of modality or evaluation.
Perception of the rhematic components of messages allows the interpreter to understand the meaning of the messages as well as their modality and evaluation of facts and events by the speaker. Failure to do this leads to serious mistakes and distortions in interpreting.
Consider Text 4.1 (please, listen to the phonogram) in which the speaker indistinctly pronounces the rhematic element parity (рівні права, паритет), although it is repeated further on in the speech, and the surrounding words. Failure to “hear” and to interpret this element may lead to considerable distortions and even failure to interpret the ongoing utterances where the speaker talks about the struggle of women for their rights. Another important rhematic element, though also not very clearly pronounced, is down and out of the way (усунений, знятий). It presupposes further argumentation of the speaker and it is essential that it should be properly rendered.
Text 4.1