Login or register (free and only takes a few minutes) to participate in this question.
You will also have access to many other tools and opportunities designed for those who have language-related jobs
(or are passionate about them). Participation is free and the site has a strict confidentiality policy.
|Spanish to English translations [PRO]|
Social Sciences - Social Science, Sociology, Ethics, etc. / Communication - hegemonic discourse
|Spanish term or phrase: Ayuda con frase|
|"Cualquier discurso comunicativo (conversación interpersonal, libro de texto, conferencia académica, correo electrónico, carta postal, chat informático, debate televisivo, etc.) se construye mediante la circulación de expresiones; la fiabilidad, pertinencia y objetividad de dichas expresiones se ponen en duda, pues, de lo contrario, sería imposible que los interlocutores puedan meta-comunicarse, es decir, alcancen acuerdos sobre la comunicación, más allá de lo que se expresa. "|
This sentence is causing me grief. It is one of the introductory paragraphs in an academic abstract on mass communications media/social communications media.
Maybe I've got completely the wrong end of the stick, but, de entrada, I feel very strongly that "se ponen en duda" should be in negative in order for this sentence to make sense. How can there be meta-communication without some common ground?
TIA - I'll post in Esp-Esp now, and will read both with interest.
Selected response from:
Local time: 20:34
|First in of those who gave me the confidence to question the original! Client has now confirmed there is a missing "no".|
Thanks to everyone for their time and help.
4 KudoZ points were awarded for this answer
23 mins confidence: peer agreement (net): +5
se ponen en duda - are discussed (or, more strongly, "scrutinized", put under the microscope, etc.)
assuming that the original does not have a mistake, then perhaps it means that there is room for discussion about the reliability of these expressions etc., and this allows meta-communication to take place