This study deals with interpretation practices that speakers employ in order to (re)formulate what another person has said or implied. Analyzing interpretations in a public televised mediation that resembles a public debate, I show which kinds of interpretation practices that speakers adopt and how they differ depending the participants' roles. Systematically comparing all interpretations of the mediator vs. the opposing participants’, I argue that interpretations can be described as general practices with specific interactional effects, but that they are designed and exploited in different ways (i.e., for clarification and discourse-organization vs. self- and other-positioning and constructing arguments). I point out that speakers use meta-pragmatic accounts that support the interactional effects of their interpretations.

这项研究涉及说话者为了（重新）表达别人所说或暗示的内容而进行的口译实践。在类似于公众辩论的公共电视中介中分析口译时，我将展示演讲者采用哪种口译实践以及视参与者的角色而不同。我系统地比较了调解人和对立参与者的所有解释，我认为解释可以被描述为具有特定交互作用的一般做法，但是它们是以不同的方式设计和利用的（例如，为澄清和话语组织而作）。自我定位和其他定位以及建构论点）。我指出，演讲者使用的是元语用账户，以支持其解释的相互作用。