1. The Reform and Opening-up (RoU) program initiated by Deng Xiaoping in 1978 is an overarching metadiscourse that justifies China's recent development.
2. Development is a key component of the RoU discourse and a central theme throughout interpreter-mediated premier-meets-the-press conferences in China.
3. Through corpus-based critical discourse analysis, the study reveals the interpreters' institutional alignment and strengthening of Beijing's development discourse in English, establishing their role in shaping reality and effecting changes to East-West power differentials.
The article titled "Concordancing develop* at the interpreter-mediated press conferences: A corpus-based CDA on Reform and Opening-up (RoU) as an overarching metadiscourse justifying China's recent development" explores the role of interpreters in shaping China's discourse on development. The article is well-written and provides a detailed analysis of the data collected from premier-meets-the-press conferences in China from 1998 to 2017.
However, there are some potential biases and one-sided reporting in the article. Firstly, the article focuses solely on the government-affiliated interpreters' agency and (re)construction of China's `development' discourse. This narrow focus ignores other important actors who may also shape China's discourse on development, such as journalists, academics, and civil society organizations.
Secondly, the article presents an uncritical view of China's Reform and Opening-up program as a major watershed in China's recent history that has led to sustained development. While it is true that China has experienced rapid economic growth over the past few decades, this growth has come at a cost to human rights, environmental sustainability, and social justice. The article does not explore these issues or acknowledge any potential negative consequences of China's development model.
Thirdly, the article promotes a positive view of interpreting as a vital tool for facilitating communication and understanding between different cultures. While interpreting can certainly play an important role in promoting cross-cultural dialogue, it is also important to acknowledge that interpreters may face ethical dilemmas when working for authoritarian regimes or governments with poor human rights records.
Overall, while the article provides valuable insights into how interpreters shape China's discourse on development, it would benefit from a more critical perspective that acknowledges potential biases and limitations in its analysis.