translate the following paragraphs into Chinese.  It was found in our study that the speaker’s desire to obscure his words and conceal their problematic details triggers
many changes that take place in his narratives with invented scripts, in comparison with his narratives with factual
scripts:
1. The number of words in the narratives with invented scripts is smaller—the speaker tends to speak less or to speak
very briefly, apparently thinking that the less he says, the fewer details he might reveal that could help the person
seeking to detect the invention.
2. Narratives with invented scripts contain more coordinate and dependent clauses and fewer independent clauses—
using coordinate clauses enables the speaker to economize with his words (in Hebrew). The subordination testifies
to a dynamic process and imparts a rhythm of ‘‘breathlessness’’ to the story, on account of which the person hearing
the story hastens to what is new information in the sentence and ‘‘en route’’ misses what is said within the dependent
clauses (Fruchtman, 1990). In contrast, narratives with factual scripts state facts, which are presented in simple
sentences.
3. The conjunctions in narratives with invented scripts are more numerous, in light of the extensive use of compound
and complex sentences that they entail.
4. Narratives with invented scripts contain fewer verbs in the past tense and more in the present and future. From the
standpoint of content, a person intending to mislead can tell a story that may sound completely true, but in linguistic
terms he uses verbs in the present or future tenses, whose significance is that the story has not yet taken place or has
not happened at all. A further reason for the use of present or future verbs is the speaker’s desire to prevent an
examination to verify what has been said. When he tells about something that is going on at the moment or that has
not occurred yet, the matter cannot be examined. He can thus, if confronted with his invention, use the excuse that he
never said that these things really happened.
5. More general and fewer specific words are to be found in narratives with invented scripts—using many generalized
words is evidence of the speaker’s lack of close personal acquaintance with the matters he is describing, or of his
attempt to obscure by distancing his words from a precise description of details. In this way, he conceals what he
does not want to be known (Knapp et al., 1974; Chapman, in press; Johnson and Raye, 1981; Sornig, 1989).
Several examples of the use of techniques of concealment and vagueness are in evidence in a passage from the
fabricated story of subject number 35:
It was...the Japanese police, that we didn’t have the vaguest uh notion (generalized word) why...they stopped us,
what we did (subordinate clause), uh, what we’re supposed (use of present tense) to do, uh, we got out of the car
now, uh, you’ve got to understand that the Japanese...they uh...don’t know (use of present tense) how you speak
Hebrew at all (dependent clause), ahem. We started...uh...to talk to them to shout at them they started to shout at
us and...and...anyway they um...they go on like this for 20 min...scream at us in and...shout (use of present
tense) at us, we didn’t know what to do, in the end when they saw we have...Da...a child (generalized word) in
the car, somehow they started to feel sorry for us and told us that we should (use of future tense)  follow them
(conjunction and dependent clause). ...and...in the end uh...we decided to phone my hus...uh [first name]’s my
husband’s parents, and...not in the end but pretty much at the beginning we phoned [first name]’s parents
(coordinate clause), we told them they should (use of future tense) clear up what’s going on, what is this....
Persuasion. Persuasion is a technique used by a speaker who wishes to steer the thinking of those listening to him in
a certain direction that the speaker desires. Persuasion techniques are in particularly extensive use in advertising and
propaganda (Nir, 1984; Landau, 1987; Nir, 1988; Van Dijk, 1997; Nordhielm and Suzuki, 2000; Nordhielm, 2003).
In Sornig’s opinion (1989), the mechanism of persuasion works on cognitive arguments.
This study shows that many techniques of persuasion are also applicable when an attempt is being made to mislead.
The speaker attempts to persuade his listeners that his words are correct and to steer their thinking and belief in the
direction of what he says. The success of his persuasion can help him to evade punishment or to derive benefit from
misleading his listeners; as a result, the ability to persuade is of great value.
The desire of the speaker to persuade his listeners is manifest in the research results in several measures: