translate the following paragraphs into Chinese.  1. Greater use of collocations and idioms in narratives with invented scripts. Collocation is defined as ‘‘any sequence
of words tending to appear together and in a set order’’ (Toury and Margalit, 1973:100). This is one of the external
means that the speaker employs to raise the level of his language so as to sound credible.
2. Many repetitions of details. These are repetitions of words or sentences which were uttered in close proximity to
each other. Such a tactic is a form of ‘‘brainwashing’’ of the listener, as if the more times the words are spoken, the
more correct they are. The tactic is also an attempt to demonstrate the speaker’s practical and emotional familiarity
with what is being described, although it was never really experienced by him. Nir (1997), in his paper on political
slogans, notes that word repetition is a rhetorical technique that makes the subject under discussion catchier and
easier to remember (ibid.).
3. Exaggerated number of emotive words in narratives with invented scripts. The deceiving speaker will exaggerate in
his use of emotive words, in order to impart credibility to his words (Landau, 1987; Sornig, 1989). If true stories
testify that the speaker makes normative use of emotive words, why should he increase his use of these words? The
reason must be his conscious attempt to sound believable, and he therefore in fact exaggerates their use.
A passage from the fabricated story of subject number 2 exemplifies a number of instances of the technique of
persuasion:
The...promoter decided uh that he... he would get us to sign. He got us to sign about the...that deal. He...
I understood that...we couldn’t get out of it (idiom). We had to go on with the...enterprise, and...there was an
agonizing moral debate (emotionalism). And because I know both sides of the system, u-va-e...I understand
what it can do, I decided to go to the department. The department of uh Rafael [Israel’s Authority for Weapons
Development] at...the Technion [University]. And...I went to them and I made my case before (collocation)
the...before the...main man in charge. I should point out that this man in charge was a promoter from uh the
business world, purely [business]. He wasn’t a part of...the university. So he denied my claims (collocation) and
said nothing would come of it anyway (idiom), or I don’t have anything to be afraid of (emotionalism), and
everything was fine and dandy (collocation). That’s it. So uh...it turned out that in the end after we finished that
project and it was our final project that...came out really well, brilliant, and...we got a grade of ‘‘excellent’’,
I realized that...that project, that enterprise, helped uh to develop a product that...was sold to...Arab states,
and they use it in...in their tanks, it improves their ability uh to intercept a night action. Uh, it’s on my
conscience (emotionalism). To this day.
Distancing of responsibility. The distancing of responsibility can be of two types: One, the speaker’s desire to
distance himself from the physical situation of giving testimony or the story of an event that did not happen. The
speaker demonstrates discomfort from finding himself in a situation in which the act of misleading occurs, and from
the necessity (whether arising from external or internal factors) of being in such a situation. He attempts to minimize
his part in the story, and thereby also his responsibility for what is told. The second type is the distancing of the story
itself from any possibility of examining it closely, either verifying it or proving that it did not happen. In this case, the
content of the story is manipulated; all the details that might be examined are removed from it, and with them, any
possibility of confronting the speaker with what he said (Knapp et al., 1974; Dulaney, 1982).
The speaker’s desire to distance himself from a description of the event and from the possibility of accepting
responsibility for his actions can be identified in two areas:
1. Greater use of verbs in the third person and minimal use of verbs in the first person in narratives with invented
scripts—in such narratives, greater use was found of third person verbs. Changing verbs in this manner indicates an
attempt on the part of the speaker to distance himself from the invented situation and from the possibility of being
caught out. By using the technique of ‘‘they did’’ or ‘‘he said,’’ the speaker renders himself passive or he disappears
from the description of the occurrence, and if he is passive, he bears no responsibility for the results.
2. More references to the other in narratives with invented scripts—this finding testifies to the speaker’s ability to
conceal his feelings about fabricating without explicitly changing the content of the story, in keeping with the
findings of the studies of Knapp et al. (1974), Johnson and Raye (1981), and Dulaney (1982). The extensive use of
references to the other enables the speaker to distance himself from the situation described—to make himself merely a supporting player, in that he makes others the subjects of his sentences. This extensive use of references to
the other will enable the speaker to evade responsibility for his actions at some future date, if he is ever confronted
with his words. He didn’t do them; others did. This is consistent with the morphological examination, in which
liberal use of third person verbs was found—in other words, an emphasis on the ‘‘other’’, in contrast to a minimal
resort to verbs in the first person.