Repositioning Self and Others in the translation of China’s diplomatic responses

How Words Shape Global Images

When governments speak to the world, every word helps shape how a country is seen. This article looks at how China’s foreign ministry press conferences about COVID-19 were translated into English, and shows that translation is not just about swapping words between languages. Subtle choices in what to tone down, what to highlight, and how to describe different players quietly reshape China’s image, its critics, and the power of its spokespersons in the eyes of international audiences.

Why Pandemic Talk Became a Battleground

The study starts from the idea that political language is always about positioning: how speakers present themselves, their allies, and their rivals. During the COVID-19 pandemic, China’s regular foreign ministry briefings became an important stage for defending the country’s actions, answering accusations, and promoting cooperation. As COVID-19 turned into what some call “pandemic geopolitics,” these briefings were not just about public health; they were about who was responsible, whose system worked better, and who could be trusted. Because foreign journalists rely heavily on the English versions of these remarks, the way the Chinese statements were interpreted and translated matters greatly for how China is perceived abroad.

How the Researchers Read Between the Lines

The authors collected Chinese and English versions of 71 COVID‑19 related question-and-answer exchanges from China’s foreign ministry press conferences in May 2020, the period when China was reopening while the virus was surging elsewhere. They used a systematic method for tracking evaluative language—words that show feelings, judgments of people’s behavior, and assessments of how valuable or important things are. They also examined how speakers open up or close down room for disagreement, and how strongly they stress particular points. Finally, they applied “framing” tools from narrative studies to see whether certain details were omitted, added, generalized, or made more specific in translation, and how these shifts repositioned China (“Self”), other countries (“Others”), and the relationship between spokespersons and their audiences.

What Changes When Chinese Becomes English

Across all categories, the English versions contained fewer evaluative and intensifying expressions than the Chinese originals. Praise for China’s own efforts—its speed, responsibility, and generosity—was frequently softened or omitted, especially flowery phrases and strong boosters like “always” or “actively.” At the same time, some strong negative descriptions of other actors, particularly the United States and certain politicians, were trimmed, yet in other cases sharpened with added or more concrete detail. The translators most often used “selective appropriation”: leaving out or occasionally inserting pieces of evaluative language, and sometimes relabelling participants more broadly (for example, shifting from “China” to “Asian groups”) to widen the moral stakes. These choices changed not only how positive or negative the statements sounded, but also how close or distant the spokesperson appeared from controversial claims.

Subtle Shifts in Power and Politeness

These patterns of change produced a threefold repositioning. First, China’s own image became more modest and restrained in English. By toning down self-praise and scaling back emotional intensity, the translations presented China as less boastful and more polite, a style the authors argue is likely more acceptable to foreign audiences and consistent with diplomatic courtesy. Second, while some criticism of other countries was softened, the English versions often made the misdeeds of “negative others” more concrete and easier to grasp, reinforcing a clear contrast between China and its critics without sounding overly aggressive. Third, small tweaks in how statements were framed—such as adding phrases that imply certainty, or removing markers that distance the speaker from a claim—tended to increase the authority of the spokesperson and limit space for disagreement, even as other additions made the tone friendlier and more inclusive on non-sensitive topics. Together, these shifts suggest a defensive but carefully managed diplomatic stance.

Why These Quiet Choices Matter

In everyday terms, the article shows that the interpreters at China’s foreign ministry are not just neutral language machines. Under time pressure and institutional constraints, their choices systematically nudge how China’s pandemic story is told to the world. The English versions make China sound more measured and courteous, slightly blur its self-congratulation, sharpen the picture of those seen as acting unfairly, and bolster the spokespersons’ authority. These are small adjustments in wording, but they add up to real differences in how national identity, blame, and power come across in global conversation.

Citation: Liu, Q.Y., Ang, L.H. Repositioning Self and Others in the translation of China’s diplomatic responses. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 13, 429 (2026). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-026-06794-z

Keywords: diplomatic translation, China foreign ministry, COVID-19 communication, political discourse, international image