Sociocognitive constructs in Translation and Interpreting Studies (TIS): Do we really need concepts like norms and risk when we have a comprehensive usage-based theory of language?

Within TIS, the epistemological status of constructs at the interface of the social and cognitive domains has been identified as an urgent concern. Several scholars are calling for a philosophical approach to ground constructs that are either irreducibly sociocognitive or capable of integrating the domains in a principled way. There are few analyses, however, of whether, or if so how, prevalent constructs from TIS actually serve this purpose. This paper explores two constructs, norms and risk, that are claimed to cater for this epistemological need, and which at the same time are theoretically ambitious. In the analysis of the two concepts, we focus on three central lines of critique: 1. an ontological and epistemological instability, or slipperiness, 2. reliance on a rational actor model of human behavior, and 3. the backgrounding or elision of the specifically linguistic nature of translation. In the analysis, each concept is interrogated along these lines, making use of a framework for conceptual analysis outlined in Marín García. Following this critique, we introduce the foundational assumptions and characteristics of usage-based theories of language and outline the contours of an approach to translation and interpreting that builds on it. In conclusion, we argue that adopting such an approach resolves many of the problems identified in the analysis and renders independent theorization of both norms and risk redundant.