18

interpretations(Part 1 of the questionnaire) of uncertainty expressions made by the German respondents and those made by the Swiss and Austrian respondents. One-way ANOVA found only one expression(“mit der Aussicht”) for which a significant difference exists. Post hoc comparisons show a significant difference between the Gern and Austrian groups of WPs on this expression. Because of the small number of Austrian respondents(n=8), treating the Austrians as a separate group ın ANOVA is tenuous. Therefore, the Austrian and Swiss responses were combined and compared with those of the German group. There was only one significantly different mean response between these two groups(“erwartet”). When the Austrian and German groups were combined and compared with the Swiss group, no significant differences were found. The general lack of significant differences between these three groups of German-speaking WPs allows us to conclude that nationality alone does not cause differences in interpretation of uncertainty expressions. Indeed, there appears to be a common interpretation among German-speaking WPs regardless of nationality. Because of this, the responses of these three groups are combined for subsequent hypothesis testing. This combined group is referred to as WP/German(n=109).

Part 1 of questionnaire GE1 and part 2 of questionnaire GE2 were the same. In both cases, German-speaking WPs were asked to assign point estimate probabilities to English expressions. A comparison of the results of these two groups resulted in no significant differences in means across the 16 expressions. The responses to these two questionnaires are combined into a group referred to as WP/English(n=62) for subsequent testing.

Table 3 reports the mean probability assigned to each English uncertainty expression by

the CPA and WP/English groups(Columns 3 and 4), and to the German translations by the