Corp
Corpus-based Translation
us-based Translation
Studies: A Quantitative or
Studies: A Quantitative or
Qualitati
Qualitative
ve Development?
Development?
Article Article CITATIONS CITATIONS 4 4 READS READS 1,456 1,456 1 author: 1 author:
Some of the authors of this publication are
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these relatedalso working on these related
projects:
projects:
English-Thai parallel corpus of international treaties
English-Thai parallel corpus of international treaties ViewView
project
project
Dorothy Kenny
Dorothy Kenny
Dublin City University
Dublin City University 16
16 PUBLICATIONSPUBLICATIONS 165165CITATIONSCITATIONS SEE PROFILE
Corpus-based Translation Studies:
Corpus-based Translation Studies:
A
A Quantitative
Quantitative or
or Qualitative
Qualitative
Development?
Development?
Dorothy Kenny Dorothy Kenny Abstract AbstractBaker’s (1993) earliest paper on
Baker’s (1993) earliest paper on the potential of corpus-based translationthe potential of corpus-based translation studies argued that corpora would provide an empirical basis for studies argued that corpora would provide an empirical basis for descriptive translation studies. Since then corpora have been used descriptive translation studies. Since then corpora have been used principally in the investigation of “universal” (or, more tentatively, principally in the investigation of “universal” (or, more tentatively, “general”) features of translation, on the one hand,
“general”) features of translation, on the one hand, and in the study of and in the study of thethe
specific styles of individual translators, on the other. A number of specific styles of individual translators, on the other. A number of extensive case studies have now been conducted, and advances in extensive case studies have now been conducted, and advances in corpus-based methodologies have been made, but it is not altogether clear what based methodologies have been made, but it is not altogether clear what corpora have added to our understanding of basic theoretical constructs in corpora have added to our understanding of basic theoretical constructs in translation studies. Has the quantitative shift led to a qualitative shift, as translation studies. Has the quantitative shift led to a qualitative shift, as Tognini-Bonelli (1996) has argued in the case of linguistics in general? In Tognini-Bonelli (1996) has argued in the case of linguistics in general? In this paper I aim to investigate whether or not our understanding of this paper I aim to investigate whether or not our understanding of aspects of our object of enquiry has shifted in any way after a decade of aspects of our object of enquiry has shifted in any way after a decade of using corpora in translation studies. Taking such concepts as the unit of using corpora in translation studies. Taking such concepts as the unit of translation, equivalence, and the translator’s voice as examples, I ask translation, equivalence, and the translator’s voice as examples, I ask whether exposure to more data, and new ways of looking at this data, whether exposure to more data, and new ways of looking at this data, have led us to rethink or refine any of these concepts.
have led us to rethink or refine any of these concepts.
1.
1. IIntntrrododuuctctiionon
In her agenda-setting 1993 paper on corpus linguistics and translation In her agenda-setting 1993 paper on corpus linguistics and translation studies, Mona Baker argued that access to corpora — large electronic studies, Mona Baker argued that access to corpora — large electronic collections of texts — stood to change the face of translation studies. Given collections of texts — stood to change the face of translation studies. Given that translation studies had already begun to shed its preoccupation with that translation studies had already begun to shed its preoccupation with
source texts and prescriptive notions of equivalence, and had instead begun source texts and prescriptive notions of equivalence, and had instead begun to focus on real translated texts in
to focus on real translated texts in their host contexts — notably under thetheir host contexts — notably under the influence of Even-Zohar’s (1979) polysystem theory and Toury’s (1980, influence of Even-Zohar’s (1979) polysystem theory and Toury’s (1980, 1995) descriptive translation studies — Baker argued that the time was ripe 1995) descriptive translation studies — Baker argued that the time was ripe for corpora to be pressed into
for corpora to be pressed into service in translation studies. Large corporaservice in translation studies. Large corpora of translated and original texts would help translation theorists further of translated and original texts would help translation theorists further define and account for their object of inquiry, by providing them “with a define and account for their object of inquiry, by providing them “with a unique opportunity to observe the object of their study
unique opportunity to observe the object of their study and to explore whatand to explore what
it is that makes it different from other objects of study, such as language in it is that makes it different from other objects of study, such as language in general or indeed any other kind of cultural interaction” and by allowing general or indeed any other kind of cultural interaction” and by allowing them “to explore, on a larger scale than was ever possible before, the them “to explore, on a larger scale than was ever possible before, the principles that govern translational behaviour and the constraints under principles that govern translational behaviour and the constraints under which it operates” (Baker 1993: 235). Corpora, it was hoped, could help which it operates” (Baker 1993: 235). Corpora, it was hoped, could help translation studies make the leap from “prescriptive to descriptive translation studies make the leap from “prescriptive to descriptive statements, from methodologising to proper theorising, and from statements, from methodologising to proper theorising, and from individual and fragmented pieces of
individual and fragmented pieces of research to powerful generalisations”research to powerful generalisations”
(ibid.: 248). (ibid.: 248).
It is easy to understand Baker’s sense of anticipation, when one It is easy to understand Baker’s sense of anticipation, when one considers how corpora had already begun to revolutionise other considers how corpora had already begun to revolutionise other disciplines, including lexicography and linguistics. The first corpus-based disciplines, including lexicography and linguistics. The first corpus-based dictionary of English had been published in 1987 (Sinclair 1987), and dictionary of English had been published in 1987 (Sinclair 1987), and before long, corpora had begun to dominate the area. Indeed dictionaries before long, corpora had begun to dominate the area. Indeed dictionaries are nowadays compiled almost exclusively using corpora (Cermák 2003: are nowadays compiled almost exclusively using corpora (Cermák 2003: 18). In linguistics, despite early scepticism about the usefulness of corpora, 18). In linguistics, despite early scepticism about the usefulness of corpora, the shift to real language data was well underway by the early 1990s, so the shift to real language data was well underway by the early 1990s, so much so that corpus linguists delighted in the fact that corpora were much so that corpus linguists delighted in the fact that corpora were becoming mainstream (Svartvik 1996). And before long it
becoming mainstream (Svartvik 1996). And before long it was consideredwas considered
very poor form
very poor form nonot t to invoke corpus data to back up linguistic to invoke corpus data to back up linguistic
generalisations (see, for example, Aitchison 2005: 18).
generalisations (see, for example, Aitchison 2005: 18).11 Corpora had also Corpora had also
come to dominate computational linguistics (see unpublished work by come to dominate computational linguistics (see unpublished work by Julia Hirschberg cited in Sampson 2005), with automatic induction from Julia Hirschberg cited in Sampson 2005), with automatic induction from corpora now seen as the only viable way to build computational grammars, corpora now seen as the only viable way to build computational grammars, overcome the knowledge-acquisition bottleneck in machine translation, overcome the knowledge-acquisition bottleneck in machine translation, etc.
etc.
In lexicography and the branch of linguistics that deals with In lexicography and the branch of linguistics that deals with lexicogrammar, which considers the interaction between words and the lexicogrammar, which considers the interaction between words and the grammatical structures they typically occur in (a concern not just in corpus grammatical structures they typically occur in (a concern not just in corpus linguistics, but also in other areas of theoretical and computational linguistics, but also in other areas of theoretical and computational linguistics — see Pustejovsky 1995: 5), the corpus revolution did not linguistics — see Pustejovsky 1995: 5), the corpus revolution did not
ˆ ˆ
merely mean that linguists now looked to large, easily searchable and merely mean that linguists now looked to large, easily searchable and independent collections of data to validate their claims about language. independent collections of data to validate their claims about language. Rather, the argument goes, the sheer quantity of data available led to a Rather, the argument goes, the sheer quantity of data available led to a qualitative shift, with corpus evidence being used to question the qualitative shift, with corpus evidence being used to question the assumption that lexis could be separated from grammar, or form from assumption that lexis could be separated from grammar, or form from meaning, or even instance from system. Concordance lines, the meaning, or even instance from system. Concordance lines, the stock-in-trade of the corpus linguist, were used to
trade of the corpus linguist, were used to illustrate the fact that the verticalillustrate the fact that the vertical patterns in language become visible when we see enough of the horizontal; patterns in language become visible when we see enough of the horizontal; and Saussure’s (1916) paradigmatic and
and Saussure’s (1916) paradigmatic and syntagmatic relations are actuallysyntagmatic relations are actually
two ways of seeing the same data. Pu
two ways of seeing the same data. Put the other way round, “the cumulativt the other way round, “the cumulativee
effect of repeated instances is taken to reflect the semiotic system” effect of repeated instances is taken to reflect the semiotic system” (Tognini-Bonelli 1996: 71). Sinclair’s (1996) treatment of syntagmatic (Tognini-Bonelli 1996: 71). Sinclair’s (1996) treatment of syntagmatic relations ultimately led him to claim that “so strong are the cooccurrence relations ultimately led him to claim that “so strong are the cooccurrence tendencies of words, word classes, meanings and attitudes that we must tendencies of words, word classes, meanings and attitudes that we must widen our horizons and expect the units of meaning to be much more widen our horizons and expect the units of meaning to be much more extensive and varied than is seen in a single word” (Sinclair 1996: 94). extensive and varied than is seen in a single word” (Sinclair 1996: 94). Michael Stubbs (2001, 2002), in particular, then went on to use corpus Michael Stubbs (2001, 2002), in particular, then went on to use corpus evidence in an attempt to quantify the
evidence in an attempt to quantify the extent to which common lexemes inextent to which common lexemes in
English partake in such extended units of meaning. Corpus evidence has English partake in such extended units of meaning. Corpus evidence has thus been adduced to make profound
thus been adduced to make profound claims about the object of inquiry inclaims about the object of inquiry in
linguistics, and the units of analysis that could be applied to real language linguistics, and the units of analysis that could be applied to real language data, and the centrality of corpora to contemporary lexicography, Natural data, and the centrality of corpora to contemporary lexicography, Natural Language Processing and European linguistics at least (see Teubert 2001: Language Processing and European linguistics at least (see Teubert 2001: 125) is undeniable.
125) is undeniable.
After a decade of using corpora in translation studies, it seems After a decade of using corpora in translation studies, it seems fitting to ask what contribution they have made to the discipline in general. fitting to ask what contribution they have made to the discipline in general. Have they become indispensable? Has the “corpus linguistic turn in Have they become indispensable? Has the “corpus linguistic turn in translation studies” (Laviosa 2004: 9) been restricted to those working translation studies” (Laviosa 2004: 9) been restricted to those working within the area specifically known as corpus-based translation studies, within the area specifically known as corpus-based translation studies, or are its ramifications felt across the whole discipline? Have corpora or are its ramifications felt across the whole discipline? Have corpora helped us to define our object of inquiry and explain any of its helped us to define our object of inquiry and explain any of its specificity (if, indeed, translations can be said to demonstrate specific specificity (if, indeed, translations can be said to demonstrate specific characteristics), as Baker (1993) predicted they would? Have they forced characteristics), as Baker (1993) predicted they would? Have they forced us to rethink any of the analytical categories we apply to translations, or us to rethink any of the analytical categories we apply to translations, or told us anything new about how we can investigate the style of individual told us anything new about how we can investigate the style of individual translators? In this paper I attempt to answer some of these questions, translators? In this paper I attempt to answer some of these questions, starting with the influence corpora have had on translation studies in starting with the influence corpora have had on translation studies in general.
2.
2. How How InflueInfluential ntial Has Has CorpusCorpus-based -based TranslTranslation ation StudieStudiess Been?
Been?
There is no doubt that there has been an impressive volume of activity There is no doubt that there has been an impressive volume of activity within the area of corpus-based translation studies. Several monographs within the area of corpus-based translation studies. Several monographs (see, for example, Kenny 2001; Laviosa 2002; Olohan 2004), collected (see, for example, Kenny 2001; Laviosa 2002; Olohan 2004), collected volumes (for example, Zanettin et al. 2003; Mauranen and Kujamäki 2004) volumes (for example, Zanettin et al. 2003; Mauranen and Kujamäki 2004) and special issues of journals (Laviosa 1998, Tagnin
and special issues of journals (Laviosa 1998, Tagnin 2002, Kruger 2004a)2002, Kruger 2004a)
have been published since the mid 1990s, and in August 2006 the have been published since the mid 1990s, and in August 2006 the
Bibliograp
Bibliography of hy of TranslatioTranslation Studn Studiesies listed 370 publications concerned withlisted 370 publications concerned with
corpus-based translation studies (although some of these may not have corpus-based translation studies (although some of these may not have been based on
been based on electronicelectronic corpora). There is also a growing body of PhDcorpora). There is also a growing body of PhD
dissertati
dissertations, and there have ons, and there have been a number of been a number of conferences and conferenceconferences and conference panels dedicated to the area (see Kruger 2004b: 2). Corpus-based panels dedicated to the area (see Kruger 2004b: 2). Corpus-based translation studies thus appears to be well established by now.
translation studies thus appears to be well established by now.
The potential contribution of corpora to the discipline at large has also The potential contribution of corpora to the discipline at large has also been acknowledged by translation theorists operating outside of been acknowledged by translation theorists operating outside of corpus-based translation studies as such, including those who present a
based translation studies as such, including those who present a bird’s eyebird’s eye
view of translation studies. Corpora thus get a brief mention in Munday’s view of translation studies. Corpora thus get a brief mention in Munday’s (2001)
(2001) Introduc Introducing ing TranslatTranslation ion StudiesStudies, although he suggests that their, although he suggests that their
application in translation studies was still “limited” at the time, and in his application in translation studies was still “limited” at the time, and in his
Translation Studies Reader
Translation Studies Reader Venuti (2000: 335) speaks of the “powerful Venuti (2000: 335) speaks of the “powerful
analytic tools” that corpus linguistics offers translation scholarship. In analytic tools” that corpus linguistics offers translation scholarship. In what is simultaneously a cautious and a bold statement, Mason (2004) what is simultaneously a cautious and a bold statement, Mason (2004) describes corpus-based translati
describes corpus-based translation studies as “what on studies as “what many would see as many would see as thethe future of empirical studies of translating”.
future of empirical studies of translating”.
This blend of optimism and caution is perhaps well advised. On the This blend of optimism and caution is perhaps well advised. On the one hand, it becomes very clear to researchers who need to analyse one hand, it becomes very clear to researchers who need to analyse linguistic features (1) whose formal realisation is highly predictable and (2) linguistic features (1) whose formal realisation is highly predictable and (2) which are so frequent that the analyst would not be able to cope unaided which are so frequent that the analyst would not be able to cope unaided with the amount of data that is extractable from even a modestly sized with the amount of data that is extractable from even a modestly sized collection of texts, that a (semi-) automatically searchable corpus of collection of texts, that a (semi-) automatically searchable corpus of electronic texts is the ideal resource to use. On the other hand, there are electronic texts is the ideal resource to use. On the other hand, there are many features of texts that are worthy of investigation but whose formal many features of texts that are worthy of investigation but whose formal realisation is less predictable and thus less amenable to detection using realisation is less predictable and thus less amenable to detection using corpus tools. And even if corpus tools can be used to detect instances of corpus tools. And even if corpus tools can be used to detect instances of certain features, they certainly can’t be used to “analyse” such features in certain features, they certainly can’t be used to “analyse” such features in depth or to contextualise whole texts. This type of work is still the preserve depth or to contextualise whole texts. This type of work is still the preserve of human analysts. So those on the outs
on corpus-based translation studies, often betraying equal measures of on corpus-based translation studies, often betraying equal measures of interest and scepticism, but we can’t say that corpus techniques have
interest and scepticism, but we can’t say that corpus techniques have beenbeen
adopted wholesale in empirical translation studies, and nor would we adopted wholesale in empirical translation studies, and nor would we recommend that they should be.
recommend that they should be. 3.
3. Have Have CorCorpora pora HelHelped Uped Us to Ds to Definefine Our Oe Our Objebject of ct of Inquiry?
Inquiry?
One early attempt to define the object of inquiry in translation studies from One early attempt to define the object of inquiry in translation studies from a specifically corpus-oriented point of view focused on the issue of a specifically corpus-oriented point of view focused on the issue of representativeness in corpus design: Halverson (1998) proposed the representativeness in corpus design: Halverson (1998) proposed the building of translation corpora whose centre would be occupied by building of translation corpora whose centre would be occupied by “prototypical” translations, that is those carried out by professionals (for “prototypical” translations, that is those carried out by professionals (for Western cultures at least), and in which other (lower status) translations Western cultures at least), and in which other (lower status) translations would occupy the periphery. Tymoczko (1998) countered that rather than would occupy the periphery. Tymoczko (1998) countered that rather than becoming a vehicle for institutionalising certain translation practices, or becoming a vehicle for institutionalising certain translation practices, or valorising one type of translation over another, corpora could encourage an valorising one type of translation over another, corpora could encourage an inclusive, decentring, dynamic type of translation studies. If defining the inclusive, decentring, dynamic type of translation studies. If defining the object of inquiry meant fixing the boundaries to the population of what object of inquiry meant fixing the boundaries to the population of what would be known as translation, then this project appeared misguided to would be known as translation, then this project appeared misguided to Tymoczko, and does not appear to have been pursued to any great extent Tymoczko, and does not appear to have been pursued to any great extent in corpus-based translation studies, although sampling remains an issue in corpus-based translation studies, although sampling remains an issue that all corpus builders have to contend with.
that all corpus builders have to contend with.
A second avenue in the attempt to set translation off from other objects A second avenue in the attempt to set translation off from other objects of study involves the investigation of recurrent features of translation. In of study involves the investigation of recurrent features of translation. In Baker’s (1993) early article, she argued that corpora could be used to Baker’s (1993) early article, she argued that corpora could be used to investigate certain behaviours thought to be
investigate certain behaviours thought to be so characteristic of translationso characteristic of translation
that they could be called “universals”.
that they could be called “universals”.22 While the whole of idea of While the whole of idea of
“universals” has been controversial, the programme of research designed “universals” has been controversial, the programme of research designed to uncover them has yielded much evidence that
to uncover them has yielded much evidence that “demands interpretation”“demands interpretation”
(Mauranen and Kujamäki 2004: 2). Repeated studies have shown, for (Mauranen and Kujamäki 2004: 2). Repeated studies have shown, for example, that the tendency to explicitate is extremely common in example, that the tendency to explicitate is extremely common in translation. This is manifest in translations that are grammatically or translation. This is manifest in translations that are grammatically or otherwise more explicit than comparable texts written in the target otherwise more explicit than comparable texts written in the target language, or in translations that make explicit in the target text information language, or in translations that make explicit in the target text information that was merely implicit in the source text. A by now well-known example that was merely implicit in the source text. A by now well-known example of the former case is Olohan and Baker’s (2000) finding that the optional of the former case is Olohan and Baker’s (2000) finding that the optional connector (or “complementizer”)
connector (or “complementizer”) that that is far more frequent in texts is far more frequent in texts
translated into English than in texts originally written in English. An translated into English than in texts originally written in English. An
example of the latter is the follow-up study by Kenny (2005), which example of the latter is the follow-up study by Kenny (2005), which showed that while patterns of omission of
showed that while patterns of omission of thatthat after the verbafter the verb SAYSAY inin
translated English texts tended to reflect patterns of omission of the equally translated English texts tended to reflect patterns of omission of the equally optional connector
optional connector daßdaß (or (or dassdass, in the new German spelling) in the, in the new German spelling) in the
German source texts investigated, patterns of inclusion of
German source texts investigated, patterns of inclusion of thatthat did notdid not
reflect in any predictable way patterns of inclusion of
reflect in any predictable way patterns of inclusion of daßdaß, and the, and the
tendency was clearly for translators to introduce an optional
tendency was clearly for translators to introduce an optional that that in their in their
target texts regardless of what the source text
target texts regardless of what the source text looked like. These and otherlooked like. These and other
studies suggest that explicitation must take a special place in the
studies suggest that explicitation must take a special place in the battery of battery of
textual interventions made by translators, although we can by no means textual interventions made by translators, although we can by no means claim that it is peculiar to translation.
claim that it is peculiar to translation. 4.
4. HavHave Corpe Corpora Heora Helpelped Us to Refd Us to Refine Ouine Our Analr Analytiyticalcal Categories?
Categories?
Another way to gauge the
Another way to gauge the influence of corpus-based translation studies oninfluence of corpus-based translation studies on the discipline at large relates to the above question. If it could be shown the discipline at large relates to the above question. If it could be shown that a specifically corpus-based approach had led to new insights that that a specifically corpus-based approach had led to new insights that caused us to rethink certain fundamental categories in translation studies, caused us to rethink certain fundamental categories in translation studies, then this would indeed be a contribution to the wider area. While it is not then this would indeed be a contribution to the wider area. While it is not evident that this has actually happened, in Kenny (forthcoming) I evident that this has actually happened, in Kenny (forthcoming) I discuss the potential for parallel corpora (i.e., collections of source discuss the potential for parallel corpora (i.e., collections of source texts alongside their translations) in particular to shed new light on the texts alongside their translations) in particular to shed new light on the nature of translation units (considered here to be a basic analytical nature of translation units (considered here to be a basic analytical category, given their prominence in, for example, process-oriented category, given their prominence in, for example, process-oriented translation studies and pedagogical approaches to translation). I contrast translation studies and pedagogical approaches to translation). I contrast differing conceptualisations of the translation unit in comparative differing conceptualisations of the translation unit in comparative stylistics, process-oriented translation studies, descriptive translation stylistics, process-oriented translation studies, descriptive translation studies, and Natural Language Processing, and suggest that while the latter studies, and Natural Language Processing, and suggest that while the latter appears to make better use of the searchability and retrievability of appears to make better use of the searchability and retrievability of information from electronic corpora, it is Toury’s (1995) “coupled-pair” information from electronic corpora, it is Toury’s (1995) “coupled-pair” approach that might best suit a humanities-oriented corpus-based approach that might best suit a humanities-oriented corpus-based translation studies. Toury’s coupled pairs (ibid.: 78–79) refer to
translation studies. Toury’s coupled pairs (ibid.: 78–79) refer to mappingsmappings
between segments of source texts and segments of target texts for
between segments of source texts and segments of target texts for which itwhich it
is possible to claim that there are “no leftovers” outside the target text is possible to claim that there are “no leftovers” outside the target text segment to the solution of a translation problem presented by the source segment to the solution of a translation problem presented by the source text segment. I also ask whether the “extended units of meaning” (see also text segment. I also ask whether the “extended units of meaning” (see also the discussion of Sinclair 1996 above) whose identification is facilitated the discussion of Sinclair 1996 above) whose identification is facilitated using corpus techniques might coincide with translation units. Taking using corpus techniques might coincide with translation units. Taking
repeated patterns from a corpus of German source texts and their repeated patterns from a corpus of German source texts and their translations into English, I argue that prototypical translations (as translations into English, I argue that prototypical translations (as evidenced by the fact that they are recorded in bilingual dictionaries or evidenced by the fact that they are recorded in bilingual dictionaries or appear frequently in parallel corpora) can point to extended units of appear frequently in parallel corpora) can point to extended units of meaning in source texts (see also Kenny 2004). The investigation of meaning in source texts (see also Kenny 2004). The investigation of prototypical and non-prototypical translations can then indicate how prototypical and non-prototypical translations can then indicate how translators have handled what a source-language speaker is likely to translators have handled what a source-language speaker is likely to interpret as a single meaning unit. Thus the identification of extended units interpret as a single meaning unit. Thus the identification of extended units of meaning and units of translation can go hand in hand, even if it is not the of meaning and units of translation can go hand in hand, even if it is not the case that the two are
case that the two are always co-terminous. Corpus evidence is also used toalways co-terminous. Corpus evidence is also used to lend empirical support to Paul Bennett’s (1994) treatment of translation lend empirical support to Paul Bennett’s (1994) treatment of translation units, which distinguishes between a translation
units, which distinguishes between a translation atomatom, a stretch of text that, a stretch of text that
should not be translated compositionally if the translator wishes to avoid should not be translated compositionally if the translator wishes to avoid “over-translation” (Vinay and Darbelnet 1995:16) and the translation “over-translation” (Vinay and Darbelnet 1995:16) and the translation
focus
focus, the part of the source text that is currently occupying the translator’s, the part of the source text that is currently occupying the translator’s
attention. Specifically, it is argued that “the ST part of a coupled pair (often attention. Specifically, it is argued that “the ST part of a coupled pair (often a translation ‘atom’) and the parts of the ST that must be kept in focus to a translation ‘atom’) and the parts of the ST that must be kept in focus to arrive at a TT solution do
arrive at a TT solution do not necessarily coincide” (Kenny forthcoming).not necessarily coincide” (Kenny forthcoming). The interaction of analytical categories such as unit of meaning, The interaction of analytical categories such as unit of meaning, translation atom, translation focus, etc, is complex, but it is hoped that a translation atom, translation focus, etc, is complex, but it is hoped that a single example (borrowed from Kenny forthcoming, where these matters single example (borrowed from Kenny forthcoming, where these matters are discussed in far
are discussed in far greater detail) might help clarify matters here: Table 1greater detail) might help clarify matters here: Table 1 shows a non-exhaustive extract from a concordance for the search phrase shows a non-exhaustive extract from a concordance for the search phrase
mit all*
mit all* in the German novels contained in the German-English Parallel in the German novels contained in the German-English Parallel
Corpus of Literary Texts, or Gepcolt (see Kenny 2001). In the extract a Corpus of Literary Texts, or Gepcolt (see Kenny 2001). In the extract a
T
Table able 1:1: mit all* mit all* concordance concordance ff angefroren sein mußte. Sie
ff angefroren sein mußte. Sie versuchte mit aller versuchte mit aller Kraft, bei klarem Verstand zuKraft, bei klarem Verstand zu n aus den Gedanken, in denen er steckt, mit aller Kraft herausziehen, doch selbs n aus den Gedanken, in denen er steckt, mit aller Kraft herausziehen, doch selbs e Stopfnadel aus meinem Handarbeitszeug mit aller Kraft, und wenn ich sage Kraft e Stopfnadel aus meinem Handarbeitszeug mit aller Kraft, und wenn ich sage Kraft ahrtendolch in Pension ist, und posiert mit aller Kraft wie auf Sophies Bruderfo ahrtendolch in Pension ist, und posiert mit aller Kraft wie auf Sophies Bruderfo hlieflend ersticht er die tote Schwester mit aller Kraft. Dann ist er endlich dam hlieflend ersticht er die tote Schwester mit aller Kraft. Dann ist er endlich dam der Kurt Lukas war, schien sein Messer mit aller Kraft in die Hündin zu treiben der Kurt Lukas war, schien sein Messer mit aller Kraft in die Hündin zu treiben hle Bäume vor dem Feld, der Mann rannte mit aller Kraft, das sah ich an den gewö hle Bäume vor dem Feld, der Mann rannte mit aller Kraft, das sah ich an den gewö tarre der Meereisdecke ziehen die Hunde mit aller Kraft nach der nächstgelegenen tarre der Meereisdecke ziehen die Hunde mit aller Kraft nach der nächstgelegenen ultern gegen die Matratze, stemmte mich mit aller Kraft gegen seinen Amoklauf, e ultern gegen die Matratze, stemmte mich mit aller Kraft gegen seinen Amoklauf, e hte lebenden Embryo-Gesichter, scheinen mit aller Kraft von der Sonne angezogen hte lebenden Embryo-Gesichter, scheinen mit aller Kraft von der Sonne angezogen eren Glas-Röhrchen auf ihr Blut warten, mit aller Kraft und Empörung auf den Fuß eren Glas-Röhrchen auf ihr Blut warten, mit aller Kraft und Empörung auf den Fuß
repeated pattern
repeated pattern mit aller Kraft mit aller Kraft is very much in evidence. This pattern, is very much in evidence. This pattern,
which, along with a number of variations discussed in Kenny which, along with a number of variations discussed in Kenny (forthcoming), roughly translates as “with all one’s might”, can be taken to (forthcoming), roughly translates as “with all one’s might”, can be taken to constitute a single unit of meaning, by virtue of
constitute a single unit of meaning, by virtue of its apparent existence as aits apparent existence as a
prefabricated unit of the type described by Sinclair (1996) and discussed prefabricated unit of the type described by Sinclair (1996) and discussed above. (I take it that no linguist would argue that the phrase is created anew above. (I take it that no linguist would argue that the phrase is created anew each time it is used).
each time it is used).
A deeper analysis of the co-text surrounding the phrase
A deeper analysis of the co-text surrounding the phrase mit aller Kraft mit aller Kraft
suggests that it has a strong affinity with, or “semantic preference” suggests that it has a strong affinity with, or “semantic preference” (Sinclair 1996) for verbs that denote an
(Sinclair 1996) for verbs that denote an expenditure of effort, and even theexpenditure of effort, and even the
use of extreme physical force. There is also bilingual evidence from use of extreme physical force. There is also bilingual evidence from Gepcolt (and which is presented in Kenny forthcoming) to show that the Gepcolt (and which is presented in Kenny forthcoming) to show that the translation of
translation of mit aller Kraft mit aller Kraft is influenced by the verb with which the is influenced by the verb with which the
phrase co-occurs. What becomes very clear from
phrase co-occurs. What becomes very clear from the (truncated) bilingualthe (truncated) bilingual
data supplied in Table 2 here, however, is that the phrase cannot usually be data supplied in Table 2 here, however, is that the phrase cannot usually be translated without access to knowledge of the
translated without access to knowledge of the subjectsubject of the clause inof the clause in
which this phrase appears as an adjunct (hence variations such as
which this phrase appears as an adjunct (hence variations such as with allwith all
his/my/her might his/my/her might ).).
So what do examples such as this tell us about the boundaries of So what do examples such as this tell us about the boundaries of translation units? or the overlap between units of meaning and translation translation units? or the overlap between units of meaning and translation units? not to mention the stability or the supposed context-independence of units? not to mention the stability or the supposed context-independence of translation equivalents? In Kenny (forthcoming) I argue that the phrases translation equivalents? In Kenny (forthcoming) I argue that the phrases “with all her strength”, “with all his might”, etc, contain all the solution “with all her strength”, “with all his might”, etc, contain all the solution (with no “leftovers”) to the problem posed by
(with no “leftovers”) to the problem posed by mit aller Kraft mit aller Kraft , and thus that, and thus that
they constitute “coupled pairs” with the German, and translation units for they constitute “coupled pairs” with the German, and translation units for
T
Table 2:able 2: TTranslranslationations in Gepcolt fos in Gepcolt forr mit aller Kraf mit aller Kraf m
miit t aalllleer r KKrraafftt 11.. wwiitth h aalll l hheer r ssttrreennggtthh 2.
2. wiwith th alall ol our ur ststrerengngthth 3.
3. **foforcrce/e/fufull ll foforcrcee 4.
4. as as wewell ll as as hehe’’s s abablele 55.. wwiitth ah alll hl hiis ms miigghhtt 66.. wwiitth ah alll hl hiis ms miigghhtt 77.. ffoor ar alll hl he we was as wwoorrtthh 8.
8. **ststrarain in eveverery my mususclclee 99.. wwiitth h aalll l mmy y mmiigghhtt 10.
10. by eby eververy fiy fibre obre of thf their beir beineingg
our purposes. At the same time, the source of part of the solution (i.e. our purposes. At the same time, the source of part of the solution (i.e. knowledge of the agent) lies outside the solution itself, and thus the knowledge of the agent) lies outside the solution itself, and thus the translator must maintain attentional focus on the whole clause when translator must maintain attentional focus on the whole clause when translating
translating mit aller Kraft mit aller Kraft . Here we have a case of the clause operating as. Here we have a case of the clause operating as
the “macro-unit” (Bennett 1994).
the “macro-unit” (Bennett 1994).33 So the distinction between translation So the distinction between translation
unit and translation focus appears to be well motivated. Having said that, unit and translation focus appears to be well motivated. Having said that, it is possible to argue, based on experience and corpus evidence, that it is possible to argue, based on experience and corpus evidence, that translators work with units more extensive than phrases such as
translators work with units more extensive than phrases such as mit aller mit aller
Kraft
Kraft , and that subject, verb and adjunct, which together might constitute, and that subject, verb and adjunct, which together might constitute
some kind of extended unit of meaning à la Sinclair, are all somehow some kind of extended unit of meaning à la Sinclair, are all somehow translated “together”. Without access to detailed information on the translated “together”. Without access to detailed information on the translation process, however, this avenue appears difficult to pursue within translation process, however, this avenue appears difficult to pursue within “traditional” corpus-based translation studies, although the triangulation of “traditional” corpus-based translation studies, although the triangulation of process-oriented and product-oriented data could prove useful here. It is process-oriented and product-oriented data could prove useful here. It is clear however, that the kind of translation unit evidenced by the
clear however, that the kind of translation unit evidenced by the mit aller mit aller
Kraft
Kraft examples shows once again that translations, even of apparentlyexamples shows once again that translations, even of apparently
simple phrases, can be highly context-dependent, without being simple phrases, can be highly context-dependent, without being idiosyncratic. This appears to be an inconvenient fact to many working in idiosyncratic. This appears to be an inconvenient fact to many working in the field of Natural Language
the field of Natural Language Processing (see Kenny forthcoming), whereProcessing (see Kenny forthcoming), where
highly predictable “correspondences” between, e.g., lexical units, are highly predictable “correspondences” between, e.g., lexical units, are prioritised over messier, less predictable “equivalents”.
prioritised over messier, less predictable “equivalents”.44 Although such Although such
work is only now beginning, it is hoped that the constant testing of work is only now beginning, it is hoped that the constant testing of analytical categories in translation studies against data contained in parallel analytical categories in translation studies against data contained in parallel corpora, will lead to greater conceptual clarification in translation studies corpora, will lead to greater conceptual clarification in translation studies as a whole.
as a whole. 5.
5. AnAnd Whd What oat of thf the Tre Trananslslatoator?r?
Another area in which corpora have the potential to make a significant Another area in which corpora have the potential to make a significant contribution is in the study of the sometimes elusive “translator’s voice”. contribution is in the study of the sometimes elusive “translator’s voice”. Corpora have already been used to reveal the presen
Corpora have already been used to reveal the presence of the translator, andce of the translator, and
to reveal new ways in which this presence can be traced. An example of to reveal new ways in which this presence can be traced. An example of this type of research is Bosseaux’s (2004) investigation of deictic elements this type of research is Bosseaux’s (2004) investigation of deictic elements in two translations into French of Virginia Wolff’s
in two translations into French of Virginia Wolff’s The WavesThe Waves. As had been. As had been
shown in previous studies based on non-electronic corpora (for example, shown in previous studies based on non-electronic corpora (for example, Mason and Serban 2003), adverbs and pronouns such as
Mason and Serban 2003), adverbs and pronouns such as herehere and and therethere,,
this
this andand that that , and, and nownow andand thenthen, serve to indicate the “viewing position, serve to indicate the “viewing position
assumed by the narrator” (Bosseaux ibid.: 260), in other words the assumed by the narrator” (Bosseaux ibid.: 260), in other words the narrator’s spatial point of view, as well as the “temporal dimension in narrator’s spatial point of view, as well as the “temporal dimension in
¸ ¸
which the subject of the fiction is framed” (ibid.), or temporal point of which the subject of the fiction is framed” (ibid.), or temporal point of view. The deictic shifts that often happen in translation (Bosseaux ibid.; view. The deictic shifts that often happen in translation (Bosseaux ibid.; Winters 2005; Mason and Serban ibid.) thus combine to produce more or Winters 2005; Mason and Serban ibid.) thus combine to produce more or less subtle shifts in narrative point of view, and it can be shown that the less subtle shifts in narrative point of view, and it can be shown that the translator-narrator’s point of view can differ from that of the original translator-narrator’s point of view can differ from that of the original author. Even in cases where a target text is “fluent” and the translator’s author. Even in cases where a target text is “fluent” and the translator’s visibility to the target text reader is thus diminished (Venuti 1995: 2), the visibility to the target text reader is thus diminished (Venuti 1995: 2), the translator’s presence in the text can still be brought out by
translator’s presence in the text can still be brought out by the analyst whothe analyst who
is equipped with appropriate analytical categories and a sufficiently large is equipped with appropriate analytical categories and a sufficiently large corpus.
corpus.
A related study that relies on corpus tools to extract, sort and display A related study that relies on corpus tools to extract, sort and display thousands of instances of formally predictable features is Winters (2005).
thousands of instances of formally predictable features is Winters (2005).55
Winters tracks the use of modal particles, a German word-class used Winters tracks the use of modal particles, a German word-class used principally to express speakers’ (or writers’) attitudes to their utterances, in principally to express speakers’ (or writers’) attitudes to their utterances, in two translations of Scott Fitzgerald’s
two translations of Scott Fitzgerald’s The Beautiful and Damned The Beautiful and Damned . The use. The use
of epistemic modal particles like
of epistemic modal particles like wohlwohl can change the psychological point can change the psychological point
of view in a narrative, by expressing uncertainty about the content of an of view in a narrative, by expressing uncertainty about the content of an utterance. Dependin
utterance. Depending on g on the placement of the particle, the the placement of the particle, the uncertainty mayuncertainty may be understood to operate at the level of a character, or the narrator. In some be understood to operate at the level of a character, or the narrator. In some cases in Winters’ study, the addition of a modal particle makes it appear cases in Winters’ study, the addition of a modal particle makes it appear that the translator has better access to a character’s thought processes than that the translator has better access to a character’s thought processes than did the original narrator. In other cases, the addition of a modal particle did the original narrator. In other cases, the addition of a modal particle suggests that the narrator is less sure of characters’ motives than she/he suggests that the narrator is less sure of characters’ motives than she/he might otherwise be. In Winters’ words:
might otherwise be. In Winters’ words: The narrator generally used in
The narrator generally used in The Beautiful and Damned The Beautiful and Damned is the omniscient is the omniscient
Type B narrator, who knows the characters’ thoughts and feelings. In the Type B narrator, who knows the characters’ thoughts and feelings. In the instances which contain epistemic modality on the narrator’s level, the narrator instances which contain epistemic modality on the narrator’s level, the narrator becomes an external Type D narrator, whose knowledge is limited and who becomes an external Type D narrator, whose knowledge is limited and who does not have access to the
does not have access to the characters’ inner states.characters’ inner states.66
The following example demonstrates a shift from the relative certainty The following example demonstrates a shift from the relative certainty of a character’s position in Scott
of a character’s position in Scott Fitzgerald’s (FSF) original to the relativeFitzgerald’s (FSF) original to the relative uncertainty of the same character’s position in Renate Orth-Guttmann’s uncertainty of the same character’s position in Renate Orth-Guttmann’s (ROG) translation, whereby the positing of such uncertainty on the (ROG) translation, whereby the positing of such uncertainty on the character level (largely realised through the modal particle
character level (largely realised through the modal particle wohlwohl) can be) can be
understood as the translator enjoying greater insight into the character’s understood as the translator enjoying greater insight into the character’s psyche than did the original author (emphases mine)
psyche than did the original author (emphases mine) FSF:
FSF:He consideredHe considered, nevertheless,, nevertheless, thatthathe had given her an he had given her an object-lesson andobject-lesson and that
that the matter was closed… the matter was closed… ¸ ¸
HCO: Nichtsdestoweniger
HCO: Nichtsdestoweniger war er der Meinungwar er der Meinung,, daßdaß er ihr einen Denkzetteler ihr einen Denkzettel
verpaflt hatte und
verpaflt hatte und daßdaß die Sache damit erledigt war… die Sache damit erledigt war…
ROG: Immerhin,
ROG: Immerhin, sagte er sichsagte er sich, habe er ihr eine Lektion erteilt und damit sei, habe er ihr eine Lektion erteilt und damit sei
der Fall wohl erledigt. der Fall wohl erledigt.
This increased insight into the character’s psyche is supported by the This increased insight into the character’s psyche is supported by the use of other devices that shift the focus from the narrator to the character use of other devices that shift the focus from the narrator to the character in Orth-Guttmann’s translation. For example, Scott Fitzgerald uses in Orth-Guttmann’s translation. For example, Scott Fitzgerald uses reported indirect thought, in which a
reported indirect thought, in which a thought-act report verbthought-act report verb consideredconsidered is is
accompanied twice by the complementizer
accompanied twice by the complementizer that that , which has the effect of , which has the effect of
giving prominence to the fact that something is being reported, and hence giving prominence to the fact that something is being reported, and hence to the act of narration, while in some ways delaying
to the act of narration, while in some ways delaying what what is being reported. is being reported.
The adversative conjunction nevertheless can be considered as operating The adversative conjunction nevertheless can be considered as operating on the narrator’s level (i.e., it is the narrator who understands there to be on the narrator’s level (i.e., it is the narrator who understands there to be some tension between what has been reported previously and what is about some tension between what has been reported previously and what is about to be reported). The
to be reported). The translation by Hans Christian Oeser (HCO) maintainstranslation by Hans Christian Oeser (HCO) maintains this foregrounding of the narration through the use of a
this foregrounding of the narration through the use of a similar thought-acsimilar thought-actt
report verb
report verb war er der Meinungwar er der Meinung (“he was of the opinion”) in conjunction(“he was of the opinion”) in conjunction
with two instances of the complementizer
with two instances of the complementizer daßdaß in German. Likewise, his in German. Likewise, his
placement of the equivalent of
placement of the equivalent of nevertheless (“nichtsdestoweniger”) allowsnevertheless (“nichtsdestoweniger”) allows the recognition of a tension to operate on the level of the narrator. Renate the recognition of a tension to operate on the level of the narrator. Renate Orth-Guttmann, on the other hand, uses a verb that points to a reported Orth-Guttmann, on the other hand, uses a verb that points to a reported internal speech act
internal speech act sagte er sichsagte er sich (“he said to himself”) in her reporting(“he said to himself”) in her reporting
clause, which suggests greater immediacy and a
clause, which suggests greater immediacy and a more faithful rendering of more faithful rendering of
Anthony’s original thought, and that it is Anthony who recognises a Anthony’s original thought, and that it is Anthony who recognises a tension, expressed through the conjunction immerhin (“nevertheless”), tension, expressed through the conjunction immerhin (“nevertheless”), rather than the narrator. Orth-Guttmann also eschews use of the German rather than the narrator. Orth-Guttmann also eschews use of the German complementizer
complementizer daßdaß,,77 and thus does not postpone the introduction of and thus does not postpone the introduction of
Anthony’s thoughts in the same way as Scott Fitzgerald and Oeser do. Anthony’s thoughts in the same way as Scott Fitzgerald and Oeser do. Crucially, however, it is the introduction of the modal particle
Crucially, however, it is the introduction of the modal particle wohlwohl in thein the
reported clause in
reported clause in Orth-Guttmann’Orth-Guttmann’s translation that suggests s translation that suggests that Anthonythat Anthony is not entirely sure that the matter really is closed, and thus that is not entirely sure that the matter really is closed, and thus that Orth-Guttmann, who appears to focus more on character’s internal states than on Guttmann, who appears to focus more on character’s internal states than on the narration in general, has once again greater access to characters’ the narration in general, has once again greater access to characters’ psyches than do either Scott Fitzgerald or Oeser.
psyches than do either Scott Fitzgerald or Oeser.
By revealing instances of where modal particles cause shifts in the By revealing instances of where modal particles cause shifts in the psychological point of view between original and target text, as well as psychological point of view between original and target text, as well as differences in point of view that arise between the two translations, differences in point of view that arise between the two translations, Winters reveals a previously unexplored way in which the translator’s Winters reveals a previously unexplored way in which the translator’s
presence in the text can be felt, at least by a
presence in the text can be felt, at least by a sensitive analyst. This level of sensitive analyst. This level of
innovation would not have been possible had
innovation would not have been possible had the researcher not had at herthe researcher not had at her
disposal a sufficiently large electronic corpus and tools to manipulate it, disposal a sufficiently large electronic corpus and tools to manipulate it, and had she not taken a “data-driven” approach, from which hypotheses and had she not taken a “data-driven” approach, from which hypotheses emerged following an initial “word crunching” phase in which differing emerged following an initial “word crunching” phase in which differing distributions of certain modal particles were observed in the two distributions of certain modal particles were observed in the two translations.
translations. 6
6.. CoConcnclulusisioonsns
Corpus-based translation studies is still relatively young, but researchers Corpus-based translation studies is still relatively young, but researchers working in the area have already managed to generate an impressive working in the area have already managed to generate an impressive number of studies that reveal new ways of investigating sometimes new number of studies that reveal new ways of investigating sometimes new questions, and that have the potential to force us to revisit some basic questions, and that have the potential to force us to revisit some basic concepts in translation studies. Although certain research agendas in the concepts in translation studies. Although certain research agendas in the area have met with greater acceptance than others, it seems clear that area have met with greater acceptance than others, it seems clear that corpus-based translation studies is here to stay. In fact, as instruction in corpus-based translation studies is here to stay. In fact, as instruction in corpus analysis techniques becomes more commonplace on translation corpus analysis techniques becomes more commonplace on translation programmes worldwide, we can expect corpora to become just another programmes worldwide, we can expect corpora to become just another resource used by translation scholars — and when that happens, they will resource used by translation scholars — and when that happens, they will have been truly mainstreamed.
have been truly mainstreamed. Acknowledgement
Acknowledgement
This is an expanded and updated version of a
This is an expanded and updated version of a paper originally presented at thepaper originally presented at the
Int
Internernatiationaonal l SymSymposposium ium on on New New HorHorizoizons ns in in TheTheoreoretictical al TraTranslnslatiation on StuStudiediess
at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, Department of Translation, from at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, Department of Translation, from 19–20 January 2006. The author is grateful to the two anonymous reviewers 19–20 January 2006. The author is grateful to the two anonymous reviewers who provided very useful feedback on an earlier version.
who provided very useful feedback on an earlier version. Notes
Notes 1.
1. These These commcomments nents notwitotwithstanhstanding, ding, there rthere remainemain, of cou, of course, arrse, areas of leas of linguiinguisticsstics where researchers do not rely upon corpora as sources of data.
where researchers do not rely upon corpora as sources of data. 2.
2. On the dOn the declineclining poing popularipularity of thty of the term “e term “univeuniversals orsals of transf translationlation”, see”, see Williams (2004: 206). Note, however, that some theorists continue to use the Williams (2004: 206). Note, however, that some theorists continue to use the term (Mauranen and Kujamäki 2004).
term (Mauranen and Kujamäki 2004). 3.
3. For insFor instanctances wheres where the texe the text funct functiontions as “macs as “macro-uro-unit”nit”, see Ken, see Kenny (200ny (2001: 1631: 163–– 67).
4.
4. See SantSee Santos (20os (2000), fo00), for a counter a counter-exr-examplample withie within an NLP publn an NLP publicaticationion, and Krai, and Kraif f (2003) for an excellent discussion of one NLP approach to “lexical (2003) for an excellent discussion of one NLP approach to “lexical correspondences” and “translational equivalents”.
correspondences” and “translational equivalents”. 5.
5. My dMy descriptescription hion here of ere of BosseBosseaux (2aux (2004) 004) and Wiand Winters nters (2005(2005) is, ) is, of couof course,rse, incomplete. Both authors consider other linguistic features (as we shall see incomplete. Both authors consider other linguistic features (as we shall see below for Winters), for example, the use of modal verbs, transitivity, and below for Winters), for example, the use of modal verbs, transitivity, and speech act report verbs, in their treatments of the translator’s voice/style. speech act report verbs, in their treatments of the translator’s voice/style. 6.
6. WinteWinters (ibirs (ibid.) brod.) broadly foadly follows llows FowlerFowler’s (199’s (1996) mod6) model of psel of psycholychological ogical pointpoint of view, positing four types of narrator: Type A is an “internal” narrator, who of view, positing four types of narrator: Type A is an “internal” narrator, who has access to characters’ consciousness, and tells the story from the point of has access to characters’ consciousness, and tells the story from the point of view of a participating character; Type B is also an internal narrator, but view of a participating character; Type B is also an internal narrator, but narrates from the point of view of a non-participating character; Types C and narrates from the point of view of a non-participating character; Types C and D are both “external”, that is they do not have access to characters’ D are both “external”, that is they do not have access to characters’ consciousness. They differ in that Type C remains neutral and impersonal, consciousness. They differ in that Type C remains neutral and impersonal, whereas Type D narrators give
whereas Type D narrators give their opinions and offer subjective judgements.their opinions and offer subjective judgements. 7.
7. NotNote, hoe, howevwever, ter, that Ohat Orthrth-Gu-Guttmttmann uann uses tses thehe Konjunktiv I Konjunktiv I verb forms verb forms habehabe and and sei
sei to indicate the presence of reported speech. to indicate the presence of reported speech.
References References
Aitchison, Jean (2005). “Review of M. Lynne Murphy. Semantic Relations and the Aitchison, Jean (2005). “Review of M. Lynne Murphy. Semantic Relations and the
Lexicon: Antonymy, Synonymy and Other Paradigms.”
Lexicon: Antonymy, Synonymy and Other Paradigms.” International Journal International Journal
of Lexicography
of Lexicography 18 (1), 106–9. 18 (1), 106–9.
Baker, Mona (1993). “Corpus Linguistics and Translation Studies. Implications Baker, Mona (1993). “Corpus Linguistics and Translation Studies. Implications and Applications.” In Mona Baker, Gill Francis and Elena Tognini-Bonelli and Applications.” In Mona Baker, Gill Francis and Elena Tognini-Bonelli (eds.)
(eds.) Text and Technology: In Honour of John Sinclair Text and Technology: In Honour of John Sinclair Amsterdam/ Amsterdam/
Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 233–50. Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 233–50.
Bennett, Paul (1994). “The Translation Unit in Human and Machine.”
Bennett, Paul (1994). “The Translation Unit in Human and Machine.” Babel Babel 40 40
(1), 12–20. (1), 12–20.
Bibliography
Bibliography of of Translation Translation StudiesStudies available from http://www.stjerome.co.uk/ available from http://www.stjerome.co.uk/
tsaonline/index.php, last accessed 17 August 2006. tsaonline/index.php, last accessed 17 August 2006.
Bosseaux, Charlotte (2004). “Translating Point of View: A Corpus-Based Study.” Bosseaux, Charlotte (2004). “Translating Point of View: A Corpus-Based Study.”
In Alet Kruger (ed.), 259–74. In Alet Kruger (ed.), 259–74.
Even-Zohar, Itamar (1979). “Polysystem Theory.”
Even-Zohar, Itamar (1979). “Polysystem Theory.” Poetics TodayPoetics Today 11 (1), 9–26. 11 (1), 9–26.
Fowler, Roger (1996).
Fowler, Roger (1996). Lin Linguiguististic c CriCriticticismism. . 22ndnd Edition. Oxford: Oxford Edition. Oxford: Oxford
University Press. University Press.
Halverson, Sandra (1998). “Translation Studies and Representative Corpora: Halverson, Sandra (1998). “Translation Studies and Representative Corpora: Establishing Links between Translation Corpora, Theoretical/Descriptive Establishing Links between Translation Corpora, Theoretical/Descriptive Categories and a Conception of the Object of Study.” In Sara Laviosa (ed.), Categories and a Conception of the Object of Study.” In Sara Laviosa (ed.), 494–514.
494–514.
Kenny, Dorothy (2001).
Kenny, Dorothy (2001). Lexis Lexis and and CreatCreativity ivity in in TranslTranslation: ation: A A CorpusCorpus-based -based Study
Kenny, Dorothy (2004). “Die Übersetzung von usuellen und nicht usuellen Kenny, Dorothy (2004). “Die Übersetzung von usuellen und nicht usuellen Wortverbindungen vom Deutschen ins Englische. Eine korpusgestützte Wortverbindungen vom Deutschen ins Englische. Eine korpusgestützte Untersuchung.” In Kathrin Steyer (ed.)
Untersuchung.” In Kathrin Steyer (ed.) WortverbinduWortverbindungen, mehr oder ngen, mehr oder weniger weniger fest.
fest. Berlin/New York: de Gruyter, 335–47.Berlin/New York: de Gruyter, 335–47.
Kenny, Dorothy (2005). “Parallel Corpora and Translation Studies: Old
Kenny, Dorothy (2005). “Parallel Corpora and Translation Studies: Old Questions,Questions,
New Perspectives? Reporting
New Perspectives? Reporting that that in Gepcolt. A Case Study.” In Geoff in Gepcolt. A Case Study.” In Geoff
Barnbrook, Pernilla Danielson and Michaela Mahlberg (eds.)
Barnbrook, Pernilla Danielson and Michaela Mahlberg (eds.) Meani Meaningfulngful
Texts: The Extraction of Semantic Information from Monolingual and Texts: The Extraction of Semantic Information from Monolingual and Multilingual Corpora
Multilingual Corpora.” London/New York: Continuum, 154–65..” London/New York: Continuum, 154–65.
Kenny, Dorothy (forthcoming). “Translation Units and Corpora.” In Alet Kruger Kenny, Dorothy (forthcoming). “Translation Units and Corpora.” In Alet Kruger
(ed.)
(ed.) Corpus-based Translation Studies: More Research and ApplicationsCorpus-based Translation Studies: More Research and Applications
(provisional title). Manchester: St. Jerome. (provisional title). Manchester: St. Jerome.
Kraif, Olivier (2003). “From Translational Data to Contrastive Knowledge.” Kraif, Olivier (2003). “From Translational Data to Contrastive Knowledge.”
International Journal of
International Journal of Corpus LinguisticsCorpus Linguistics 8 (1), 1–29. 8 (1), 1–29.
Kruger, Alet (ed.) (2004a).
Kruger, Alet (ed.) (2004a). Languag Language e MattersMatters. . SpeciaSpecial l Issue Issue — — Corpus-Corpus-based based Translation Studies: Research and Applications
Translation Studies: Research and Applications 35 (1). 35 (1).
Kruger, Alet (2004b). “Editorial. Corpus-based Translation Research Comes to Kruger, Alet (2004b). “Editorial. Corpus-based Translation Research Comes to
Africa.” In Alet Kruger (ed.), 1–5. Africa.” In Alet Kruger (ed.), 1–5. Laviosa, Sara (ed.) (1998).
Laviosa, Sara (ed.) (1998). L’appr L’approche oche basée basée sur sur le le corpus/corpus/The The corpus-corpus-based based approach
approach. Special issue of. Special issue of Meta Meta 43 (4). 43 (4).
Laviosa, Sara (2002).
Laviosa, Sara (2002). Corpus-based Translation Studies. Theory, Findings,Corpus-based Translation Studies. Theory, Findings, Applications
Applications. Amsterdam: Rodopi.. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Laviosa, Sara (2004). “Corpus-based Translation Studies: Where Does It Come Laviosa, Sara (2004). “Corpus-based Translation Studies: Where Does It Come
From? Where Is It Going?” In Alet Kruger (ed.), 6–27. From? Where Is It Going?” In Alet Kruger (ed.), 6–27.
Mason, Ian (2004). Review on back cover of Maeve Olohan (2004). Mason, Ian (2004). Review on back cover of Maeve Olohan (2004).
Mason, Ian and Adriana Serban (2003). “Deixis as an Interactive Feature in Mason, Ian and Adriana Serban (2003). “Deixis as an Interactive Feature in
Literary Translations from Romanian into English.”
Literary Translations from Romanian into English.” Target Target 15 (2), 269– 15 (2), 269–
94. 94.
Mauranen, Anna and Pekka Kujamäki (eds) (2004).
Mauranen, Anna and Pekka Kujamäki (eds) (2004). Translation Universals. DoTranslation Universals. Do
They Exist?
They Exist? Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Munday, Jeremy (2001).
Munday, Jeremy (2001). In Introtroducducining g TrTransanslatlation ion StStudiudies. es. ThTheoreorieies s and and Applications
Applications. London/New York: Routledge.. London/New York: Routledge.
Olohan, Maeve (2004).
Olohan, Maeve (2004). Introducing Corpor Introducing Corpora in Translation a in Translation Studies.Studies. London/NewLondon/New
York: Routledge. York: Routledge.
Olohan, Maeve and Baker, Mona (2000). “Reporting
Olohan, Maeve and Baker, Mona (2000). “Reporting that that in Translated English: in Translated English:
Evidence for Subconscious Processes of Explicitation?”
Evidence for Subconscious Processes of Explicitation?” Across Across LanguagesLanguages
and Cultures
and Cultures 1 (2), 141–58. 1 (2), 141–58.
Pustejovsky, James (1995).
Pustejovsky, James (1995). The Generative LexiconThe Generative Lexicon. Cambridge, MA: MIT. Cambridge, MA: MIT
Press. Press.
Sampson, Geoffrey (2005). “Quantifying the Shift Towards Empirical Methods.” Sampson, Geoffrey (2005). “Quantifying the Shift Towards Empirical Methods.”
International Journal of
International Journal of Corpus LinguisticsCorpus Linguistics 10 (1), 15–36. 10 (1), 15–36.
Santos, Diana (2000). “The Translation Network. A Model for a Fine-Grained Santos, Diana (2000). “The Translation Network. A Model for a Fine-Grained
¸ ¸
