What happens in translation? A comparison of original and translated texts containing verbs meaning SIT, STAND and LIE in the English-Swedish Parallel Corpus (ESPC)1 (original) (raw)
2016, Nordic Journal of English Studies
This article studies translation effects by comparing the use of verbs meaning SIT, STAND and LIE in original and translated texts in the English-Swedish Parallel Corpus (ESPC). Effects on both the frequency of use and the use of lexical and structural translation shifts are studied. Postural verbs have a much higher frequency overall in Swedish than in English. In Swedish translated texts, postural verbs are significantly under-represented in comparison to original texts, whereas postural verbs are significantly over-represented in English translations. At a more fine-grained level, it is possible to show that various categories are treated differently, in particular the types of subjects. The effect on frequency is stronger for Human subjects, which represent an unmarked category, than it is for Inanimate subjects, which are more marked. However, the pattern of over-and under-representation presupposes a functional overlap across languages. Writing as subject, which is a category that is unique to Swedish in relation to English, follows a different pattern. (This type of subject appears in examples such as: Nyheten står i tidningen 'The news is (literally: stands) in the paper'). The result is discussed both from the point of view of the research methodology used in contrastive studies based on translation corpora and from a theoretical point of view. For methodology, the conclusion is that frequencies can be considerably skewed, whereas a language remains true to its system of basic semantic contrasts in professional translations. Theoretically, the result can be related to theories of language contact and studies of second language acquisition and bilingual development.
Sign up for access to the world's latest research
checkGet notified about relevant papers
checkSave papers to use in your research
checkJoin the discussion with peers
checkTrack your impact
Related papers
This article studies translation effects by comparing the use of verbs meaning SIT, STAND and LIE in original and translated texts in the English-Swedish Parallel Corpus (ESPC). Effects on both the frequency of use and the use of lexical and structural translation shifts are studied. Postural verbs have a much higher frequency overall in Swedish than in English. In Swedish translated texts, postural verbs are significantly under-represented in comparison to original texts, whereas postural verbs are significantly over-represented in English translations. At a more fine-grained level, it is possible to show that various categories are treated differently, in particular the types of subjects. The effect on frequency is stronger for Human subjects, which represent an unmarked category, than it is for Inanimate subjects, which are more marked. However, the pattern of over-and under-representation presupposes a functional overlap across languages. Writing as subject, which is a category that is unique to Swedish in relation to English, follows a different pattern. (This type of subject appears in examples such as: Nyheten står i tidningen 'The news is (literally: stands) in the paper'). The result is discussed both from the point of view of the research methodology used in contrastive studies based on translation corpora and from a theoretical point of view. For methodology, the conclusion is that frequencies can be considerably skewed, whereas a language remains true to its system of basic semantic contrasts in professional translations. Theoretically, the result can be related to theories of language contact and studies of second language acquisition and bilingual development.
A tentative typology of translation-induced language change
2011
Language contact through translation (LCTT) is a particular source of contact-induced language change. While investigations into individual scenarios have shown its importance, major works on language contact have largely neglected this type of language contact. In particular, no attempt has been made so far at establishing general principles and mechanisms for LCTT situations. This contribution presents a tentative typology for the study of LCTT and analyzes two different situations from that perspective, namely the contact between Latin and Old Swedish in the Middle Ages and between English and German today.
Linguisik Online, 2005
The two pilot studies described in this article, both part of a larger on-going project investigating multilingualism in a translation context, deal with separation of languages in translation students. At the same time, they demonstrate how multilingualism research can be integrated into the translation classroom. Within the framework of Grosjean's model (1997, 1998, 2001), the first study tests the influence on translation performance of preferentially activating one of the languages for the translation version Spanish (L2) into German (L1). The second assesses the transfer of structures from the dominant language in translating from German (L1) into English (L2). Despite the relatively small database, various inferences can be made about multilingual language processing in trainee translators. * The research reported here is part of a larger project "Research in the translation classroom" (supported by the Department of Applied Linguistics and Cultural Studies) in collaboration with Paula Bazo Castellanos, Marcel Eggler, and Chris Ricketts. We would like to express our appreciation to them for permission to use these data, as well as to the 2003/04 first-and second-year translation students at the Zurich University of Applied Sciences Winterthur for their participation and to Heather Bryn-Thomas, Martina von Arx, and Claudia Isler for their assistance in collecting the native speaker judgments. 1 Williams (1994) notes that translating and interpreting from L2 into L1 is more of a prescriptive rule than a descriptive one. See also Baker (1998) for a discussion of this issue.
THEORETICAL ISSUES OF LANGUAGE CONTACTS, BORROWINGS AND INTERFERENCE
The article is devoted to the theoretical problem of language contacts in modern linguistics. The problem of the relationship between language and consciousness has been comprehensively discussed: various studies of the language picture of the world are carried out by the speakers of a particular language, associative dictionaries of different languages are created, this gives rich material for studying the real perception within a particular culture. To understand how and in which direction the contacting languages change, the authors offer to see the process at three different levels: linguistic level itself, sociolinguistic terms, psycholinguistic terms of individual bilingualism.
Bilinguals vs. monolinguals: Where is the difference? Studia Linguistica 67(1), 101–122.
Studia Linguistica, 2013
It has been suggested earlier that the reinforced syntactic variation in bilingual input might lead to cross-linguistic influence and vulnerability in some areas of the child grammar. This study verifies this suggestion against new experimental data. Since direct object scrambling is optional in Ukrainian and prohibited in English, it could be a more vulnerable domain in Ukrainian-English bilingual acquisition than in monolingual Ukrainian acquisition. It appears, however, that 2;2–6;3-year-old bilingual children mostly follow similar patterns in scrambling production as their monolingual peers. Several aspects of possible distinctions are discussed (i.e., direct object type and pragmatic sensitivity), but the available data do not allow us to claim that there are significant group differences between bilinguals and monolinguals in regard to the considered phenomenon at the syntax-semantics interface.
The aim of this book is to demonstrate that all language contact phenomena are governed by the same set of underlying principles. The theoretical framework which Carol Myers-Scotton employs is the Matrix Language Frame model (MLF), which was first proposed in . Central to the MLF is the distinction between Matrix Language and Embedded Language; this develops the idea of asymmetry between participating languages prevalent in the literature on codeswitching (cf. whilst treating the Matrix and Embedded Languages as abstract linguistic systems rather than actual languages. It is the Matrix Language which contributes structure (morpheme order) and "critical system morphemes," that is, "system morphemes which have grammatical relations external to their head constituent (i.e. which participate in the sentence's thematic role grid)" (p. 59). The Embedded Language contributes other morphemes, most notably content words.
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.