1887
  1. Home
  2. Books
  3. Contrastive Pragmatics and Translation

Contrastive Pragmatics and Translation

Evaluation, epistemic modality and communicative styles in English and German

image of Contrastive Pragmatics and Translation
GBP
Buy:£76.00 + Taxes

This book provides the first comprehensive account of English-German pragmatic contrasts in written discourse and their effects on English-German translations. The novel and multi-dimensional corpus-based studies of business communication and popular science writing presented in this book combine quantitative and qualitative approaches and focus on the use of evaluative adjectives and epistemic modal markers. They provide empirical evidence that English and German differ in systematic ways and that translations, while being adapted to target audience’s preferences to a large extent, are clearly susceptible to source language interference when it comes to more fine-grained differences. The book discusses which general factors determine the degree of impact of source language features on translations and also comments on the possibility of source language influence on target language norms via translations. The book is of interest to researchers and students in a variety of fields, such as pragmatics, translation studies, genre analysis and stylistics.

References

  1. Adamson, Sylvia
    2000 “A Lovely Little Example: Word Options and Category Shift in the Premodifying String.” InPathways of Change. Grammaticalisation in English, ed. by Olga Fischer , Anette Rosenbach , and Dieter Stein , 39–66. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/slcs.53.04ada
     https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.53.04ada [Google Scholar]
  2. Albrecht, Jörn
    2005 Übersetzung und Linguistik. Grundlagen der Übersetzungsforschung. Vol. 2. Tübingen: Narr.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Baker, Mona
    1996 “Corpus-Based Translation Studies: The Challenges That Lie Ahead.” InTerminology, LSP and Translation. Studies in Language Engineering in Honour of Juan C. Sager, ed. by Harold Somers , 175–186. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/btl.18.17bak
     https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.18.17bak [Google Scholar]
  4. Barlow, Michael
    1995 “ParaConc: A Concordancer for Parallel Texts.” Computers and Text10: 14–16.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. 2009 ParaConc and Parallel Corpora in Contrastive and Translation Studies. Houston, TX: Athelstan Publications.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Barron, Anne
    2008 “The Structure of Requests in Irish English and English English”. InVariational Pragmatics, ed. by Klaus P. Schneider , and Anne Barron , 35–68. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/pbns.178.04bar
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.178.04bar [Google Scholar]
  7. Baumgarten, Nicole
    2007 “Converging Conventions? Macrosyntactic Conjunction with English and and German und .” Text and Talk27: 139–170. doi: 10.1515/TEXT.2007.006
     https://doi.org/10.1515/TEXT.2007.006 [Google Scholar]
  8. 2008 “Writer Construction in English and German Popularized Academic Discourse: The Uses of we and wir .” Multilingua27: 409–438. doi: 10.1515/MULTI.2008.019
     https://doi.org/10.1515/MULTI.2008.019 [Google Scholar]
  9. Baumgarten, Nicole , Juliane House , and Julia Probst
    2004 “English as Lingua Franca in Covert Translation Processes.” The Translator10: 83–108. doi: 10.1080/13556509.2004.10799169
     https://doi.org/10.1080/13556509.2004.10799169 [Google Scholar]
  10. Baumgarten, Nicole , and Demet Özçetin
    2008 “Linguistic Variation Through Language Contact in Translation.” InLanguage Contact and Contact Languages, ed. by Peter Siemund , and Noemi Kintana , 293–316. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/hsm.7.17bau
     https://doi.org/10.1075/hsm.7.17bau [Google Scholar]
  11. Becher, Viktor
    2009 “The Decline of damit in English-German Translations. A Diachronic Perspective on Source Language Interference.” SKASE Journal of Translation and Interpretation4: 2–24.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. 2010a “Abandoning the Notion of “Translation-Inherent” Explicitation. Against a Dogma of Translation Studies.” Across Languages and Cultures11: 1–28. doi: 10.1556/Acr.11.2010.1.1
     https://doi.org/10.1556/Acr.11.2010.1.1 [Google Scholar]
  13. 2010b “Towards a More Rigorous Treatment of the Explicitation Hypothesis in Translation Studies.” trans-kom3: 1–25.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. 2010c “Differences in the Use of Deictic Expressions in English and German Texts.” Linguistics48: 1309–1342. doi: 10.1515/ling.2010.042
     https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.2010.042 [Google Scholar]
  15. 2011 Explicitation and Implicitation in Translation. A Corpus-Based Study of English-German and German-English Translations of Business Texts. PhD Thesis: University of Hamburg. Accessible online underediss.sub.uni‑hamburg.de/volltexte/2011/5321/pdf/Dissertation.pdf. Date last accessed: March, 02, 2015.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Becher, Viktor , Juliane House , and Svenja Kranich
    2009 “Convergence and Divergence of Communicative Norms Through Language Contact in Translation.” InConvergence and Divergence in Language Contact Situations, ed. by Kurt Braunmüller , and Juliane House , 125–152. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/hsm.8.06bec
     https://doi.org/10.1075/hsm.8.06bec [Google Scholar]
  17. Becker, Annette
    2009 “Modality and Engagement in British and German Political Interviews.” Languages in Contrast9: 5–22. doi: 10.1075/lic.9.1.02bec
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lic.9.1.02bec [Google Scholar]
  18. Behrens, Bergljot
    2005 “Cohesive Ties in Translation: A Contrastive Study of the Norwegian Connective dermed .” Languages in Contrast5: 3–32. doi: 10.1075/lic.5.1.04beh
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lic.5.1.04beh [Google Scholar]
  19. Bell, Allan
    1984 “Language Style as Audience Design.” Language and Society13: 145–204. doi: 10.1017/S004740450001037X
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S004740450001037X [Google Scholar]
  20. Bextermöller, Matthias
    2001 Empirisch-linguistische Analyse des Geschäftsberichts. PhD Thesis: University of Duisburg.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Biber, Douglas
    1995 Dimensions of Register Variation: A Cross-Linguistic Comparison. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511519871
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511519871 [Google Scholar]
  22. Biber, Douglas , Stig Johansson , Geoffrey Leech , Susan Conrad , and Edgar Finegan
    1999 Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. London: Longman.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Blum-Kulka, Shoshana , Juliane House , and Gabriele Kasper
    1989 Cross-Cultural Pragmatics: Requests and Apologies. Norwood: Ablex Publishing.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Bolinger, Dwight
    1967 “Adjectives in English: Attribution and Predication.” Lingua18: 1‑34. doi: 10.1016/0024‑3841(67)90018‑6
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-3841(67)90018-6 [Google Scholar]
  25. Bolten, Jürgen
    2001 “Kann man Kulturen beschreiben oder erklären, ohne Stereotypen zu verwenden?” Interculture Online 1. Accessible online atwww2.uni‑jena.de/philosophie/iwk/publikationen/kulturbeschreibung.pdf.
  26. Bolten, Jürgen , Marion Dathe , Susanne Kirchmeyer , Marc Roennau , Peter Witchalls , and Sabine Ziebell-Drabo
    1996 “Interkulturalität, Interlingualität und Standardisierung bei der Öffentlichkeitsarbeit von Unternehmen. Gezeigt an amerikanischen, britischen, deutschen, französischen und russischen Geschäftsberichten.” InFachliche Textsorten. Komponenten – Relationen – Strategien, ed. by Klaus-Dieter Baumann , and Hartwig Kalverkämper , 389–425. Tübingen: Narr.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Böttger, Claudia
    2007 Lost in Translation? An Analysis of the Role of English as the Lingua Franca of Multilingual Business Communication. Hamburg: Verlag Dr. Kovač.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Böttger, Claudia and Kristin Bührig
    2003 “Translating Obligation in Business Communication.” InSpeaking in Tongues: Languages across Contexts and Users, ed. by Luis Pérez González , 161–185. University of Valencia: PUV.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Böttger, Claudia , and Kristin Bührig
    2004 “Financial Communication, Translation and Text Forms: A Contrastive Analysis of US-American and German Letters to Shareholders.” InDiscourse, Communication and the Enterprise, ed. by Carlos Gouveia , Carminda Silvestre , and Luísa Azuaga , 233–243. Lisbon: Ulices (University of Lisbon Centre for English Studies).
     [Google Scholar]
  30. 2007 “La communication économique et les traductions.” InLangue, Économie, Entreprise. Le Travail des Mots, ed. by Irmtraut Behr , Dieter Hentschel , and Michel Kauffmann , 269–283. Paris: Presses Sorbonne Nouvelle.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Bührig, Kristin , and Juliane House
    2004 “Connectivity in Translation: Transitions from Orality to Literacy.” InMultilingual Communication, ed. by Juliane House , and Jochen Rehbein , 87–114. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/hsm.3.06buh
     https://doi.org/10.1075/hsm.3.06buh [Google Scholar]
  32. 2007 “Linking Constructions in Discourse across Languages.” InConnectivity in Grammar and Discourse, ed. by Jochen Rehbein , Christiane Hohenstein , and Lukas Pietsch , 345–366. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/hsm.5.20buh
     https://doi.org/10.1075/hsm.5.20buh [Google Scholar]
  33. Byrnes, Heidi
    1986 “Interactional Style in German and American Conversations.” Text6: 189–206.10.1515/text.1.1986.6.2.189
     https://doi.org/10.1515/text.1.1986.6.2.189 [Google Scholar]
  34. Cecchetto, Vittorina , and Magda Stroińska
    1997 “Systems of Reference in Intellectual Discourse: A Potential Source of Intercultural Stereotypes.” InCulture and Styles of Academic Discourse, ed. by Anna Duszak , 141–154. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110821048.141
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110821048.141 [Google Scholar]
  35. Channell, Joanna
    2001 “Corpus-Based Analysis of Evaluative Lexis.” InEvaluation in Text. Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse, ed. by Susan Hunston , and Geoff Thompson , 38–55. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Clemen, Gudrun
    1997 “The Concept of Hedging: Origins, Approaches and Definitions.” InHedging and Discourse. Approaches to the Analysis of a Pragmatic Phenomenon in Academic Texts, ed. by Raija Markkanen , and Hartmut Schröder , 235–248. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Clyne, Michael
    1987 “Cultural Differences in the Organization of Academic Texts. English and German.” Journal of Pragmatics11: 211–247. doi: 10.1016/0378‑2166(87)90196‑2
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(87)90196-2 [Google Scholar]
  38. 1991 “The Sociocultural Dimension. The Dilemma of the German-Speaking Scholar.” InSubject-Oriented Texts. Languages for Special Purposes and Text Theory, ed. by Hartmut Schröder , 49–67. Berlin: Walter De Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110858747.49
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110858747.49 [Google Scholar]
  39. 1994 Inter-Cultural Communication at Work. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. 2003 Dynamics of Language Contact. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511606526
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511606526 [Google Scholar]
  41. Coates, Jennifer
    1995 “The Expression of Root and Epistemic Possibility in English.” InModality in Grammar and Discourse, ed. by Joan Bybee , and Suzanne Fleischmann , 55–66. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tsl.32.04coa
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.32.04coa [Google Scholar]
  42. Crismore, Avon , and Rodney Farnsworth
    1990 “Metadiscourse in Popular and Professional Science Discourse.” InThe Writing Scholar. Studies in Academic Discourse, ed. by Walter Nash , 118–136. London: Sage.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Crismore, Avon , and William J. Vande Kopple
    1997 “Hedges and Readers: Effects on Attitudes and Learning.” InHedging and Discourse. Approaches to the Analysis of a Pragmatic Phenomenon in Academic Texts, ed. by Raija Markkanen , and Hartmut Schröder , 83–113. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Croft, William
    1991 Syntactic Categories and the Cognitive Organization of Information. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Declerck, Renaat
    2009 “Not-yet-Factual at Time t: A Neglected Modal Concept.” InModality in English. Theory and Description, ed. by Raphael Salkie , Pierre Busuttil , and Johan van der Auwera , 31–54. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110213331.31
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110213331.31 [Google Scholar]
  46. Denison, David
    1993 English Historical Syntax: Verbal Constructions. London: Longman.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. De Waard, Jan , and Eugene A. Nida
    1986 From One Language to Another. Functional Equivalence in Bible Translating. Nashville: Nelson Publishers.
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Diewald, Gabriele
    1999 Die Modalverben im Deutschen: Grammatikalisierung und Polyfunktionalität. Tübingen: Niemeyer. doi: 10.1515/9783110945942
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110945942 [Google Scholar]
  49. 2010 “On Some Problem Areas in Grammaticalization Theory.” InGrammaticalization: Current Views and Issues, ed. by Katerina Stathi , Elke Gehweiler , and Ekkehard König , 17–50. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/slcs.119.04die
     https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.119.04die [Google Scholar]
  50. Dixon, Robert M.W
    1982 Where Have all the Adjectives Gone? And Other Essays in Semantics and Syntax. Berlin: Mouton. doi: 10.1515/9783110822939
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110822939 [Google Scholar]
  51. Doherty, Monika
    1995 “Prinzipien und Parameter als Grundlagen einer allgemeinen Theorie der vergleichenden Stilistik.” InStilfragen, ed. by Gerhard Stickel , 181–197. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  52. 2001 “Discourse Relators and the Beginnings of Sentences in English and German.” Languages in Contrast3: 223–251. doi: 10.1075/lic.3.2.05doh
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lic.3.2.05doh [Google Scholar]
  53. 2002 Language Processing in Discourse. A Key to Felicitous Translation. London: Routledge. doi: 10.4324/9780203216934
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203216934 [Google Scholar]
  54. 2006 Structural Propensities: Translating Nominal Word Groups from English into German. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/btl.65
     https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.65 [Google Scholar]
  55. Duszak, Anna
    1997 “Cross-Cultural Academic Communication: A Discourse-Community View.” InCulture and Styles of Academic Discourse, ed. by Anna Duszak , 11–39. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110821048
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110821048 [Google Scholar]
  56. (ed) 1997 Culture and Styles of Academic Discourse. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110821048
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110821048 [Google Scholar]
  57. Ehlich, Konrad
    2000 “Wissenschaftsstile, Wissenschaftssprache und ihre (wissens-) soziologischen Hintergründe.” InEinstellungsforschung in der Soziolinguistik und in den Nachbardisziplinen. Studies in Language Attitudes, ed. by Szilvia Deminger , Thorsten Fögen , Joachim Scharloth , and Simone Zwickel , 59–71. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
     [Google Scholar]
  58. Evans, Karin U. H
    1998 “Organizational Patterns of American and German Texts for Business and Economics: A Contrastive Study.” Journal of Pragmatics29: 681–703. doi: 10.1016/S0378‑2166(97)00080‑5
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(97)00080-5 [Google Scholar]
  59. Fabricius-Hansen, Cathrine
    2005 “Elusive Connectives: A Case Study on the Explicitness Dimension of Discourse Coherence.” Linguistics43: 17–48. doi: 10.1515/ling.2005.43.1.17
     https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.2005.43.1.17 [Google Scholar]
  60. Fahnestock, Jeanne
    1986 “Accommodating Science: The Rhetorical Life of Scientific Facts.” Written Communication3: 275–96. doi: 10.1177/0741088386003003001
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088386003003001 [Google Scholar]
  61. Fandrych, Christian , and Gabriele Graefen
    2002 “Text Commenting Devices in German and English Academic Articles.” Multilingua21: 17–43. doi: 10.1515/mult.2002.002
     https://doi.org/10.1515/mult.2002.002 [Google Scholar]
  62. Fischer, Klaus
    2013 Satzstrukturen im Deutschen und Englischen. Berlin: Akademie Verlag. doi: 10.1515/9783050064291
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783050064291 [Google Scholar]
  63. Fløttum, Kjersti
    1998 “Le Mot du P.D.G. – descriptif ou polémique?” InDiscours Professionnels en Français, ed. by Yves Gambier , 105–122. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
     [Google Scholar]
  64. Fløttum, Kjersti , Inge B. Hemmingsen , and Unni P. Pereira
    1994 “Readability in English, French and German ‘Chairman’s Statement’.” InApplications and Implications of Current LSP Research. Vol. 2, ed. by Robert M. W. Dixon , 729–737. Bergen: Fagbokforlaget.
     [Google Scholar]
  65. Frawley, William
    1984 “Prolegomenon to a Theory of Translation.” InTranslation: Literary, Linguistic, and Philosophical Perspectives, ed. by William Frawley , 159–175. London: Associated University Presses.
     [Google Scholar]
  66. Friedrich, Paul
    1989 “Language, Ideology, and Political Economy.” American Anthropologist91: 295–312. doi: 10.1525/aa.1989.91.2.02a00010
     https://doi.org/10.1525/aa.1989.91.2.02a00010 [Google Scholar]
  67. Galtung, Johan
    1981 “Structure, Culture, and Intellectual Style: An Essay Comparing Saxonic, Teutonic, Gallic, and Nipponic Approaches.” Social Science Information20: 817–856. doi: 10.1177/053901848102000601
     https://doi.org/10.1177/053901848102000601 [Google Scholar]
  68. 1985 “Struktur, Kultur und intellektueller Stil. Ein vergleichender Essay über sachsonische, teutonische, gallische und nipponische Wissenschaft.” InDas Fremde und das Eigene: Prolegomena zu einer Interkulturellen Germanistik, ed. by Alois Wierlacher , 151–196. München: Iudicium-Verlag.
     [Google Scholar]
  69. Garzone, Giuliana
    2004 “Annual Company Reports and CEO’s Letters: Discoursal Features and Cultural Markedness.” InIntercultural Aspects of Specialized Communication, ed. by Christopher Candlin , and Maurizio Gotti , 311–341. Bern: Peter Lang.
     [Google Scholar]
  70. 2005 “Letters to Shareholders and Chairman’s Statements: Textual Variability and Generic Integrity.” InGenre Variation in Business Letters, ed. by Paul Gillaerts , and Maurizio Gotti , 179–204. Bern: Peter Lang.
     [Google Scholar]
  71. Gläser, Rosemarie
    1990 Fachtextsorten im Englischen. Tübingen: Narr.
     [Google Scholar]
  72. Gohr, Martina
    2002 Geschäftsbericht und Aktionärsbrief – eine textsortenlinguistische Analyse mit anwendungsbezogenen Aspekten. PhD Thesis: University of Düsseldorf.
     [Google Scholar]
  73. González Díaz, Victorina
    2008 English Adjective Comparison. A Historical Perspective. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/cilt.299
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.299 [Google Scholar]
  74. Grabe, William , and Robert Kaplan
    1997 “On the Writing of Science and the Science of Writing: Hedging in Science Text and Elsewhere.” InHedging and Discourse. Approaches to the Analysis of a Pragmatic Phenomenon in Academic Texts, ed. by Raija Markkanen , and Hartmut Schröder , 151–167. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  75. Graefen, Gabriele
    2000 “Textkommentierung in deutschen und englischen wissenschaftlichen Artikeln.” InSprache und Kultur, ed. by Horst-Dieter Schlosser , 113–124. Bern: Lang.
     [Google Scholar]
  76. Grieve, Averil
    2010 “‘Aber ganz ehrlich’: Differences in Episodic Structure, Apologies and Truth-Orientation in German and Australian Workplace Telephone Discourse.” Journal of Pragmatics42: 190–219. doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2009.05.009
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2009.05.009 [Google Scholar]
  77. Halliday, Michael A. K. , and Christian M. I. M. Matthiessen
    2004 An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Hodder Arnold.
     [Google Scholar]
  78. Hansen-Schirra, Silvia
    2011 “Between Normalization and Shining through: Specific Properties of English-German Translations and Their Influence on the Target Language.” InMultilingual Discourse Production. Diachronic and Synchronic Perspectives, ed. by Svenja Kranich , Viktor Becher , Steffen Höder , and Juliane House , 135–162. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/hsm.12.07han
     https://doi.org/10.1075/hsm.12.07han [Google Scholar]
  79. Hansen-Schirra, Silvia , Stella Neumann , and Erich Steiner
    2007 “Cohesive Explicitness and Explicitation in an English-German Translation Corpus.” Languages in Contrast7: 241–265. doi: 10.1075/lic.7.2.09han
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lic.7.2.09han [Google Scholar]
  80. Hansen-Schirra, Silvia , Sandra Hansen , Sascha Wolfer , and Lars Konieczny
    2009 “Fachkommunikation, Popularisierung, Übersetzung: Empirische Vergleiche am Beispiel der Nominalphrase im Englischen und Deutschen.” Linguistik Online39: 109–118.
     [Google Scholar]
  81. Hansen-Schirra, Silvia , Stella Neumann , and Erich Steiner
    (eds) 2012 Cross-Linguistic Corpora for the Study of Translations. Insights from the Language Pair English-German. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. doi: 10.1515/9783110260328
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110260328 [Google Scholar]
  82. Hawkins, John A
    1986 A Comparative Typology of English and German. Unifying the Contrasts. Austin: University of Texas Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  83. Höder, Steffen
    2010 Sprachausbau im Sprachkontakt. Syntaktischer Wandel im Altschwedischen. Heidelberg: Winter.
     [Google Scholar]
  84. Hoey, Michael
    2001 Textual Interaction: An Introduction to Written Discourse Analysis. London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  85. Hofstede, Geert
    1980 Culture’s Consequences. International Differences in Work-Related Values. Beverly Hills: Sage.
     [Google Scholar]
  86. 2002 “Dimensions Do Not Exist: A Reply to Brendan McSweeney.” Human Relations55: 1355–1361. doi: 10.1177/0018726702055011921
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726702055011921 [Google Scholar]
  87. House, Juliane
    1977 A Model for Translation Quality Assessment. Tübingen: Narr.
     [Google Scholar]
  88. 1979 “Interaktionsnormen in deutschen und englischen Alltagsdialogen.” Linguistische Berichte59: 76–90.
     [Google Scholar]
  89. 1982 “Opening and Closing Phases in English and German Dialogues.” Grazer Linguistische Studien16: 52–83.
     [Google Scholar]
  90. 1989 “‘Oh Excuse Me Please…’: Apologizing in a Foreign Language.” InEnglisch als Zweitsprache, ed. by Bernhard Kettemann , Peter Bierbaumer , Alwin Fill , and Annemarie Karpf , 303–327. Tübingen: Narr.
     [Google Scholar]
  91. 1996 “Contrastive Discourse Analysis and Misunderstanding: The Case of German and English.” InContrastive Sociolinguistics, ed. by Marlis Hellinger , and Ulrich Ammon , 345–361. Berlin: Mouton. doi: 10.1515/9783110811551.345
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110811551.345 [Google Scholar]
  92. 1997 Translation Quality Assessment: A Model Revisited. Tübingen: Narr.
     [Google Scholar]
  93. 1998a “Kontrastive Pragmatik und interkulturelle Kompetenz im Fremdsprachenunterricht.” InKontrast und Äquivalenz. Beiträge zu Sprachvergleich und Übersetzung, ed. by Wolfgang Börner , and Klaus Vogel , 162–189. Tübingen: Narr.
     [Google Scholar]
  94. 1998b “Politeness and Translation.” InThe Pragmatics of Translation, ed. by Leo Hickey , 54–71. Clevedon: Avon.
     [Google Scholar]
  95. 2004 “Linguistic Aspects of the Translation of Children’s Books.” InÜbersetzung. Translation. Traduction. An International Encyclopedia of Translation Studies, ed. by Harald Kittel , Armin Paul Frank , Norbert Greiner , Theo Hermans , Werner Koller , José Lambert , and Fritz Paul , in association with Juliane House , and Brigitte Schultze , 683–697. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  96. 2006 “Communicative Styles in English and German.” European Journal of English Studies10: 249–267. doi: 10.1080/13825570600967721
     https://doi.org/10.1080/13825570600967721 [Google Scholar]
  97. 2007 “Covert Translation and Language Contact and Change.” The Chinese Translators Journal28: 17–26.
     [Google Scholar]
  98. 2008a “Beyond Intervention: Universals in Translation?” trans-kom1: 6–19.
     [Google Scholar]
  99. 2008b “Impoliteness in Germany: Intercultural Encounters in Everyday and Institutional Talk.” Intercultural Pragmatics7: 561–595.
     [Google Scholar]
  100. 2009 Translation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  101. 2011a “Using Translation and Parallel Text Corpora to Investigate the Influence of Global English on Textual Norms in Other Languages.” InCorpus-Based Translation Studies. Research and Applications, ed. by Alet Kruger , Kim Wallmach , and Jeremy Munday , 187–210. London: Continuum.
     [Google Scholar]
  102. 2011b “Linking Constructions in English and German Translated and Original Texts.” InMultilingual Discourse Production. Diachronic and Synchronic Perspectives, ed. by Svenja Kranich , Viktor Becher , Steffen Höder , and Juliane House , 163–182. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/hsm.12.08hou
     https://doi.org/10.1075/hsm.12.08hou [Google Scholar]
  103. 2014 Translation Quality Assessment: Past and Present. London: Routledge. doi: 10.1057/9781137025487.0017
     https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137025487.0017 [Google Scholar]
  104. House, Juliane , and Gabriele Kasper
    1981 “Politeness Markers in English and German.” InConversational Routine: Explorations in Standardized Communication Situations and Prepatterned Speech. Vol. 2, ed. by Florian Coultmas , 157–185. The Hague: Mouton.
     [Google Scholar]
  105. 1987 “Interlanguage Pragmatics: Requesting in a Foreign Language.” InPerspectives on Language and Performance. Festschrift for Werner Hüllen, ed. by Rainer Schulze , 1250–1288. Tübingen: Narr.
     [Google Scholar]
  106. Hunston, Susan
    2007a “Using a Corpus to Investigate Stance Quantitatively and Qualitatively.” InStancetaking in Discourse, ed. by Robert Englebretson , 27–47. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/pbns.164.03hun
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.164.03hun [Google Scholar]
  107. 2007b “Semantic Prosody Revisited.” International Journal of Corpus Linguistics12: 249–268. doi: 10.1075/ijcl.12.2.09hun
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.12.2.09hun [Google Scholar]
  108. Hunston, Susan , and John Sinclair
    2001 “A Local Grammar of Evaluation.” InEvaluation in Text. Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse, ed. by Susan Hunston , and Geoff Thompson , 74–101. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  109. Hunston, Susan , and Geoff Thompson
    (eds) 2001 Evaluation in Text. Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  110. Hyland, Ken
    1994 “Hedging in Academic Writing and EAP Textbooks.” English for Specific Purposes13: 239–256. doi: 10.1016/0889‑4906(94)90004‑3
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-4906(94)90004-3 [Google Scholar]
  111. 1996 “Writing Without Conviction? Hedging in Science Research Articles.” Applied Linguistics17: 433–454. doi: 10.1093/applin/17.4.433
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/17.4.433 [Google Scholar]
  112. 1998 “Boosting, Hedging, and the Negotiation of Academic Knowledge”. Text18: 349–382.10.1515/text.1.1998.18.3.349
     https://doi.org/10.1515/text.1.1998.18.3.349 [Google Scholar]
  113. Kammhuber, Stefan
    1998 “Kulturstandards in der interkulturellen Kommunikation – Grobe Klötze oder nützliche Denkgriffe?” InInterkulturelle Kommunikation, ed. by Ingrid Jonach , 45–53. München: Reinhardt.
     [Google Scholar]
  114. Kilgarriff, Adam , and Gregory Grefenstette
    2003 “Web as Corpus.” Introduction to the Special Issue Web as Corpus . Computational Linguistics29 (3). doi: 10.1162/089120103322711569
     https://doi.org/10.1162/089120103322711569 [Google Scholar]
  115. Klaudy, Kinga
    2009 “The Asymmetry Hypothesis in Translation Research.” InTranslators and Their Readers. In Homage to Eugene A. Nida, ed. by Rodica Dimitriu , and Miriam Shlesinger , 285–302. Paris: Les Éditions du Hasard.
     [Google Scholar]
  116. Kohut, Gary F. , and Albert H. Segars
    1992 “The President’s Letter to Stockholders: An Examination of Corporate Communication Strategies.” The Journal of Business Communication29: 7–21. doi: 10.1177/002194369202900101
     https://doi.org/10.1177/002194369202900101 [Google Scholar]
  117. Koller, Werner
    2004 “Der Begriff der Äquivalenz in der Übersetzungswissenschaft.” InÜbersetzung. Translation. Traduction. An International Encyclopedia of Translation Studies, ed. by Harald Kittel , Armin Paul Frank , Norbert Greiner , Theo Hermans , Werner Koller , José Lambert , and Fritz Paul , 343–354. In association with Juliane House, and Brigitte Schultze. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  118. 2011 Einführung in die Übersetzungswissenschaft. 8th ed. Tübingen: Narr.
     [Google Scholar]
  119. König, Ekkehard , and Volker Gast
    2009 Understanding English-German Contrasts. Grundlagen der Anglistik und Amerikanistik. 2nd ed. Berlin: Erich Schmidt Verlag.
     [Google Scholar]
  120. Königs, Karin
    2011 Übersetzen Englisch-Deutsch: Lernen mit System. 3rd ed. München: Oldenbourg.
     [Google Scholar]
  121. Kranich, Svenja
    2009 “Epistemic Modality in English Popular Scientific Articles and Their German Translations.” trans-kom2: 26–41. Accessible online atd‑nb.info/999839527/34.
     [Google Scholar]
  122. 2011a “To Hedge or Not to Hedge. The Use of Epistemic Modal Expressions in Popular Science in English Texts, English-German Translations and German Original Texts.” Text and Talk31: 77–99. doi: 10.1515/text.2011.004
     https://doi.org/10.1515/text.2011.004 [Google Scholar]
  123. 2011b “L’emploi des expressions épistémiques dans des lettres aux actionnaires en France, aux États-Unis et en Allemagne.” Langage et Société137: 115–134. doi: 10.3917/ls.137.0115
     https://doi.org/10.3917/ls.137.0115 [Google Scholar]
  124. 2014a “Translation as a Locus of Language Contact.” InTranslation. A Multidisciplinary Approach, ed. by Juliane House , 96–115. London: Palgrave Macmillan. doi: 10.1057/9781137025487_6
     https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137025487_6 [Google Scholar]
  125. 2014b “The Modals in Recent English. A Closer Look at may and must .” Work-in-progress-report at the ICAME 35, April 30 – May 05, 2014. Nottingham.
     [Google Scholar]
  126. 2014c “Recent Changes in Epistemic Modal Marking in Written English.” Paper presented at the3rd ISLE (International Society of the Linguistics of English), August 24 – 27, 2014. Zurich.
     [Google Scholar]
  127. Kranich, Svenja , Viktor Becher , and Steffen Höder
    2011 “A Tentative Typology of Translation-Induced Language Change.” InMultilingual Discourse Production. Synchronic and Diachronic Perspectives, ed. by Svenja Kranich , Viktor Becher , Steffen Höder , and Juliane House , 11–44. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/hsm.12
     https://doi.org/10.1075/hsm.12 [Google Scholar]
  128. Kranich, Svenja , and Andrea Bicsár
    2012 “These Forecasts May Be Substantially Different from Actual Results. The Use of Epistemic Modal Markers in English and German Original Letters to Shareholders and in English‐German Translations.” Linguistik Online 55. Accessible online atwww.linguistik‑online.org/55_12/kranichBicsar.html.
     [Google Scholar]
  129. Kranich, Svenja , and Victorina González Díaz
    2009 “Appraisal Strategies: Recent Change and Cross-Cultural Tendencies.” Paper presented at theWorkshop Appraisal Strategies, Research Center on Multilingualism, June 17, 2009. Hamburg.
     [Google Scholar]
  130. 2010 “Good, Great or Remarkable? Evaluation in English, German and Spanish Letters to Shareholders.” Paper presented at New Challenges for Multilingualism in Europe , April 11 – 15, 2010. Dubrovnik.
     [Google Scholar]
  131. 2012 “Translating Evaluation. A Corpus-Based Study of Business Communication.” Paper presented at the ICAME 33. Corpora at the Centre and Crossroads of English Linguistics , May 30 – June 03, 2012. Leuven.
     [Google Scholar]
  132. Kranich, Svenja , Juliane House , and Viktor Becher
    2012 “Changing Conventions in English-German Translations of Popular Scientific Texts.” InMultilingual Individuals and Multilingual Societies, ed. by Kurt Braunmüller , and Christoph Gabriel , 315–334. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/hsm.13.21kra
     https://doi.org/10.1075/hsm.13.21kra [Google Scholar]
  133. Kranich, Svenja , and Volker Gast. Forthc
    . “Explicitness of Epistemic Modal Marking: Recent Changes in British and American English.” InThinking Modally: English and Contrastive Studies on Modality ed. by Juan R. Zamorano-Mansilla , Carmen Maíz , Elena Domínguez , and María Victoria Martín de la Rosa . Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
     [Google Scholar]
  134. Kratzer, Angelika
    1991 “Modality.” InSemantics. An International Handbook of Contemporary Research, ed. by Arnim von Stechow , and Dieter Wunderlich , 639–650. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  135. Krein-Kühle, Marion
    2014 “Translation and Equivalence.” InTranslation: A Multidisciplinary Approach, ed. by Juliane House , 15–35. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
     [Google Scholar]
  136. Kreutz, Heinz , and Annette Harres
    1997 “Some Observations on the Distribution and Function of Hedging in German and English Academic Writing.” InCulture and Styles of Academic Discourse, ed. by Anna Duszak , 181–201. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110821048.181
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110821048.181 [Google Scholar]
  137. Kunz, Kerstin , and Erich Steiner
    2013 “Cohesive Substitution in English and German. A Contrastive and Corpus-Based Perspective.” InAdvances in Corpus-Based Contrastive Linguistics. Studies in Honour of Stig Johansson, ed. by Karin Aijmer , and Bengt Altenberg , 201–232. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/scl.54.12kunz
     https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.54.12kunz [Google Scholar]
  138. Langacker, Ronald W
    1990 “Subjectification.” Cognitive Linguistics1: 5–38. doi: 10.1515/cogl.1990.1.1.5
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.1990.1.1.5 [Google Scholar]
  139. 1999 “Losing Control: Grammaticization, Subjectification, and Transparency.” InHistorical Semantics and Cognition, ed. by Andreas Blank , and Peter Koch , 147–175. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110804195.147
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110804195.147 [Google Scholar]
  140. Lakoff, George
    1972 “Hedges: A Study of Meaning Criteria and the Logic of Fuzzy Concepts.” InPapers from the Eighth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, ed. by Paul Peranteau , Judith Levi , and Gloria Phares , 183–228. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  141. Laviosa-Braithwaite, Sara
    1998 “Universals of Translation.” InRoutledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies, ed. by Mona Baker , 288–291. London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  142. Lehmann, Christian
    2002 Thoughts on Grammaticalization. 2nd ed. Erfurt: Arbeitspapiere der Universität Erfurt.
     [Google Scholar]
  143. Lightfoot, David
    1979 Principles of Diachronic Syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  144. Louw, Bill
    1993 “Irony in the Text or Insincerity in the Writer? The Diagnostic Potential of Semantic Prosodies.” InText and Technology. In Honour of John Sinclair, ed. by Mona Baker , Gill Francis , and Elena Tognini-Bonelli , 157–176. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/z.64.11lou
     https://doi.org/10.1075/z.64.11lou [Google Scholar]
  145. Mair, Christian
    2006 Twentieth-Century English. History, Variation and Standardization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511486951
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486951 [Google Scholar]
  146. Markkanen, Raija , and Hartmut Schröder
    1989 “Hedging as a Translation Problem in Scientific Texts.” InSpecial Language. From Human Thinking to Thinking Machines, ed. by Christer Laurén , and Marianne Nordman , 171–175. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
     [Google Scholar]
  147. 1997 “Hedging: A Challenge for Pragmatics and Discourse Analysis.” InHedging and Discourse. Approaches to the Analysis of a Pragmatic Phenomenon in Academic Texts, ed. by Raija Markkanen , and Hartmut Schröder , 3–18. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  148. Martin, James R
    1997 “Analysing Genre: Functional Parameters.” InGenre and Institutions. Social Processes in the Workplace and School, ed. by Frances Christie , and James R. Martin , 3–39. London: Continuum.
     [Google Scholar]
  149. 2001 “Beyond Exchange: Appraisal Systems in English.” InEvaluation in Text. Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse, ed. by Susan Hunston , and Geoff Thompson , 142–175. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  150. Martin, James R. , and Peter R. R. White
    2005 The Language of Evaluation. Appraisal in English. London: Palgrave Macmillan. doi: 10.1057/9780230511910
     https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230511910 [Google Scholar]
  151. Matthiessen, Christian M. I. M. , Kazuhiro Teruya , and Marvin Lam
    2010 Key Terms in Systemic Functional Linguistics. London: Continuum.
     [Google Scholar]
  152. Mauranen, Anna
    1997 “Hedging in Language Revisers’ Hands.” InHedging and Discourse. Approaches to the Analysis of a Pragmatic Phenomenon in Academic Texts, ed. by Raija Markkanen , and Hartmut Schröder , 115–133. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  153. McCallister, Linda , and Constance Bates
    1986 “Language as a Proxy for the Study of Culturally Based Managerial Values: An Analysis of German and American Expression.” The Journal of Language for International Business2: 1–14.
     [Google Scholar]
  154. McSweeney, Brendan
    2002a “Hofstede’s Model of National Cultural Differences and Their Consequences: A Triumph of Faith – a Failure of Analysis.” Human Relations55: 89–117. doi: 10.1177/0018726702055001602
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726702055001602 [Google Scholar]
  155. 2002b “The Essentials of Scholarship: A Reply to Geert Hofstede.” Human Relations55: 1363–1372. doi: 10.1177/00187267025511005
     https://doi.org/10.1177/00187267025511005 [Google Scholar]
  156. Meyer, Paul Georg
    1997 “Hedging Strategies in Written Academic Discourse: Strengthening the Argument by Weakening the Claim.” InHedging and Discourse. Approaches to the Analysis of a Pragmatic Phenomenon in Academic Texts, ed. by Raija Markkanen , and Hartmut Schröder , 21–41. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  157. Murphy, Amanda Clare
    2013 “On “True” Portraits of Letters to Shareholders – and the Importance of Phraseological Analysis.” InCurrent Issues in Phraseology, ed. by Michaela Mahlberg . Special issue of the International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 18: 57–80.
     [Google Scholar]
  158. Myers, Greg
    1989 “The Pragmatics of Politeness in Scientific Articles.” Applied Linguistics10: 1–35. doi: 10.1093/applin/10.1.1
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/10.1.1 [Google Scholar]
  159. Namsaraev, Vasili
    1997 “Hedging in Russian Academic Writing in Sociological Texts.” InHedging and Discourse. Approaches to the Analysis of a Pragmatic Phenomenon in Academic Texts, ed. by Raija Markkanen , and Hartmut Schröder , 64–79. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  160. Neumann, Stella
    2013 Contrastive Register Variation. A Quantitative Approach to the Comparison of English and German. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. doi: 10.1515/9783110238594
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110238594 [Google Scholar]
  161. Nickerson, Catherine , and Elizabeth De Groot
    2005 “Dear Shareholder, Dear Stockholder, Dear Stakeholder: The Business Letter Genre in the Annual General Report.” InGenre Variation in Business Letters, ed. by Paul Gillaerts , and Maurizio Gotti , 324–345. Bern: Lang.
     [Google Scholar]
  162. Nida, Eugene A
    1964 Toward a Science of Translating. Leiden: Brill.
     [Google Scholar]
  163. Niederhauser, Jürg
    1999 Wissenschaftssprache und Populärwissenschaftliche Vermittlung. Tübingen: Narr.
     [Google Scholar]
  164. Palmer, Frank
    2001 Mood and Modality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139167178
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139167178 [Google Scholar]
  165. Paradis, Carita
    1997 Degree Modifiers of Adjectives in Spoken British English. Lund: Lund University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  166. Partington, Alan
    1998 Patterns and Meanings. Using Corpora for English Language Research and Teaching. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/scl.2
     https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.2 [Google Scholar]
  167. 2004 “‘Utterly Content in Each Other’s Company’. Semantic Prosody and Semantic Preference.” International Journal of Corpus Linguistics9: 131–156. doi: 10.1075/ijcl.9.1.07par
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.9.1.07par [Google Scholar]
  168. Philip, Gill
    2011 Colouring Meaning. Collocation and Connotation in Figurative Language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/scl.43
     https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.43 [Google Scholar]
  169. Pindi, Makaya , and Thomas Bloor
    1987 “Playing Safe with Predictions: Hedging, Attribution and Conditions in Economic Forecasting.” InWritten Language. Papers from the Annual Meeting of the British Association for Applied Linguistics Held at the University of Reading, September 1986, ed. by Thomas Bloor , and John Norrish , 55–69. London: CILT.
     [Google Scholar]
  170. Preacher, Kristopher J
    2001 “Calculation for the Chi-Square Test: An Interactive Calculation Tool for Chi-Square Tests of Goodness of Fit and Independence” [Computer software]. Available fromquantpsy.org. Date last accessed: November 5, 2014.
  171. Probst, Julia
    2009 Der Einfluss des Englischen auf das Deutsche. Zum Sprachlichen Ausdruck von Interpersonalität in Populärwissenschaftlichen Texten. Hamburg: Verlag Dr. Kovač.
     [Google Scholar]
  172. Pym, Anthony
    2005 “Explaining Explicitation.” InNew Trends in Translation Studies. In Honour of Kinga Klaudy, ed. by Krisztina Károly , and Ágota Fóris , 29–34. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.
     [Google Scholar]
  173. 2008 “On Toury’s Laws of How Translators Translate.” InBeyond Descriptive Translation Studies, ed. by Anthony Pym , Miriam Shlesinger , and Daniel Simeoni , 311–328. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/btl.75.24pym
     https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.75.24pym [Google Scholar]
  174. Reiß, Katharina , and Hans J. Vermeer
    1984 Grundlegung einer allgemeinen Translationstheorie. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer. doi: 10.1515/9783111351919
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783111351919 [Google Scholar]
  175. Rohdenburg, Günter
    1990 “Aspekte einer vergleichenden Typologie des Englischen und Deutschen.” InKontrastive Linguistik, ed. by Claus Gnutzmann , 133–152. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
     [Google Scholar]
  176. Sajavaara, Kari , and Jaako Lehtonen
    1997 “The Silent Finn Revisited.” InSilence. Interdisciplinary Perspectives, ed. by Adam Jaworski , 263–283. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  177. Salager-Meyer, Françoise
    1994 “Hedges and Textual Communicative Function in Medical English Written Discourse.” English for Specific Purposes13: 149–170. doi: 10.1016/0889‑4906(94)90013‑2
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-4906(94)90013-2 [Google Scholar]
  178. Schneider, Klaus P
    2008 “Small Talk in England, Ireland, and the USA”. InVariational Pragmatics, ed. by Klaus P. Schneider , and Anne Barron , 99–140. Amsterdam: Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/pbns.178.06sch
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.178.06sch [Google Scholar]
  179. Schröder, Hartmut
    1995 “Der Stil wissenschaftlichen Schreibens zwischen Disziplin, Kultur und Paradigma – Methodologische Anmerkungen zur interkulturellen Stilforschung.” InStilfragen, ed. by Gerhard Stickel , 150–180. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  180. Scollon, Ron , and Suzanne Wong Scollon
    2001 Intercultural Communication. A Discourse Approach. 2nd ed. Oxford: Blackwell.
     [Google Scholar]
  181. Sinclair, John
    1998 “The Lexical Item.” InContrastive Lexical Semantics, ed. by Edda Weigand , 1–24. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/cilt.171.02sin
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.171.02sin [Google Scholar]
  182. Steiner, Erich
    2005a “Some Properties of Lexicogrammatical Encoding and Their Implications for Situations of Language Contact and Multilinguality.” Zeitschrift für Literaturwissenschaft und Linguistik139: 54–75.10.1007/BF03379443
     https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03379443 [Google Scholar]
  183. 2005b “Some Properties of Texts in Terms of ‘Information Distribution’ across Languages.” Languages in Contrast5: 49–72. doi: 10.1075/lic.5.1.06ste
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lic.5.1.06ste [Google Scholar]
  184. 2008 “Empirical Studies of Translations as a Mode of Language Contact – “Explicitness” of Lexicogrammatical Encoding as a Relevant Dimension.” InLanguage Contact and Contact Languages, ed. by Peter Siemund , and Noemi Kintana , 317–345. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/hsm.7.18ste
     https://doi.org/10.1075/hsm.7.18ste [Google Scholar]
  185. Stolze, Radigundis
    2008 Übersetzungstheorien. Eine Einführung. 5th ed. Tübingen: Narr.
     [Google Scholar]
  186. Stubbs, Michael
    2001a “On Inference Theories and Code Theories: Corpus Evidence for Semantic Schemas.” Text21: 437–465.10.1515/text.2001.007
     https://doi.org/10.1515/text.2001.007 [Google Scholar]
  187. 2001b Words and Phrases. Corpus Studies of Lexical Semantics. Oxford: Blackwell.
     [Google Scholar]
  188. Swales, John M
    1990 Genre Analysis. English in Academic and Research Settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  189. 2004 Research Genres. Exploration and Applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139524827
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524827 [Google Scholar]
  190. Talbot, Mary
    2010 Language and Gender. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Polity Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  191. Tanaka, Shin
    2011 Deixis und Anaphorik. Referenzstrategien in Text, Satz und Wort. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110256598
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110256598 [Google Scholar]
  192. Teich, Elke
    2003 Cross-Linguistic Variation in System and Text. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110896541
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110896541 [Google Scholar]
  193. Teyssier, Jacques
    1968 “Notes on the Syntax of the Adjective in Modern English.” Lingua20: 225–249. doi: 10.1016/0024‑3841(68)90149‑6
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-3841(68)90149-6 [Google Scholar]
  194. Thiel, Gisela , and Gisela Thome
    1996 “Fachlichkeit in wissenschaftsjournalistischen Texten. Dargestellt am Gebrauch von Nomina mit hypothetischer Bedeutung (Deutsch – Englisch – Französisch).” InFachliche Textsorten. Komponenten – Relationen – Strategien, ed. by Klaus-Dieter Baumann , and Hartwig Kalverkämper , 746–773. Tübingen: Narr.
     [Google Scholar]
  195. Thomas, Jenny
    1995 Meaning in Interaction. Introduction to Pragmatics. London: Pearson Longman.
     [Google Scholar]
  196. Thompson, Geoff , and Puleng Thetela
    1995 “The Sound of one Hand Clapping: The Management of Interaction in Written Discourse.” Text15: 103–127.10.1515/text.1.1995.15.1.103
     https://doi.org/10.1515/text.1.1995.15.1.103 [Google Scholar]
  197. Tiittula, Liisa
    1995 “Stile in interkulturellen Begegnungen.” InStilfragen, ed. by Gerhard Stickel , 198–224. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  198. Toury, Gideon
    1995 Descriptive Translation Studies and Beyond. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/btl.4
     https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.4 [Google Scholar]
  199. Traugott, Elizabeth Closs
    1989 “On the Rise of Epistemic Meanings in English. An Example of Subjectification in Semantic Change.” Language65: 31–55. doi: 10.2307/414841
     https://doi.org/10.2307/414841 [Google Scholar]
  200. 1990 “From Less to More Situated in Language. The Unidirectionality of Semantic Change.” InPapers from the 5th International Conference on English Historical Linguistics, ed. by Silvia Adamson , Vivien Law , Nigel Vincent , and Susan Wright , 496–517. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/cilt.65.28clo
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.65.28clo [Google Scholar]
  201. Van de Pol, Nikki , and Hubert Cuyckens
    2014 “Branching out. A Diachronic Prototype Approach to the Development of the English Absolute.” Paper presented at the3rd ISLE (International Society of the Linguistics of English) , August 24 – 27, 2014. Zurich.
     [Google Scholar]
  202. Van der Auwera, Johan , Ewa Schalley , and Jan Nuyts
    2005 “Epistemic Possibility in a Slavonic Parallel Corpus: A Pilot Study.” InModality in Slavonic languages: New Perspectives, ed. by Petr Karlik , and Björn Hansen , 201–217. München: Sagner.
     [Google Scholar]
  203. Verstraete, Jean-Christophe
    2007 Rethinking the Coordinate-Subordinate Dichotomy. Interpersonal Grammar and the Analysis of Adverbial Clauses in English. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. doi: 10.1515/9783110918199
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110918199 [Google Scholar]
  204. White, Peter R. R
    2003 “Beyond Modality and Hedging: A Dialogic View of the Language of Intersubjective Stance.” Text23: 259–284.10.1515/text.2003.011
     https://doi.org/10.1515/text.2003.011 [Google Scholar]
  205. White, Peter R. R. , and Motoki Sano
    2006 “Dialogistic Positions and Anticipated Audiences – a Framework for Stylistic Comparisons.” InPragmatic Markers in Contrast, ed. by Karin Aijmer , and Anne-Marie Simon-Vandenbergen , 189–214. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
     [Google Scholar]
  206. Whitley, Richard
    1985 “Knowledge Producers and Knowledge Acquirers. Popularisation as a Relation Between Scientific Fields and Their Publics.” InExpository Science. Forms and Functions of Popularisation, ed. by Terry Shinn , and Richard Whitley , 3–28. Dordrecht: D. Reidel. doi: 10.1007/978‑94‑009‑5239‑3_1
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-5239-3_1 [Google Scholar]
  207. Whorf, Benjamin
    1956 “Language, Mind, and Reality.” InSelected Writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf, ed. by John B. Carroll , 246–270. Cambridge (MA): MIT Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  208. Wierzbicka, Anna
    1986 “What’s in a Noun? (Or: How Do Nouns Differ in Meaning from Adjectives?).” Studies in Language10: 353–389. doi: 10.1075/sl.10.2.05wie
     https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.10.2.05wie [Google Scholar]
  209. Wilke, Jürgen
    1986 “Probleme wissenschaftlicher Informationsvermittlung durch die Massenmedien.” InWissenschaftssprache und Gesellschaft. Aspekte der wissenschaftlichen Kommunikation und des Wissenstransfers in der heutigen Zeit, ed. by Theo Bungarten , 304–318. Hamburg: Edition Akademion.
     [Google Scholar]
  210. Xiao, Richard
    2008 “Well-Known and Influential Corpora.” InCorpus Linguistics. An International Handbook. Vol. 1, ed. by Anke Lüdeling , and Merja Kytö , 383–457. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  211. Xiao, Richard , and Tony McEnery
    2006 “Collocation, Semantic Prosody, and Near Synonymy. A Cross-Linguistice Perspective.” Applied Linguistics27: 103–129. doi: 10.1093/applin/ami045
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/ami045 [Google Scholar]
  212. Yli-Jokipii, Hilkka
    1994 Requests in Professional Discourse. A Cross-Cultural Study of British, American and Finnish Business Writing. Helsinki: Suomalainen tiedeakatemia.
     [Google Scholar]
  213. Yule, George
    1996 Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/books/9789027267276
Loading

  • From This Site

    /content/books/9789027267276
    dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Chapter
    10
    5
/content/books/9789027267276
dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
-contentType:Journal -contentType:Chapter
10
5
Chapter
content/books/9789027267276
Book
false
Loading
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error