Volume 28, Issue 2
  • ISSN 0929-0907
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9943
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



It is generally acknowledged that onomatopoeia poses challenges for translation. However, there is little research into the translation of onomatopoeia in Pragmatics. This study seeks to examine the nature of onomatopoeia and its implications for translation from the perspective of relevance theory, addressing, in particular, the following questions: (i) Can notions from pragmatics help to account for the perceived challenges involved in translating onomatopoeia? (ii) Would the showing-meaning nature affect the translation of onomatopoeia? (iii) What other factors result in difficulties in translating onomatopoeia and why? To this end, a corpus-based analysis of onomatopoeia was conducted using user-generated data provided by Cookpad Inc. Findings show that the relevance-theoretic notions of the continuum and perceptual resemblance can indeed help account for the perceived challenges in translating onomatopoeia. Findings also show that stylistic aspects, such as types of expressions and text types, also impact on the translation of onomatopoeia.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Akita, Kimi & Mark Dingemanse
    2019 Ideophones (mimetics, expressives). InOxford Research Encyclopedia of Linguistics23. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acrefore/9780199384655.013.477
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780199384655.013.477 [Google Scholar]
  2. Alves, Fabio
    2006 A relevance-theoretic approach to effort and effect in translation: Discussing the cognitive interface between inferential processing, problem-solving and decision-making. InProceedings of the International Symposium on New Horizons in Theoretical Translation Studies. Hong Kong: Chinese University of Hong Kong Press, 1–12.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Alves, Fabio. & Jóse Luiz V. R. Gonçalves
    2003 A relevance theory approach to the investigation of inferential processes in translation. InFabio Alves (ed.), Triangulating Translation: Perspectives in Process Oriented Research, 3–24. Amsterdam: John Benjamins (Benjamins Translation Library 45). 10.1075/btl.45.04alv
    https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.45.04alv [Google Scholar]
  4. 2007 Modelling translator’s competence. Relevance and expertise under scrutiny. InY. Gambier, Miriam Shlesinger & Radegundis Stolze (eds.), Doubts and Directions in Translation Studies, 14–55. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.72.07alv
    https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.72.07alv [Google Scholar]
  5. 2010 Relevance and translation. InYves Gambier & Luc van Doorslaer (eds.), Handbook of Translation Studies, Volume1, 279–284. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/hts.1.rel2
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hts.1.rel2 [Google Scholar]
  6. 2013 Investigating the conceptual-procedural distinction in the translation process. A relevance-theoretic analysis of micro and macro translation units. Target25(1): 107–124. 10.1075/target.25.1.09alv
    https://doi.org/10.1075/target.25.1.09alv [Google Scholar]
  7. 2015 Investigating the conceptual-procedural distinction in the translation process. A relevance-theoretic analysis of micro and macro translation units. InMaureen Ehrensberger-Dow, Susanne Göpferich & Sharon O’Brien (eds.), Interdisciplinarity in Translation and Interpreting Process Research, 109–126. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/bct.72.09alv
    https://doi.org/10.1075/bct.72.09alv [Google Scholar]
  8. Baker, Mona
    1992In other words: a coursebook on translation. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Barsalou, Lawrence W.
    1999 Perceptual symbol systems. Behavioral and Brain Sciences22. 577–660. 10.1017/S0140525X99002149
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X99002149 [Google Scholar]
  10. Bartashova, Olga A. & Anton E. Sichinskiy
    2014 Japanese–English Onomatopoeic and Mimetic Parallels: The Problem of Translatability. Journal of Siberian Federal University. Humanities & Social Sciences2. 222–229.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Blakemore, Diane & Fabrizio Gallai
    2014 Discourse markers in free indirect style and interpreting. Journal of Pragmatics60: 106–120. 10.1016/j.pragma.2013.11.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2013.11.003 [Google Scholar]
  12. Bogucki, L.
    2004 The constraint of relevance in subtitling. Journal of Specialised Translation1: 71–88.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. 2009a Pragmatic considerations in translating films. InPiotr Cap (ed.), Pragmatics Today, 255–262. Berlin: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. 2009b Amateur subtitling on the Internet. InJóse Díaz-Cintas and Gunilla Anderman (eds.), Audiovisual Translation: Language Transfer on Screen, 49–57. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/9780230234581_4
    https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230234581_4 [Google Scholar]
  15. 2020A relevance-theoretic approach to decision-making in subtitling. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1007/978‑3‑030‑51803‑5
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-51803-5 [Google Scholar]
  16. Braun, Sabine
    2016 The importance of being relevant? A cognitive-pragmatic framework for conceptualising audiovisual translation. Target28(2): 302–313. 10.1075/target.28.2.10bra
    https://doi.org/10.1075/target.28.2.10bra [Google Scholar]
  17. 2018 The importance of being relevant? A cognitive-pragmatic framework for conceptualising audiovisual translation. InYves Gambier and Sara Ramos Pinto (eds.), Audiovisual Translation. Theoretical and Methodological Challenges, 121–132. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/bct.95.10bra
    https://doi.org/10.1075/bct.95.10bra [Google Scholar]
  18. Carston, Robyn
    2018 Figurative language, mental imagery, and pragmatics. Metaphor and Symbol33 (3). 198–217. 10.1080/10926488.2018.1481257
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10926488.2018.1481257 [Google Scholar]
  19. Casas-Tost, Helena
    2014 Translating onomatopoeia from Chinese into Spanish: A corpus-based analysis. Perspectives22 (1). 39–55. 10.1080/0907676X.2012.712144
    https://doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.2012.712144 [Google Scholar]
  20. Edström, Bert
    1989 Japanese onomatopoetic words: A research note. Orientaliska Studier65. 35–52.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Flyxe, Martin
    2002 Translation of Japanese onomatopoeia into Swedish (with focus on lexicalization). Africa & Asia2. 54–73.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Gallai, Fabrizio
    2016 Point of view in free indirect thought and in community interpreting. Lingua175–176: 97–121. 10.1016/j.lingua.2015.08.012
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2015.08.012 [Google Scholar]
  23. 2019 Cognitive pragmatics and translation studies. InRebecca Tipton & Louisa Desilla (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Translation and Pragmatics, 51–72. Abingdon: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315205564‑4
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315205564-4 [Google Scholar]
  24. Gutt, Ernst-August
    1991Translation and relevance: Cognition and context. Oxford: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. 1996 On the nature of implicit information in literary translation: A relevance-theoretic perspective. Target8: 239–256. 10.1075/target.8.2.03gut
    https://doi.org/10.1075/target.8.2.03gut [Google Scholar]
  26. 2005 On the significance of the cognitive core of translation. The Translator11(1): 25–49. 10.1080/13556509.2005.10799188
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13556509.2005.10799188 [Google Scholar]
  27. 2006 Approaches to translation: relevance theory. InKeith Brown (ed.), Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics (2nd edition). Amsterdam: Elsevier. 10.1016/B0‑08‑044854‑2/00464‑8
    https://doi.org/10.1016/B0-08-044854-2/00464-8 [Google Scholar]
  28. 2010 Relevance and translation: On the value of a good theoretical foundation of translation. InEwa Wałaszewska, Marta Kisielewska-Krysiuk, & Agnieszka Piskorska (eds.), In the mind and across minds: A relevance-theoretical perspective on communication and translation, 292–310. New Castle: Cambridge Scholars.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Hayase, Mitsuaki
    1978 Characteristics of Japanese onomatopoeia observed through the English translation. Kanssai Gaikokugodaigaku Kenkyu Ronshu28. 117–127.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Imai, Mutsumi, Sotaro Kita, Miho Nagumo & Hiroyuki Okada
    2008 Sound symbolism facilitates early verb learning. Cognition109 (1). 54–65. 10.1016/j.cognition.2008.07.015
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2008.07.015 [Google Scholar]
  31. Inose, Hiroko
    2008 Translating Japanese onomatopoeia and mimetic words. InAnthony Pym and Alexander Perekrestenko (eds.), Translation research projects1. 97–116. Tarragona: Intercultural Studies Group.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Kantartzis, Katerina, Mutsumi Imai & Sotaro Kita
    2011 Japanese sound-symbolism facilitates word learning in English-speaking children. Cognitive Science35 (3). 575–586. 10.1111/j.1551‑6709.2010.01169.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1551-6709.2010.01169.x [Google Scholar]
  33. Kubo, Atsuko
    1995 Miyazawa Kenji no Onomatope no Sekai [The world of onomatopoeia in Miyazawa Kenji’s Work]. Kobe Kaisei Review34. 17–30.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Laing, Catherine E.
    2014 A phonological analysis of onomatopoeia in early word production. First Language34 (5). 387–405. 10.1177/0142723714550110
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0142723714550110 [Google Scholar]
  35. 2017 A perceptual advantage for onomatopoeia in early word learning: evidence from eye-tracking. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology161. 32–45. 10.1016/j.jecp.2017.03.017
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2017.03.017 [Google Scholar]
  36. Laing, Catherine
    2018 A role for onomatopoeia in early language: Evidence from phonological development. Language and Cognition11 (2). 173–187. 10.1017/langcog.2018.23
    https://doi.org/10.1017/langcog.2018.23 [Google Scholar]
  37. Laing, Catherine E.
    2019 Phonological motivation for the acquisition of onomatopoeia: An analysis of early words. Language Learning and Development15 (2). 177–197. 10.1080/15475441.2019.1577138
    https://doi.org/10.1080/15475441.2019.1577138 [Google Scholar]
  38. Meinard, Maruszka Eve Marie
    2015 Distinguishing onomatopoeias from interjections. Journal of Pragmatics76. 150–168. 10.1016/j.pragma.2014.11.011
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2014.11.011 [Google Scholar]
  39. Merriam Webster Dictionary
  40. Minashima, Hiroshi
    2004 Nihhongo no onomatope [Onomatopoeia in Japanese]. Fukui Daigaku Kyoiku Chiiki Kagakubu Kiyou60. 97–115.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Newmark, Peter
    1991About translation. Vol.74. Multilingual matters.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. 1988A textbook of translation. London: Prentice Hall International.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Nygaard, Lynne C., Allison E. Cook & Laura L. Namy
    2009 Sound to meaning correspondences facilitate word learning. Cognition112 (1). 181–186. 10.1016/j.cognition.2009.04.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2009.04.001 [Google Scholar]
  44. Padilla Cruz, Manuel
    2019 Qualifying insults, offensive epithets, slurs and expressive expletives. A relevance-theoretic approach. Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict7(2). 156–181. 10.1075/jlac.00023.cru
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jlac.00023.cru [Google Scholar]
  45. Rohan, Olivia, Ryoko Sasamoto, & Rebecca Jackson
    2018 Argumentation, relevance theory and persuasion. An analysis of onomatopoeia in Japanese publications using manga stylistics. International Review of Pragmatics, 10: 219–242. 10.1163/18773109‑01002005
    https://doi.org/10.1163/18773109-01002005 [Google Scholar]
  46. Sasamoto, Ryoko
    2019Onomatopoeia and relevance. Communication of impressions via sound. London: Palgrave MacMillan. 10.1007/978‑3‑030‑26318‑8
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26318-8 [Google Scholar]
  47. Sasamoto, Ryoko & Rebecca Jackson
    2016 Onomatopoeia – showing-word or saying-word? Relevance theory, lexis, and the communication of impressions’. Lingua, 175: 36–53. 10.1016/j.lingua.2015.11.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2015.11.003 [Google Scholar]
  48. Sperber, Dan & Deirdre Wilson
    1995Relevance: communication and cognition, 2nd ed. Oxford: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Sperber, Dan, & Deirdre Wilson
    2015 Beyond speaker’s meaning. Croatian Journal of Philosophy15 (2). 117–149.
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Tamori, Ikuhiro & Lawrence Clifford Schourup
    1999Onomatope: keitai-to imi [Onomatopoeia: form and meaning]. Tokyo: Kuroshio Shuppan.
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Tipton, Rebecca & Louisa Desilla
    2019The Routledge handbook of translation and pragmatics. Oxon/New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315205564
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315205564 [Google Scholar]
  52. Wharton, Tim
    2003 Interjections, language, and the “showing/saying” continuum. Pragmatics and Cognition11 (1). 39–91. 10.1075/pc.11.1.04wha
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pc.11.1.04wha [Google Scholar]
  53. 2008 “Meaningnn” and “showing”: Gricean intentions and relevance-theoretic intentions. Intercultural Pragmatics5(2). 131–152. 10.1515/IP.2008.008
    https://doi.org/10.1515/IP.2008.008 [Google Scholar]
  54. 2009Pragmatics and non-verbal communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511635649
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511635649 [Google Scholar]
  55. 2010 Recipes: Beyond the words. Gastronomica: The Journal of Food and Culture10 (4). 67–73. 10.1525/gfc.2010.10.4.67
    https://doi.org/10.1525/gfc.2010.10.4.67 [Google Scholar]
  56. 2016 That bloody so-and-so has retired: Expressives revisited. Lingua175–176. 20–35. 10.1016/j.lingua.2015.08.004
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2015.08.004 [Google Scholar]
  57. Wrembel, Magdalena
    2010 Sound symbolism in foreign language phonological acquisition. Research in Language8 (1). 1–14. 10.2478/v10015‑010‑0013‑6
    https://doi.org/10.2478/v10015-010-0013-6 [Google Scholar]

Data & Media 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