1887
Volume 8, Issue 1
  • ISSN 2211-3711
  • E-ISSN: 2211-372X
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This paper explores the formulaicity of EU translations into Polish across four institutional genres (legislation, judgments, reports, websites) with reference to the corresponding EU English corpora in order to understand how the degree of formulaicity is affected by the variable of genre. Formulaicity is operationalised as lexical bundles – high-frequency multi-word sequences (Biber and Barbieri 2007). The study shows a strong correlation between formulaicity and genres, as well as multiple facets of formulaicity (e.g. tokens vs. types). Our findings generally confirm the increased aggregate formulaicity of translations as regards bundle tokens for all EU genres, except for judgments, and the increased variation of bundles (types) for all the genres at the 40 occurrences per million words (pmw) threshold, although the “micro-formulaicity” threshold yielded inconclusive results. Another finding reveals a consistently low overlap of bundles between translations and non-translations. We argue that translations develop their own formulaic profiles which are levelled out compared to EU English corpora and which minimally overlap with formulaic profiles of domestic genres.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/ts.00013.bie
2019-06-26
2019-10-23
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Baker, Mona
    1996 “Corpus-based Translation Studies: The Challenges That Lie Ahead.” Terminology, LSP and Translation: Studies in Language Engineering in Honour of Juan C. Sager, edited by Harold L. Somers , 175–186. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi:  10.1075/btl.18.17bak
    https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.18.17bak [Google Scholar]
  2. Biber, Douglas
    2009 “Corpus-based and Corpus-driven Analyses of Language Variation and Use.” The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Analysis, edited by Bernd Haine , and Heiko Narrog . AccessedNovember 11, 2018. doi:  10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199544004.013.0008
    https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199544004.013.0008 [Google Scholar]
  3. Biber, Douglas , and Federica Barbieri
    2007 “Lexical Bundles in University Spoken and Written Registers.” English for Specific Purposes26 (3): 263–286. doi:  10.1016/j.esp.2006.08.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2006.08.003 [Google Scholar]
  4. Biber, Douglas , Stig Johansson , Geoffrey Leech , Susan Conrad , and Edward Finegan
    1999Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Harlow: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Biel, Łucja
    2014Lost in the Eurofog: Textual Fit of Translated Law. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. 10.3726/978‑3‑653‑03986‑3
    https://doi.org/10.3726/978-3-653-03986-3 [Google Scholar]
  6. 2015 “Phraseological Profiles of Legislative Genres: Complex Prepositions as a Special Case of Legal Phrasemes in EU Law and National Law.” Fachsprache: International Journal of Specialized Communication37 (3–4): 139–160. doi:  10.24989/fs.v37i3‑4.1286
    https://doi.org/10.24989/fs.v37i3-4.1286 [Google Scholar]
  7. 2016 “Mixed Corpus Design for Researching the Eurolect: A Genre-based Comparable-Parallel Corpus in the PL EUROLECT Project.” Polskojęzyczne korpusy równoległe. Polish-Language Parallel Corpora, edited by Ewa Gruszczyńska , and Agnieszka Leńko-Szymańska , 197–208. Warsaw: The Institute of Applied Linguistics. AccessedNovember 11, 2018. rownolegle.blog.ils.uw.edu.pl/files/2016/03/12_Biel.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  8. 2018 “Lexical Bundles in EU Law: The Impact of Translation Process on the Patterning of Legal Language.” Phraseology in Legal and Institutional Settings: A Corpus-based Interdisciplinary Perspective, edited by Stanisław Goźdź-Roszkowski , and Gianluca Pontrandolfo , 11–26. Abingdon: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Biel, Łucja , Koźbiał Dariusz , and Katarzyna Wasilewska
    2018 “Zbitki wielowyrazowe w polskim eurolekcie – analiza gatunkowa formuliczności tłumaczeń. Badanie pilotażowe.” [Lexical Bundles in the Polish Eurolect: A Genre Analysis of the Formulaicity of Translations. A Pilot Study.] InWybrane zagadnienia lingwistyki tekstu, analizy dyskursu i komunikacji międzykulturowej – In memoriam Profesor Anny Duszak (1950–2015) [Selected Aspects of Text Linguistics, Discourse Analysis and Intercultural Communication – In Memoriam of Professor Anna Duszak (1950–2015)], edited by Urszula Okulska-Łukawska , Urszula Topczewska , and Anna Jopek-Bosiacka , 253–294. Warsaw: Institute of Applied Linguistics.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Borja, Anabel , Isabel García Izquierdo , and Vicent Montalt
    2009 “Research Methodology in Specialized Genres for Translation Purposes.” The Interpreter and Translator Trainer3 (1): 57–77. doi:  10.1080/1750399X.2009.10798781
    https://doi.org/10.1080/1750399X.2009.10798781 [Google Scholar]
  11. Breeze, Ruth
    2013 “Lexical Bundles Across Four Legal Genres.” International Journal of Corpus Linguistics18 (2): 229–253. doi:  10.1075/ijcl.18.2.03bre
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.18.2.03bre [Google Scholar]
  12. Derlén, Mattias
    2015 “A Single Text or a Single Meaning: Multilingual Interpretation of EU Legislation and CJEU Case Law in National Courts.” Language and Culture in EU Law. Multidisciplinary Perspectives, edited by Susan Šarčević , 53–72. Farnham: Ashgate.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Derlén, Mattias , and Johan Lindholm
    2015 “Characteristics of Precedent: The Case Law of the European Court of Justice in Three Dimensions.” German Law Journal16 (5): 1073–1098. 10.1017/S2071832200021040
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S2071832200021040 [Google Scholar]
  14. DGT (Directorate-General for Translation), European Commission
    DGT (Directorate-General for Translation), European Commission 2015DGT Translation Quality Guidelines. DGT.IS/IP/DH/GH/th-(2015)5977178. AccessedJuly 1, 2018. ec.europa.eu/translation/maltese/guidelines/documents/dgt_translation_quality_guidelines_en.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Doczekalska, Agnieszka
    2009 “Drafting and Interpretation of EU Law – Paradoxes of Legal Multilingualism.” Formal Linguistics and Law, edited by Günther Grewendorf , and Monika Rathert , 339–370. Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Fairclough, Norman
    2003Analysing Discourse. Textual Analysis for Social Research. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203697078
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203697078 [Google Scholar]
  17. 2006 “Genres in Political Discourse.” Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, 2nd edition, edited by Keith Brown , 32–38. Oxford: Elsevier. 10.1016/B0‑08‑044854‑2/00719‑7
    https://doi.org/10.1016/B0-08-044854-2/00719-7 [Google Scholar]
  18. Gouadec, Daniel
    2007Translation as a Profession. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.73
    https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.73 [Google Scholar]
  19. Goźdź-Roszkowski, Stanisław
    2011Patterns of Linguistic Variation in American Legal English: A Corpus-based Study. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. 10.3726/978‑3‑653‑00659‑9
    https://doi.org/10.3726/978-3-653-00659-9 [Google Scholar]
  20. Greaves, Chris , and Martin Warren
    2010 “What Can a Corpus Tell us About Multi-word Units?” The Routledge Handbook of Corpus Linguistics, edited by Anne O’Keeffe , and Michael McCarthy , 212–226. London and New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203856949.ch16
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203856949.ch16 [Google Scholar]
  21. Gunnarsson, Britt-Louise
    2009Professional Discourse. London: Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Handford, Michael
    2010The Language of Business Meetings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139525329
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139525329 [Google Scholar]
  23. Heller, Dorothee , and Jan Engberg
    2017 “Sprachliche Verfahren der Popularisierung von Rechtswissen Zur Rekontextualisierung asylrechtlicher Grundbegriffe [Linguistic Methods of Popularization of Legal Knowledge: On the Recontextualization of Basic Concepts from Legislation on Asylum].” trans-kom. Zeitschrift für Translationswissenschaft und Fachkommunikation10 (1): 1–21.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Hyland, Ken
    2008 “As Can Be Seen: Lexical Bundles and Disciplinary Variation.” English for Specific Purposes27: 4–21. doi:  10.1016/j.esp.2007.06.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2007.06.001 [Google Scholar]
  25. Jablonkai, Reka
    2010 “English in the Context of European Integration: A Corpus-driven Analysis of Lexical Bundles in English EU Documents.” English for Specific Purposes29 (4): 253–267. doi:  10.1016/j.esp.2010.04.006
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2010.04.006 [Google Scholar]
  26. Jiménez-Crespo, Miguel A.
    2011 “To Adapt or Not to Adapt in Web Localization: A Contrastive Genre-based Study of Original and Localised Legal Sections in Corporate Websites.” Jostrans: The Journal of Specialised Translation15: 2–27. AccessedJuly 1, 2018. https://www.jostrans.org/issue15/art_jimenez.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Koskinen, Kaisa
    2008Translating Institutions. An Ethnographic Study of EU Translation. Manchester: St. Jerome.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Margetts, Helen
    2013 “Democracy and the Internet.” The Oxford Handbook of Internet Studies, edited by William H. Dutton . AccessedNovember 6, 2018. doi:  10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199589074.013.0020
    https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199589074.013.0020 [Google Scholar]
  29. Mauranen, Anna
    2006 “Translation Universals.” Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, 13, 2nd edition, edited by Keith Brown , 93–100. Oxford: Elsevier. 10.1016/B0‑08‑044854‑2/00492‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1016/B0-08-044854-2/00492-2 [Google Scholar]
  30. 2007 “Universal Tendencies in Translation.” InIncorporating Corpora: The Linguist and the Translator, edited by Gunilla Anderman , and Margaret Rogers , 32–48. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. 10.21832/9781853599873‑006
    https://doi.org/10.21832/9781853599873-006 [Google Scholar]
  31. Nesti, Giorgia
    2010 “The Information and Communication Policy of the European Union between Institutionalisation and Legitimation.” InPublic Communication in the European Union: History, Perspectives and Challenges, edited by Giorgia Nesti , and Chiara Valentini , 23–48. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Oakey, David
    2002 “Formulaic Language in English Academic Writing.” Using Corpora to Explore Linguistic Variation, edited by Randi Reppen , Susan M. Fitzmaurice , and Douglas Biber , 111–129. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/scl.9.08oak
    https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.9.08oak [Google Scholar]
  33. Prieto Ramos, Fernando
    2014 “International and Supranational Law in Translation: From Multilingual Lawmaking to Adjudication.” The Translator20 (3), 313–331. doi:  10.1080/13556509.2014.904080
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13556509.2014.904080 [Google Scholar]
  34. 2019 “Implications of Text Categorisation for Corpus-based Legal Translation Research: The Case of International Institutional Settings.” Research Methods in Legal Translation and Interpreting: Crossing Methodological Boundaries, edited by Łucja Biel , Jan Engberg , Rosario Martín Ruano , and Vilelmini Sosoni , 29–47. London and New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Rayson, Paul , and Roger Garside
    2000 “Comparing Corpora using Frequency Profiling.” Proceedings of the Workshop on Comparing Corpora, Held in Conjunction with the 38th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL 2000). 1–8 October 2000, Hong Kong, 1–6. AccessedNovember 12, 2018. ucrel.lancs.ac.uk/people/paul/publications/rg_acl2000.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Robertson, Colin
    2015 “EU Multilingual Law: Interfaces of Law, Language and Culture.” Language and Culture in EU Law. Multidisciplinary Perspectives, edited by Susan Šarčević , 33–52. Farnham: Ashgate.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Scott, Mike
    2016WordSmith Tools version 7. Stroud: Lexical Analysis Software.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Swales, John M.
    2004Research Genres: Explorations and Applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139524827
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524827 [Google Scholar]
  39. Šarčević, Susan
    1997New Approach to Legal Translation. The Hague: Kluwer Law International.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. 2016Language and Culture in EU Law: Multidisciplinary Perspectives. London and New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Toury, Gideon
    1995Descriptive Translation Studies and Beyond. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.4
    https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.4 [Google Scholar]
  42. Trklja, Aleksandar
    2018 “A Corpus Investigation of Formulaicity and Hybridity in Legal Language. A Case of EU Case Law Texts.” Phraseology in Legal and Institutional Settings: A Corpus-based Interdisciplinary Perspective, edited by Stanisław Goźdź-Roszkowski , and Gianluca Pontrandolfo , 89–108. Abingdon: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Wilson, Andrew
    2013 “Embracing Bayes Factors for Key Item Analysis in Corpus Linguistics.” New Approaches to the Study of Linguistic Variability, edited by Markus Bieswanger , and Amei Koll-Stobbe , 3–11. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Wood, David
    2015Fundamentals of Formulaic Language: An Introduction. London: Bloomsbury.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Wray, Alison
    2002Formulaic Language and the Lexicon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511519772
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511519772 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/ts.00013.bie
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/ts.00013.bie
Loading

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