Prominent POS-Grams and n-Grams in Translated Czech in the Mirror of the English Source Texts
The most typical or prominent POS-grams, i.e., sequences of parts of speech or possibly other grammatical categories, can reveal a lot about the character of a text, especially with regard to its dynamics (reflected in the dominance of nominal or verbal constructions) or lexical density (the accumulation of lexical words as opposed to grammatical word sequences).
In the study of translated Czech, previous research has shown that the POS-grams salient in translated texts differ from those in comparable non-translated Czech texts: they include more verbal combinations and pronouns. Their concrete realizations, e.g., the most frequent n-grams (sequences of n words) in given combinations, have indicated a possible interference effect based on the most represented source language: English.
This study builds on the previous POS-gram and n-gram research on translated Czech and strives to describe and interpret the prominent POS-grams in translated Czech in the light of their corresponding English source texts, using a parallel corpus (namely, the English–Czech part of the InterCorp corpus). As a theoretical basis for description, hypotheses about translation universals are discussed. The results of the analysis indicate that some of the presumably universal translation tendencies can certainly be traced in Czech translations; however, translators’ choices tend to be the result of a combination of factors rather than a single reason (such as explicitation or normalization). The study also comments on the specificities of cross-linguistic comparison based on POS-grams and n-grams in two typologically different languages.
KeywordsLanguage of translation POS-grams n-grams Parallel corpus Interference
- Biber, D., Conrad, S., Finegan, E., Leech, G., & Johansson, S. (1999). Longman grammar of spoken and written English. Harlow, England: Longman.Google Scholar
- Chesterman, A. (2004). Hypotheses about translation universals. In G. Hansen, K. Malmkjær, & D. Gile (Eds.), Claims, changes and challenges in translation studies. Selected contributions from the EST Congress Copenhagen 2001 (pp. 1–14). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
- Chlumská, L. (2013). JEROME: jednojazyčný srovnatelný korpus pro výzkum překladové češtiny [JEROME: a Monolingual Comparable Corpus for the Research of Translated Czech]. Institute of the Czech National Corpus, Faculty of Arts, Charles University, Prague. Available at WWW: http://www.korpus.cz. http://www.korpus.cz.
- Chlumská, L. (2016). (Ne)typické slovní kombinace v českých překladech a možnosti jejich zkoumání. [(Non)typical word combinations in Czech translations and avenues for their research]. In A. Čermáková, L. Chlumská, & M. Malá (Eds.), Jazykové paralely [Linguistic Parallels] (pp. 235−266). Prague, Czech Republic: NLN.Google Scholar
- Chlumská, L. (2017). Překladová čeština a její charakteristiky [Translated Czech and its Characteristics]. Prague, Czech Republic: NLN.Google Scholar
- Cvrček, V., & Václavík, J. (2015). Jednoznačnost a kontext. Kvantitativní studie. [Unambiguity and context. A Quantitative study]. Korpus, gramatika, axiologie, 11, 28–41.Google Scholar
- Čermáková, A., & Chlumská, L. (2016). Jazyk dětské literatury: kontrastivní srovnání angličtiny a češtiny [The language of children’s literature: A contrastive comparison of English and Czech]. In A. Čermáková, L. Chlumská, & M. Malá (Eds.), Jazykové paralely [Linguistic Parallels] (pp. 162−183). Prague, Czech Republic: NLN.Google Scholar
- Čermáková, A., & Chlumská, L. (2017). Expressing ‘place’ in children’s literature: Testing the limits of the n-gram method in contrastive linguistics. In T. Egan & H. Dirdal (Eds.), Cross-linguistic correspondences. From lexis to genre (pp. 75–95). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Frawley, W. (1984). Prolegomenon to a theory of translation. In Translation: Literary, linguistic and philosophical perspectives. Newark, NJ: University of Delaware Press.Google Scholar
- Gellerstam, M. (1986). Translationese in Swedish novels translated from English. In L. Wollin & H. Lindquist (Eds.), Translation studies in Scandinavia (pp. 88–95). Lund, Sweden: CWK Gleerup.Google Scholar
- Grabowski, L. (2012). On translation universals in selected contemporary Polish literary translations. Studies in Polish Linguistics, 7(1), 165–183 Xiao 2010.Google Scholar
- Granger, S. (2013). Tracking the third code: A cross-linguistic corpus-driven approach to discourse markers. Conference paper at ICLC 7 – UCCTS 3, 11–13 July 2013, Gent, Belgium.Google Scholar
- Granger, S., & Lefer, M.-A. (2013). In K. Aijmer & B. Altenberg (Eds.), Advances in corpus-based contrastive linguistics: Studies in honour of Stig Johansson. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
- Mahlberg, M. (2012). Corpus stylistics and Dickens’s fiction (Vol. 14). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Mauranen, A. (2000). Strange strings in translated language. A Study on corpora. In M. Olohan (Ed.), Intercultural faultlines. Research models in translation studies 1: Textual and cognitive aspects (pp. 119–141). Manchester, England: St. Jerome Publishing.Google Scholar
- Neumann, S. (2014). Beyond translation properties: The contribution of corpus studies to empirical translation theory. Plenary talk at the UCCTS 4, Lancaster, UK, 25 July 2014.Google Scholar
- Toury, G. (1980). In search of a theory of translation. Tel Aviv, Israel: The Porter Institute for Poetics and Semiotics.Google Scholar
- Zanettin, F. (2011). Translation and corpus design. SYNAPS – A Journal of professional Communication, 26, 14–23.Google Scholar