250 likes | 406 Views
UCCTS 2010 Edge Hill University 27-29 July 2010. Using corpora to define target-language use in translation. Rudy Loock Université de Lille 3, France & CNRS UMR 8163 STL. 1. Introduction. Starting point : teaching considerations Literal translation belongs to an ideal world
E N D
UCCTS 2010 Edge Hill University 27-29 July 2010 Using corpora to define target-language use in translation Rudy Loock Université de Lille 3, France & CNRS UMR 8163 STL
1. Introduction • Starting point : teaching considerations • Literal translation belongs to an ideal world • Translators have to face several types of constraints when translating from source-language (SL) to target-language (TL) : • Morphological • Syntactic • Stylistic
1. Introduction • Morphological constraints : some morpheme associations are possible in SL but not in TL (1) Adj + -ly : slow>slowly / lent>lentement ; quick>quickly / rapide>rapidement ; clever>cleverly / intelligent>intelligemment fervent>fervently / fervent>*fervemment (avec ferveur) ; interesting>interestingly / intéressant>*intéressamment (de façon intéressante) (2) success>successful / succès>*successeux (avec succès) (3) compounding : white-teethed ; leather-bound ; gay-friendly = lexical gaps
1. Introduction • Syntactic constraints : Some syntactic organizations are possible in SL but not in TL (4) dative passive: Lily was given flowers. >*Lily a été donnée des fleurs. (Lily a reçu des fleurs.) (5) satellite-framed vs. verb-framed language (cf. Talmy, Slobin): Mary swam across the river. > *Mary a nagé à travers la rivière. (Mary a traversé la rivière à la nage.) (6) stranded prepositions: The article which I referred to > *L’article que j’ai référé à (l’article auquel j’ai référé)
1. Introduction • Stylistic constraints Some literal translations are impossible because the result would be long, complex or clumsy sentences that do not combine together properly (7) The reason I don't have him thrown out is because I find all this curiously thrilling. => Si je ne le fais pas jeter dehors, c'est que je trouve toute cette histoire curieusement excitante.
1. Introduction • But not sufficient : need to explain why one translation sounds ‘better’, ‘more natural’ twhile another ‘sounds like translation’ : « That’s not what native speakers usually say… » « Your translation is fine, but does not sound completely natural… » • =Usage/langue use constraint that takes into account the way real people really use the language
1. Introduction • Problem: how to determine language use/usage? Some is codified/lexicalized and listed in dictionaries: table leg vs. pied de table cast-iron case vs. dossier en béton But what about non-codified usage? • Intuition of native speakers? (What if you’re not?) • General conceptions based on personal experience (talent)? • More scientific way of determining the usage constraint? => Corpora investigation
2. Determining usage • Lexical usage Expressions to refer to ‘influenza endemic to birds’ : E : bird flu | avian (in)flu(enza) | H5N1 virus/strain F : grippe du poulet | grippe aviaire | virus/souche H5N1 The different terms seem to suggest a series of equivalences : (e.g. bird flu = grippe du poulet) But speakers do not use these terms in the same way/with the same frequency in English and in French => Search on Google
2. Determining usage Google search July 2010
2. Determining usage • Expression of periodicity : weekly vs. hebdomadairement Google search July 2010
2. 2. Determining usage • Syntactic usage : more difficult to evaluate e.g. relative clauses : • not always translated ‘literally’, i.e. using the same structure • seems to be some systematicity independently of syntactic constraints • Corpus search • But Google impossible to use
2. Determining usage • Corpus-based study on the translation of RCs from English to French and from French to English (Loock 2009) • Corpus: first 25,000 words taken from: • 2 novels originally written in French and translated into English (N. Hornby’s How to be Good and D. Lodge’s Thinks…) • 2 novels originally written in English and translated into French (F. Beigbeder’s Windows on the world and B. Werber’s Les Fourmis) • Search for some systematic differences/patterns
2. Determining usage • Global results : RCs not systematically maintained * Participle clauses, independent clauses, adjectives, noun phrases, parentheticals, ellipsis…
2. Determining usage • Systematic non-literal translations (ceteris paribus): • (Much) more frequent use of cleft structures (it is [X] that…/c’est [X] qui…) in F than in E: (8) Et tout d'un coup c'est David qui prend la parole, en fixant les marches de l'escalier au milieu desquelles coule une rivière. (Beigbeder 99) => Then, suddenly, David starts to speak, staring at the river running down the steps. (9) C'est une antenne anonyme qui vient d'émettre cette phéromone phrase. (Werber 71) • An anonymous antenna had just emitted this pheromone sentence. (10) Ce sont tout d'abord les murs qui subissent une grande secousse latérale. (Werber 110) => First the walls were shaken by a big lateral tremor.
2. Determining usage • In general, RCs are often reformulated when translated from E to F with prepositional phrases: (11) He had a glass of white wine in his hand and I guess it wasn't the first one he'd imbibed that evening. (Lodge 51) => Il tenait à la main un verre de vin blanc et ce n'était sûrement pas pour lui le premier de la soirée. (12) Or we may develop computers that are carbon-based, like biological organisms, instead of silicon-based ones.' (Lodge 90) => Nous pourrions aussi élaborer des ordinateurs à base de carbone comme les organismes biologiques, au lieu qu'ils soient à base de silicone. (13) David's only steady income derives from a newspaper column he contributes to our local paper. (Hornby 15) => David tire son seul revenu régulier d'une rubrique dans notre journal local.
2. Determining usage • Frenchs RCs, when they are reformulated, are often replaced with –ing clauses (25% in our corpus): (14) Si un Boeing entrait sous mes pieds, je saurais enfin ce qui me torture depuis un an : je saurais la fumée noire qui monte du sol, la chaleur qui fait fondre les murs, les fenêtres explosées… (Beigbeder 21) => If a Boeing were to crash below my feet, I would finally know what it is that has tortured me for a year now: the black smoke seeping from the floor, the heat melting the walls, the exploded windows... (15) L'écrivain est comme la cavalerie, qui arrive toujours trop tard. (Beigbeder 25) => The writer is like the cavalry, always arriving too late.
2. Determining usage • Some general tendencies can be defined for syntactic usage and help translation learners to provide translations that respect such usage. N.B. : small corpus (4x25,000 words) no hard rules
3. Questions and issues • Whyisthis important? Cf. study by Cappelle on translation from E to F, specifically on VPsexpressing direction : Mary [swam] [across] the river. Mary [traversa] la rivière [à la nage]/[en nageant]. What happens when translators translate from a verb-framed (F)to a satellite(E)-framed language (or vice-versa)? Do theyreframe or do theyotherwiserephrase?
3. Questions and issues Comparisonbetween 3 corpora : • A corpus of translatedtextsfrom SL to TL (e.g. Victor Hugo in English) • A corpus of SL texts (e.g. Victor Hugo in French) • A corpus of TL texts (e.g. Charles Dickens in English) • Cappelle’sresults show thattranslatedtexts and original textsclearlydiffer: “under-representation of manner-of-motion verbs (typical of Germanic languages) in English translated from French as compared with original English” => What does this mean about the quality of the translations?
3. Questions and issues • Isn’t there a danger of trying to reduce a language to a stereotypical series of linguistic properties? e.g. The fact that grippe du poulet (bird flu) is hardly ever used in F does not mean it is *never* used. • Rigidify language use and personification of language (E uses bird flu while F used grippe aviaire). • Should not be considered as hard rules but tendencies translators should be aware of.
3. Questions and issues • Languages change with time, so usage changes with time • can corpora show such evolution?
Conclusion • At a time when usage-based linguistics/grammar is becoming more and more popular, one might also consider usage-based translation. • Permits the discovery of systematic tendencies that are characteristic of specific languages. • Final aim : Taking usage into account improves the quality (fluency, natural character) of translations.
References • Cappelle, B. 2010. Reframing and rephrasing in translation, Talk given at the Verbes et complexités verbales Symposium, Paris 7, France, May 31-June 1. • Loock, R. 2009. ‘Parce qu’en plus il faut traduire la syntaxe ?!’ : contraintes et stratégies dans la traduction de la structuration d’un texte , in D'Amélio (ed.), Actes du colloque international « La forme comme paradigme du traduire » Mons; CIPA : 173-190. • Slobin, D. 2004. The many ways to search for a frog: linguistic typology & the expression of motion events. In S. Strömqvist & L. Verhoeven eds. Relating Events in Narrative. Vol 2, 219-257. Mahwah, NJ: LEA. • Talmy, L. 2000. Toward a Cognitive Semantics: Typology and Process in Concept Structuring, vol. 2. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Relative clauses corpus: - Hornby, N. 2001. How to Be Good. Viking Airside Ed. Translated by I. Chapman. La Bonté mode d’emploi. 10-18. - Lodge, D. 2002. Thinks. Penguin New Ed. Translated by S. Mayoux. Pensées secrètes. Rivages Poche. - Beigbeder, F. 2005. Windows on the World. Gallimard. Translated by F. Wynne. Windows on the World. Harper Perennial. - Werber, B. 1991. Les Fourmis. Livre de poche. Translated by M. Rocques. The Empire of the Ants. Bantam books.
Thank you for your attention! Contact: rudy.loock@univ-lille3.fr http://stl.recherche.univ-lille3.fr/sitespersonnels/loock/index.htm