Article published In:
International Journal of Corpus LinguisticsVol. 20:3 (2015) ► pp.293–325
Using the features of translated language to investigate translation expertise
A corpus-based study
The study reported on in this article set out to test the hypothesis that linguistic operationalisations of the features of translated language will demonstrate significant differences in the work of experienced and inexperienced translators. A custom-built comparable English corpus was used, comprising three subcorpora: translations produced by experienced translators, translations by inexperienced translators, and non-translated texts. A number of linguistic operationalisations were selected for three of the features of translated language: explicitation, simplification and normalisation. The differences in these linguistic features in the three subcorpora were analysed, using parametric or non-parametric ANOVA, and T-tests or Mann-Whitney U-tests as post-hoc tests where applicable. The findings of the study indicate substantial (though not unqualified) support for the hypothesis. It is argued that experience-related variation in register sensitivity, language competence, awareness of written language conventions and sensitivity to translation norms are the main factors contributing to expertise.
References (63)
Alves, F., & Gonçalves, J.L. (2007). Modelling translator’s competence: Relevance and expertise under scrutiny. In Y. Gambier, M. Shlesinger & R. Stolze (Eds.), Doubts and Directions in Translation Studies (pp. 41–55). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins. 
Alves, F., Pagano, A., Neumann, S., Steiner, E., & Hansen-Schirra, S. (2010). Translation units and grammatical shifts: Towards an integration of product and process-based translation research. In G.M. Shreve & E. Angelone (Eds.), Translation and Cognition (pp. 109–141). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.
Alves, F., & Vale, D. (2011). On drafting and revision in translation: A corpus linguistics oriented analysis of translation process data. TC3: Compution, Corpora, Cognition, 1(1), 105–122.
Angelelli, C.V. (2009). Using a rubric to assess translation ability: Defining the construct. In C.V. Angelelli & H.E. Jacobson (Eds.), Testing and Assessment In Translation and Interpreting Studies (pp. 13–48). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.
Baker, M. (1993). Corpus linguistics and translation studies: Implications and applications. In M. Baker, G. Francis & E. Tognini-Bonelli (Eds.), Text and Technology: In Honour of John Sinclair (pp. 233–250). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.
. (1996). Corpus-based translation studies: The challenges that lie ahead. In H.L. Somers (Ed.), Terminology, LSP and Translation: Studies in Language Engineering In Honour of Juan C. Sager (pp. 175–186). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.
Baumgarten, N., Meyer, B., & Özçetin, D. (2008). Explicitness in translation and interpreting: A critical review and some empirical evidence (of an elusive concept). Across Languages and Cultures, 9(2), 177–203.
Becher, V. (2011). When and why do translators add connectives? A corpus-based study. Target, 23(1), 26–47.
Bernardini, S. (2011). Monolingual comparable corpora and parallel corpora in the search for features of translated language. SYNAPS – A Journal of Professional Communication, 261, 2–13.
Bernardini, S., & Ferraresi, A. (2011). Practice, description and theory come together: Normalization or interference in Italian technical translation. Meta, 56(2), 226–246.
Biber, D. (1988). Variation Across Speech and Writing. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E. (1999). Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. London, UK: Longman.
Blum-Kulka, S. (2004) [1986]. Shifts of cohesion and coherence in translation. In L. Venuti (Ed.), The Translation Studies Reader (2nd ed.) (pp. 290–305). London, UK: Routledge.
Blum-Kulka, S., & Levenston, E.A. (1984). Universals of lexical simplification. In C. Færch & G. Kasper (Eds.), Strategies in Interlanguage Communication (pp. 119–139). London, UK: Longman.
Bullon, S., Krishnarmurthy, R., Manning, E., & Todd, J. (Eds.). (1990). Collins COBUILD English Grammar Dictionary. London, UK: Collins.
Castagnoli, S. (2008). Regularities and variations in learner translations: A corpus-based study of conjunctive explicitation. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
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. 1–13). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.
. (2014). Translation studies forum: Universalism in translation studies. Translation Studies, 7(1), 82–90.
Delaere, I., De Sutter, G., & Plevoets, K. (2012). Is translated language more standardized than non-translated language? Using profile-based correspondence analysis for measuring linguistic distances between language varieties. Target, 24(2), 203–224.
Göpferich, S. (2009). Towards a model of translation competence and its acquisition: The longitudinal study ‘TransComp’. In S. Göpferich, A.L. Jakobsen & I.M. Mees (Eds.), Behind the Mind: Methods, Models and Results In Translation Process Research (pp. 11–37). Copenhagen, Denmark: Samfundslitteratur.
. (2013). Translation competence: Explaining development and stagnation from a dynamic systems perspective. Target, 25(1), 61–76.
Göpferich, S., & Jääskeläinen, R. (2009). Process research into the development of translation competence: Where are we, and where do we need to go? Across Languages and Cultures, 10(2), 169–191.
Halliday, M.A.K., & Matthiessen, M.I.M. (2004). An Introduction to Functional Grammar (3rd ed.). London, UK: Arnold.
Hansen-Schirra, S. (2011). Between normalization and shining-through: Specific properties of English-German translations and their influence on the target language. In S. Kranich, V. Becher, S. Höder & J. House (Eds.), Multilingual Discourse Production: Diachronic and Synchronic Perspectives (pp. 133–162). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.
Hansen-Schirra, S., Neumann, S., & Steiner, E. (2007). Cohesive explicitness and explicitation in an English-German translation corpus. Languages in Contrast, 7(2), 241–265.
House, J. (2008). Beyond intervention: universals in translation? Trans-kom, 1(1), 6–19.
ICE (International Corpus of English). (2012). International Corpus of English: Homepage. Retrieved from [URL] (last accessed May 2015).
Kenny, D. (1998). Creatures of habit? What translators usually do with words. Meta, 43(4), 515–523.
. (2001). Lexis and Creativity in Translation: A Corpus-based Study. Manchester, UK: St Jerome.
Kruger, A. (2002). Corpus-based translation research: Its development and implication for general, literary and Bible translation. Acta Theologica Supplementum 2, 22(1), 70–106.
Kruger, H., & Van Rooy, B. (2012). Register and the features of translated language. Across Languages and Cultures, 13(1), 33–65.
Laviosa, S. (1998). Core patterns of lexical use in a comparable corpus of English narrative prose. Meta, 43(4), 557–570.
. (2002). Corpus-based Translation Studies: Theory, Findings, Applications. New York, NY: Rodopi.
. (2008). Universals. In M. Baker & G. Saldanha (Eds.), The Routledge Encyclopaedia of Translation Studies (2nd ed.) (pp. 306–310). London, UK: Routledge.
Leech, G., Smith, N., & Rayson, P. (2012). English style on the move: Variation and change in stylistic norms in the twentieth century. Language & Computers, 76(1), 69–98.
Malmkjær, K. (2005). Norms and nature in translation studies. SYNAPS – A Journal of Professional Communication, 161, 13–19.
Martín, R.M. (2009). Expertise and environment in translation. Mutatis Mutandis: Revista Latinoamericana de Traducción, 2(1), 24–37.
Mauranen, A., & Kujamäki, P. (Eds.). (2004). Translation Universals: Do They Exist? Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.
Munday, J. (1998). A computer-assisted approach to the analysis of translation shifts. Meta, 43(4), 1–16.
O’Brien, S. (2013). The borrowers: Researching the cognitive aspects of translation. Target, 25(1), 5–17.
Olohan, M. (2003). How frequent are the contractions? A study of contracted forms in the Translational English Corpus. Target, 15(2), 59–89.
Olohan, M., & Baker, M. (2000). Reporting that in translated English: Evidence for subconscious processes of explicitation? Across Languages and Cultures, 1(2), 141–158.
Øverås, L. (1998). In search of the third code: An investigation of norms in literary translation. Meta, 43(4), 557–570.
PACTE. (2009). Results of the validation of the PACTE translation competence model: Acceptability and decision making. Across Languages and Cultures, 10(2), 207–230.
. (2011). Results of the validation of the PACTE translation competence model: Translation poject and dynamic translation index. In S. O’Brien (Ed.), Cognitive Explorations of Translation (pp. 30–53). London, UK: Continuum.
Peters, P. (2004). The Cambridge Guide to English Usage. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Pym, A. (2003). Redefining translation competence in an electronic age: In defence of a minimalist approach. Meta, 48(4), 481–497.
. (2005). Explaining explicitation. In K. Károly & A. Fóris (Eds.), New Trends in Translation Studies: In Honour of Kinga Klaudy (pp. 29–34). Budapest, Hungary: Akadémiai Kiadó.
. (2011). Translation research terms: A tentative glossary for moments of perplexity and dispute. In A. Pym (Ed.), Translation Research Projects 3 (pp. 75–110). Tarragona, Italy: Intercultural Studies Group (pp. 75–110). Retrieved from [URL] (last accessed May 2015).
Saldanha, G. (2008). Explicitation revisited: Bringing the reader into the picture. Trans-kom, 1(1), 20–35.
Scott, M. (2008). WordSmith Tools Version 5. Liverpool: Lexical Analysis Software. Retrieved from [URL] (last accessed May 2015).
Shreve, G. (2002). Knowing translation: Cognitive and experiential aspects of translation expertise from the perspective of expertise studies. In A. Riccardi (Ed.), Translation Studies: Perspectives on an Emerging Discipline (pp. 150–171). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
StatSoft Inc. (2012). STATISTICA (Data Analysis Software System). Version 11.
Tirkkonen-Condit, S. (2004). Unique items: Over- or under-represented in translated language? In A. Mauranen & P. Kujamäki (Eds.), Translation Universals: Do They Exist? (pp. 176–184). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.
Torres Cacoullos, R., & Walker, J.A. (2009). On the persistence of grammar in discourse formulas: A variationist study of that
. Linguistics, 47(1), 1–43.
Toury, G. (2012). Descriptive Translation Studies and Beyond (2nd ed.). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.
Williams, D. (2005). Recurrent features of translation in Canada: A corpus-based study. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada.
Xiao, R. (2010). How different is translated Chinese from native Chinese? A corpus-based study of translation universals. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 15(1), 5–35.
. (2011). Word clusters and reformulation markers in Chinese and English: Implications for translation universal hypotheses. Languages in Contrast, 11(2), 145–171.
Xiao, R., He, L., & Yue, M. (2010). In pursuit of the third code: Using the ZJU corpus of translational Chinese in translation studies. In R. Xiao (Ed.), Using Corpora in Contrastive and Translation Studies (pp. 182–214). Newcastle, UK: Cambridge Scholars.
Xiao, R., & Yue, M. (2009). Using corpora in translation studies: The state of the art. In P. Baker (Ed.), Contemporary Corpus Linguistics (pp. 237–261). London, UK: Continuum.
Zanettin, F. (2012). Translation-Driven Corpora. Manchester, UK: St. Jerome.
. (2013). Corpus methods for descriptive translation studies. Procedia: Social and Behavioral Sciences, 951: 20–32.
Cited by (17)
Cited by 17 other publications
de S. Penha-Marion, Laura A., Gaëtanelle Gilquin & Marie-Aude Lefer
2024. Chapter 6. The effect of directionality on lexico‑syntactic simplification in French>. In Constraints on Language Variation and Change in Complex Multilingual Contact Settings [Contact Language Library, 60], ► pp. 153 ff. 
Ding, Guoqi
2024. Triangulating text relationship in literary retranslation: The Great Gatsby in Chinese. Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 39:3 ► pp. 849 ff.
van Rooy, Bertus & Haidee Kotze
2024. Chapter 9. Conclusion. In Constraints on Language Variation and Change in Complex Multilingual Contact Settings [Contact Language Library, 60], ► pp. 255 ff.
De Sutter, Gert, Marie-Aude Lefer & Bram Vanroy
2023. Is linguistic decision-making constrained by the same cognitive factors in student and in professional
translation?. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research 9:1 ► pp. 60 ff.
Granger, Sylviane & Marie-Aude Lefer
Leńko-Szymańska, Agnieszka & Łucja Biel
2023. Terminological collocations in trainee and professional legal translations. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research 9:1 ► pp. 29 ff.
Pang, Shuangzi & Kefei Wang
2023. Sketching the changing patterns in kaleidoscopes: New developments in corpus-based studies of translation features (2001–2021). Research in Corpus Linguistics 11:2 ► pp. 79 ff.
François, Thomas & Marie-Aude Lefer
2022. Revisiting simplification in corpus-based translation studies: Insights from readability research. Meta 67:1 ► pp. 50 ff.
Mattioli, Virginia
2022. La tendencia hacia la simplificación en el discurso especializado y no-especializado: ampliando el alcance de los estudios de traducción basados en corpus al análisis multidiscursivo. TRANS: Revista de Traductología 26:1 ► pp. 65 ff.
Ji, Meng & Pierrette Bouillon
2021. Predicting the Linguistic Accessibility of Chinese Health Translations: Machine Learning Algorithm Development. JMIR Medical Informatics 9:10 ► pp. e30588 ff.
Yue, Yan
2021. The role of registerial expertise in translators’ logical choices: A case study of the Chinese medicine classic Huang Di Nei Jing. Meta: Journal des traducteurs 66:3 ► pp. 690 ff.
De Sutter, Gert & Marie-Aude Lefer
2020. On the need for a new research agenda for corpus-based translation studies: a multi-methodological, multifactorial and interdisciplinary approach. Perspectives 28:1 ► pp. 1 ff.
Liu, Kanglong
2020. Corpus-Assisted Translation Teaching: An Overview. In Corpus-Assisted Translation Teaching [Corpora and Intercultural Studies, 7], ► pp. 9 ff.
Kruger, Haidee
2019. That Again: A Multivariate Analysis of the Factors Conditioning Syntactic Explicitness in Translated English. Across Languages and Cultures 20:1 ► pp. 1 ff.
Alasmri, Ibrahim & Haidee Kruger
2018. Conjunctive markers in translation from English to Arabic: a corpus-based study. Perspectives 26:5 ► pp. 767 ff.
Kruger, Haidee & Gert De Sutter
2018. Alternations in contact and non-contact varieties. Translation, Cognition & Behavior 1:2 ► pp. 251 ff.
Kruger, Haidee & Bertus van Rooy
2016. Syntactic and pragmatic transfer effects in reported-speech constructions in three contact varieties of English influenced by Afrikaans. Language Sciences 56 ► pp. 118 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 19 november 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.