Cover not available
Article published In:
Target
Vol. 9:1 (1997) ► pp.1–24

'Acceptability' and Language-Specific Preference in the Distribution of Information

| Humboldt Universität zu Berlin
The paper generalizes upon some basic aspects of acceptability concerning language-specific preferences in the distribution of information in original texts and translations. It is assumed that the pragmatic principle of Optimal Relevance and major grammatical parameters jointly determine language-specific processing conditions for an optimal distribution of information. The claims are illustrated by the German translation of a passage from an English novel, where the preferred translational variants meet different processing conditions in 'right-peripheral' German, as opposed to 'left-peripheral' English. The differences concern word order, including initial and final position in simple and complex sentences, and may have an impact on the semantic readings of formally similar sentence structures, which can require redistribution of information beyond sentence boundaries.
Article outline
  • 1.Acceptability and Applicability—Key Concepts of Translation and Translation Studies
  • 2.Grammar
  • 3.Language Processing
  • 4.Information Structure
  • 5.An Example
  • 6.Complexity
  • 7.Conclusions
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 1 January 1997
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/target.9.1.02doh
References (23)
References
Abraham, Werner. 1992. "Clausal Focus Versus Discourse Rhema in German: A Program-matic View". Language und Cognition II1. 1–19.Google Scholar
Altmann, Gerry T.M. 1989. "Parsing and Interpretation: An Introduction". Language and Cognitive Processes 4:3/4. 1–19.Google Scholar
Büring, Daniel. 1995. The 59th Street Bridge Accent: On the Meaning of Topic and Focus. University of Tubingen. [PhD Dissertation.]Google Scholar
Doherty, Monika. 1992. "Informationelle Holzwege". LiLi 841. 30–49.Google Scholar
Féry, Caroline. 1993. German Intonational Patterns. Tubingen: Niemeyer.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Frazier, Lyn. 1988. "Grammar and Language Processing". Frederick J. Newmeyer, ed. Linguistics: The Cambridge Survey II1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988. 15–34. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grice, Paul. 1975. "Logic and Conversation". Peter Cole and Jerry L. Morgan, eds. Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts. New York: Academic Press, 1975. 41–58.Google Scholar
Haider, Hubert. 1995. "Wenn die Semantik arbeitet,—und die Syntax sie gewähren läßt". Universität Stuttgart. [Unveröffentlichtes Manuskript.]Google Scholar
Isham, William P. 1994. "Memory for Sentence Form after Simultaneous Interpretation: Evidence both for and against Deverbalization". Sylvia Lambert and Barbara Moser-Mercer, eds. Bridging the Gap: Empirical Research in Simultaneous Interpretation. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 1994. 191–211.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Koller, Werner. 1992. Einfuhrung in die Übersetzungswissenschaft. Wiesbaden: Quelle & Meyer.Google Scholar
Levelt, Willem. 1989. Speaking: From Intention to Articulation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Lohnstein, Horst. 1994. "Grammatik und Parsing". ZS 13:1. 56–109.Google Scholar
Macheiner, Judith. 1995. Übersetzen: Ein Vademecum. Frankfurt: Eichborn.Google Scholar
Maienborn, Claudia. 1996. "Towards a Compositional Semantics for Locative Modifiers". M. Simons and T. Galloway, eds. Proceedings from Semantics and Linguistic Theory V1. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Linguistic Publications, 1996. 237–254.Google Scholar
Quirk, Randolph et al.. 1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Russell, Bertrand. 1945. A History of Western Philosophy. New York: Touchstone.Google Scholar
Schmitt, Peter A. 1992. "Culturally Specific Elements in Technical Translations". Joachim Schwend, Susanne Hagemann and Hermann Völkel, eds. Literatur im Kontext/Litera-ture in Context: Festschrift für Horst W. Drescher. Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 1992. 495–515.Google Scholar
Sperber, Dan and Deirdre Wilson. 1986. Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Ox-ford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Tanenhaus, Michael K. 1988. "Psycholinguistics: An Overview". Frederick J. Newmeyer, ed. Linguistics: The Cambridge Survey III1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988. 1–37. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Toury, Gideon. 1995. Descriptive Translation Studies and Beyond. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins. [Benjamins Translation Library, 4.]   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vallduví, Enric. 1993. Information Packaging: A Survey. Edinburgh. [Research Paper HCRC/RP-44.]Google Scholar
Vallduví, Enric and Elisabeth Engdahl. 1996. "The Linguistic Realisation of Information Packaging". Monika Doherty, ed. Information Structure: A Key Concept for Transla-tion Theory [= Linguistics 34:3]. 459–520.Google Scholar
Wolfe, Thomas. 1984. Look Homeward, Angel. New York: Collier Books.Google Scholar
Cited by (5)

Cited by five other publications

Károly, Krisztina
2013. News Discourse in Translation: Topical Structure and News Content in the Analytical News Article. Meta 57:4 ► pp. 884 ff. DOI logo
Vandepitte, Sonia, Kathelijne Denturck & Dominique Willems
2013. Translator respect for source text information structure: A parallel investigation of causal connectors. Across Languages and Cultures 14:1 ► pp. 47 ff. DOI logo
Doherty, Monika
1999. Clefts in Translations between English and German1. Target. International Journal of Translation Studies 11:2 ► pp. 289 ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2017. Aspects of Cohesion and Coherence in Translation [Benjamins Translation Library, 134], DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2017. Chapter 8. Summary and conclusions. In Aspects of Cohesion and Coherence in Translation [Benjamins Translation Library, 134], ► pp. 206 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 27 september 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.