lnu.sePublications
Change search
Refine search result
1 - 16 of 16
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Rows per page
  • 5
  • 10
  • 20
  • 50
  • 100
  • 250
Sort
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
Select
The maximal number of hits you can export is 250. When you want to export more records please use the Create feeds function.
  • 1.
    Levin, Magnus
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Department of Languages.
    Kan man gå en översättarutbildning på distans?: Det funkar alldeles utmärkt!2016In: Facköversättaren, ISSN 1400-125X, no 2, p. 1p. 18-18Article in journal (Other (popular science, discussion, etc.))
  • 2.
    Levin, Magnus
    et al.
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Department of Languages.
    Ström Herold, Jenny
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Department of Languages.
    English hyphenated premodifiers in German and Swedish translations: A cutting-edge-state-of-the-art study2015In: ICAME 36: Words, Words, Words – Corpora and Lexis : Abstracts, 2015, p. 27-28Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This study stems from our work training translators where we have noticed that trainee translators struggle with English hyphenated premodifiers. Such premodifiers come in a variety of different forms, e.g., N + ed-participle (pig-headed losers), adjective + ing-participle (a tight-fitting beret), NPs (the end-of-term reports) and verb phrases (a go-along-and-enjoy-yourselves gesture) (for an overview, see Biber et al. 1999: 534–5). As indicated in these examples, hyphens are used both with highly lexicalized premodifiers (Arnaud et al. 2008: 116) and ad hoc constructions. The aim is to investigate how professional translators translate these construction types into German and Swedish in the Oslo Multilingual Corpus, focusing on how the structural means of the two target languages affect the choices made. The results will also help to improve teaching materials for trainee translators, by providing an overview of the strategies used by professionals.

    Previous findings suggest that premodification is more common in German than in Swedish source texts, which favour postmodification (cf. Fleischer & Barz 1995: 320–31; Teleman et al. 1999: III: 71–84). It can therefore be assumed that translations into these languages also have different preferences.

    Our data show that different construction types are connected to different types of translation alternatives, and there are some indications of target-language-specific preferences. For example, ed-participles are generally rendered as similar adjectives in the translations (liver- coloured > leberfarbene/leverfärgad), and relative clauses are more common in Swedish translations (a market-analysis firm > ett företag som gjorde marknadsanalyser) which confirms the observation that Swedish is more prone to postmodification. In the German translations, on the other hand, complex premodifications are more often rendered as extended participial premodifiers (sea-washed stone > vom Meer glattgeschliffenen Stein). Other frequent translation strategies involve compounding and prepositional phrases. These premodifiers often lack lexicalized equivalents, and they are often omitted, restructured or rendered word-for-word.

    Our results indicate that there is a relatively low degree of correspondence between the structures chosen in the target languages, at least regarding the more lexicalized instances. This suggests that the structural means of the individual languages affect the strategies used by either allowing or forcing translators into making different choices. The degree of lexicalization is a key factor when translating more freely or word-for-word. 

  • 3.
    Levin, Magnus
    et al.
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Department of Languages.
    Ström Herold, Jenny
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Department of Languages.
    From language to language, from time to time: echoic binomials in an English-German-Swedish perspective2019In: Language in time, time in language. ICAME40: Book of abstracts. June 1-5, 2019, Neuchâtel: Université de Neuchâtel , 2019, p. 51-52Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Echoic, or repetitive, binomials (Mollin 2013: 172; Gustafsson 1975: 9) are a cross-linguistic phenomenon dating back at least to biblical times (tooth for tooth) (Malkiel 1959: 125–126). Such binomials are characterized by a tripartite structure in which two tokens of the same lexical type are linked by the coordinator and or a preposition. The repeated words may be nouns (day by day), adverbs (again and again) or adjectives (smaller and smaller). Although such constructions occur in many languages (Jackendoff 2008: 8), contrastive studies are lacking.

    Echoic binomials express a variety of meanings, but in our data as many as three out of four relate to time. The repeated lexical items either already denote concepts of time (hour after hour) or the binomial invokes a temporal or aspectual reading (collapse bit by bit and grow brighter and brighter). Although German and Swedish have corresponding phraseological patterns, parallel corpora reveal that the forms, functions and distributions of these binomials differ cross-linguistically.   

    This study is based on the Linnaeus University English-German-Swedish corpus and the English-Swedish Parallel Corpus. A customized script was used to retrieve all relevant occurrences in both source and target texts. Our findings suggest that echoic binomials are equally common in English and Swedish but much rarer in German. In German, competing phraseological patterns are more pervasive, an example being the immer COMP.ADJ construction used for English adjectival binomials (a bigger and bigger hit > einen immer größeren Kick [‘ever bigger’]).

    Interestingly, echoic binomials appear to be more common in translations than in originals. About half the instances are translated into corresponding binomials (step by step > steg för steg), and a large number are also “introduced” in translations. In the latter case, echoic binomials fill constructional gaps as when the continuative-iterative reading of the English keep V-ing construction is rendered as the Swedish binomial om och om (igen) (we kept saying > om och om igen sa vi [‘again and again we said’]). Moreover, some language-specific binomials may be “overused” in translations, leading to reduced lexical variation. This is the case for German nach und nach which is a frequent choice for many different English source-text items (gradually, finally, begin to, Ø).

    A data-driven approach to echoic binomials enables researchers to uncover cross-linguistic patterns. One notable finding is that when the correspondents are not echoic, meanings still tend to be expressed by related recurring phraseological patterns, e.g., line by line > en rad i taget [‘a line at a time’]. Thus, recurrent meanings tend to be expressed by recurrent patterns.   

    References

    Gustafsson, Marita. 1975. Binomial expressions in present-day English. Turku: University of Turku.

    Jackendoff, Ray. 2008. Construction after construction and its theoretical challenges. Language, 84(1), 8–28.

    Malkiel, Yakov. 1959. Studies in irreversible binomials. Lingua 8, 113–160.

    Mollin, Sandra. 2013. Pathways of change in the diachronic development of binomial reversibility in Late Modern American English. Journal of English Linguistics 41(2), 168–203.

  • 4.
    Levin, Magnus
    et al.
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Department of Languages.
    Ström Herold, Jenny
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Department of Languages.
    Give and Take: A contrastive study of light verb constructions in English, German and Swedish2015In: Cross-Linguistic Perspectives on Verb Constructions / [ed] Signe Oksefjell Ebeling, Hilde Hasselgård, Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2015, p. 144-168Chapter in book (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This paper investigates light verb constructions (LVCs) with give/geben/ge and take/nehmen/ta in English, German and Swedish in the Oslo Multilingual Corpus and the English-Swedish Parallel Corpus. The results indicate that LVCs express aspectual distinctions (which is often done through quantification) and carry (mostly adjective) modifications. English prefers LVCs with zero-derived nouns, German mostly uses suffixed nouns and Swedish mainly nouns without equivalent verbs. Swedish translations from and into English are affected by the types of LVCs translated while German translations are less so. In general, LVCs with give/geben/ge are more similar cross-linguistically than those with take/nehmen/ta because the former are often based on the double-object construction.

  • 5.
    Levin, Magnus
    et al.
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Department of Languages.
    Ström Herold, Jenny
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Department of Languages.
    Tyrkkö, Jukka
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Department of Languages.
    From the BBC to the PFC and CAPTCHA: Acronym typology from a cross-linguistic perspective2018In: ICAME 39, Tampere, 30 May – 3 June, 2018, Corpus Linguistics and Changing Society: Book of Abstracts, Tampere: University of Tampere , 2018, p. 108-109Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Acronyms are prevalent and increasingly frequent both in English (Leech et al. 2009: 212–213) and other languages, such as German (Steinhauer 2000: 1), a development which mirrors the increasing societal prominence of science/technology and politics/business outside specialized domains (Kobler-Trill 1994: 200). Although acronyms allow brief and unambiguous communication among experts, they also decrease transparency for non-experts both when it comes to retrieving the full form of the acronym (e.g., LSD) or its referent (UNFCCC). The potential lack of transparency is further compounded in translations due to cultural differences. However, few previous studies have addressed the translation of acronyms and none from a corpus-based perspective.

    This study investigates the use of acronyms in English originals and their translations into German and Swedish, comparing forms, functions and distributions across the languages. A major outcome will be a typology of translation strategies and acronym use in the three languages. The material consists of an English-German-Swedish popular non-fiction parallel corpus currently being compiled by the authors. This genre covers, for instance, popular science and biographies, and the texts are aimed at informing and entertaining non-specialist audiences. Therefore, writers and translators need to strike a balance between brevity and transparency without compromising accuracy or alienating readers.

    Preliminary results suggest that acronyms most often occur as noun phrase heads (When IBM introduced…), but they are also frequent in more complex structures such as English premodifiers (PGP encryption) and German (UN-Klimakonvention) and Swedish compounds (NKVD-officer) (cf. Ström Herold & Levin in preparation). They also occasionally form part of new words (NAFTA-style). This flexibility is likely facilitated by the simplex forms of acronyms (Fleischer & Barz 2012: 284).

    The first-time mentions of acronyms in texts are of particular interest. Based on our popular non-fiction corpus, knowledge of some frequent acronyms is presupposed (e.g., DNA tests), others are given as appositive noun phrases alongside the full form (The chemical dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (usually known as DDT) […]) (cf. Biber & Gray 2016: 202–207), while some receive more extensive meta-linguistic comments (WYSIWYG, pronounced "wiz-ee-wig," an acronym for "What you see is what you get."). This is also found in translations, which can be either more or less explicit than the original:

    (1a)  Complete the CAPTCHA (Completely Automated Public Turing test to tell Computers and Humans Apart), and you're in.

    (1b) den CAPTCHA […] (den ”Completely Automated Public Turing test to tell Computers and Humans Apart", also den ”vollautomatischen öffentlichen Turingtest zur Unterscheidung von Computern und Menschen") [’i.e. the ”completely-automated…”’]

    (1c) captcha-rutan (ett robotfilter för att skilja människor från datorer) [’the captcha-box (a robot-filter to tell …’]

    The translations of first-time mentions vary greatly between German and Swedish target texts. Important factors are the target audience’s (assumed) culture-specific knowledge and their knowledge of English. Our acronym typology will consider structural and pragmatic features and their relevance to translation.

    References

    Biber, Douglas & Bethany Gray. 2016. Grammatical complexity in academic English. Linguistic change in writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Fleischer, Wolfgang & Irmhild Barz. 2012. Wortbildung der deutschen Gegenwartssprache. Berlin: De Gruyter.

    Kobler-Trill, Dorothea. 1994. Das Kurzwort im Deutschen. Eine Untersuchung zu Definition, Typologie und Entwicklung. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag.

    Leech, Geoffrey, Marianne Hundt, Christian Mair & Nicholas Smith. 2009. Change in contemporary English. A grammatical study. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Steinhauer, Anja. 2000. Sprachökonomie durch Kurzwörter: Bildung und Verwendung in der Fachkommunikation. Tübingen: Narr.

    Ström Herold, Jenny & Magnus Levin. In preparation. The Obama presidency, the Macintosh keyboard and the Norway fiasco. English proper noun modifiers in German and Swedish contrast. Paper presented at BICLCE, Vigo, September 2017.

  • 6.
    Rosén, Christina
    et al.
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Department of Languages.
    Bögeholz, Hartwig
    Ström Herold, Jenny
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Department of Languages.
    Fölster, Kaj
    Hellström, Mats
    Ravelli, Stefan
    SRS Sjölanders, Sweden.
    Bristande kunskaper i tyska ett handikapp för Sverige2015In: Göteborgsposten, ISSN 1103-9345, no 2015-03-13Article in journal (Other (popular science, discussion, etc.))
    Abstract [sv]

    Tyskland är Sveriges i särklass viktigaste ekonomiska partner. Men bland politiker och i svenskt näringsliv är tyskakunskaperna en bristvara. Det är ett allvarligt handikapp som direkt går att översätta i ekonomiska förlustsiffror. 

  • 7.
    Ström Herold, Jenny
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Department of Languages.
    Bli Master i facköversättning på Linnéuniversitetet: Varva översättningspraktik med teori – läs till en master i facköversättning vid Linnéuniversitetet i Växjö2018In: Facköversättaren, ISSN 1400-125X, no 2, p. 1p. 5-5Article in journal (Other (popular science, discussion, etc.))
  • 8.
    Ström Herold, Jenny
    Lunds universitet.
    Event anaphors: a unified account?2006In: Working papers, Lunds universitet , 2006, , p. 26p. 107-132Chapter in book (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    This paper is concerned with different types of event anaphors in English and to some extent also in Swedish. The point of departure is the seminal work of Hankamer and Sag (1976) where two major classes of anaphors are suggested, namely surface anaphors and deep anaphors. An important distinction is that surface anaphors, such as the VP-ellipsis, demand a linguistically realized antecedent, whereas deep anaphors, like the do it proform, can also refer to a situationally evoked antecedent. Ever since its publication date, Hankamer and Sag´s work has been the subject of much debate, some linguists claiming the distinction to be legitimate, while others dismiss some or all aspects of the suggested anaphor division. Considering English and Swedish data, the question will be pursued if the original proposal can be maintained.

  • 9.
    Ström Herold, Jenny
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Department of Languages.
    Introducing the Linnaeus University English-German-Swedish corpus (LEGS): rationale, composition and first results2018In: ICAME 39, Tampere, 20 May - 3 June, 2018, Corpus Linguistics and Changing Society: Book of abstracts, Tampere: University of Tampere , 2018, p. 200-201Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Translation studies have been largely based on fiction texts (Bassnett 2014) and literary analysis. Fiction texts nevertheless contain many author-specific features and are therefore less suitable for many research purposes. Moreover, some translation corpora, such as the Oslo Multi-Lingual Corpus (OMC), largely consist of idiosyncratic and fairly old fiction texts.

    In order to address the lack of present-day non-fiction translation corpora, we are in the process of compiling the Linnaeus University English-German-Swedish corpus (LEGS) containing, for instance, biographies and texts about popular science and history. The results of the studies carried out on this corpus will help translators solve actual problems in their work, make language-specific text norms visible, and allow for more research-based translator training.

    LEGS consists of recently published (2000s) popular non-fiction texts in English, German and Swedish, and it is balanced for the three languages, every original always being accompanied by two target texts. Each author and translator is represented only once. The corpus currently comprises about 350,000 words in each source language with translations. The aim for the first compilation phase is half a million words.

    The main advantage of the corpus is that there are always two translations available for every source-text segment. This makes it possible to compare how the very same instance has been translated into two target languages, allowing identification of language-specific and translation-specific features. Moreover, the corpus provides translations from two source languages into each language.

    The current research questions concern German and Swedish correspondences of various English lexico-grammatical structures. One recent study concerns English supplementive ing-clauses in contrast (e.g., Hitler exploded, demanding examples.) (Ström Herold & Levin submitted), and another deals with proper nouns used as modifiers (Ström Herold & Levin in preparation). The findings indicate that German translations of proper noun modifiers produce more compound nouns than Swedish ones, which instead prefer prepositional phrases (e.g., the Norway fiasco > das Norwegen-Fiasko (GE) / fiaskot i Norge (SW)). In contrast, German and Swedish prepositional phrases (Laboratorien in New York (GE) > a New York laboratory) and genitives (FBI:s högkvarter (SW) > FBI headquarters) are very rarely rendered as English proper noun modifiers.

    This poster will mainly focus on the progression of the corpus compilation process and the benefits of working with a trilingual translation corpus.

    References

    Bassnett, Susan. 2014. Translation studies (4th ed). New York: Routledge.

    Ström Herold, Jenny & Magnus Levin. In preparation. The Obama presidency, the Macintosh keyboard and the Norway fiasco. English proper noun modifiers in German and Swedish contrast. Paper presented at BICLCE, Vigo, September 2017.

    Ström Herold, Jenny & Magnus Levin. Submitted. English supplementive ing-clauses and their German and Swedish translations. Paper presented at ICAME in Prague, Prague, May, 2017.

  • 10. Ström Herold, Jenny
    Proformen und Ellipsen: Zur Syntax und Diskurspragmatik prädikativer Anaphern im Deutschen und im Schwedischen2009Doctoral thesis, monograph (Other academic)
  • 11.
    Ström Herold, Jenny
    et al.
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Department of Languages.
    Levin, Magnus
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Department of Languages.
    English supplementive ing-clauses and their German and Swedish correspondences2018In: Bergen Language and Lingustics Studies, ISSN 1892-2449, E-ISSN 1892-2449, Vol. 9, no 1, p. 115-138Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This paper investigates English supplementive ing-clauses (e.g., Hitler exploded, demanding examples.) in German and Swedish contrast. The material consists of popular non-fiction originals and their translations from the Linnaeus University English-German-Swedish corpus (LEGS) (version 0.1). The results show that coordination is the most frequent correspondence of supplementive ing-clauses in German and Swedish translations and originals. Like the supplementive ing-clause, a coordination is a compressed and semantically indeterminate structure. The other major correspondences include subordination, main clause and prepositional phrase. German translators more often use main clauses than Swedish translators, which seems to be related to an increasing German tendency for parataxis rather than hypotaxis. A number of German and Swedish instances involve different kinds of explicitation, including conjunctions and German pronominal adverbs.

  • 12.
    Ström Herold, Jenny
    et al.
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Department of Languages.
    Levin, Magnus
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Department of Languages.
    Premodification in translation: Hyphenated premodifiers in fiction and their translations into German and Swedish2017In: Cross-linguistic Correspondences: From lexis to genre / [ed] Thomas Egan, Hildegunn Dirdal, John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2017, p. 149-175Chapter in book (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    The present study concerns English hyphenated premodifiers translated into German and Swedish. The material was collected from the fiction part of the English – Swedish Parallel Corpus and the Oslo Multilingual Corpus, and includes almost 700 instances of translations into both German and Swedish, as well as 500 instances each of translations from German and Swedish into English. In the material, hyphenated premodifiers come in many different forms. However, they are mostly short, often containing nominal heads (head-office (man)), ed-participles (water-filled (ditches)) or adjectives (gray-green (tweed)), and only a few are longer, creative hapaxes ((her) take-me-seriously-or-I’ll-sue-you(demeanor)). The translations into English contain less variation than English originals, as predicted by translation theory. When the premodifiers are translated into German and Swedish they are often restructured, and only half are translated into German and Swedish premodifiers. German and Swedish premodifying compound adjectives/participles are the most frequent equivalents of English hyphenated premodifiers. More complex English premodifiers are often rendered as postmodifiers in German and Swedish. As could be expected from the preferred noun-phrase structures in German and Swedish, German translations have a (slightly) stronger preference for premodification (e.g., the all-embracing unit die alles umschließende Einheit), while Swedish (slightly) more often uses postmodifying clauses and prepositional phrases (fifteen-year-old schoolgirls skolflickor i femtonårsåldern). German and Swedish postmodifiers are very rarely translated into English hyphenated premodifiers.

  • 13.
    Ström Herold, Jenny
    et al.
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Department of Languages.
    Levin, Magnus
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Department of Languages.
    The NAFTA signing, a Luftwaffe staff officer and a Västerbotten family: English proper noun modifiers in German and Swedish contrast2017In: 7th Biennial International Conference of the Linguistics of Contemporary English: University of Vigo, 28-30 September 2017 : Book of abstracts, 2017, p. 54-55Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Although previous studies of English proper noun modifiers have touched upon contrastive aspects with other languages (see, e.g., Koptjevskaja-Tamm 2013; Schlücker 2013: 464–5; Breban 2017: 13), to date there has been no systematic study. The aim of this paper is to fill this gap by investigating personal names, place names and the names of organizations used as premodifiers in English non-fiction source texts and their translations into English from German and Swedish. The investigation will provide insights into (i) how translators interpret the modifiers, (ii) what structural means are used in German and Swedish to render them, (iii) in what ways the semantic relations that the proper nouns express affect the translation choices and (iv) the specific nature of translated language (cf. Baker 1993). German and Swedish share most of structural means used to translate proper noun modifiers, including the most straightforward equivalent, compound nouns.

    The material was collected from a new, parallel and comparable corpus. The corpus is being compiled by the researchers, and the texts include recently published biographies and books on popular science.

    The non-fiction genre seems to favour the use of modifiers based on acronyms (NKVD troops) and locations (Southampton traffic) (as found also by Rosenbach 2007: 165), rather than personal names (the Obama presidency). Overall, there are a large number of alternatives among the renderings of proper noun modifiers, e.g., compound nouns (Stirling undergraduates > Stirlingstudenter (Sw.)), prepositional phrases (the Apple corridors > korridorerna på Apple (Sw.)), genitives (Apple headquarters > Apples högkvarter (Sw.)), adjectives (Washington think tanks > Washingtoner Denkfabriken (Ge.)), appositions (the Clinton administration > die Regierung Clinton (Ge.)), metonymies (a Picasso painting > einem Picasso (Ge.)) and omissions of the proper noun (White House interns > Praktikantinnen (Ge.)).

    Our findings support Schlücker’s (2013) observation that German translations of location- based English modifiers may involve prepositional phrases or adjectives. The same holds true for the Swedish translations. Furthermore, there seems to be a tendency for modifiers with a deverbal head noun and a complement interpretation to be rendered as prepositional phrases in both German and Swedish (the NAFTA signing > die Unterzeichnung von NAFTA (Ge.) / undertecknandet av NAFTA (Sw.)). Among the notable language-specific tendencies is a German preference for postposed genitives (RAF airfields > Flugfelder der RAF) and a more frequent Swedish use of compounds (the Dunkirk pocket > Dunkerque-fickan).

    Proper noun modifiers in English texts translated from German and Swedish are mostly based on compounds in the source texts (e.g., DDR-Fernsehen (Ge.) > GDR television; Karl XII- dagen (Sw.) > the Charles XII anniversary day). Interestingly, some English modifiers originate in the translation strategy explicitation (skärgården (Sw.) > the Stockholm archipelago). 

  • 14.
    Ström Herold, Jenny
    et al.
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Department of Languages.
    Levin, Magnus
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Department of Languages.
    The Obama presidency, the Macintosh keyboard and the Norway fiasco: English proper noun modifiers and their German and Swedish correspondences2019In: English Language and Linguistics, ISSN 1360-6743, E-ISSN 1469-4379, Vol. 23, no 4, p. 827-854Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This article concerns English proper noun modifiers denoting organizations, people and places and their German and Swedish correspondences. It supplements previous studies touching upon contrastive comparisons by providing large-scale systematic findings on the translation correspondences of the three aforementioned semantic types. The data are drawn from the Linnaeus University English–German–Swedish Corpus (LEGS), which contains popular non-fiction, a genre previously not studied in connection with proper noun modifiers. The results show that organization-based modifiers are the most common and person-based ones the rarest in English originals. Compounds are the most frequent correspondences in German and Swedish translations and originals with genitives and prepositional phrases as other common options. The preference for compounds is stronger in German, while it is stronger for prepositional phrases in Swedish translations, reflecting earlier findings on language-specific tendencies. Organization-based modifiers tend to be translated into compounds, and place-based modifiers into prepositional phrases. German and Swedish translators relatively often opt for similar target-language structures. Two important target-language differences emerge: (i) compounds with complex heads are dispreferred in Swedish (US news show > *USA-nyhetsprogram) but unproblematic in German (US-Nachrichtensendung), and (ii) compounds with acronyms (WTO ruling >WTO-Entscheidung) are more frequent in German.

  • 15.
    Ström Herold, Jenny
    et al.
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Department of Languages.
    Levin, Magnus
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Department of Languages.
    The Obama presidency, the Macintosh keyboard and the Norway fiasco: English proper noun modifiers in German and Swedish contrast2018In: Book of Abstracts: Using Corpora in Contrastive and Translation Studies Conference (5th edition) / [ed] Sylviane Granger, Marie-Aude Lefer, Laura Aguiar de Souza Penha Marion, Louvain-la-Neuve: University of Louvain , 2018, p. 164-165Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Nouns used as premodifiers have tripled over the last two centuries in English (Biber, Grieve & Iberri-Shea 2009: 187), and proper nouns are increasing in frequency in writing, a change which is particularly noticeable with acronyms (Leech et al. 2009: 212). In German and Swedish, which disallow nouns as premodifiers (*Dylan bootlegs; *Australien Projekt) and instead use either hyphenated or solid compounds (Dylan-bootlegs (Sw.); Australienprojekt (Ge.)), the frequencies of such compounds also appear to be on the increase (for German, see Zifonun 2010 and for Swedish Koptjevskaja-Tamm 2013). It is noteworthy that Zifonun (2010) attributes this change in German to English influence.

    Although previous studies of English proper noun modifiers have touched upon contrastive aspects (see, e.g., Koptjevskaja-Tamm 2013; Schlücker 2013: 464–5; Breban 2017: 13), there has to date been no systematic study. The aim of this paper is to fill this gap by investigating the semantic categories personal names, place names and names of organizations used as premodifiers in both English source texts and English target texts translated from German and Swedish. The investigation shows (i) what structural means are used in German and Swedish to render the modifiers, (ii) in what ways the semantic categories of the proper nouns affect the translation choices, (iii) what German and Swedish structures are translated as English proper noun modifiers and (iv) the specific nature of translated language (cf. Baker 1993).

    The corpus used in this study, the Linnaeus University English-German-Swedish Corpus (LEGS) (see, Ström Herold & Levin Forthcoming), consists of recently published (2000s) popular non-fiction texts (e.g., biographies and popular science) in English, German and Swedish, and is balanced for the three languages, each original always being accompanied by two target texts. Also, each author and translator is represented only once. The corpus, which is being compiled by the present authors, currently comprises about 250,000 words in each source language with translations. The main advantage of the corpus is that there are always two translations available for every source-text segment. This makes it possible to compare how the very same instance has been translated into two target languages, thereby allowing identification of language-specific and translation-specific features. Moreover, the corpus provides translations from two source languages into each language. A tagged version of the corpus was searched for proper nouns immediately followed by (a) common noun(s). This way, more than 1,000 instances of English proper noun modifiers and 1,600 German and Swedish correspondences were retrieved.

    The results show that there are many different alternatives among the renderings of proper noun modifiers, the three most frequent being compound nouns (the Norway fiasco > das Norwegen-Fiasko (Ge.)), prepositional phrases (the Apple corridors > korridorerna på Apple (Sw.)) and genitives (U.N. climate summits > FN:s klimattoppmöten (Sw.)). Apart from these, ten minor correspondence categories were identified.

    Among the notable language-specific tendencies is a significantly stronger German preference for compounds (the Stanford campus > den Stanford-Campus) (cf. Carlsson’s (2004) finding on compounds being more common in German than in Swedish). Swedish translations instead use more postmodifying prepositional phrases (the Fukushima disaster > katastrofen i Fukushima [‘the disaster in Fukushima’]). However, compounds are strongly disfavoured in both German and Swedish translations when the noun phrase contains a “heavy head” (cf. Koptjevskaja-Tamm 2013), i.e. a head consisting of a ‘compound’/ two or more nouns. Such noun phrases are instead often translated into (compound nouns followed by) prepositional phrases containing the proper nouns, e.g. a Yale law degree > einen Juraabschluss in Yale (Ge.); juristexamen vid Yale (Sw.) [‘a law-degree at Yale’].

    Concerning the semantic categories of proper noun, the ones based on organizations are typically translated into compounds (every Apple product > jedes Apple-Produkt (Ge.)) or genitives (Red Army soldiers > Röda arméns soldater (Sw.)). In contrast, proper noun modifiers based on place names are more often rendered as prepositional phrases (Ontario residents > die Bürger von Ontario (Ge.); invånarna i Ontario (Sw.)), as already noted by Schlücker (2013) for German.

    Overall, acronyms are quite frequent as premodifiers (NKVD troops) in both English source texts and translations, and they have a bearing on translation choices. While German prefers compounds (a US news show > einer US-Nachrichtensendung), Swedish prefers genitives (U.S. negotiators > USA:s förhandlare).

    Most of the proper noun modifiers in English target texts translated from German and Swedish are based on compounds (e.g., DDR-Fernsehen (Ge.) > GDR television). Postmodifying prepositional phrases are very rarely translated into premodifiers (ett hotell i Florida (Sw.) > a Florida hotel), as also found by Levin & Ström Herold (2017), and the same holds true for genitives. It is noteworthy that some English modifiers originate in the translation strategy explicitation (skärgården [‘the archipelago’] (Sw.) > the Stockholm archipelago).

    The results indicate that premodifiers (such as proper noun modifiers) are rarer in translations than in source texts, possibly because they are less explicit and/or more compressed, as suggested by Levin & Ström Herold (2017). Another translation-specific feature concerns proper noun modifiers being dispreferred with unknown/exotic elements, as when the Swedish compound Expressenjournalisten is translated into a postmodifying prepositional phrase in English a journalist on Expressen newspaper, in spite of similar constructions often being written as premodifiers in English source texts (e.g., the Time reporter).

     

    References

    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. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: Benjamins, 233–250.

    Biber, D., Grieve, J. & Iberri-Shea, G. (2009). Noun phrase modification. In G. Rohdenburg & Julia Schlüter (eds.) One Language, Two Grammars? Differences between British and American English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 182–193.

    Breban, T. (2017). Proper names used as modifiers: a comprehensive functional analysis. English Language and Linguistics, 1–21.

    Carlsson, M. (2004). Deutsch und Schwedisch im Kontrast: Zur Distribution nominaler und verbaler Ausdrucksweise in Zeitungstexten. Göteborg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.

    Koptjevskaja-Tamm, M. (2013). A Mozart sonata and the Palme murder: The structure and uses of proper-name compounds in Swedish. In K. Börjars, D. Denison & A. Scott (eds.) Morphosyntactic Categories and the Expression of Possession. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: Benjamins, 253–290.

    Leech, G., Hundt, M. Mair, C. & Smith, N. (2009). Change in Contemporary English. A Grammatical Study. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Levin, M & Ström Herold, J. (2017). Premodification in translation English hyphenated premodifiers in fiction and their translations into German and Swedish. In T Egan & H. Dirdal (eds.) Cross-linguistic Correspondences: From Lexis to Genre. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: Benjamins,  149–176.

    Rosenbach, A. (2007). Emerging variation: determiner genitives and noun modifiers in English. English Language and Linguistics 11(1), 143–189.

    Schlücker, B. (2013). Non-classifying compounds in German. Folia Linguistica 47, 449–480.

    Ström Herold, J. & Levin, M. (Forthcoming). English ing-clauses and their German and Swedish correspondences.

    Zifonun, G. (2010). Von Bush administration zu Kohl-Regierung: Englische Einflüsse auf deutsche Nominalkonstruktionen? In C. Scherer & A. Holler (eds.) Strategien der Integration und Isolation nicht-nativer Einheiten und Strukturen. Berlin: De Gruyter, 165–182.

     

     

  • 16.
    Ström Herold, Jenny
    et al.
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Department of Languages.
    Levin, Magnus
    Linnaeus University, Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Department of Languages.
    Translating textual indeterminacy: English supplementive ing-clauses and their German and Swedish translations2017In: Corpus et Orbis : Interpreting the World through Corpora: Book of Abstracts, 2017, p. 39-40Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Subordinatorless supplementive ing-clauses (as in Hitler exploded, demanding examples) are characterized by their “considerable indeterminacy as to the semantic relationship to be inferred” ( irk et al. 1985: 1123; cf. also Biber et al. 1999: 820; Malá 2005) and may induce, for example, temporal, causal, conditional, concessive or circumstantial readings ( irk et al. 1985: 1124; Kortmann 1991: 114–141). is puts a heavy interpretation load on translators, the translation task becoming more intricate with target languages lacking a similarly productive form. us, it is not unexpected that previous studies on the translation of ing-clauses into Swedish highlight the multitude of translation equivalents found in target texts (Lindquist 1989: 120–128; Blensenius 2006: 36).

    is multi-target-language study provides insights into how di erent translators interpret and render the very same instance of an ing-clause. It draws on data from a new corpus being compiled by the authors. It comprises recently published English, German and Swedish non- ction texts and their translations into the respective languages. In order to compare original English with translated English, the study also includes ing-clauses used as equivalents of German and Swedish source-text structures. Preliminary findings indicate that the position of the ing-clause a ects the dis- tribution of translation equivalents. e rare sentence-initial ing-clauses more o en show congruent, i.e. formally and semantically matching, translations, both target languages o en opting for causal or temporal nite subclauses (e.g., Feeding bread to the ducks, I noticed [...] rendered as Als ich die Enten mit Brot fü erte (‘when I the ducks with bread fed’) in German and similarly in Swedish När jag matade änderna med bröd, or a PP expressing manner (e.g., Using this set up, Ellington’s team could [...] rendered as Mithilfe dieser Vorrichtung (‘by means of this device’) in German and Med detta upplägg (‘with this set-up’) in Swedish). e equivalents of sentencenal ing-clauses are more varied and non-congruent, ranging from in nitives to relative clauses, separate or coordinated main clauses, adverbial nite subclauses and prepositional phrases. Also, the translations more often differ semantically in this position. Overall, nite structures dominate in both target languages, which indicates that translators are producing more explicit structures. Moreover, our ndings suggest that ing-clauses are much rarer in English target texts (in particular from Swedish originals), indicating a potential case of translationese.

1 - 16 of 16
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf