Cover not available

In:Constraints on Language Variation and Change in Complex Multilingual Contact Settings
Edited by Bertus van Rooy and Haidee Kotze
[Contact Language Library 60] 2024
► pp. 223–254

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload Book PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload Book EPUB
authorization required

Chapter 8
Comparing contact effects in translation and second language writing

 | RWTH Aachen University
 | RWTH Aachen University
 | RWTH Aachen University
Published online: 20 June 2024
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/coll.60.08neu
Abstract
This chapter compares the role of the bilingual text production context in (second language) L2 writing and translation. Although both tasks involve activation of the two languages involved, their influence may differ. To explore this influence against the background of variation along the constraint dimensions, we analyse a corpus of 204 English texts with the help of geometric multivariate analysis based on automatic counts for a range of lexicogrammatical features. The analysis indicates a combined influence of register and expertise and a more subtle effect of the bilingual production context in L2 writing. Although translation involves going back and forth between the source and the target language, translations in our data cluster more with L1 originals in the target language.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
    • 1.1Shared tendencies in L2 writing and translation
    • 1.2The present study
  • 2.The dataset
  • 3.Analysis
  • 4.Discussion
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
References (46)
References
Alsop, Siam, & Nesi, Hilary. (2009). Issues in the development of the British Academic Written English (BAWE) corpus. Corpora, 4(1), 71–83. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Baker, Mona. (1993). Corpus linguistics and translation studies: Implications and applications. In Mona Baker, Gill Francis, & Elena Tognini-Bonelli (Eds.), Text and technology: In honour of John Sinclair (pp. 233–250). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (1996). Corpus-based translation studies: The challenges that lie ahead. In Harold Somers (Ed.), Terminology, LSP and translation: Studies in language engineering in honour of Juan C. Sager (pp. 175–186). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas. (1988). Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas., Johansson, Stig, Leech, Geoffrey, Conrad, Susan, & Finegan, Edward. (1999). The Longman grammar of spoken and written English. Harlow: Pearson.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dahl, Östen. (2011). Grammaticalization and linguistic complexity. In Bernd Heine, & Heiko Narrog (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of grammaticalization (pp. 153–162). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
De Groot, Anette M. B. (1992). Determinants of word translation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 18(5), 1001–1018.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Diwersy, Sascha, Evert, Stefan, & Neumann, Stella. (2014). A weakly supervised multivariate approach to the study of language variation. In Benedikt Szmrecsanyi, & Bernhard Wälchli (Eds.), Aggregating dialectology, typology, and register analysis: Linguistic variation in text and speech (pp. 174–204). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dragsted, Barbara, & Hansen, Inge G. (2008). Comprehension and production in translation: A pilot study on segmentation and the coordination of reading and writing processes. In Susanne Göpferich, Arnt Lykke Jakobsen, & Inger M. Mees (Eds.), Looking at eyes: Eye-tracking studies of reading and translation processing (pp. 1–21). Frederiksberg: Samfundslitteratur.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ellis, Rod. (1997). Second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Even-Zohar, Itamar. (1979). Polysystem theory. Poetics Today, 1(1/2), 287–310.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Evert, Stefan, & Hardie, Andrew. (2011). Twenty-first century corpus workbench: Updating a query architecture for the new millennium. In Proceedings of the Corpus Linguistics Conference 2011, University of Birmingham, UK, 20–22 July 2011. University of Birmingham. 〈[URL]〉
Evert, Stefan, & Neumann, Stella. (2017). The impact of translation direction on characteristics of translated texts: A multivariate analysis for English and German. In Gert de Sutter, Marie-Aude Lefer, & Isabelle Delaere (Eds.), Empirical translation studies: New theoretical and methodological traditions (pp. 47–80). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Evert, Stefan, & The CWB Development Team. (2020). The IMS Open Corpus Workbench (CWB) CQP query language tutorial. 〈[URL]〉
Freiwald, Jonas. (2023). Theme in English and German: A corpus-based contrastive analysis of clause openings in original and translated texts. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Garside, Roger, & Smith, Nicholas. (1997). A hybrid grammatical tagger: CLAWS4. In Roger Garside, Geoffrey Leech, & Anthony McEnery (Eds.), Corpus annotation: Linguistic information from computer text corpora (pp. 102–121). London: Longman.
Gass, Susan. (1996). Second language acquisition and linguistic theory: The role of language transfer. In William C. Ritchie, & Tej K. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 317–345). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hansen-Schirra, Silvia. (2011). Between normalization and shining-through. In Svenja Kranich, Viktor Becher, Steffen Höder, & Juliane House (Eds.), Multilingual discourse production: Diachronic and synchronic perspectives (pp. 135–162). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hansen-Schirra, Silvia, Neumann, Stella, & Steiner, Erich. (2012). Cross-linguistic corpora for the study of translations: Insights from the language pair English–German. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jarvis, Scott. (2000). Methodological rigor in the study of transfer: Identifying L1 influence in the interlanguage lexicon. Language Learning, 50(2), 245–309. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kerz, Elma, & Wiechmann, Daniel. (2016). Second language construction learning: Investigating domain-specific adaptation in advanced L2 production. Language and Cognition, 8(4), 533–565. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Koehn, Philipp. (2005). Europarl: A Parallel Corpus for Statistical Machine Translation. Proceedings of Machine Translation Summit X: Papers, 79–86. 〈[URL]〉
Kruger, Haidee, & De Sutter, Gert. (2018). Alternations in contact and non-contact varieties. Translation, Cognition & Behavior, 1(2), 251–290. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kupsch-Losereit, Sigrid. (2004). Interferenz in der Übersetzung [Interference in translation]. In Harald Kittel, Armin Paul Frank, Norbert Greiner, Theo Hermans, Werner Koller, José Lambert, & Fritz Paul (Eds.), Translation/Traduction/Übersetzung: An international encyclopedia of translation studies/Encyclopédie Internationale de la recherche sur la traduction/Ein internationales Handbuch zur Übersetzungsforschung (pp. 543–950). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lightbown, Patsy M. (1984). The relationship between theory and method in second language acquisition research. In Anthony Howatt, Alan Davies, & Clive Criper (Eds.), Interlanguage (pp. 241–252). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Matthiessen, Christian M. I. M. (2019). Register in systemic functional linguistics. Register Studies, 1(1), 10–41. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mauranen, Anna. (2004). Corpora, universals and interference. In Anna Mauranen, & Pekka Kujamäki (Eds.), Translation universals: Do they exist? (pp. 65–82). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Neumann, Stella. (2014). Contrastive register variation: A quantitative approach to the comparison of English and German. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Neumann, Stella, & Evert, Stefan. (2021). A register variation perspective on varieties of English. In Elena Seoane, & Douglas Biber (Eds.), Corpus-based approaches to register variation (pp. 143–178). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Niemietz, Paula, Neumann, Stella, & Freiwald, Jonas. (2017). Shifts in theme and subject realization in English–German translation. In Stella Neumann, Rebekah Wegener, Jennifer Fest, Paula Niemietz, & Nicole Hützen (Eds.), Challenging boundaries in linguistics: Systemic functional perspectives (pp. 331–357). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Odlin, Terence. (1989). Language transfer: Crosslinguistic influence and conceptual transfer. What are the concepts? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
O’Donnell, Matthew B., Römer, Ute, & Ellis, Nick C. (2013). The development of formulaic sequences in first and second language writing: Investigating effects of frequency, association, and native norm. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 18(1), 83–108. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Piróth, Attila. (2016). Translation into a non-native language: IAPTI’s Survey. Rivista internazionale di tecnica della traduzione, 18, 15–29. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pym, Anthony. (2015). Translating as risk management. Journal of Pragmatics, 85, 67–80. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rabinovich, Ella, Nisioi, Sergiu, Ordan, Noam, & Wintner, Shuly. (2016). On the similarities between native, non-native and translated texts. In Proceedings of the 54th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (pp. 1870–1881). Association for Computational Linguistics. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Römer, Ute, & O’Donnell, Matthew B. (2011). From student hard drive to web corpus (part 1): The design, compilation and genre classification of the Michigan Corpus of Upper-Level Student Papers (MICUSP). Corpora, 6(2), 159–177. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Selinker, Larry. (1972). Interlanguage. IRAL: International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 10(3), 209–231. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Spoelman, Marianne, & Verspoor, Marjolijn. (2010). Dynamic patterns in development of accuracy and complexity: A longitudinal case study in the acquisition of Finnish. Applied Linguistics, 31(4), 532–553. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Teich, Elke. (2003). Cross-linguistic variation in system and text: A methodology for the investigation of translations and comparable texts. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Toury, Gideon. (2004). Probabilistic explanations in translation studies: Welcome as they are, would they qualify as universals? In Anna Mauranen, & Pekka Kujamäki (Eds.), Translation universals: Do they exist? (pp. 15–32). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Shen, Lin
2025. Constrained communication of motion events. Review of Cognitive Linguistics DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 8 december 2025. 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.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue