Cover not available

Article published In: Languages in Contrast
Vol. 20:1 (2020) ► pp.84–106

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

Spatial deictics in translation

A case of proximal demonstratives in English and Lithuanian

 | Vytautas Magnus University (Lithuania)
 | Vytautas Magnus University (Lithuania)
Published online: 17 May 2019
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/lic.18007.bar
Abstract
Recent research on deictic elements has made extensive use of translation corpora to demonstrate that asymmetries between translational paradigms signal subtle contrasts from a systemic and pragmatic perspective. The purpose of the present study is to identify translation correspondences of the English spatial demonstrative this in Lithuanian and to discuss the contrastive features within the analytical framework of translational explicitation and implicitation. The results indicate that in the prototypical situational usage there is a high degree of correspondence between this and its Lithuanian translation, while textual uses demonstrate low formal equivalence. A tendency to implicitate stems from the null subject construction and object ellipsis in Lithuanian and is also a result of the availability of facultative deictic words in Lithuanian. The apparent systemic difference between the deictic systems of English and Lithuanian indicates a tendency towards optional implicitation and stylistic variation in literary translation.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.The system of demonstratives in Lithuanian
  • 3.Deixis in translation
  • 4.Methodology
  • 5.Results and discussion
    • 5.1Implicitation
    • 5.2Full correspondence
    • 5.3Explicitation
    • 5.4Cross-linguistic contrasts
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Disclosure statement
  • References
References (36)
References
Ambrazas, V. (ed). 1997. Lithuanian Grammar. Vilnius: Institute of the Lithuanian Language.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Barlow, M. 2008. ParaConc and Parallel Corpora in Contrastive and Translation Studies. Houston: Athelstan Publications.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Becher, V. 2010. Differences in the Use of Deictic Expressions in English and German texts. Linguistics 48(6): 1309–1342. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2011. Explicitation and Implicitation in Translation. A Corpus-based Study of English-German and German-English Translations of Business Texts. PhD thesis, University of Hamburg.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S. and Finegan, E. (eds). 1999. Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Blum-Kulka, S. 1986. Shifts of Cohesion and Coherence in Tanslation. In Interlingual and Intercultural Communication: Discourse and Cognition in Translation and Second Language Acquisition Studies, J. House and S. Blum-Kulka (eds), 17–35. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2013. Is There a Deictic Frame of Reference? In Space in Language and Linguistics: Geographical, Interactional, and Cognitive Perspectives, P. Auer, M. Hilpert, A. Stukenbrock and B. Szmrecsanyi (eds), 687–692. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fillmore, C. J. 1971. Santa Cruz Lectures on Deixis. University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2013. Demonstratives on the Move: What Translational Shifts Tell us about Demonstrative Determiners and Definite Articles in Spanish and Dutch. Linguistics 51(3): 517–553. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hasselgård, H. 2004. Spatial Linking in English and Norwegian. In Translation and Corpora, K. Aijmer and H. Hasselgård (eds), 163–188. Göteborg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2006. Not Now – on Non-correspondence between the Cognate Adverbs now and nå. Pragmatic Markers in Contrast 21: 93–114.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Himmelmann, N. P. 1996. Demonstratives in Narrative Discourse: a Taxonomy of Universal Uses. In Studies in Anaphora, B. Fox (ed), 205–254. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Judžentytė, G. 2017. Spatial Deixis in Lithuanian: Demonstrative Pronouns. In Language: Meaning and Form 8. Grammatical and Lexical Variance in Language System, A. Kalnača and I. Lokmane (eds), 173–193. Rīga: LU Akadēmiskais apgāds.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Klaudy, K. 2009. Explicitation. In Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies, M. Baker and G. Saldanha (eds), 104–108. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Klaudy, K. and Károly, K. 2005. Implicitation in Translation: Empirical Evidence for Operational Asymmetry in Translation. Across Languages and Cultures 6(1): 13–28. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Krein-Kühle, M. 2002. Cohesion and Coherence in Technical Translation: The Case of Demonstrative Reference. In Linguistics and Translation Studies, L. Van Vaerenbergh (ed), 41–53. Antwerpen: Hogeschool Antwerpen.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kryk, B. 1987. On Deixis in English and Polish: the Role of Demonstrative Pronouns. Frankfurt: Verlag Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Levinson, S. C. 1983. Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2004. Deixis. In The Handbook of Pragmatics, L. R. Horn and G. Ward (eds), 97–121. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lyons, J. 1977. Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pavesi, M. 2013. This and That in the Language of Film. Dubbing: a Corpus-Based Analysis. Meta 58(1): 103–133. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2015. The Translation of Conversation and Film Dubbing as a Discovery Procedure: Evidence from Demonstratives. In Language across Languages – New Perspectives on Translation, E. Miola and P. Ramat (eds), 143–172. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pym, A. 2010. Exploring Translation Theories. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Remys, E. 2001. Review of Modern Lithuanian Grammar. Chicago: Lithuanian Research Studies Center.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ribera, C. J. and Cuenca, M. J. 2013. Use and Translation of Demonstratives in Fiction: a Contrastive Approach (English-Catalan). Catalan Review: International Journal of Catalan Culture 271: 27–49. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rosinas, A. 1996. Lietuvių bendrinės kalbos įvardžiai: funkcijos ir semantika. [Pronouns in Standard Lithuanian: Functions and Semantics]. Vilnius: Mokslo ir Enciklopediju̧ Leidykla.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2009. Baltų kalbų įvardžių semantinė ir morfologinė struktūra: sinchronija ir diachronija. [Semantic and Morphological Structure of Pronouns in the Baltic Languages: Synchrony and Diachrony]. Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stirling, L. and Huddleston, R. 2002. Deixis and Anaphora. In The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language, R. Huddleston and G. K. Pullum (eds), 1449–1564. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Valeckienė, A. 1998. Funkcinė lietuvių kalbos gramatika [Functional Grammar of Lithuanian]. Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vanderbauwhede, G., Desmet, P. and Lauwers, P. 2011. The Shifting of the Demonstrative Determiner in French and Dutch in Parallel Corpora: From Translation Mechanisms to Structural Differences. Meta 56(2): 443–464. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vinay, J. P. and Darbelnet, J. 1958/2000. A Methodology for Translation. In The Translation Studies Reader, L. Venuti (ed), 84–93. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vondřička, P. 2016. InterText Editor v1.5 Comprehensive Guide. Institute of the Czech National Corpus, Charles University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Diyanati, Masoumeh & Mohammad Amouzadeh
2025. Deictic shifts and re-contextualization in translation. Pragmatics and Society 16:5 ► pp. 748 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 26 november 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