Cover not available

In:Contexts of Subordination: Cognitive, typological and discourse perspectives
Edited by Laura Visapää, Jyrki Kalliokoski and Helena Sorva
[Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 249] 2014
► pp. 245–268

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

French and Finnish converbal constructions and their translation from French into Finnish

Published online: 4 September 2014
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.249.10hav
The term ‘subordination’ is often associated with clause combining by conjunctions marking the linkage, but subordination can also be expressed by other means. Both French and Finnish have nonfinite constructions which can be regarded as subordinate clauses with an “operational dependency” towards the main clause. This is because their temporal, aspectual and modal implication is dependent on the semantics of the main clause. However, “traditional” subordinate clauses have a more explicit syntactic structure, whereas nonfinite constructions are constructionally more complex, different types of information being embedded in the construction. This paper first discusses French and Finnish converbs and their eventual correspondence, and then proceeds to examine six Finnish translations of French literary texts in order to see how translators have interpreted and translated the original French converbs.
References (39)
References
Aarts, Bas. 1992. Small Clauses in English. Berlin-New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cristofaro, Sonia. 2003. Subordination [Oxford Studies in Typology and Linguistic Theory]. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Eriksson, Olof. 1997. Språk i kontrast. Stockholm: Akademiförlaget.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Eskola, Sari. 2005. “Lauserakenteiden käytön piirteitä suomennetussa kaunokirjallisuudessa.” In Käännössuomeksi. Tutkimuksia suomen kielestä, ed. by A. Mauranen, and J.H. Jantunen, 225–243. Tampere: Tampere University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gettrup, Harald. 1977. “Le gérondif, le participe présent et la notion de repère temporel”. Revue Romane XII (2): 210–271.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Givón, Talmy. 2009. The Genesis of Syntactic Complexity. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grevisse, Maurice. 1993 [13e éd. refondu par A. Goosse]. Le bon Usage. Paris – Louvain-la-Neuve: Éditions Duculot.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hakulinen, Auli et al. 2004. Iso suomen kielioppi. Helsinki: SKS.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Halmøy, Odile. 1982. Le gérondif. Éléments pour une description syntaxique et sémantique. TAAR, Université de Trondheim.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2003. Le gérondif en français. Paris: Ophrys.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin. 1995. “The Converb as a Cross-linguistically Valid Category.” In Converbs in Cross-Linguistic Perspective, ed. by M. Haspelmath, and E. König, 1–55. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Havu, Eva. 2009. “Comment traduire en finnois les prédications secondes détachées du français?” Cahiers d’Etudes Hongroises 15: 207–216.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Havu, Eva, and Michel Pierrard. 2008a. “L’interprétation des participes présents adjoints: converbalité et portée du rapport entre prédications”. In Congrès Mondial de Linguistique Française – CMLF’08, ed. by Durand Jacques, Benoît Habert, and Bernard Laks, (CD-Rom: ISBN 978-2-7598-0358-3). Paris: Institut de Linguistique Française.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2008b. “La prédication seconde: essai de mise au point”. Travaux de linguistique 57: 7–21. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2009a. “Prédications secondes adjectivales et participiales: l’interprétation des participes présents adjoints”. In Représentation du sens linguistique III, Actes du colloque international de Bruxelles (2005), ed. by Ivan Evrard, Michel Pierrard, Laurence Rosier, and Dan van Raemdonck, 89–104. Bruxelles: De Boeck/Duculot.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2009b. “Variation de contexte et de structure langagière: les co-prédicats adjectivants dans le discours écrit littéraire et journalistique”. In La langue en contexte. Actes du colloque Représentation du sens IV, Helsinki, 28–30 mai 2008, Mémoires de la Société Néophilologique de Helsinki LXXVIII, ed. by E. Havu, J. Härmä, M. Helkkula, M. Larjavaara, and U. Tuomarla, 51–66. Helsinki: Société Néophilologique.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Herlin, Ilona, and Lari Kotilainen. 2005. “Itsenäistyvä infinitiivi. 2. infinitiivin inessiivin kehitys kirjakielen aikana”. In Suomen infiniittisten rakenteiden dynamiikkaa, ed. by Ilona Herlin, and Laura Visapää, 258–291. Helsinki: SKS.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Herlin, Ilona, Pentti Leino, and Laura Visapää. 2005. “Kas siinä pulma.” In Suomen infiniittisten rakenteiden dynamiikkaa, ed. by Ilona Herlin, and Laura Visapää, 9–38. Helsinki: SKS.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Herslund, Mikael. 2000. “Le participe présent comme co-verbe�. Langue française 127: 86–94. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Himmelmann, Nikolaus P., and Eva Schultze-Berndt (eds). 2005. Secondary Predication and Adverbial Modification. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kleiber, Georges. 2007. “En passant par le gérondif avec mes (gros) sabots”. In Études sémantiques et pragmatiques sur le temps, l’aspect et la modalité. Cahiers Chronos 19, ed. by Louis Saussure, Jacques Moeschler, and Genoveva Puskás, 93–125. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2009. “Gérondif et relations de cohérence: le cas de la relation de cause”. 
Recherches ACLIF: actes du séminaire de didactique universitaire 6: 9–24.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Koivisto, Vesa. 2005. “Monikasvoinen -mA ja suomen agenttipartisiipin tausta”. In Suomen infiniittisten rakenteiden dynamiikkaa, ed. by Ilona Herlin, and Laura Visapää, 146–171. Helsinki: SKS.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
König, Ekkehard. 1995. “The Meaning of Converb Constructions”. In Converbs in Cross-Linguistic Perspective, ed. by M. Haspelmath, and E. König, 57–95. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
König, Ekkehard, and Johan van der Auwera. 1990. “Adverbial Participles, Gerunds and Absolute Constructions in the Languages of Europe.” In Toward a Typology of European Languages, ed. by J. Bechert, G. Bernini, and C. Buridant, 337–355. Berlin – New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mauranen, Anna, and Jarmo H. Jantunen (eds). 2005. Käännössuomeksi. Tutkimuksia suomen kielestä. Tampere: Tampere University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mauranen, Anna, and Liisa Tiittula. 2005. Minä käännössuomessa ja supisuomessa. In Käännössuomeksi. Tutkimuksia suomen kielestä, ed. by A. Mauranen and J.H. Jantunen, 35–69. Tampere: Tampere University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mihailov, Mihail. 2005. “Venäjästä käännetyssä suomessa on enemmän “hyvyyttä”.” In Käännössuomeksi. Tutkimuksia suomen kielestä, ed. by A. Mauranen, and J.H. Jantunen, 85–101. Tampere: Tampere University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nedjalkov, Igor V. 1998. “Converbs in the Languages of Europe.” In Adverbial Constructions in the Languages of Europe, ed. by Johan van der Auwera, and Dónall Ó Baoill, 421–455. Berlin–New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ontermaa, Aki. 2005. “Hilsettä ja herrastelua? Toisen infinitiivin instruktiivin ohjailu ja kielenhuollon ideologiat”. In Suomen infiniittisten rakenteiden dynamiikkaa, ed. by Ilona Herlin, and Laura Visapää, 318–343. Helsinki: SKS.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pokela, Hanna. 2005. “Kirjakieltä kehittäen – Lönnrotin 2. infinitiivin instruktiivi”. In Suomen infiniittisten rakenteiden dynamiikkaa, ed. by Ilona Herlin, and Laura Visapää, 292–317. Helsinki: SKS.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Valijärvi, Riitta-Liisa. 2007. A Corpus-Based Study on the Degrees of Lexicalization and Grammaticalization of Finnish Converbs. Doctoral thesis. Uppsala Universitet, Uppsala.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Duras, Marguerite. 1984. L’Amant. Paris: Les éditions de Minuit. Translation by Juha 
Mannerkorpi. Rakastaja. Helsinki: Otava, 1987.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Echenoz, Jean. 1999. Je m’en vais. Paris: Les éditions de Minuit. Translation by Erkki Jukarainen. Minä lähden. Helsinki: Tammi, 2001.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gavalda, Anna. 1999. Je voudrais que quelqu’un m’attende quelque part. Paris: Le Dilettante. Translation by Titia Schuurman. Kunpa joku odottaisi minua jossakin. Jyväskylä-Helsinki: Gummerus, 2001.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
de Maupassant, Guy. 1881. La maison Tellier - Une partie de Campagne. corpus ABU ([URL]).Translation by Annikki Suni. Huviretki ja muita kertomuksia. Hämeenlinna: Karisto, 1983.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1887. Le Horla. corpus ABU ([URL]).Translation by Sulamit Reenpää, and Guy de Maupassant. Suuret kertomukset. Otava, 1970.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nothomb, Amélie. 1999. Stupeur et tremblements. Paris: Albin Michel.Translation by Annikki Suni. Nöyrin palvelijanne. Helsinki: Otava, 1999.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van Valin Robert D. Jr., and Randy J. LaPolla. 1997. Syntax: Structure, Meaning & Function. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue