Cover not available

Article published In: Target
Vol. 35:1 (2023) ► pp.1–33

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

How do translators select among competing (near-)synonyms in translation?

A corpus-based approach using random forest modelling

 | Ghent University
ORCiD logo with link | Ghent University
Published online: 19 July 2022
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/target.20095.deb
Abstract
This article investigates how translators choose between multiple competing onomasiological variants to express (verbal) inchoativity in English-to-Dutch translations. Using a corpus-based multifactorial research design, we measure the impact of three well-known socio-cognitive mechanisms on the actual choice, namely the complexity principle, risk aversion, and cognate exposure. We apply the behavioural profile method, which allows us to operationalise these three explanatory mechanisms via ID-tags, and we then use conditional random forest modelling to determine the impact of each mechanism on the choice between four competing verbs of inchoativity. The results of our analyses show that the complexity principle plays a clear role in translated texts, as there is a significant preference for the active construction and for prototypical verbs in passive constructions. Genre-specific risk-averse behaviour as well as cognate avoidance were not observed.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Previous research: Near-synonymy and socio-cognitive explanations
    • 2.1Complexity
    • 2.2Risk aversion
    • 2.3Cognate exposure
    • 2.4Summing up
  • 3.Methodology
    • 3.1Lexeme selection
    • 3.2Behavioural profiles
      • 3.2.1Complexity
      • 3.2.2Risk aversion
      • 3.2.3Cognate exposure
    • 3.3Statistical analysis
  • 4.Results
    • 4.1Random forest models for non-translated and translated Dutch
    • 4.2In-depth analysis of the most influential features
      • 4.2.1Voice
      • 4.2.2Genre
      • 4.2.3Cognate exposure
  • 5.Discussion and conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
References (87)
References
Alves, Fabio, and José Luiz Gonçalves. 2010. “Relevance and Translation.” In Handbook of Translation Studies: Volume 11, edited by Yves Gambier and Luc van Doorslaer, 279–284. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Arnold, Jennifer E., Anthony Losongco, Thomas Wasow, and Ryan Ginstrom. 2000. “Heaviness vs. Newness: The Effects of Structural Complexity and Discourse Status on Constituent Ordering.” Language 76 (1): 28–55. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Baayen, R. Harald, Anna Endresen, Laura A. Janda, Anastasia Makarova, and Tore Nesset. 2013. “Making Choices in Russian: Pros and Cons of Statistical Methods for Rival Forms.” In Time and Space in Russian Temporal Expressions, edited by Laura A. Janda, Stephen M. Dickey, and Tore Nesset, special issue of Russian Linguistics 37 (3): 253–291. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Balling, Laura Winther. 2013. “Reading Authentic Texts: What Counts as Cognate?” Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 16 (3): 637–653. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Baker, Mona. 1993. “Corpus Linguistics and Translation Studies – Implications and Applications.” In Text and Technology: In Honour of John Sinclair, edited by Mona Baker, Gill Francis, and Elena Tognini-Bonelli, 17–45. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Becher, Viktor. 2010. “Abandoning the Notion of ‘Translation-Inherent’ Explicitation: Against a Dogma of Translation Studies.” Across Languages and Cultures 11 (1): 1–28. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bonin, Patrick, Margaux Gelin, and Aurélia Bugaiska. 2014. “Animates are Better Remembered than Inanimates: Further Evidence from Word and Picture Stimuli.” Memory & Cognition 42 (3): 370–382. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Blum-Kulka, Shoshana, and Eddie A. Levenston. 1983. “Universals of Lexical Simplification.” In Strategies in Interlanguage Communication, edited by Claus Faerch and Gabriele Kasper, 119–139. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brysbaert, Marc, Michaël Stevens, Simon de Deyne, Wouter Voorspoels, and Gert Storms. 2014. “Norms of Age of Acquisition and Concreteness for 30,000 Dutch Words.” Acta Psychologica 1501: 80–84. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Carroll, Susanne E. 1992. “On Cognates.” Second Language Research 8 (2): 93–119.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chamizo Domínguez, Pedro J., and Brigitte Nerlich. 2002. “False Friends: Their Origin and Semantics in Some Selected Languages.” Journal of Pragmatics 34 (12): 1833–1849. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Costa, Albert, Michele Miozzo, and Alfonso Caramazza. 1999. “Lexical Selection in Bilinguals: Do Words in the Bilingual’s Two Lexicons Compete for Selection?” Journal of Memory and Language 41 (3): 365–397. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Costa, Albert, Àngels Colomé, and Alfonso Caramazza. 2000. “Lexical Access in Speech Production: The Bilingual Case.” Psicológica 21 (2): 403–437.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Costa, Albert, Mikel Santesteban, and Agnès Caño. 2005. “On the Facilitatory Effects of Cognate Words in Bilingual Speech Production.” Brain and Language 94 (1): 94–103. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cruse, David Alan. 1986. Lexical Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
De Baets, Pauline, Lore Vandevoorde, and Gert de Sutter. 2020. “On the Usefulness of Comparable and Parallel Corpora for Contrastive Linguistics: Testing the Semantic Stability Hypothesis.” In New Approaches to Contrastive Linguistics: Empirical and Methodological Challenges, edited by Renata Enghels, Bart Defrancq, and Marlies Jansegers. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Delaere, Isabelle. 2015. Do Translations Walk the Line? Visually Exploring Translated and Non-Translated Texts in Search of Norm Conformity. PhD diss. Ghent University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
De Sutter, Gert, Isabelle Delaere, and Koen Plevoets. 2012. “Lexical Lectometry in Corpus-Based Translation Studies.” In Quantitative Methods in Corpus-Based Translation Studies: A Practical Guide to Descriptive Translation Research, edited by Michael P. Oakes and Meng Ji, 325–345. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
De Sutter, Gert, and Marie-Aude Lefer. 2020. “On the Need for a New Research Agenda for Corpus-Based Translation Studies: A Multi-Methodological, Multifactorial and Interdisciplinary Approach.” Perspectives 28 (1): 1–23. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dijkstra, Ton, Jonathan Grainger, and Walter J. B. van Heuven. 1999. “Recognition of Cognates and Interlingual Homographs: The Neglected Role of Phonology.” Journal of Memory and Language 41 (4): 496–518. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Divjak, Dagmar. 2010. Structuring the Lexicon: A Clustered Model for Near-Synonymy. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Divjak, Dagmar, and Stefan Th. Gries. 2006. “Ways of Trying in Russian: Clustering Behavioral Profiles.” Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 2 (1): 23–60. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2009. “Corpus-Based Cognitive Semantics: A Contrastive Study of Phasal Verbs in English and Russian.” In Studies in Cognitive Corpus Linguistics, edited by Barbara Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk and Katarzyna Dziwirek, 273–296. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dyvik, Helge. 1998. “A Translational Basis for Semantics.” In Corpora and Cross-Linguistic Research: Theory, Method, and Case Studies, edited by Stig Johansson and Signe Oksefjell, 51–86. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2004. “Translations as Semantic Mirrors: From Parallel Corpus to Wordnet.” In Advances in Corpus Linguistics: Papers from the 23rd International Conference on English Language Research on Computerized Corpora (ICAME 23), Göteborg 22–26 May 2002, edited by Karin Aijmer and Bengt Altenberg, 309–326. Göteborg: Rodopi.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Edmonds, Philip, and Graeme Hirst. 2002. “Near-Synonymy and Lexical Choice.” Computational Linguistics 28 (2): 105–144. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Egan, Thomas. 2012. “Using Translation Corpora to Explore Synonymy and Polysemy.” In Aspects of Corpus Linguistics: Compilation, Annotation, Analysis, edited by Signe Oksefjell, Jarle Ebeling, and Hilde Hasselgård, issue of Studies in Variation, Contacts and Change in English 121. [URL]
Ferreira, Fernanda. 1991. “Effects of Length and Syntactic Complexity on Initiation Times for Prepared Utterances.” Journal of Memory and Language 30 (2): 210–233. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ferreira, Victor S., and Gary S. Dell. 2000. “Effect of Ambiguity and Lexical Availability on Syntactic and Lexical Production.” Cognitive Psychology 40 (4): 296–340. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gleitman, Lila R., David January, Rebecca Nappa, and John C. Trueswell. 2007. “On the Give and Take between Event Apprehension and Utterance Formulation.” Journal of Memory and Language 57 (4): 544–569. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gollan, Tamar H., and Lori-Ann R. Acenas. 2004. “What is a TOT? Cognate and Translation Effects on Tip-of-the-Tongue States in Spanish–English and Tagalog–English Bilinguals.” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 30 (1): 246–269.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gries, Stefan Th., and Dagmar Divjak. 2009. “Behavioral Profiles: A Corpus-Based Approach to Cognitive Semantic Analysis.” In New Directions in Cognitive Linguistics, edited by Vyvyan Evans and Stéphanie Pourcel, 57–75. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Halverson, Sandra L. 2003. “The Cognitive Basis of Translation Universals.” Target 15 (2): 197–241. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Halverson, Sandra. 2010. “Cognitive Translation Studies: Developments in Theory and Method.” In Translation and Cognition, edited by Gregory Shreve and Erik Angelone, 349–369. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Halverson, Sandra L. 2013. “Implications of Cognitive Linguistics for Translation Studies.” In Cognitive Linguistics and Translation: Advances in Some Theoretical Models and Applications, edited by Ana Rojo and Iraide Ibarretxe-Antuñano, 33–74. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2017. “Gravitational Pull in Translation: Testing a Revised Model.” In Empirical Translation Studies: New Methodological and Theoretical Traditions, edited by Gert de Sutter, Marie-Aude Lefer, and Isabelle Delaere, 9–46. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hothorn, Torsten, Kurt Hornik, and Achim Zeileis. 2006. “Unbiased Recursive Partitioning: A Conditional Inference Framework.” Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics 15 (3): 651–674. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
House, Juliane. 2008. “Beyond Intervention: Universals in Translation?” Trans-kom 1 (1): 6–19.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jansegers, Marlies, Clara Vanderschueren, and Renata Enghels. 2015. “The Polysemy of the Spanish Verb Sentir: A Behavioral Profile Analysis.” Cognitive Linguistics 26 (3): 381–421. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kotze, Haidee. 2020. “Converging What and How to Find out Why: An Outlook on Empirical Translation Studies”. In New Empirical Perspectives on Translation and Interpreting, edited by Lore Vandevoorde, Joke Daems, and Bart Defrancq, 333–371. Vancouver: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2022. “Translation as Constrained Communication: Principles, Concepts and Methods.” In Extending the Scope of Corpus-based Translation Studies, edited by Sylviane Granger and Marie-Aude Lefer, 67–98. London: Bloomsbury. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kroll, Judith, F. Dietz, and David Green. 2000. “Language Switch Costs in Bilingual Picture Naming and Translation.” In Abstracts of the XXVII International Congress of Psychology, special issue of International Journal of Psychology 35 (3–4): 405.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2019. “That Again: A Multivariate Analysis of the Factors Conditioning Syntactic Explicitness in Translated English.” Across Languages and Cultures 20 (1): 1–33. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kruger, Haidee, and Bertus van Rooy. 2012. “Register and the Features of Translated Language.” Across Languages and Cultures 13 (1): 33–65. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2020. “Conditional Inference Trees and Random Forests.” In A Practical Handbook of Corpus Linguistics, edited by Magali Paquot and Stefan Th. Gries, 611–643. New York: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Macken, Lieve, Orphée de Clercq, and Hans Paulussen. 2011. “Dutch Parallel Corpus: A Balanced Copyright-Cleared Parallel Corpus.” Meta 56 (2): 374–390. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Malkiel, Brenda. 2009a. “When Idioti (Idiotic) Becomes ‘Fluffy’: Translation Students and the Avoidance of Target-Language Cognates.” Meta 54 (2): 309–325. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Marín, Rafael, and Louise McNally. 2011. “Inchoativity, Change of State, and Telicity: Evidence from Spanish Reflexive Psychological Verbs.” Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 29 (2): 467–502. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Olohan, Maeve, and Mona Baker. 2000. “Reporting That in Translated English: Evidence for Subconscious Processes of Explicitation?” Across Languages and Cultures 1 (2): 141–158. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pijpops, Dirk, Dirk Speelman, Stefan Grondelaers, and Freek van de Velde. 2018. “Comparing Explanations for the Complexity Principle: Evidence from Argument Realization.” Language and Cognition 10 (3): 514–543. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Piñón, Christopher. 2001. “A Finer Look at the Causative-Inchoative Alternation.” In Proceedings of SALT 11, edited by Rachel Hastings, Brendan Jackson, and Zsofia Zvolenszky, special issue of Semantics and Linguistic Theory 111: 346–364. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pym, Anthony. 2005. “Explaining Explicitation.” In New Trends in Translation Studies: In Honour of Kinga Klaudy, edited by Krisztina Károly and Ágota Fóris, 29–34. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2008. “On Toury’s Laws of How Translators Translate.” In Beyond Descriptive Translation Studies: Investigations in Homage to Gideon Toury, edited by Anthony Pym, Miriam Schlesinger, and Daniel Simeoni, 311–328. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2015. “Translating as Risk Management.” Journal of Pragmatics 851: 67–80. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rohdenburg, Günter. 1996. “Cognitive Complexity and Increased Grammatical Explicitness in English.” Cognitive Linguistics 7 (2): 149–182. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2016. “Testing two processing principles with respect to the extraction of elements out of complement clauses in English.” English Language & Linguistics 20 (3): 463–486. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Saridakis, Ioannis E. 2015. “Probabilistic Laws and Risk Aversion in Translation: A Case Study in Translation Didactics.” Current Trends in Translation Teaching and Learning E (CTTL E) 21: 196–245.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schepens, Job, Ton Dijkstra, and Franc Grootjen. 2012. “Distributions of Cognates in Europe as Based on Levenshtein Distance.” Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 15 (1): 157–166. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Seeber, Kilian G. 2013. “Cognitive Load in Simultaneous Interpreting: Measures and Methods.” In Interdisciplinarity in Translation and Interpreting Process Research, edited by Maureen Ehrensberger-Dow, Susanne Göpferich, and Sharon O’Brien, special issue of Target 25 (1): 18–32. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sherkina, Miriam. 2004. “The Cognate Facilitation Effect in Bilingual Speech Processing: The Case of Russian-English Bilingualism.” In Proceedings of the Fourth Annual Meeting of the Niagara Linguistic Society, edited by Michael Barrie, Mohammad Haji-Abdolhosseini, Nick Pendar, and Jonathon Herd, special issue of Cahiers linguistics d’Ottawa 321: 108–121.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shlesinger, Miriam, and Brenda Malkiel. 2005. “Comparing Modalities: Cognates as a Case in Point.” Across Languages and Cultures 6 (2): 173–193. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shi, Ziqiang. 1990. “On the Inherent Aspectual Properties of NPs, Verbs, Sentences and the Decomposition of Perfectivity and Inchoativity.” Word 41 (1): 47–67. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Steiner, Erich. 1997. “Systemic Functional Linguistics and its Application to Foreign Language Teaching.” Estudios de Lingüística Aplicada 15 (26): 15–27.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Strobl, Carolin, Anne-Laure Boulesteix, Achim Zeileis, and Torsten Hothorn. 2007. “Bias in Random Forest Variable Importance Measures: Illustrations, Sources and a Solution.” BMC Bioinformatics 81. [URL].
Szymor, Nina. 2015. “Behavioral Profiling in Translation Studies.” trans-kom 8 (2): 483–498.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van Assche, Eva, Wouter Duyck, Robert J. Hartsuiker, and Kevin Diependaele. 2009. “Does Bilingualism Change Native-Language Reading? Cognate Effects in a Sentence Context.” Psychological Science 20 (8): 923–927. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van Beveren, Amélie, Gert de Sutter, and Timothy Colleman. 2018. “Questioning explicitation in translation studies: A multifactorial corpus investigation of the om-alternation in translated and original Dutch.” Paper presented at Using Corpora in Contrastive and Translation Studies, Louvain-La-Neuve, September 2018.
Van Hell, Janet G., and Annette M. B. de Groot. 1998. “Conceptual Representation in Bilingual Memory: Effects of Concreteness and Cognate Status in Word Association.” Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 1 (3): 193–211. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van Hell, Janet G., and Ton Dijkstra. 2002. “Foreign Language Knowledge Can Influence Native Language Performance in Exclusively Native Contexts.” Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 9 (4): 780–789. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vandevoorde, Lore. 2016. On Semantic Differences: A Multivariate Corpus-Based Study of the Semantic Field of Inchoativity in Translated and Non-Translated Dutch. PhD diss. Ghent University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2020. Semantic Differences in Translation: Exploring the Field of Inchoativity. Berlin: Language Sciences Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vandevoorde, Lore, Els Lefever, Koen Plevoets, and Gert de Sutter. 2017. “A Corpus-Based Study of Semantic Differences in Translation: The Case of Dutch Inchoativity.” Target 29 (3): 388–415. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Verroens, Filip. 2011. La construction inchoative se mettre à: Syntaxe, sémantique et grammaticalisation [The inchoative construction ‘se mettre à’: Syntax, semantics and grammaticalisation]. PhD diss. Ghent University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Walker, Ian, and Charles Hulme. 1999. “Concrete Words Are Easier to Recall than Abstract Words: Evidence for a Semantic Contribution to Short-Term Serial Recall.” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 25 (5): 1256–1271.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yetkin, Nihal. 2011. “Partial False Friends in English–Turkish Translations: Diplomatic Texts.” Hacettepe University Journal of Faculty of Letters 28 (1): 207–222.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

王, 安琪
2025. A Corpus-Based Study on Synonym Teaching in Primary School English. Modern Linguistics 13:10 ► pp. 563 ff. DOI logo
Bębeniec, Daria
2024. In search of methodological standards for corpus-based cognitive semantics: The case of Behavioral Profiles. Studia Neophilologica 96:2 ► pp. 483 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 4 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