Re-opening the case: A corpus-based study of translational patterns using non-agentive constructions in translations from English to German

Jonas Freiwald and Stella Neumann
RWTH Aachen University

How does the variability of the language system affect translational language use? Despite inconclusive results of earlier corpus studies, machine learning approaches reach high accuracies in distinguishing translated from non-translated texts. Translations must therefore involve linguistic patterns easy to spot by computers, but harder to spot by the human analyst. Consequently, the differences have been characterized as small, but systematic. This article adopts a quantitative corpus-based approach to examining shifts in probability between translated and non-translated language. To this end, we investigate how translators handle non-agentive constructions, a phenomenon displaying contrastive usage differences in English and German. A multifactorial analysis of 7441 instances shows that differences are indeed small and that they stem from a multitude of factors. Accounting for these factors turns out to be challenging even for a sophisticated statistical procedure. Therefore, the case of how subtle the effects of translation are cannot be settled just yet.

Publication history

Date received: 29 March 2024

Date accepted: 23 September 2025

Published online: 10 October 2025

Table of contents

Recent empirically oriented linguistics has emphasized the idea that language is probabilistic in nature and evolves through usage both as a system as well as in the development of the individual (see Beckner et al. 2009). According to this view, a language remains alive by being spoken by millions of language users in overlapping generations who interact with each other in speech communities. Linguistic features are chosen by language users based on their continued observations of how others use them — in slightly different ways (Grafmiller et al. 2018, 2). In this process, language users also extract information about the specific contexts in which these features are used in a particular way and in a particular combination with other features. From a cognitive point of view, language users make inferences by judging the probabilities of an event to happen. They might, for instance, infer the meaning of an item based on the (recurring) input they receive through the use by others (Chater, Tenenbaum, and Yuille 2006). More specifically, language users continuously expand their linguistic experience through use (Ellis 2019, 48), thus becoming highly skilled at choosing features that are likely to occur in a given context. The fact that language users choose between different possibilities of expressing a given state or event, also known as construal, foregrounds the paradigmatic nature of language. The result of language users’ likely choices has been observed in corpora as (co-)occurrence patterns that can be modelled as probabilistic choices. In light of such a probabilistic conception of the distribution of features in language, a rigid notion of ‘rule’ can be meaningfully replaced by ‘regularity’, thus making room for the possibility that a language user might still opt for an improbable choice. In this sense, each individual instance of using language “both maintains and perturbs the system” (Halliday 2005, 66).

Full-text access is restricted to subscribers. Log in to obtain additional credentials. For subscription information see Subscription & Price. Direct PDF access to this article can be purchased through our e-platform.

References

Bates, Douglas, Martin Mächler, Ben Bolker, and Steve Walker
2015 “Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using Lme4.” Journal of Statistical Software 67 (1): 1–48. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Beckner, Clay, Richard Blythe, Joan Bybee, Morten H. Christiansen, William Croft, Nick C. Ellis, John Holland, Jinyun Ke, Diane Larsen-Freeman, and Tom Schoenemann
2009 “Language Is a Complex Adaptive System: Position Paper.” Language Learning 59 (s1): 1–26. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Burchardt, Aljoscha, Katrin Erk, Anette Frank, Andrea Kowalski, Sebastian Padó, and Manfred Pinkal
2009 “8. Using FrameNet for the Semantic Analysis of German: Annotation, Representation, and Automation.” In Multilingual FrameNets in Computational Lexicography, edited by Hans C. Boas, 209–244. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chater, Nick, Joshua B. Tenenbaum, and Alan Yuille
2006 “Probabilistic Models of Cognition: Conceptual Foundations.” Probabilistic Models of Cognition, edited by Nick Chater, Joshua B. Tenenbaum, and Alan Yuille, special issue of Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10 (7): 287–291. 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
De Swart, Peter
2014 “Prepositional Inanimates in Dutch: A Paradigmatic Case of Differential Object Marking.” Linguistics: An Interdisciplinary Journal of the Language Sciences 52 (2): 445–468. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Doms, Steven, Bernard de Clerck, and Sonia Vandepitte
2016 “Non-Human Agents as Subjects in English and Dutch: A Corpus-Based Translation Study.” In Atypical Predicate-Argument Relations, edited by Thierry Ruchot and Pascale Van Praet, 87–112. Lingvisticæ Investigationes Supplementa 33. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ellis, Nick C.
2019 “Essentials of a Theory of Language Cognition.” The Modern Language Journal 103 (S1): 39–60. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Evert, Stefan, and Stella Neumann
2017 “The Impact of Translation Direction on Characteristics of Translated Texts: A Multivariate Analysis for English and German.” In Empirical Translation Studies: New Theoretical and Methodological Traditions, edited by Gert de Sutter, Marie-Aude Lefer, and Isabelle Delaere, 47–80. Berlin: De Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fillmore, Charles J., Christopher R. Johnson, and Miriam R. L. Petruck
2003 “Background to FrameNet.” International Journal of Lexicography 16 (3): 235–250. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Freiwald, Jonas
2016 “You Say Theme, I Say Thema: A Corpus-Based Approach to Theme in English and German from an SFL Perspective.” MA thesis. RWTH Aachen University.
2023 Theme in English and German: A Corpus-Based Contrastive Analysis of Clause Openings in Original and Translated Texts. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
García García, Marco, Beatrice Primus, and Nikolaus P. Himmelmann
2018 “Shifting from Animacy to Agentivity.” Theoretical Linguistics 44 (1–2): 25–39. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grafmiller, Jason, Benedikt Szmrecsanyi, Melanie Röthlisberger, and Benedikt Heller
2018 “General Introduction: A Comparative Perspective on Probabilistic Variation in Grammar.” Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics 3 (1): 94.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Granger, Sylviane, and Marie-Aude Lefer
2020 “The Multilingual Student Translation Corpus: A Resource for Translation Teaching and Research.” Language Resources and Evaluation 54: 1183–1199. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gries, Stefan Th., and Stefanie Wulff
2021 “Examining Individual Variation in Learner Production Data: A Few Programmatic Pointers for Corpus-Based Analyses Using the Example of Adverbial Clause Ordering.” Applied Psycholinguistics 42 (2): 279–299. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K.
2005 “Corpus Studies and Probabilistic Grammar (1991).” In Computational and Quantitative Studies, vol. 6 Collected Works of M.A.K. Halliday, edited by Jonathan J. Webster, 63–75. London: Continuum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K., and Christian M. I. M. Matthiessen
2014 Halliday’s Introduction to Functional Grammar. 4th ed. London: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Halverson, Sandra L., and Haidee Kotze
2022 “Sociocognitive Constructs in Translation and Interpreting Studies (TIS): Do We Really Need Concepts Like Norms and Risk When We Have a Comprehensive Usage-Based Theory of Language?” In Contesting Epistemologies in Cognitive Translation and Interpreting Studies, edited by Sandra L. Halverson and Álvaro Marín García, 51–79. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hansen-Schirra, Silvia, Stella Neumann, and Erich Steiner
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
Hansen-Schirra, Silvia, and Erich Steiner
2012 “Towards a Typology of Translation Properties.” In Cross-Linguistic Corpora for the Study of Translations, by Silvia Hansen-Schirra, Stella Neumann, and Erich Steiner, 255–279. Berlin: De Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hawkins, John A.
1986 A Comparative Typology of English and German: Unifying the Contrasts. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heilmann, Arndt, Tatiana Serbina, Jonas Freiwald, and Stella Neumann
2021 “Animacy and Agentivity of Subject Themes in English–German Translation.” In Dynamicity and Contrast in Systemic Functional Linguistics, edited by Izaskun Elorza, Jorge Arús-Hita, and Tom Bartlett, special issue of Lingua 261 (October): 102813. 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
Kast, Marlene
2012 “Variation within the Grammatical Function ‘Subject’ in English–German and German–English Translations.” In Cross-Linguistic Corpora for the Study of Translations: Insights from the Language Pair English–German, by Silvia Hansen-Schirra, Stella Neumann, and Erich Steiner, 147–160. Berlin: De Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
König, Ekkehard, and Volker Gast
2018 Understanding English–German Contrasts. 4th ed. Berlin: Erich Schmidt Verlag.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Königs, Karin
2011 Übersetzen Englisch–Deutsch: Lernen Mit System [Translation English–German: Learning systematically]. 3rd ed. München: Oldenbourg.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kotze, Haidee
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, 67–97. London: Bloomsbury Academic. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Levshina, Natalia
2015 How to Do Linguistics with R: Data Exploration and Statistical Analysis. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 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. Cham: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lødrup, Helge
1993 “Subjects and Thematic Roles in English and Norwegian.” Norsk Lingvistisk Tidsskrift 11 (2): 105–124.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: Journal des traducteurs 56 (2): 374–390. 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, Gert de Sutter, and Stefan Evert
2017 “Register-Specific Interference in Translation.” In Conference Booklet of the 39th Annual Conference of the German Linguistic Society. Saarbrücken, Germany.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Neumann, Stella, and Stefan Evert
2021 “A Register Variation Perspective on Varieties of English.” In Corpus-Based Approaches to Register Variation, edited by Elena Seoane and Douglas Biber, 143–178. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Neumann, Stella, and Silvia Hansen-Schirra
2012 “Corpus Methodology and Design.” In Cross-Linguistic Corpora for the Study of Translations: Insights from the Language Pair English–German, by Silvia Hansen-Schirra, Stella Neumann, and Erich Steiner, 21–34. Berlin: De Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
R Core Team
2018 R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://​www​.R​-project​.org
Reynaert, Ryan, Lieve Macken, Arda Tezcan, and Gert de Sutter
2021 “Building a New-Generation Corpus for Empirical Translation Studies: The Dutch Parallel Corpus 2.0.” In New Perspectives on Corpus Translation Studies, edited by Vincent X. Wang, Lily Lim, and Defeng Li, 75–100. Singapore: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Serbina, Tatiana
2015 A Construction Grammar Approach to the Analysis of Translation Shifts: A Corpus-Based Study. PhD thesis. RWTH Aachen University.
Szmrecsanyi, Benedikt, Jason Grafmiller, Benedikt Heller, and Melanie Röthlisberger
2016 “Around the World in Three Alternations: Modeling Syntactic Variation in Varieties of English.” English World-Wide 37 (2): 109–137. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali A., and R. Harald Baayen
2012 “Models, Forests, and Trees of York English: Was/Were Variation as a Case Study for Statistical Practice.” Language Variation and Change 24 (2): 135–178. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Teich, Elke, Peter Fankhauser, Stefania Degaetano-Ortlieb, and Yuri Bizzoni
2021 “Less Is More/More Diverse: On The Communicative Utility of Linguistic Conventionalization.” Frontiers in Communication 5. 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 Translation Universals: Do They Exist?, edited by Anna Mauranen and Pekka Kujamäki, 15–32. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Volansky, Vered, Noam Ordan, and Shuly Wintner
2015 “On the Features of Translationese.” Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 30 (1): 98–118. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zaenen, Annie, Jean Carletta, Gregory Garretson, Joan Bresnan, Andrew Koontz-Garboden, Tatiana Nikitina, M. Catherine O’Connor, and Tom Wasow
2004 “Animacy Encoding in English: Why and How.” In Proceedings of the Workshop on Discourse Annotation, 118–125. Barcelona: Association for Computational Linguistics. https://​aclanthology​.org​/W04​-0216.
 
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue