Cover not available
Article published In:
Babel
Vol. 67:4 (2021) ► pp.500–521

Learning Chinese political formulaic phraseology from a self-built bilingual United Nations Security Council corpus

A pilot study

| Hong Kong Polytechnic University
| Hong Kong Polytechnic University
| Guangdong University of Foreign Studies
This pilot study investigates the formulaic phraseology most frequently used in highly formulaic political documents by examining a self-built bilingual parallel corpus of 43 speeches delivered in United Nations Security Council (UNSC) meetings by Chinese representatives. The study also probes corpus-based approaches to explore formulaic phraseology and demonstrates a method to retrieve Chinese formulaic phraseology from the UNSC corpus. Formulaic phraseology is often seen in political discourse. It can be defined as a sequence, continuous or discontinuous, of words or other meaning elements that are, or appear to be, prefabricated, stored and retrieved whole from memory at the time of use rather than being subject to generation or analysis by the language grammar. This study begins with a literature review of formulaic phraseology, including its features and significance in simultaneous interpreting. It then exhibits a four-step retrieval process with the Sketch Engine software program to acquire Chinese formulaic phraseology from the corpus to fill previous studies’ gap. Key functional units of the Sketch Engine, including Wordlist, N-grams, and Concordance, are used to extract formulaic phraseology from the UNSC corpus. Methodological issues involved in identifying formulaic phraseology, such as length of phraseology and quantitative criteria (frequency and dispersion thresholds), are also discussed in the study. Three types of formulaic phraseology are identified: (1) greeting representatives and other members and expressing appreciation; (2) expressing concerns about the topic of the meeting; (3) expressing China’s viewpoints about the topic of the meeting. The training of interpreters would be more effective if this categorization of formulaic phraseology is incorporated into the curriculum.
Keywords: formulaic phraseology, corpus, united nations security council, simultaneous interpreting
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Chinese language and the UN
  • 3.Previous related studies
    • 3.1Formulaic phraseology in previous studies
    • 3.2Corpus-based research on formulaic phraseology
  • 4.Learning formulae from a UNSC corpus
    • 4.1Features of the UNSC speeches
    • 4.2Retrieval of formulaic phraseology from the UNSC corpus
  • 5.Discussion and conclusion
  • References
Published online: 16 July 2021
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/babel.00233.wu
References (38)
References
Altenberg, B. 1998. “On the Phraseology of Spoken English: The Evidence of Recurrent Word-Combinations.” In Phraseology: Theory, Analysis and Applications, edited by A. P. Cowie, 101–122. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Aston, Guy. 2018. “Acquiring the Language of Interpreters: A Corpus-Based Approach.” In Making Way in Corpus-Based Interpreting Studies, edited by Mariachiara Russo, Claudio Bendazzoli, and Bart Defrancq, 83–96. Singapore: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baker, Mona. 1996. “Corpus-Based Translation Studies: The Challenges That Lie Ahead.” In Terminology, LSP and Translation: Studies in Language Engineering in Honour of Juan C. Sager, edited by Harold Somers, 175–186. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Stig Johansson, Geoffrey Leech, Susan Conrad, and Edward Finegan. 1999. Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas, and Federica Barbieri. 2007. “Lexical Bundles in University Spoken and Written Registers.” English for Specific Purposes 26 (3): 263–286. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas. 2009. “A Corpus-Driven Approach to Formulaic Language in English: Multi-Word Patterns in Speech and Writing.” International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 14 (3): 275–311. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biel, Łucja, Dariusz Koźbiał, and Katarzyna Wasilewska. 2019. “The Formulaicity of Translations across EU Institutional Genres: A Corpus-Driven Analysis of Lexical Bundles in Translated and Non-Translated Language.” Translation Spaces 8 (1): 67–92. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Breeze, Ruth. 2013. “Lexical Bundles across Four Legal Genres.” International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 18 (2): 229–253. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cheung, Andrew Kay Fan. 2019. “The Hidden Curriculum Revealed in Study Trip Reflective Essays.” In The Evolving Curriculum in Interpreter and Translator Education: Stakeholder Perspectives and Voices, edited by David B. Sawyer, Frank Austermühl, and Vanessa Enríquez Raído, 393–408. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cortes, Viviana. 2004. “Lexical Bundles in Published and Student Disciplinary Writing: Examples from History and Biology.” English for Specific Purposes 23 (4): 397–423. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
de Laet, Franc. 2012. “Teaching and Training Sight Translation – A Multitasking Activity.” In Interpreting in the Age of Globalization, edited by Wen Ren, 181–198. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.Google Scholar
Eyckmans, J. (2007). “Taking SLA Research to Interpreter-Training: Does Knowledge of Phrases Foster Fluency?” In Multilingualism and Applied Comparative Linguistics, Volume 1: Pedagogical Perspectives, edited by Frank Boers, Jeroen Darquennes, and Rita Temmerman, 89–105. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Scholar Publishing.Google Scholar
Gries, Stefan Th. (2008). “Dispersions and Adjusted Frequencies in Corpora.” International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 13 (4): 403–437. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gu, Chonglong. 2019. “Interpreters’ Institutional Alignment and (Re)construction of China’s Political Discourse and Image: A Corpus-Based CDA of the Premier-Meets-the-Press Conferences.” PhD diss., University of Manchester.Google Scholar
Hyland, Ken. 2008. “As Can Be Seen: Lexical Bundles and Disciplinary Variation.” English for Specific Purposes 27 (1): 4–21. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jablonkai, Réka. 2010. “English in the Context of European Integration: A Corpus-Driven Analysis of Lexical Bundles in English EU Documents.” English for Specific Purposes 29 (4): 253–267. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kawashima, Tomoyuki. 2021. “English Use by the Heads of State at the United Nations General Assembly: Biennial Survey of 1,540 Speeches between 2004 and 2018.” English Today 37 (2): 1–23. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kilgarriff, Adam, Pavel Rychlý, Pavel Smrz, David Tugwell. 2004. “The Sketch Engine.” In Proceedings of the Eleventh EURALEX International Congress, edited by Geoffrey Williams and Sandra Vessier, 105–116. Lorient: EURALEX.Google Scholar
Kilgarriff, Adam, Vít Baisa, Jan Bušta, Miloš Jakubíček, Vojtěch Kovář, Jan Michelfeit, Pavel Rychlý, and Vít Suchomel. 2014. “The Sketch Engine: Ten Years on.” Lexicography 1 (1): 7–36. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Li, Changshuan. 2010. “Coping Strategies for Fast Delivery in Simultaneous Interpretation.” Journal of Specialised Translation 131: 19–25.Google Scholar
Liu, Liyuan. 1988. “Lianheguo de huiyi kouyi” 联合国的会议口译 [Conference interpretation at the United Nations]. Waiyu jiaoyu yu yanjiu 外语教育与研究 [Foreign language teaching and research] 74 (2): 42–46.Google Scholar
Moon, Rosemund. 1997. “Vocabulary Connections: Multi-Word Items in English.” In Vocabulary: Description, Acquisition, and Pedagogy, edited by Norbert Schmitt and Michael McCarthy, 40–63. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Nattinger, James R., and Jeanette S. DeCarrico. 1992. Lexical Phrases and Language Teaching. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Pawley, Andrew, and Frances Hodgetts Syder. 1983. “Two Puzzles for Linguistic Theory: Nativelike Selection and Nativelike Fluency.” In Language and Communication, edited by Jack C. Richards and R. W. Schmidt, 191–226. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Schmitt, Norbert. 2005. “Formulaic Language: Fixed and Varied.” Estudios de Lingüística Inglesa Aplicada [Studies in applied English linguistics] 61: 13–39.Google Scholar
. 2010. Researching Vocabulary: A Vocabulary Research Manual. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Seeber, Kilian G. 2017. “Interpreting at the European Institutions: Higher, Faster, Stronger = La interpretación en las instituciones europeas: más rápido, más alto, más fuerte.” CLINA 3 (2): 73–90. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sinclair, John. 1991. Corpus, Concordance, Collocation. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tao, Diguang 陶迪光. 2001. “Lianheguo de Zhongwen tongsheng chuanyi” 联合国的中文同声传译 [Simultaneous interpreting of Chinese at the United Nations]. Zongheng 纵横 [Across time and space] (8): 62–64.Google Scholar
Tonkin, Humphrey. 2011. “Language and the United Nations: A preliminary Review.” Léger 1 (1): 2–5.Google Scholar
Wang, Jianhua 王建华. 2012. “Yukuai jiaoxue celue dui tigao xuesheng huiyi kouyi zhunquexing de shiyan yanjiu” 语块教学策略对提高学生会议口译准确性的实验研究 [Effects of chunk teaching strategy on accuracy of students’ conference interpreting: An empirical study]. Zhongguo fanyi 中国翻译 [Chinese translators journal] 33 (2): 47–51.Google Scholar
Wood, David. 2015. Fundamentals of Formulaic Language: An Introduction. London and New York: Bloomsbury Academic.Google Scholar
Wray, Alison, and Mick Perkins. 2000. “The Functions of Formulaic Language: An Integrated Model.” Language and Communication 20 (1): 1–28. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wray, Alison. 2002. Formulaic Language and the Lexicon. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Xiao, Richard, and Xianyao Hu. 2015. Corpus-Based Studies of Translational Chinese in English-Chinese Translation. Berlin: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yao, Bin 姚斌, and Xiaoling Deng 邓小玲. 2019. “Bilulanlü, yi qi shanlin: Lianheguo yixun ban (bu) sishi zhounian fangtan lu” 筚路蓝缕，以启山林：联合国译训班(部)四十周年访谈录 [Interviews with former faculty members and students of the UN Training Program for Interpreters and Translators at Beijing Foreign Studies University]. Fanyi jie 翻译界 [Translation horizon] 2019 (1): 149–164.Google Scholar
Cited by (6)

Cited by six other publications

Cheung, Andrew K. F.
2024. Editorial: Cognition and language contact: interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary approaches. Frontiers in Psychology 15 DOI logo
Chang, Vincent Chieh-Ying & I-Fei Chen
2023. Translation directionality and the Inhibitory Control Model: a machine learning approach to an eye-tracking study. Frontiers in Psychology 14 DOI logo
Huang, Dan Feng, Fang Li & Hang Guo
2023. Chunking in simultaneous interpreting: the impact of task complexity and translation directionality on lexical bundles. Frontiers in Psychology 14 DOI logo
Tian, Sha, Lingxiao Jia & Zhining Zhang
2023. Investigating students’ attitudes towards translation technology: The status quo and structural relations with translation mindsets and future work self. Frontiers in Psychology 14 DOI logo
Liu, Kanglong & Andrew K. F. Cheung
2022. Translation and Interpreting in the Age of COVID-19: Challenges and Opportunities. In Translation and Interpreting in the Age of COVID-19 [Corpora and Intercultural Studies, 9], ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Zhang, Yifan & Andrew K. F. Cheung
2022. A corpus-based study of modal verbs in Chinese–English governmental press conference interpreting. Frontiers in Psychology 13 DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 4 july 2024. 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.