Cover not available
Article published In:
Learner translation corpus research
Guest-edited by Sylviane Granger and Marie-Aude Lefer
[International Journal of Learner Corpus Research 9:1] 2023
► pp. 97–125

Exploring variation in student translation

| University of Macerata

This paper explores the issue of variation in translation, as well as its connection with the concept of “literal translation” and translator experience, on the basis of a multiple student translation corpus containing concurrent Italian versions of the same English source text produced by 35 undergraduate and postgraduate trainee translators. Translation paradigms for preselected lexical items expected to trigger different degrees of variation are extracted and analysed to identify both recurrent and sporadic solutions, whose acceptability in the target language is assessed using the source text’s official translation, alternative professional translations and the Europarl Corpus as reference. The analysis shows that variation is most remarkable with respect to idiomatic/metaphorical and evaluative items than for non-idiomatic items, but also when a literal translation would not be possible in the target language. Translators are found to generally prefer literal translations whenever acceptable in the target language, irrespective of their degree of experience.

Keywords: student translation corpora, variation, literal translation, translation experience
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Related work
  • 3.Corpus material, research hypotheses and methodology
  • 4.Analyses
    • 4.1Idiomatic multi-word units
    • 4.2Non-idiomatic multi-word units
    • 4.3Prepositional phrases with evaluative meaning
    • 4.4Adjectives
  • 5.Discussion
  • 6.Concluding remarks
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 11 April 2023
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ijlcr.22010.cas
References
Bangalore, S., Behrens, B., Carl, M., Ghankot, M., Heilmann, A., Nitzke, J., Schaeffer, M., & Sturm, A.
(2016) Syntactic Variance and Priming Effects in Translation. In M. Carl, S. Bangalore, & M. Schaeffer (Eds.), New directions in empirical translation process research: Exploring the CRITT TPR-DB (pp. 211–238). Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Behrens, B.
(2014) Nominalization: A case study of linguistic text conventions in comparable and parallel texts: English and Norwegian. Oslo Studies in Language, 6 (1), 143–160. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E.
(1999) Longman grammar of spoken and written English. Pearson Education Limited.Google Scholar
Bizzoni, Y., & Lapshinova-Koltunski, E.
(2021, September 9–11). How surprising are translators depending on the competence and context? [Paper presentation]. Using Corpora in Contrastive and Translation Studies (UCCTS 2021), University of Bologna, Italy.
Bosseaux, C.
(2006) Who’s afraid of Virginia’s you: A corpus-based study of the French translations of The Waves. Meta, 51 (3), 599–610. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Campbell, S.
(2000) Choice network analysis in translation research. In M. Olohan (Ed.), Intercultural faultlines: research models in translation studies 1 – Textual and cognitive aspects (pp. 29–42). Routledge.Google Scholar
Carl, M., & Schaeffer, M.
(2017) Measuring translation literality. In A. L. Jakobsen & B. Mesa-Lao (Eds.), Translation in transition: Between cognition, computing and technology (pp. 81–106). John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Castagnoli, S.
(2016) Investigating trainee translators’ contrastive pragmalinguistic competence: a corpus-based analysis of interclausal linkage in learner translations. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 10 (3), 343–363. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2020) Translation choices compared: Investigating variation in a learner translation corpus. In S. Granger & M. A. Lefer (Eds.), Translating and comparing languages: Corpus-based insights (pp. 25–44). Presses universitaires de Louvain.Google Scholar
Castagnoli, S., Ciobanu, D., Kübler, N., Kunz, K., & Volanschi, A.
(2011) Designing a learner translator corpus for training purposes. In N. Kübler (Ed.), Corpora, language, teaching, and resources: From theory to practice (pp. 221–248). Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Chesterman, A.
(2011) Reflections on the literal translation hypothesis. In C. Alvstad, A. Hild, & E. Tiselius (Eds.), Methods and strategies of process research (pp. 23–35). John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Deléchat, C. & Medina, L.
(2020) What is the informal economy? Having fewer workers outside the formal economy can support sustainable development. International Monetary Fund (imf.org). [URL]
De Sutter, G., Cappelle, B., De Clercq, O., Loock, R., & Plevoets, K.
(2017) Towards a corpus-based, statistical approach to translation quality: Measuring and visualizing linguistic deviance in student translation. Linguistica Antverpiensia, New Series: Themes in Translation Studies, 16 1, 25–39.Google Scholar
Dirdal, H.
(2014) Individual variation between translators in the use of clause building and clause reduction. Oslo Studies in Language, 6 (1), 119–142. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dragsted, B.
(2012) Indicators of difficulty in translation – Correlating product and process data. Across Languages and Cultures, 13 (1), 81–98. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Granger, S.
(1998) Prefabricated patterns in advanced EFL writing: collocations and formulae. In A. Cowie (Ed.), Phraseology: theory, analysis and applications (pp. 145–160). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Granger, S., & Lefer, M. A.
(2020) The Multilingual Student Translation corpus: a resource for translation teaching and research. Language Resources and Evaluation, 54 1, 1183–1199. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hale, S., & Campbell, S.
(2002) The interaction between text difficulty and translation accuracy. Babel, 48 (1), 14–33. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halverson, S. L.
(2013) Implications of cognitive linguistics for translation studies. In A. Rojo & I. Ibarretxe-Antuñano (Eds.), Cognitive linguistics and translation: advances in some theoretical models (pp. 33–73). Mouton De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
International Labour Organization
(2015) Transition from the Informal to the Formal Economy Recommendation, 2015 (No. 204). International Labour Organization (ilo.org). [URL]
Jakubíček, M., Kilgarriff, A., Kovář, V., Rychlý, P., & V. Suchomel
(2013) The TenTen corpus family. Proceedings of the 7th International Corpus Linguistics Conference 2013, 125–127.Google Scholar
Ji, M., & Oakes, M. P.
(2012) A corpus study of early English translations of Cao Xueqin’s Hongloumeng . In M. P. Oakes and M. Ji (Eds.), Quantitative methods in corpus-based translation studies (pp. 177–208). John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jiménez-Crespo, M.
(2012) Translation under pressure and the Web: a parallel corpus-study of Obama’s Inaugural speech in the online media. Translation and Interpreting, 4 (1), 56–76.Google Scholar
(2011) Between Scylla and Charybdis. On individual variation in translation. Languages in Contrast, 11 (1), 3–19. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lapshinova-Koltunski, E.
(2020) Tracing normalisation and shining-through in novice and professional translations with data mining techniques. In S. Granger & M. A. Lefer (Eds.), Translating and comparing languages: Corpus-based insights (pp. 45–59). Presses universitaires de Louvain.Google Scholar
Li, D., Zhang, C. & Liu, K.
(2011) Translation style and ideology: A corpus-assisted analysis of two English translations of Hongloumeng. Literary and Linguistic Computing, 26 (2), 153–166. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Maier, R., Pickering, M., & Hartsuiker, R.
(2016) Does translation involve structural priming? Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 70 (8), 1–15.Google Scholar
Mastropierro, L.
(2018) Key clusters as indicators of translator style. Target, 30 (2), 240–259. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Matthiessen, C. M. I. M.
(2001) The environments of translation. In E. Steiner & C. Yallop (Eds.), Exploring translation and multilingual text production (pp. 41–124). Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Munday, J.
(2012) Evaluation in translation: Critical points of translator decision-making. Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Neumann, S.
(2021, September 9–11). Translation as specialised language use. A probabilistic view of linguistic characteristics of translations. [Plenary talk]. Using Corpora in Contrastive and Translation Studies (UCCTS 2021), University of Bologna, Italy.Google Scholar
Reynaert, R., Macken, L., Tezcan, A., & De Sutter, G.
(2021) Building a new-generation corpus for empirical translation studies: the Dutch Parallel Corpus 2.0. In V. Wang, L. Lim, & D. Li (Eds.), New perspectives on corpus translation studies (pp. 75–100). Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ruano, P.
(2017) Corpus methodologies in literary translation studies: An analysis of speech verbs in four Spanish translations of Hard Times. Meta, 62 (1), 94–113. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tiedemann, J.
(2012) Parallel Data, Tools and Interfaces in OPUS. In N. Calzolari, K. Choukri, T. Declerck, M. Uğur Doğan, B. Maegaard, J. Mariani, A. Moreno, J. Odijk, & S. Piperidis (Eds.), Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC’12) (pp. 2214–2218). European Language Resources Association (ELRA).Google Scholar
Tirkkonen-Condit, S.
(2005) The Monitor Model revisited: Evidence from process research. Meta, 50 (2), 405–414. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Toury, G.
(2004) Probabilistic explanations in translation studies. Welcome as they are, would they qualify as universals? In A. Mauranen & P. Jujamäki (Eds.), Translation universals: do they exist? (pp.15–32). John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2012) Descriptive translation studies – and beyond (Revised edition). John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar