Cover not available
Article published In:
Discourse Analysis in Translation Studies
Edited by Jeremy Munday and Meifang Zhang
[Target 27:3] 2015
► pp. 370–386

Global English, discourse and translation

Linking constructions in English and German popular science texts

| Universität Hamburg/Hellenic American University, Athens

This paper first briefly discusses the relationship between comparative discourse analyses of original and translated texts as the basis for revealing the behavior of a particular linguistic phenomenon in context and use. Concretely, the paper examines how global English impacts on translations from English into German with regard to so-called ‘linking constructions,’ a hitherto rather neglected area of connectivity in discourse. The analysis focusses on the forms, functions, distribution, and the translation equivalents in parallel and comparable corpora. Results indicate that the use of linking constructions differs substantially in English and German discourse, and these differences may well block English influence on German discourse norms via translation.

Keywords: diachronic corpus study, parallel and comparative corpora, contrastive pragmatics, English-German contrastive discourse analysis, global English, linking constructions, impact of English on German discourse norms
Article outline
  • 1.Discourse analysis and translation
  • 2.The ‘Verdecktes Übersetzen—Covert Translation’ project
  • 3.The present study: Discourse and corpus analysis of linking constructions in English and German original and translated popular science texts
  • 4.What are linking constructions?
  • 5.Analysing extraposed prepositional phrase linking constructions in the Hamburg Popular Science Corpus
    • 5.1The development of EPPs in the English original texts
    • 5.2German ‘Zusammengesetzte Verweiswörter’ (Composite Deictics)
    • 5.3The nature and distribution of translations of English EPP linking construction into German in two time frames
    • 5.4The nature and distribution of EPP linking constructions in the German Comparable Corpus in two time frames
  • 6.Interpretation and discussion of findings
  • 7.Concluding remarks
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 22 October 2015
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/target.27.3.03hou
References
Aijmer, Karin
1994 “Themes and Tails: The Discourse Functions of Dislocated Elements.” Nordic Journal of Linguistics 121: 137–154. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bateson, Gregory
1972 Steps to an Ecology of Mind. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Baumgarten, Nicole, and Julia Probst
2004 “The Interaction of Spokenness and Writtenness in Audience Design.” In Multilingual Communication, ed. by Juliane House and Jochen Rehbein, 63–86. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Becher, Viktor
2011 Explicitation and Implicitation in Translation. A Corpus-based Study of English-German and German-English Translations of Business Texts. PhD diss. University of Hamburg.Google Scholar
Becher, Viktor, Juliane House, and Svenja Kranich
2009 “Convergence and Divergence of Communicative Norms through Language Contact in Translation.” In Convergence and Divergence in Language Contact Situations, ed. by Kurt Braunmüller and Juliane House, 125–152. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bell, David
2009 “Mind You.” Journal of Pragmatics 41 (5): 915–920. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bührig, Kristin, and Juliane House
2004 “Connectivity in Translation: Transitions from Orality to Literacy.” In Multilingual Communication, ed. by Juliane House and Jochen Rehbein, 87–114. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2007 “ ‘So, Given This Common Theme’: Linking Constructions in Discourse across Languages.” In Connectivity in Grammar and Discourse, ed. by Jochen Rehbein, Christiane Hohenstein, and Lukas Pietsch, 345–366. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chafe, Wallace
1976 “Givenness, Contrastiveness, Definiteness, Subjects, Topics and Point of View.” In Subject and Topic, ed. by Charles N. Li, 25–55. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Doherty, Monika
2003 “Discourse Relators and the Beginning of Sentences in English and German.” Languages in Contrast 3 (2): 223–251. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ehlich, Konrad
1982 “Anaphora and Deixis: Same or Different?” In Speech, Place and Action, ed. by Robert Jarvella and Wolfgang Klein, 315–338. London: Wiley.Google Scholar
Frey, Werner
2005 “Pragmatic Properties of Certain German and English Left Peripheral Constructions.” Linguistics 43 (1): 89–129. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goffman, Erving
1974 Frame Analysis. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Gumperz, John
1982 Discourse Strategies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haegeman, Liliane
2009 “Parenthetical Adverbials: The Radical Orphanage Approach.” In Dislocated Elements in Discourse, ed. by Benjamin Shaer, Philippa Cook, Werner Frey, and Claudia Maienborn, 331–348. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Haegeman, Liliane, Benjamin Shaer, and Werner Frey
2009 “Postscript: Problems and Solutions for Orphan Analysis.” In Dislocated Elements in Discourse, ed. by Benjamin Shaer, Philippa Cook, Werner Frey, and Claudia Maienborn, 348–365. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Halliday, M.A.K
1970 “Language Structure and Language Function.” In New Horizons in Linguistics, ed. by John Lyons, 140–160. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
Hawkins, John
1986 A Comparative Typology of English and German: Unifying the Contrasts. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
House, Juliane
1977 A Model for Translation Quality Assessment. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
1996 “Contrastive Discourse Analysis and Misunderstanding: The Case of German and English.” In Contrastive Sociolinguistics, ed. by Marlis Hellinger and Ulrich Ammon, 345–361. Berlin: Mouton.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1997 Translation Quality Assessment: A Model Revisited. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
2003a “Misunderstanding in Intercultural University Encounters.” In Misunderstanding in Social Life. Discourse Approaches to Problematic Talk, ed. by Juliane House, Gabriele Kasper, and Stephen Ross, 22–56. London: Longman.Google Scholar
2003b “English as a Lingua Franca: A Threat to Multilingualism?” Journal of Sociolinguistics 7 (4): 556–578. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2006a “Text and Context in Translation.” Journal of Pragmatics 38 (3): 338–358. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2006b “Communicative Styles in English and German.” European Journal of English Studies 101: 249–267. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2009 Translation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
2010 “Discourse and Dominance: Global English, Language Contact and Language Change.” In Globalization, Discourse, Media: In a Critical Perspective, ed. by Anna Duszak, Juliane House, and Lukasz Kumiega, 61–94. Warsaw: Warsaw University Press.Google Scholar
2011 “Linking Constructions in English and German Translated and Original Texts.” In Multilingual Discourse Production, ed. by Svenja Kranich, Viktor Becher, Steffen Höder, and Juliane House, 163–182. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2012 “Text Linguistics and Translation.” In Handbook of Translation Studies, vol. 31, ed. by Yves Gambier and Luc van Doorslaer, 178–184. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2014a “Translation as a Site of Language Contact, Variation and Change.” In Translationswissenschaftliches Kolloquium III, ed. by Barbara Ahrens, Silvia Hansen-Schirra, Monika Krein-Kühle, Michael Schreiber, and Ursula Wienen,155–180. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
2014b Translation Quality Assessment: Past and Present. London: Routledge.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kranich, Svenja
2011 “L’emploi des expressions épistémiques dans les lettres aux actionnaires en France, aux États Unis et en Allemagne.” Langage et Société 1371: 115–134. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kranich, Svenja, and Victorina Gonzalez Diaz
2010 “Good, Great or Remarkable: Evaluation in English, German and Spanish Letters to Shareholders.” Paper given at the Conference on ‘New Challenges for Multilingualism in Europe,’ Dubrovnik, 10-15 April 2010.
Kranich, Svenja, Juliane House, and Viktor Becher
2012 “Changing Conventions in English-German Translations of Popular Scientific Texts.” In Multilingual Individuals and Multilingual Societies, ed. by Kurt Braunmüller and Christoph Gabriel, 315–334. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Küppers, Anne
2008 Sprecherdeiktika in deutschen und französischen Aktionärsbriefen. Arbeiten zur Mehrsprachigkeit 87. Hamburg: Universität Hamburg.Google Scholar
Prince, Ellen
1985 “Fancy Syntax and ‘Shared Knowledge’.” Journal of Pragmatics 9 (1): 65–81. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Probst, Julia
2001 “Der kulturelle Filter in Wirtschaftstexten multilingualer Unternehmen: Englisch-Deutsch-Französisch.” In Comunicare in ambiente professionale plurilingue. Kommunikation in der mehrsprachigen Arbeitswelt. Communiquer en milieu professionel plurilingue. Communicating in Professional Multilingual Environments, ed. by Sara Cigada, Silvia Gilardoni, and Marinette Mathey, 263–275. Lugano: Proceedings of the VALS/ASLA Congress 14-16 September 2000.Google Scholar
2009 Der Einfluss des Englischen auf das Deutsche - Zum sprachlichen Ausdruck von Interpersonalität in populärwissenschaftlichen Texten. PhD diss. Universität Hamburg.Google Scholar
Rehbein, Jochen
1995 “Über zusammengesetzte Verweiswörter und ihre Rolle in argumentierender Rede.” In Wege der Argumentationsforschung, ed. by Harald Wohlrapp, 166–198. Stuttgart: Frommann & Holzboog.Google Scholar
Shaer, Benjamin
2009 “German and English Left-Peripheral Elements and the ‘Orphan’ Analysis of Non-Integration.” In Dislocated Elements in Discourse, ed. by Benjamin Shaer, Philippa Cook, Werner Frey, and Claudia Maienborn, 366–397. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Siepmann, Dirk
2005 Discourse Markers across Languages. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Tannen, Deborah
1993 Framing in Discourse. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Widdowson, Henry
2007 Discourse Analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ziv, Yael
1994 “Left and Right Dislocations: Discourse Functions and Anaphora.” Journal of Pragmatics 22 (5): 629–646. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 6 other publications

Abdulmanova, Adelia Khamitovna, Ekaterina Kirillovna Vyunova & Irina Alekseevna Lekomtseva
2023. Identification of possible translation solutions based on comparative stylistic studies (using the material of English and Russian parallel newspaper texts). Philology. Theory & Practice 16:12 ► pp. 4297 ff. DOI logo
Castagnoli, Sara
2016. Investigating trainee translators’ contrastive pragmalinguistic competence: a corpus-based analysis of interclausal linkage in learner translations. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 10:3 ► pp. 343 ff. DOI logo
House, Juliane & Dániel Z. Kádár
2021. Cross-Cultural Pragmatics, DOI logo
İŞİ, Nazan & Korkut İŞİSAĞ
2022. Implications of English as a Lingua Franca for Translation and Interpreting: Current and Future Directions. Çeviribilim ve Uygulamaları Dergisi 2022:32 ► pp. 121 ff. DOI logo
Schäffner, Christina
2019. Translation and Discourse Analysis. Slovo.ru: Baltic accent 10:3 ► pp. 28 ff. DOI logo
Zeyrek, Deniz, Amália Mendes, Giedrė Valūnaitė Oleškevičienė & Sibel Özer
2022. An Exploratory Analysis of TED Talks in English and Lithuanian, Portuguese and Turkish Translations. Contrastive Pragmatics 3:3 ► pp. 452 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 8 april 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.