Cover not available
Article published In:
Corpus-Based Research in Legal and Institutional Translation
Edited by Fernando Prieto Ramos
[Translation Spaces 8:1] 2019
► pp. 67–92

The formulaicity of translations across EU institutional genres

A corpus-driven analysis of lexical bundles in translated and non-translated language

ORCID logo | University of Warsaw
ORCID logo | University of Warsaw
ORCID logo | University of Warsaw

This paper explores the formulaicity of EU translations into Polish across four institutional genres (legislation, judgments, reports, websites) with reference to the corresponding EU English corpora in order to understand how the degree of formulaicity is affected by the variable of genre. Formulaicity is operationalised as lexical bundles – high-frequency multi-word sequences (Biber and Barbieri 2007). The study shows a strong correlation between formulaicity and genres, as well as multiple facets of formulaicity (e.g. tokens vs. types). Our findings generally confirm the increased aggregate formulaicity of translations as regards bundle tokens for all EU genres, except for judgments, and the increased variation of bundles (types) for all the genres at the 40 occurrences per million words (pmw) threshold, although the “micro-formulaicity” threshold yielded inconclusive results. Another finding reveals a consistently low overlap of bundles between translations and non-translations. We argue that translations develop their own formulaic profiles which are levelled out compared to EU English corpora and which minimally overlap with formulaic profiles of domestic genres.

Keywords: institutional translation, EU translation, lexical bundles, corpus-driven, formulaicity, genre variation, institutional genres
Article outline
  • Institutional genres: EU transgenres
  • Lexical bundles as a new construct measuring the formulaicity of legal discourse and translation
  • Corpus design
  • Corpus-driven analysis of lexical bundles in the genre-based Eurolect corpora
    • The aggregate distribution of lexical bundles (2–8 grams): A global picture
    • Analysis of 3-grams and 4-grams: A local view
    • Overlap of 4-grams in the translation and non-translation corpora
  • Conclusions
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 26 June 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ts.00013.bie
References
Baker, Mona
1996 “Corpus-based Translation Studies: The Challenges That Lie Ahead.” Terminology, LSP and Translation: Studies in Language Engineering in Honour of Juan C. Sager, edited by Harold L. Somers, 175–186. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas
2009 “Corpus-based and Corpus-driven Analyses of Language Variation and Use.” The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Analysis, edited by Bernd Haine, and Heiko Narrog. Accessed November 11, 2018. DOI logoGoogle 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, Stig Johansson, Geoffrey Leech, Susan Conrad, and Edward Finegan
1999 Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar
Biel, Łucja
2014 Lost in the Eurofog: Textual Fit of Translated Law. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2015 “Phraseological Profiles of Legislative Genres: Complex Prepositions as a Special Case of Legal Phrasemes in EU Law and National Law.” Fachsprache: International Journal of Specialized Communication 37 (3–4): 139–160. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2016 “Mixed Corpus Design for Researching the Eurolect: A Genre-based Comparable-Parallel Corpus in the PL EUROLECT Project.” Polskojęzyczne korpusy równoległe. Polish-Language Parallel Corpora, edited by Ewa Gruszczyńska, and Agnieszka Leńko-Szymańska, 197–208. Warsaw: The Institute of Applied Linguistics. Accessed November 11, 2018. [URL]
2018 “Lexical Bundles in EU Law: The Impact of Translation Process on the Patterning of Legal Language.” Phraseology in Legal and Institutional Settings: A Corpus-based Interdisciplinary Perspective, edited by Stanisław Goźdź-Roszkowski, and Gianluca Pontrandolfo, 11–26. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Biel, Łucja, Koźbiał Dariusz, and Katarzyna Wasilewska
2018 “Zbitki wielowyrazowe w polskim eurolekcie – analiza gatunkowa formuliczności tłumaczeń. Badanie pilotażowe.” [Lexical Bundles in the Polish Eurolect: A Genre Analysis of the Formulaicity of Translations. A Pilot Study.] In Wybrane zagadnienia lingwistyki tekstu, analizy dyskursu i komunikacji międzykulturowej – In memoriam Profesor Anny Duszak (1950–2015) [Selected Aspects of Text Linguistics, Discourse Analysis and Intercultural Communication – In Memoriam of Professor Anna Duszak (1950–2015)], edited by Urszula Okulska-Łukawska, Urszula Topczewska, and Anna Jopek-Bosiacka, 253–294. Warsaw: Institute of Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar
Borja, Anabel, Isabel García Izquierdo, and Vicent Montalt
2009 “Research Methodology in Specialized Genres for Translation Purposes.” The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 3 (1): 57–77. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Breeze, Ruth
2013 “Lexical Bundles Across Four Legal Genres.” International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 18 (2): 229–253. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Derlén, Mattias
2015 “A Single Text or a Single Meaning: Multilingual Interpretation of EU Legislation and CJEU Case Law in National Courts.” Language and Culture in EU Law. Multidisciplinary Perspectives, edited by Susan Šarčević, 53–72. Farnham: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Derlén, Mattias, and Johan Lindholm
2015 “Characteristics of Precedent: The Case Law of the European Court of Justice in Three Dimensions.” German Law Journal 16 (5): 1073–1098. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
DGT (Directorate-General for Translation), European Commission
2015 DGT Translation Quality Guidelines. DGT.IS/IP/DH/GH/th-(2015)5977178. Accessed July 1, 2018. [URL]
Doczekalska, Agnieszka
2009 “Drafting and Interpretation of EU Law – Paradoxes of Legal Multilingualism.” Formal Linguistics and Law, edited by Günther Grewendorf, and Monika Rathert, 339–370. Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Fairclough, Norman
2003 Analysing Discourse. Textual Analysis for Social Research. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2006 “Genres in Political Discourse.” Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, 2nd edition, edited by Keith Brown, 32–38. Oxford: Elsevier. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gouadec, Daniel
2007 Translation as a Profession. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goźdź-Roszkowski, Stanisław
2011 Patterns of Linguistic Variation in American Legal English: A Corpus-based Study. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Greaves, Chris, and Martin Warren
2010 “What Can a Corpus Tell us About Multi-word Units?” The Routledge Handbook of Corpus Linguistics, edited by Anne O’Keeffe, and Michael McCarthy, 212–226. London and New York: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gunnarsson, Britt-Louise
2009 Professional Discourse. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Handford, Michael
2010 The Language of Business Meetings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heller, Dorothee, and Jan Engberg
2017 “Sprachliche Verfahren der Popularisierung von Rechtswissen Zur Rekontextualisierung asylrechtlicher Grundbegriffe [Linguistic Methods of Popularization of Legal Knowledge: On the Recontextualization of Basic Concepts from Legislation on Asylum].” trans-kom. Zeitschrift für Translationswissenschaft und Fachkommunikation 10 (1): 1–21.Google Scholar
Hyland, Ken
2008 “As Can Be Seen: Lexical Bundles and Disciplinary Variation.” English for Specific Purposes 271: 4–21. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jablonkai, Reka
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
Jiménez-Crespo, Miguel A.
2011 “To Adapt or Not to Adapt in Web Localization: A Contrastive Genre-based Study of Original and Localised Legal Sections in Corporate Websites.” Jostrans: The Journal of Specialised Translation 151: 2–27. Accessed July 1, 2018. [URL]
Koskinen, Kaisa
2008 Translating Institutions. An Ethnographic Study of EU Translation. Manchester: St. Jerome.Google Scholar
Margetts, Helen
2013 “Democracy and the Internet.” The Oxford Handbook of Internet Studies, edited by William H. Dutton. Accessed November 6, 2018. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mauranen, Anna
2006 “Translation Universals.” Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, 131, 2nd edition, edited by Keith Brown, 93–100. Oxford: Elsevier. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2007 “Universal Tendencies in Translation.” In Incorporating Corpora: The Linguist and the Translator, edited by Gunilla Anderman, and Margaret Rogers, 32–48. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nesti, Giorgia
2010 “The Information and Communication Policy of the European Union between Institutionalisation and Legitimation.” In Public Communication in the European Union: History, Perspectives and Challenges, edited by Giorgia Nesti, and Chiara Valentini, 23–48. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Oakey, David
2002 “Formulaic Language in English Academic Writing.” Using Corpora to Explore Linguistic Variation, edited by Randi Reppen, Susan M. Fitzmaurice, and Douglas Biber, 111–129. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Prieto Ramos, Fernando
2014 “International and Supranational Law in Translation: From Multilingual Lawmaking to Adjudication.” The Translator 20 (3), 313–331. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2019 “Implications of Text Categorisation for Corpus-based Legal Translation Research: The Case of International Institutional Settings.” Research Methods in Legal Translation and Interpreting: Crossing Methodological Boundaries, edited by Łucja Biel, Jan Engberg, Rosario Martín Ruano, and Vilelmini Sosoni, 29–47. London and New York: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rayson, Paul, and Roger Garside
2000 “Comparing Corpora using Frequency Profiling.” Proceedings of the Workshop on Comparing Corpora, Held in Conjunction with the 38th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL 2000). 1–8 October 2000, Hong Kong, 1–6. Accessed November 12, 2018. [URL]
Robertson, Colin
2015 “EU Multilingual Law: Interfaces of Law, Language and Culture.” Language and Culture in EU Law. Multidisciplinary Perspectives, edited by Susan Šarčević, 33–52. Farnham: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Scott, Mike
2016 WordSmith Tools version 7. Stroud: Lexical Analysis Software.Google Scholar
Swales, John M.
2004 Research Genres: Explorations and Applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Šarčević, Susan
1997 New Approach to Legal Translation. The Hague: Kluwer Law International.Google Scholar
2016 Language and Culture in EU Law: Multidisciplinary Perspectives. London and New York: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Toury, Gideon
1995 Descriptive Translation Studies and Beyond. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Trklja, Aleksandar
2018 “A Corpus Investigation of Formulaicity and Hybridity in Legal Language. A Case of EU Case Law Texts.” Phraseology in Legal and Institutional Settings: A Corpus-based Interdisciplinary Perspective, edited by Stanisław Goźdź-Roszkowski, and Gianluca Pontrandolfo, 89–108. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Wilson, Andrew
2013 “Embracing Bayes Factors for Key Item Analysis in Corpus Linguistics.” New Approaches to the Study of Linguistic Variability, edited by Markus Bieswanger, and Amei Koll-Stobbe, 3–11. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Wood, David
2015 Fundamentals of Formulaic Language: An Introduction. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Wray, Alison
2002 Formulaic Language and the Lexicon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 11 other publications

Biel, Łucja
2021. Chapter 10. EU institutional websites. In Translating Asymmetry – Rewriting Power [Benjamins Translation Library, 157], ► pp. 227 ff. DOI logo
Biel, Łucja
2023. From national to supranational institutionalisation: a microdiachronic study of the post-accession evolution of the Polish Eurolect. Perspectives 31:4 ► pp. 672 ff. DOI logo
Biel, Łucja & Dariusz Koźbiał
2020. How do translators handle (near-) synonymous legal terms? A mixed-genre parallel corpus study into the variation of EU English-Polish competition law terminology. Estudios de Traducción 10 ► pp. 69 ff. DOI logo
Corpas Pastor, Gloria & Fernando Sánchez Rodas
2023. EU phraseological verbal patterns in the PETIMOD 2.0 corpus. In Handbook of Terminology [Handbook of Terminology, 3], ► pp. 397 ff. 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
Koźbiał, Dariusz
2023. Research profile and bibliography of Professor Łucja Biel. Comparative Legilinguistics 52 ► pp. 381 ff. DOI logo
Liu, Xinyuan, Kanglong Liu & Andrew K. F. Cheung
2023. A Corpus-Assisted Study of Nominalization in Translated and Non-translated Judgments. In New Advances in Legal Translation and Interpreting [New Frontiers in Translation Studies, ], ► pp. 79 ff. DOI logo
Markova
2022. Peripherical means of translation adaptation of modality in Ukrainian translations of English-based international legal texts. Mìžnarodnij fìlologìčnij časopis 13:1 ► pp. 50 ff. DOI logo
Martín Martín-Mora, Concepción
2024. traducción en la Unión Europea: perfil profesional, características y relevancia de un elemento clave para el correcto funcionamiento de la organización. Entreculturas. Revista de Traducción y Comunicación Intercultural :14 ► pp. 118 ff. DOI logo
Prieto Ramos, Fernando & Diego Guzmán
2021. Examining institutional translation through a legal lens. Target. International Journal of Translation Studies 33:2 ► pp. 254 ff. DOI logo
Wu, Baimei, Andrew K.F. Cheung & Jie Xing
2021. Learning Chinese political formulaic phraseology from a self-built bilingual United Nations Security Council corpus. Babel. Revue internationale de la traduction / International Journal of Translation 67:4 ► pp. 500 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 15 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.