EU phraseological verbal patterns in the PETIMOD 2.0 corpus: A NER-enhanced approach
1.Introduction
As Prieto Ramos (2021Prieto Ramos, Fernando 2021 “Translating legal terminology and phraseology: between inter-systemic incongruity and multilingual
harmonization.” Perspectives 29(2):175–183. , 175) puts it, “terminology and
phraseology are key features of legal discourses, and central aspects of professional practice and research in legal
translation”. In the context of legal and institutional EU settings, document drafting and mediation
(translation/interpreting) are characterized by a high degree of formulaicity, which seems to be particularly notable
in the case of translations (Biel 2018 2018 “Lexical bundles in EU law: The impact of translation process on the patterning of legal
language.” In Phraseology in Legal and Institutional Settings: A Corpus-Based Interdisciplinary Perspective, edited by Stanisław Goźdź-Roszkowski and Gianluca Pontrandolfo, 11–26. London: Routledge.
).
Recent advances in corpus-based methodologies have allowed researchers to establish the contribution of
single-word terms, multi-word terms, lexical phraseological patterns and verbal phraseological patterns to the legal
flavour and genre adherence of those texts. One of the biggest advantages of the use of corpora for terminology is the
study of concordances to identify specialized phraseology, also in the form of clusters (alternatively known as
lexical bundles). As a matter of fact, specialized phraseology tends to cluster around terms, forming a link between such terms and the text and the text (Pontrandolfo 2015 2015 “Investigating Judicial Phraseology with COSPE: A contrastive Corpus-based Study.” In New directions in corpus-based translation studies, edited by Claudio Fantinuoli and Federico Zanettin, 137–159. Berlin: Language Science Press., 148). For legal and institutional translators, for example, translation is
not only a question of terminology, but also a problem of phraseological conventions. Beyond lexical and
terminological equivalence, translators have to tackle the additional difficulty of acquiring familiarity with the
genre structures or routine formulae, if they want to produce a text which is accurate from the discourse and register
point of view (Pontrandolfo 2015 2015 “Investigating Judicial Phraseology with COSPE: A contrastive Corpus-based Study.” In New directions in corpus-based translation studies, edited by Claudio Fantinuoli and Federico Zanettin, 137–159. Berlin: Language Science Press.
, 137–138).
This chapter deals with the phraseological verbal patterns associated with named entities in an intermodal corpus of EU petitions in English and Spanish (PETIMOD v. 2.0). After a brief overview of terminology and phraseology research in EU legal discourse (Section 2), Section 3 presents the main goals of the study and covers data collection, data extraction and methodology of analysis. Section 4 offers the main findings of our study and discussion of results, followed by some concluding remarks on the new venues opened by our research for contrastive analysis, translation, and interpreting (Section 5).
2.Related work
From its very beginning the study of EU legal terminology has been strongly marked by the peculiar
nature of EU law and culture. The first publications already strived to differentiate between new and foreign
institutional terms, which actually led to the identification of a distinct linguistic variety in EU texts, known as
Eurolect (Goffin 1994Goffin, Roger 1994 “L ’ eurolecte : oui , jargon communautaire : non.” Meta 39(4):636–642. , 641). The existence of Eurolect has already been
empirically proven in many official languages, such as English (Sandrelli
2018Sandrelli, Annalisa 2018 “Observing Eurolects: The case of English.” In Observing Eurolects: Corpus analysis of linguistic variation in EU law, edited by Laura Mori, 63–92.
) and Spanish (Blini 2018Blini, Lorenzo 2018 “Observing Eurolects: The case of Spanish.” In Observing Eurolects: Corpus analysis of linguistic variation in EU law, edited by Laura Mori, 329–367.
). As Biel, Biernacka, and
Jopek-Bosiacka (2018 2018 “Lexical bundles in EU law: The impact of translation process on the patterning of legal
language.” In Phraseology in Legal and Institutional Settings: A Corpus-Based Interdisciplinary Perspective, edited by Stanisław Goźdź-Roszkowski and Gianluca Pontrandolfo, 11–26. London: Routledge.
, 257) state, “as a result of non-native influences on
EU English and an increased need to create neologisms, EU texts are marked by some unnatural word combination,
including untypical collocations and collocational distortions”. Furthermore, it is observed that:
Eurolects have developed a distinct supranational terminology, as well as stylistic and grammatical features, which depart from certain conventions of national languages. With the advent of corpus methods, it has recently become possible to explore the nature of Eurolects empirically on a large scale.(Biel 2021 2021 “Eurolects and EU Legal Translation.” In The Oxford Handbook of Translation and Social Practices, edited by Meng Ji and Sara Laviosa, 477–500. Online: Oxford University Press.
, 1)
Despite the promising avenues of research, so far there have been relatively few empirical studies of
word combinations in the domain of law and in the many different contexts where legal discourse is used. Contrastive
and comparative studies also remain relatively scarce, possibly due to the absence of systematic, publicly available
corpora for the study of legal language (Biel 2021 2021 “Eurolects and EU Legal Translation.” In The Oxford Handbook of Translation and Social Practices, edited by Meng Ji and Sara Laviosa, 477–500. Online: Oxford University Press. , 2). At a monolingual
level, seminal contributions were Goźdź-Roszkowski (2011Goźdź-Roszkowski, Stanisław 2011 Patterns of Linguistic Variation in American Legal English: A Corpus-Based Study. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
, 2012 2012 “Discovering Patterns and Meanings: Corpus Perspectives on Phraseology in Legal
Discourse.” Roczniki Humanistyczne 60(8):47–70. https://www.ceeol.com/search/article-detail?id=129241), both about phraseology in US legal English. The publication of a special issue of Fachsprache (Goźdź-Roszkowski and Pontrandolfo 2015b eds. 2015b “Legal Phraseology Today. A Corpus-based View.” Fachsprache 37(3–4).
) contributed to filling the existing gap in the
literature with regard to contrastive and translational multilingual studies (Gozdz-Roszkowski and Pontrandolfo 2015a 2015a “Legal Phraseology Today: Corpus-based Applications Across Legal Languages and
Genres.” Fachsprache 37(3–4):130–138. 10.24989/fs.v37i3-4.1287.
, 134), followed by a volume with invited contributions and
workshop papers (Goźdź-Roszkowski and Pontrandolfo 2018Goźdź-Roszkowski, Stanisław and Gianluca Pontrandolfo eds. 2018 Phraseology in legal and institutional settings: A corpus-based interdisciplinary perspective. London: Routledge.
).
Regarding EU language, formulaicity has attracted most attention from researchers, especially in written
genres. Empirical corpus-based research has been carried out to discern how phraseology behaves in legal translation
and whether it is likely to retain the same level of formulaicity as non-translated law, as stated by Biel (2014)Biel, Łucja 2014 “Phraseology in legal translation: A corpus-based analysis of textual mapping in EU
law.” In The Ashgate Handbook of Legal Translation, edited by Le Cheng, King Kui Sin & Anne Wagner, 177–192. , one of the most prolific scholars in the field. The hypothesis
that translations are less patterned and less formulaic than originals and corresponding non-translated texts in the
target language was tested by Biel (2018) 2018 “Lexical bundles in EU law: The impact of translation process on the patterning of legal
language.” In Phraseology in Legal and Institutional Settings: A Corpus-Based Interdisciplinary Perspective, edited by Stanisław Goźdź-Roszkowski and Gianluca Pontrandolfo, 11–26. London: Routledge.
. The author examines to what
extent it is possible to recreate or prime the typical patterning of legal language in translation. In her study, the
hypothesis that translations are less patterned and less formulaic than non-translations was not confirmed. In fact,
translations tend to exhibit their own bundles (n-grams) due to interference of their source texts.
Another study by Biel, Koźbiał, and Wasilewska (2019)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. showed
a strong correlation between formulaicity and genres, as well as multiple facets of formulaicity (e.g. tokens vs.
types), confirming the increased aggregate formulaicity of translations as regards bundle tokens for all EU genres,
except for judgments (Biel, Koźbiał, and Wasilewska 2019Biel, 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.
). This study also
argued 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, in line with Biel (2018) 2018 “Lexical bundles in EU law: The impact of translation process on the patterning of legal
language.” In Phraseology in Legal and Institutional Settings: A Corpus-Based Interdisciplinary Perspective, edited by Stanisław Goźdź-Roszkowski and Gianluca Pontrandolfo, 11–26. London: Routledge.
.
Contrasting formulaicity of translated and non-translated texts is one of the most researched topics in
the literature. For space limitations, suffice to mention relevant publications that focus on the analysis of
multi-word terms and collocations in various types of EU legal, judicial, and regulatory documents. Most authors adopt
a monolingual, supranational or transnational perspective (Biel, Biernacka, and
Jopek-Bosiacka 2018Biel, Łucja, Agnieszka Biernacka, and Anna Jopek-Bosiacka 2018 “Collocations of Terms in EU Competition Law: A Corpus Analysis of EU English
Collocations.” In Language and Law: The Role of Language and Translation in EU Competition Law, edited by Silvia Marino, Łucja Biel, Martina Bajčić and Vilelmini Sosoni, 249–274. Cham: Springer International Publishing. ; Biel and Doczekalska 2020Biel, Łucja and Agnieszka Doczekalska 2020 “How do supranational terms transfer into national legal systems?” Terminology. International Journal of Theoretical and Applied Issues in Specialized Communication 26(2):184–212.
; Biel, Koźbiał, and Wasilewska 2019Biel, 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.
; Biel
and Pytel 2021Biel, Łucja and Izabela Pytel 2021 “Corrigenda of EU Legislative Acts as an Indicator of Quality Assurance Failures.” In Institutional Translation and Interpreting, edited by Fernando Prieto Ramos, 150–173. New York: Routledge.
; Hrežo 2020Hrežo, Vladimir 2020 “Exploring Phraseology in EU Legal Discourse.” Language – Culture – Politics 1:29–52.
; Pontrandolfo 2011Pontrandolfo, Gianluca 2011 “Phraseology in criminal judgments: A corpus study of original vs. translated
Italian.” Sendebar 22:209–234.
, 2021 2021 “National and EU judicial phraseology under the magnifying glass: a corpus-assisted analysis of
complex prepositions in Spanish.” Perspectives 29(2). 260–277.
), although there are studies that also
take a cross-lingual stance, including translation (Dobrić Basaneže 2017Dobrić Basaneže, Katja 2017 “Interpreting Phraseological Units in Contracts: The Case of Extended Term–Embedding
Collocation.” Suvremena Lingvistika 43(84):199–216.
;
Klabal 2019Klabal, Ondřej 2019 “Corpora in Legal Translation: Overcoming Terminological and Phraseological Assymetries between
Czech and English.” CLINA: Revista Interdisciplinaria de Traducción, Interpretación y Comunicación Intercultural 5(2):165–86.
; Pontrandolfo
2015 2015 “Investigating Judicial Phraseology with COSPE: A contrastive Corpus-based Study.” In New directions in corpus-based translation studies, edited by Claudio Fantinuoli and Federico Zanettin, 137–159. Berlin: Language Science Press.
; Seracini 2020Seracini, Francesca L. 2020 “Phraseology in multilingual EU legislation: a corpus-based study of translated multi-word
terms.” Perspectives 29:245–259.
; Trklja
2018Trklja, Aleksandar 2018 “A corpus investigation of formulaicity and hybridity in legal language: A case of EU case law
texts.” In Phraseology in Legal and Institutional Settings: A Corpus-Based Interdisciplinary Perspective, edited by Stanisław Goźdź-Roszkowski and Gianluca Pontrandolfo, 89–108. London: Routledge.
; Vigier-Moreno and Sánchez Ramos 2017Vigier-Moreno, Francisco Javier and María del Mar Sánchez Ramos 2017 “Using parallel corpora to study the translation of legal system-bound terms: The case of names of
English and Spanish courts.” In Computational and Corpus-Based Phraseology. Second International Conference, Europhras 2017 London, UK,
November 13–14, 2017 Proceedings, edited by Ruslan Mitkov, 260–273. Cham: Springer.
), or even present an
intermodal approach (Ferraresi and Miličević 2017Ferraresi, Adriano and Maja Miličević 2017 “Phraseological patterns in interpreting and translation : similar or different ?” In Empirical Translation Studies: New Methodological and Theoretical Traditions, edited by Gert De Sutter, Marie-Aude Lefer and Isabelle Delaere, 157–182. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
; Ferraresi et al. 2017Ferraresi, Adriano, Silvia Bernardini, Marie-Aude Lefer, and Maja Miličević 2017 “Investigating the language of written translation and simultaneous interpretation: Simplification
in EPTIC.” In Congrès Mondial de Traductologie (Université de Paris-Nanterre, du 10/04/2017 au 14/04/2017). http://hdl.handle.net/2078.1/185346; Santandrea 2014Santandrea, Manuela 2014 Le collocazioni in traduzione e interpretazione tra italiano e inglese: uno studio su
EPTIC_01_2011. Università di Bologna. https://amslaurea.unibo.it/cgi/users/home?screen=EPrint%3A%3AView&eprintid=7839), among
others.
On the other hand, studies on formulaicity in EU interpreting are scarce, but not inexistent. Apart from
the studies already mentioned comparing the phraseological patterns in both modalities of mediated discourse
(translation and interpreting), some studies are devoted specifically to interpreting. For instance, Henriksen (2007)Henriksen, Line 2007 “The song in the booth: Formulaic interpreting and oral textualisation.” Interpreting 9(1):1–20. conducted an experimental study on the Danish booth in the
Joint Interpretation Service of the European Commission. Her findings suggest that formulaic language production
contributes to the overall creation of EU discourse and is
characterized by an increased homogeneity of simultaneous interpreting in general and with regards to specific booths,
as interpreters tend to borrow formulaic phraseologies from their colleagues. In the same vein, Aston (2018)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 & Bart Defrancq, 83–96. Singapore: Springer.
analysed a corpus of European Parliament transcripts and established that
interpreters tend to use recurrent formulaic patterns as a way to enhance their fluency, manage turn-taking and other
discourse features (linked to turn-taking, justification, etc.), and reduce the cognitive load of interpretations.
Some recent intermodal studies of formulaicity in constrained communication were also contributed by Kajzer-Wietrzny and Grabowski (2021)Kajzer-Wietrzny, Marta and Łukasz Grabowski 2021 “Formulaicity in Constrained Communication: An Intermodal Approach.” MonTI. Monografías de Traducción e Interpretación 13:148–83.
.
3.Study goals and methodology
This chapter builds on our previous work and intends to delve further into the study of named entities and their phraseological patterns in an enlarged, intermodal corpus of EU petitions in English and Spanish.
Named entities (NEs) tend to be particularly ubiquitous in Eurolects. Surprisingly, this is an
under-researched and almost unexplored topic. In Corpas Pastor and Sánchez Rodas (2022), we conducted an NLP-enhanced
analysis of the translation and interpreting shifts of NEs in a former version of the PETIMOD corpus (v. 1.0), an
EN<>ES intermodal corpus of documents and speeches rendered at the Committee on Petitions of the European
Parliament. In this study we claim that institutional texts exhibit an argument-structure text-organizing pattern
centred around named entities and their phraseology, in the same way as it has been demonstrated in the field of data
mining, in which sentiment has been analysed by looking at opinions towards entities (Steinberger et al. 2011Steinberger, Josef, Polina Lenkova, Mijail Kabadjov, Ralf Steinberger, and Erik Van Der Goot 2011 “Multilingual entity-centered sentiment analysis evaluated by parallel corpora.” In International Conference Recent Advances in Natural Language Processing, RANLP, edited by Galia Angelova, Kalina Bontcheva, Ruslan Mitkov & Nikolai Nikolov, 770–775. Hissar: Association for Computational Linguistics.). To this end, we have established three main objectives:
-
Identifying, extracting and classifying NEs in the corpus;
-
Identifying, extracting and classifying NEs’ phraseological verbal patterns in the corpus;
-
Comparing the quantitative and qualitative nature of NE-based phraseology in each of the Eurolect variants (English/Spanish, translated/non-translated, interpreted/non-interpreted) and its degree of formulaicity (cf. Biel, Koźbiał, and Wasilewska 2018).
This study will use a corpus-based and NLP-enhanced methodology, as extraction of NEs and their phraseological patterns will be computer-assisted.
3.1Units of analysis
For this study we have selected named entities as our units of analysis. NEs are special types of terms that identify real-world “objects”, understood in a broad sense to encompass persons (Ursula von der Leyen), geopolitical locations, such as cities, countries, and states (Brussels, Belgium, UK), non-geopolitical locations, such as mountain ranges, seas, rivers, etc. (Danube), organizations and governing bodies (the International Court of Justice, the European Agency for Medicine EMA), buildings and other infrastructure (Westminster Abbey), and products (AstraZeneca), as well as dates (13 April, 2021), times (hour), numbers (third, 40.5), quantities and percentages (kilowatt, 3%), currency (Sterling pound, £) and even languages (English), among others.
Named entities, especially those referring to persons, locations and organizations, behave exactly
like terms11.In fact, named entities have also been referred to as “system-bound” or “culture-bound” terms in
the legal translation literature (Vigier-Moreno and Sánchez Ramos
2017Vigier-Moreno, Francisco Javier and María del Mar Sánchez Ramos 2017 “Using parallel corpora to study the translation of legal system-bound terms: The case of names of
English and Spanish courts.” In Computational and Corpus-Based Phraseology. Second International Conference, Europhras 2017 London, UK,
November 13–14, 2017 Proceedings, edited by Ruslan Mitkov, 260–273. Cham: Springer. ). However, despite drawing attention to common problems which professionals could face when
translating these entities, the literature does not explore the possible relations between single or multi-word
entities, collocations, and formulaic structures in the legal and institutional discourse. and present similar challenges for their systematic study:
homographic pairs, variant spellings, morphological inflection, phraseological patterns, and the possibility of
being referred to as multi-word expressions or acronyms (Jacquet et al.
2019Jacquet, Guillaume, Maud Ehrmann, Jakub Piskorski, Hristo Tanev, and Ralf Steinberger 2019 “Cross-lingual linking of multi-word entities and language-dependent learning of multi-word entity
patterns.” In Representation and Parsing of Multiword Expressions: Current trends, edited by Yannick Parmentier and Jakub Waszczuk, 269–297. Berlin: Language Science Press.
).
For the formulaicity analysis, we will use the classification proposed by Biel (2014Biel, Łucja 2014 “Phraseology in legal translation: A corpus-based analysis of textual mapping in EU
law.” In The Ashgate Handbook of Legal Translation, edited by Le Cheng, King Kui Sin & Anne Wagner, 177–192. , 178–181), which depicts a phraseological continuum with fuzzy
boundaries between five categories, ranging from the global textual level to the local microlevel. Examples (in
italics) illustrate various phraseological patterns (in bold) with NEs (underlined).
-
Text-organizing patterns are repetitive global textual sequences which are often prescribed in drafting guidelines. They form a matrix of a legal text, emphasizing its ritualized nature. Typical text-organizing patterns include the title of the document, citations, transitions between sections, enacting formulas, amending formulas, and closing formulas, e.g.: The meeting opened at 10.06 on Wednesday, 19 February 2020, with Ms Yana Toom, (2nd Vice – Chair) presiding .
-
Grammatical patterns are genre-specific, recurrent, and express deontic modality, if-then mental models of legal reasoning and other conditional clauses, purpose clauses, the passive voice, and other impersonal structures. E.g.: PETI should not draft an opinion to the AFET, El artículo 29 de la CDPD debe entenderse junto con el artículo 9 (Accesibilidad) [Article 29 of the CRPD should be read in conjunction with Article 9 (Accessibility)].
-
Term-forming patterns are collocates of a generic term which form more specific multi-word terms of varying degrees of terminologicality. The typical, most productive term-forming patterns tend to be Adj + N and N + N, but in practice multi-word terms may be structurally very complex, e.g.: European Commission , cuenca del Mar Menor [(The) Mar Menor basin].
-
Term-embedding collocations22.The term collocation used in this paper follows Biel’s approach (2014Biel, Łucja 2014 “Phraseology in legal translation: A corpus-based analysis of textual mapping in EU law.” In The Ashgate Handbook of Legal Translation, edited by Le Cheng, King Kui Sin & Anne Wagner, 177–192.
), which partially deviates from mainstream postulates of phraseological studies (see Corpas Pastor 2017Corpas Pastor, Gloria 2017 “Collocations in E-Bilingual Dictionaries: From Underlying Theoretical Assumptions to Practical Lexicography and Translation Issues.” In Collocations and Other Lexical Combinations in Spanish. Theoretical and Applied Approaches, edited by Sergi Torner Castells and Elisenda Bernal, 139–160. London: Routledge.
for an overview). are collocates of terms which embed terms in cognitive scripts and the text, evidencing combinatory properties of terms. N + V term-embedding collocations can be deemed prototypical in this category and provide important conceptual domain information. They denote what one can typically do with (or to) the object denoted by the base noun, e.g.: The EU Commission launched an infringement procedure ; La Comisión es consciente de las preocupaciones que señalan los peticionarios [The Commission is aware of the concerns raised by the petitioners].
-
Finally, lexical collocations are routine formulae at the microstructural level which are not built around terms. They include inter/intratextual referential patterns, such as collocates of editing units, other recurrent patterns referred to as qualifications and non-terminological lexical bundles. In contrast to term-embedding collocations and multi-word terms, recurrence is an important criterion in their identification, e.g.: according to the Water Framework Directive ; propuesta de resolución conforme al artículo 227 punto 2 [motion for a resolution pursuant to Rule 227 (2)].
Term-forming patterns and lexical collocations are outside the scope of this paper on verbal patterns with NEs as subjects or complements.
3.2Choice of corpus
For this study we will use an enlarged version of the PETIMOD corpus (described in Corpas Pastor and Sánchez Rodas, 2022). PETIMOD is a parallel intermodal corpus composed of citizens’ petitions and other documents related to the European Parliament’s Committee on Petitions (PETI). It comprises two subcorpora: (a) original texts and speeches in English and Spanish (PETIMOD_ORIG), and (b) their corresponding translations into Spanish and interpretations into English (PETIMOD_MEDIATED). The genres included are basically notices to members, speeches by MEPs and speakers invited to the Committee of Petitions’ sessions, and non-petitional public documents discussed in the sessions (e.g. reports, opinions).
3.2.1Corpus size
The initial version of the corpus (PETIMOD 1.0) consisted of all petitions discussed during
the sessions of February 2020, and all original Spanish (ES) speeches and their English (EN) interpretations of the session of 19th February 2020. Corpus
compilation involved a collection of spoken and written documents. Data collection of written documents was
rather straightforward: through the eMeeting portal33.
https://emeeting.europarl.europa.eu/emeeting/committee/agenda/202002/PETI?meeting=PETI-2020-0219_1P&session=02-19-10-00. of the European
Parliament notices to members, reports and opinions were accessed, downloaded, reformatted (from .pdf to
.txt), coded and stored. In comparison, the collection of oral data and transcriptions was more complex and
time-consuming. It involved: (1) accessing oral data via the Webstreaming section of the EP Committees site;
(2) downloading and storing recordings in HQ .mp4 format; (3) carrying out automatic speech recognition (ASR)
plus automatic text transcription (ATT) of audiofiles with YouTube; (4) manually checking and revising in line
with EPTIC conventions (Bernardini et al. 2018Bernardini, Silvia, Adriano Ferraresi, Mariachiara Russo, Camille Collard, and Bart Defrancq 2018 “Building Interpreting and Intermodal Corpora: A How-to for a Formidable Task.” In Making Way in Corpus-based Interpreting Studies, edited by Mariachiara Russo, Claudio Bendazzoli & Bart Defrancq, 21–42. Singapore: Springer. ) and the EU
Interinstitutional Style Guide (European Union 2012aEuropean Union 2012a Interinstitutional Style Guide 2011. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
and 2012b 2012b Libro de estilo interinstitucional 2011. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
),44.The transcriptions employed the English and Spanish ISG PDF editions of the year 2012, together
with the latest modifications of the ISG website up to the submission date, that is, March 2021 (see the news
archive at http://publications.europa.eu/code/en/en-000300.htm). However, a new PDF edition for all EU languages
was released in 2022 (https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2830/215072). among others; and
(5) coding and storing.
For this study, the corpus has been enlarged to include the English and Spanish draft agendas55. https://emeeting.europarl.europa.eu/emeeting/committee/en/agenda/202002/PETI?meeting=PETI-2020-0219_1P&session=02-19-10-00. and minutes66. https://emeeting.europarl.europa.eu/emeeting/committee/en/agenda/202004/PETI. from the February 2020 meeting, as well as the original Spanish speeches from the 20th February session and their interpretations into English. This session was chosen because it had similar features to that of 19th February already compiled (original Spanish speeches on related environmental topics). Draft agendas and minutes are very relevant documents in the context of committee meetings which were previously used for guidance at the first steps of PETIMOD compilation, especially for identifying and codifying the speakers’ interventions. This time they were also included in the corpus itself. In an NER-oriented study, these two text genres can be very fruitful, as they provide additional NE samples apart from the people and topics intervening in each session. Section B of draft agendas, for example, lists petitions which are proposed for closure in the light of the Commission’s written reply or other documents received. In accordance with the committee’s Guidelines, these items are not discussed during the meeting, but any PETI Member may ask before the end of the meeting for an item in section B to be kept open (European Parliament 2018European Parliament 2018 Guidelines: Committee on Petitions. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/cmsdata/138889/1145997EN.pdf). Minutes also include additional information in the form of requests on certain petitions not necessarily reflected in the agenda, and an attendance list of each meeting with MEPs, commissioners, guests, journalists, etc. Table 1 summarizes the size of PETIMOD 2.0 (in total, per component and per language). The total number of documents, running words (tokens) and word types (types) have been calculated using ReCor.77.ReCor is a solution to determine the minimum size of a corpus or a textual collection, regardless of language or textual genre of the collection, establishing therefore the minimum threshold for representation by an algorithm (N-Cor) and analyzing lexical density according to the incremental increase in the corpus (http://www.lexytrad.es/en/resources/recor-3/). The corpus size was increased by 86 documents, 3,544 types and 23,608 tokens.
PETIMOD 2.0 | Documents | Types | Tokens |
---|---|---|---|
PETIMOD2_ORIG_EN | 21 | 5,330 | 52,421 |
PETIMOD2_ORIG_ES | 81 | 3,072 | 18,409 |
PETIMOD2_MEDIATED_EN | 81 | 2,025 | 15,709 |
PETIMOD2_MEDIATED_ES | 21 | 6,262 | 61,377 |
PETIMOD2_EN (ORIG + mediated) | 102 | 7,355 | 68,130 |
PETIMOD2_ES (ORIG + mediated) | 102 | 9,334 | 79,786 |
PETIMOD2 | 204 | 16,689 | 147,916 |
3.2.2Transcription conventions and revisions
The initial set of transcription conventions were based on Bernardini et al. (2018Bernardini, Silvia, Adriano Ferraresi, Mariachiara Russo, Camille Collard, and Bart Defrancq 2018 “Building Interpreting and Intermodal Corpora: A How-to for a Formidable Task.” In Making Way in Corpus-based Interpreting Studies, edited by Mariachiara Russo, Claudio Bendazzoli & Bart Defrancq, 21–42. Singapore: Springer. , 26–27). For this study, features and codes used in the first
compilation process were also revised. The purpose was to better accommodate transcription conventions to our
NER-based methodology, removing oral features which could hinder the recognition of named entities or complex
phraseology, a task proved problematic in our previous research (cf. Corpas Pastor and Sánchez Rodas, 2022Corpas Pastor, Gloria & Fernando Sánchez Rodas 2022 NLP-enhanced Shift Analysis of Named Entities in an English Spanish Intermodal Corpus of European
Petitions. In Marta Kajzer-Wietrzny, Adriano Ferraresi, Ilmari Ivaska & Silvia Bernardini (eds.), Mediated discourse at the European Parliament: Empirical investigations, 219–251. Berlin: Language Science Press. https://langsci-press.org/catalog/book/343
). Thus, from the initial set a series of non-relevant or
problematic items were removed, namely filled pauses (ehm), mid-word pauses
(proposal /pro_posal), non-verbalized noises ([applause]), non-standard pronunciation
(sun /su:n/) and truncated words (admin-). Our proposal for
transcription conventions also includes a new feature (borrowings/denominations), as illustrated in Table 2.
Our transcription method follows a minimalistic line, ignoring the representation of purely oral features such as filled and mid-word pauses, non-verbalized noises, non-standard pronunciation, and truncated words. Mispronunciations are relegated to lapses affecting NEs. In these cases, the NE is corrected in transcription and the complete mistaken form written between single slashes (/) right after; this allows NE recognition for each case without compromising error analysis later on. Single-word repetitions are not conveyed, and neither are clarifications from interpreters. On the other hand, more flexibility is given to the use of ellipses (…). Apart from silent pauses, ellipses are also used for signalling relevant reformulations (that is, when an entire word or phrase is uttered and then completely amended) and sub-sentence segments (e.g. appositions or additional discourse markers at the beginning or the middle of a sentence). An inclusion of our own is the use of quotation marks to identify borrowings and denominations in plain-text format.88.English quotation marks are used for both languages.
Feature | Code |
---|---|
Silent pause / reformulations / sub-sentence segments | … |
Rising intonation | ? |
Inaudible segment | # |
Mispronunciation | Parlamento /parlo’mento/ |
Ambiguity | NA |
Overlapping talk | NA |
Sentence-like segments99.Double slashes (//), used in EPIC, were preferred over the original full stop (.) from the start because of aesthetic reasons. | // |
Borrowings/denominations | “fitness check” de las Directivas |
As in the first version of the corpus, spelling and capitalization were revised using a number of related resources for each language. This time, however, the process was not two-phased: on the contrary, segmentations and spelling revision could be performed simultaneously, taking advantage of our simplified approach to transcription. The English1010. https://publications.europa.eu/code/en/en-000100.htm. and Spanish1111. https://publications.europa.eu/code/es/es-000100.htm. versions of the Interinstitutional Style Guide (ISG) were used as reference, from which a selection of additional spelling resources stemmed.1212.These resources are listed as “Reference Works” for the English publications in the Official Journal and “Obras de consulta” for Spanish-specific conventions, respectively. In those cases in which language offers different correct usages, we follow the indications of the Spanish version of the ISG (European Union 2012b, 151), which states that the prevailing criteria will be those of EU translation services (e.g. for capitalization) and the Publications Office agreed norms for all languages (e.g. for acronyms). The PETIMOD corpus (version 1.0.) was also consulted throughout the revision process for the sake of coherence.
3.3Named entity recognition
Parallel to the enlargement of the corpus and simplification of the transcription conventions, the
named entity recognition (NER) procedure was also revised. In Natural Language Processing (NLP), NER is a subtask
of information retrieval consisting in the location and classification of unambiguous objects or items encountered
in a document or in a corpus (for a general overview, see Nasar, Jaffry, and
Malik 2021Nasar, Zara, Syed Waqar Jaffry, and Muhammad Kamran Malik 2021 “Named Entity Recognition and Relation Extraction: State-of-the-Art.” ACM Computing Surveys 54(1), 1–39. and Nouvel, Ehrmann, and Rosset 2016Nouvel, Damien, Maud Ehrmann, and Sophie Rosset eds. 2016 Named Entities for Computational Linguistics. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
). Examples
of real-world “objects” or NEs found in our corpus are Czech Republic, European Social
Fund, Angel Dzhambazki, the Greens, the Ombudsman for
Persons with Disabilities, etc.
3.3.1Extraction of entities and system performance
In Corpas Pastor and Sánchez Rodas (2022)Corpas Pastor, Gloria & Fernando Sánchez Rodas 2022 NLP-enhanced Shift Analysis of Named Entities in an English Spanish Intermodal Corpus of European
Petitions. In Marta Kajzer-Wietrzny, Adriano Ferraresi, Ilmari Ivaska & Silvia Bernardini (eds.), Mediated discourse at the European Parliament: Empirical investigations, 219–251. Berlin: Language Science Press. https://langsci-press.org/catalog/book/343, the
chunking, detection and extraction of NEs were carried out in two phases. First, entities were retrieved
automatically with the VIP1313.For a brief description of the VIP system, see Corpas Pastor
(2021) 2021 “Technology Solutions for Interpreters: The VIP System.” Hermēneus. Revista de Traducción e Interpretación 23:91–123.
. NER module and exported to an Excel
file. The NER module integrated SpaCy1414.SpaCy is a free open-source library in Python (https://spacy.io/). and pre-trained models for
English and Spanish.1515.The VIP NER annotation schemes distinguish at least four basic entity types: named persons or
families (PER, e.g. Dorthe Christensen, Ádám Kósa); names of politically or
geographically defined locations (LOC, e.g. Mar Menor Coastal Lagoon, Salinas y Arenales
de San Pedro del Pinatar), names of corporate, governmental or other organizational entities (ORG,
e.g. EU, Tribunal de Cuentas Europeo) and miscellaneous entities (MISC, e.g.
Tihange 2, AAE UE-Japón). In order to assess the system performance
(and, therefore, the accuracy of results), precision and recall were calculated.1616.Precision refers to the fraction of relevant NEs (i.e. a total number of correctly retrieved NEs
minus errors) among all retrieved instances whereas recall refers to the fraction of retrieved instances among all
relevant instances found in the corpus. For precision, two levels of analysis were established: (1) relevant NEs, i.e.
entities that had been correctly extracted, and (2) relevant NEs that had been correctly ascribed to four
categories: person (PER), organization (ORG), location (LOC) and miscellaneous (MISC). Precision results for
English were 0.697/0.603; and 0.513/0.385 for Spanish. These results showed a better performance for English,
especially when relevant and correctly classified NEs were considered. During the second phase of the
analysis, the list of automatically retrieved NEs was supplemented with entities extracted manually with
SketchEngine.1717.
https://www.sketchengine.eu/. Recall of our NER system was then calculated
(relevant NEs / relevant and correctly classified NEs): 0.773/0.969 for English, and 0.677/0.612 for
Spanish.
Low precision/recall results were attributed to various issues related to transcription conventions, lack of finer-grained named entity categories, or different pre-trained language models. In order to overcome those limitations, transcription conventions were revised and simplified (cf. 3.2). In addition, we adopted a new finer-grained classification of NEs by replacing the initial four categories with a longer list of pretrained categories that can accommodate up to 18 entities for English and 14 for Spanish (people, organizations, places, money, time, date, laws, languages, products, numbers, etc.).
For NER we used DeepPavlov,1818.
https://deeppavlov.ai/. an open-source
framework for deep learning tasks in Python (Burtsev et al. 2018Burtsev, Mikhail, Alexander Seliverstov, Rafael Airapetyan, Mikhail Arkhipov, Dilyara Baymurzina, Nickolay Bushkov, and Marat Zaynutdinov 2018 “Deeppavlov: Open-source library for dialogue systems.” In Proceedings of ACL 2018, System Demonstrations, 122–127. Melbourne: Association for Computational Linguistics. ).
The 18 categories have been trained on OntoNotes 5.0 (Weischedel et al.
2013Weischedel, Ralph, Martha Palmer, Mitchell Marcus, Eduard Hovy, Sameer Pradhan, Lance Ramshaw, and Ann Houston 2013 “OntoNotes Release 5.0 LDC2013T19.” Philadelphia: Linguistic Data Consortium.
) and BERT word embeddings have been used (Devlin et al.
2019Devlin, Jacob, Ming-Wei Chang, Kenton Lee, and Kristina Toutanova 2019 “Bert: Pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding.” https://arxiv.org/abs/1810.04805v2). Unlike SpaCy-based models, which employ convolutional neural networks, the BERT model offers
improved performance for almost all NLP tasks. Table 3 compares
performance of SpaCy and DeepPavlov NER models on PETIMOD 2.0.
PETIMOD 2.0 (NER) | SpaCy | DeepPavlov | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
EN | ES | EN | ES | |
errors | 322 | 820 | 309 | 383 |
relevant nes retrieved | 2,256 | 1,261 | 1,616 | 2,185 |
precision | 0.875 | 0.605 | 0.839 | 0.851 |
0.74 | 0.87 |
Precision results with SpaCy improve slightly (+0.178 for English, and +0.002 for Spanish; mean precision rate: 0.74; difference rate among languages: 0.27). This could be due to the NER-friendly simplified transcription conventions used in PETIMOD 2.0. By contrast, NER based on DeepPavlov shows slightly lower precision results for English (−0.036), but it exhibits better performance for Spanish (+0.246), with a higher mean precision rate for both languages (0.87) and a smaller difference rate (0.012).
3.3.2Phraseological Pattern Extraction for NEs
The VIP Query Corpus (QC) module and the NER module have been used to study formulaicity. First, the NER module has been used to extract NEs for manual pattern extraction. Secondly, the QC Pattern functionality has been used to combine part of speech (PoS) tags with the named entity (ENT) tag for automatic pattern extraction. Thirdly, the QC concordance functionality was also used to perform manual KWIC searches. Since the QC Pattern functionality is programmed in SpaCy, it was necessary to complement the automated retrieval with manual KWIC searches in order to locate phraseological patterns for the remaining NEs that had only been recognized with DeepPavlov. This was also necessary at times in order to retrieve contextualized examples of the patterns from the corpus. Targeted searches using key verbs and/or NEs were performed in order to retrieve candidate patterns and/or NEs spotted in the texts as well, which had not been identified neither by DeepPavlov nor SpaCy. Finally, results were imported automatically to Excel files or entered manually when needed.
Our analysis focuses on verbal patterns, divided into (i) entity-as-subject patterns and (ii) entity-as-complement patterns. Verbal patterns convey formulaicity at the level of text organization, grammatical relations, and collocational networks. Table 4 shows the list of all phraseological patterns used to query the PETIMOD 2.0 corpus.
verbal patterns | |
---|---|
Entity-as-subject patterns | Entity-as-complement patterns |
ENT + V | V + ENT |
ENT + * + V | V + * ENT |
ENT + V + * | V + * + ENT |
V + ENT + * | |
V + * + * + ENT | |
V + * + * + * + ENT |
4.Results and discussion
Additional Excel tables were created to collate and organize all NER results and corpus data obtained in our study. Concrete patterns and subpatterns have been selected according to frequency criteria from the Excel files generated by the VIP NER module and/or VIP QC Patterns functionality. Automatic pattern search and retrieval have been customized by using by using the verb (V) tag and wildcards (*), together with the ENT tag (for NEs). Figure 1 shows an example of VIP Corpus query-pattern extraction [prep + * + V + * + ENT] and results per NE type in the PETIMOD_EN subcorpus. Figure 2 displays the results obtained for the same query pattern with ORG filtering. Results can also be exported in .xls format.
Numbers of relevant hits1919.In this context, “relevant hits” means corpus-based examples of patterns containing the named entities (e.g. ENT + V). have been obtained in various ways, depending on the retrieval mode in place. If it was automatic (A), the column shows the number of hits manually counted with the help of the Excel search function. If it was semi-automatic (S), it shows the number of relevant hits automatically counted by the pattern search function of VIP. If it was manual (M), it shows the number of relevant hits manually counted in the concordance window of VIP.
While the VIP NER module enables sorting by NE type, and the QC Pattern functionality enables sort both by type and selected pattern, none of the three retrieval modes allows for automatic counting of the NE types involved. For this reason, the number of types of NEs has been calculated manually.
The tables also include a concordance line containing the pattern instance, which is marked in bold. These ‘good’ examples have been selected according to their frequency, relevance, and context-defining potential. Whenever possible, the corresponding translation or interpretation was searched for in the mediated subcorpora, in order to analyse possible translation and interpretation shifts and/or translationese features.
The results of our analysis are displayed by means of tables that include general results (Table 5 in Section 4.1), and patterns with verbs as pivoting elements (Tables 6–17 in Sections 4.2–4.4), representing the most relevant findings for the three categories in all subcorpora. For reasons of space and scope, term-embedding collocations have been illustrated with prototypical NEs (Commisión/Comisión Europea and Commission/European Commission, respectively) deemed representative of the possible microscopic mapping of entities in these textual genres.
A detailed analysis of the similarities and differences across subcorpora, brief descriptions of observed translation and interpreting shifts, discussion of main findings, including translation traits, etc., are provided for each table. But, first, a word of caution is necessary due to the limitations of our study, namely the size of the corpus and some processing errors in the pattern extraction phase.
4.1Distribution of NEs
Table 5 shows the general distribution of NEs across subcorpora. Figures for absolute and normalized frequencies are provided. The most represented categories in non-mediated English are PER (4.17), DATE (3.99), ORG (3.75), LAW (3.37) and MISC (2.18). However, translations into Spanish reflect a slightly different distribution as regards those main categories: DATE (5.46), ORG (4.06), LAW (3.46), PER (3.43), and MISC (3.18). These differences could be due to the impact of non-translated Spanish (as DATE is higher in the normalized frequency rank, while ORG is 0.1 more frequent than PER), or else be a direct consequence of various translation shifts. The fact that almost all main categories (except PER) present more instances in translated Spanish than in their original English texts also points to the existence of explicitation. In any case, the lower number of instances of PER found in translated Spanish is not in contradiction to explicitation, as original PER might have been translated as ORG.
Regarding interpreted English, the actual figures seem to point to simplification instead, as this subcorpus systematically includes fewer NEs than the corresponding original Spanish speeches. For instance, there are 36 instances of PER in original Spanish as opposed to 17 in interpreted English (the same applies to most categories). The lower number of dates (15) and cardinals (14) in the interpreted corpus compared to the higher number of instances found in the Spanish original speeches (43 and 36, respectively) could also be a sign of cognitive overload or difficulties experienced by the interpreters. Total number of NEs seem to support those two opposed general tendencies: the total number of NEs in the translated Spanish subcorpus (1,631) is higher than in the original English texts (1,239), whereas interpreted English contains fewer NEs (145) than original speeches in Spanish (294).
NE TYPE | EN | ES | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ORIG_EN (Non-T) | MED_EN (I) | ORIG_ES (Non-I) | MED_ES (T) | |||||
PER | 219 | 4.17 | 17 | 1.08 | 36 | 1.95 | 211 | 3.43 |
NORP | 30 | 0.57 | 13 | 0.82 | 27 | 1.46 | 51 | 0.82 |
FAC | 13 | 0.24 | 1 | 0.06 | 0 | – | 8 | 0.05 |
ORG | 197 | 3.75 | 15 | 0.95 | 38 | 2.05 | 250 | 4.06 |
GPE | 90 | 1.71 | 20 | 1.27 | 32 | 1.73 | 79 | 1.28 |
LOC | 21 | 0.39 | 7 | 0.44 | 14 | 0.75 | 26 | 0.42 |
PRODUCT | 3 | 0.05 | 0 | – | 0 | – | 1 | 0.01 |
EVENT | 0 | – | 0 | – | 0 | – | 0 | – |
WORK_OF_ART | 0 | – | 0 | – | 0 | – | 0 | – |
LAW | 177 | 3.37 | 11 | 0.69 | 23 | 1.24 | 213 | 3.46 |
LANGUAGE | 12 | 0.22 | 0 | – | 0 | – | 10 | 0.16 |
DATE | 210 | 3.99 | 15 | 0.69 | 43 | 2.32 | 336 | 5.46 |
TIME | 30 | 0.57 | 2 | 0.12 | 5 | 0.27 | 28 | 0.45 |
PERCENT | 13 | 0.24 | 2 | 0.12 | 2 | 0.10 | 15 | 0.24 |
MONEY | 9 | 0.17 | 7 | 0.44 | 7 | 0.37 | 9 | 0.14 |
QUANTITY | 8 | 0.00 | 4 | 0.25 | 6 | 0.32 | 10 | 0.16 |
ORDINAL | 14 | 0.26 | 8 | 0.50 | 9 | 0.48 | 15 | 0.24 |
CARDINAL | 78 | 1.48 | 14 | 0.88 | 36 | 1.94 | 173 | 2.81 |
MISC | 115 | 2.18 | 9 | 0.57 | 16 | 0.86 | 196 | 3.18 |
TOTAL | 1239 | 23.59 | 145 | 9.21 | 294 | 15.89 | 1631 | 26.51 |
4.2Text-organizing patterns
Text-organizing patterns (Table 6) are the most common category in ORIG_EN (94/139 subpatterns, 68%), and also the most varied one (11/24, 46%). 9/11 variations (82%) are built around entities in subject position. The most frequent associated NE types are DATE (42/139, 30%), ORG (36/139, 26%) and TIME (3/139, 2%). This is an indication of the importance of time organization in the activity of the Committee on Petitions, which is reflected in the different parts dividing the sessions (draft agendas and minutes), but also in the administrative processes summarized in the petition themselves. Another common point is that practically all subpatterns (10/11, 91%) contain a past participle or past continuous form. This could indicate a certain delay between the time when petitions are received and the moment at which the Committee or the Commission takes action. Each pattern can also be related to specific text-organizing functions. Two out of three ENT + V + * subpatterns, for example, are associated with concluding remarks in the petition summaries, whereas the entity-as-complement subpatterns reflect more practical, administrative functions such as deadlines, committee meeting pauses and starts, etc.
Pattern | Subpattern | Retrieval | Hits | NE type | Example |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
V + * + ENT | received + * + ENT | S | 26 | DATE: 20 ORG: 3 CARDINAL: 2 GPE: 1 |
Commission reply, received on 30 August 2017 |
V + * + * + ENT | declared + * + * + ENT | S | 18 | DATE: 17 LAW: 1 |
Admissibility Declared admissible on 4 March 2019 |
ENT + V + * | ENT + will + * | A | 16 | ORG: 14 GPE: 1 NORP: 1 |
Conclusion The Commission will continue to raise the issue in every possible forum |
V + * + ENT | requested + * + ENT | A | 16 | ORG: 14 GPE: 1 NORP: 1 |
Information requested from Commission under Rule 227(6 ) |
V + * + ENT | closed + * + ENT | S | 4 | DATE: 3 LAW: 1 |
The following petitions will be closed: 1512/2010, 1063/2018… |
ENT + V + * | ENT + decided + * | A | 3 | ORG: 2 GPE: 1 |
5. Opinions (a) Coordinators decided that PETI should not draft an opinion to the AFET Annual report |
V + * + ENT | continued + * + ENT | S | 3 | DATE: 1 CARDINAL: 1 TIME: 1 |
The meeting continued at 11:56 with Ryszard Czarnecki (3rd Vice – Chair) presiding. |
V + * + ENT | resumed + * + ENT | S | 3 | TIME: 2 DATE: 1 |
The meeting resumed at 14:33, with Tatjana Ždanoka (1st Vice – Chair) presiding. |
V + ENT + * | received + ENT + * | S | 3 | CARDINAL: 1 PERSON: 1 ORG: 1 |
c) Letters received -Poland’s Climate Ministry reply 1099 - |
ENT + V + * | ENT + concluded + * | S | 1 | ORG: 1 | On the basis of these data, and following consultation with the Group of Experts, the Commission concluded that the implementation of the project… |
V + * + * + ENT | adopted + * + * ENT | M | 1 | ORG: 1 | INFORMATION REPORT Section for Employment, Social Affairs and Citizenship Real rights of persons with disabilities to vote in European Parliament elections Rapporteur: Krzysztof PATER Legal basis Rule 31 of the Rules of Procedure Section responsible Section for Employment, Social Affairs and Citizenship Adopted in section 06/03/2019 Adopted at plenary 20/03/2019 |
When translating English sequences with text-organizing patterns into Spanish (Table 7), translators depart considerably from non-mediated Spanish. Most patterns in translated Spanish present entities as complements (6/8, 75%) and the most frequent NE types are PER and DATE instead of ORG (cf. Table 4). This reveals that although translated texts generally transfer the usage of text-organizing patterns for the same organizing functions (deadlines, concluding remarks, etc.), normalization seems to operate simultaneously on a smaller scale, affecting syntax (and interestingly also NE types) by accommodation to the Spanish norms. Consider the subpattern presentada + * + ENT, which does not exist in ORIG_EN. Non-translated petitions opt for a sequence that omits any verbal form (e.g. Petition No 1106/2018 by Alexander Edberg Thorén). The shift in translation (Petición n.º 1106/2018, presentada por Alexander Edberg Thorén) adheres better to the target language norms, which demand the introduction of a past participle before the preposition por.
Pattern | Subpattern | Retrieval | Hits | NE type | Example |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
V + * + ENT | presentada + * + ENT | M | 82 | PER: 81 ORG: 1 |
Asunto: Petición n.º 1106/2018, presentada por Alexander Edberg Thorén, de nacionalidad sueca [Petition No 1106/2018 by Alexander Edberg Thorén (Swedish)] |
V + * + ENT | recibida + * + ENT | M | 20 | DATE: 20 | Respuesta de la Comisión, recibida el 30 de agosto de 2017 [Commission reply, received on 30 August 2017] |
V + * + * + * + ENT | admitida + * + * + * + ENT | M | 17 | DATE: 17 | Admisibilidad Admitida a trámite el 4 de marzo de 2019 [Admissibility Declared admissible on 4 March 2019] |
ENT + V + * | ENT + concluyó + * | A | 3 | ORG: 3 | Sobre la base de estos datos, y previa consulta al Grupo de Expertos, la Comisión concluyó que la aplicación del proyecto… [On the basis of these data, and following consultation with the Group of Experts, the Commission concluded that the implementation of the project…] |
V + * + ENT | apruebe + * + ENT | S | 2 | LOC: 2 | SUGERENCIAS La Comisión de Peticiones pide a la Comisión de Libertades Civiles, Justicia y Asuntos de Interior, competente para el fondo, que incorpore las siguientes sugerencias en la propuesta de Resolución que apruebe: 1 [SUGGESTIONS The Committee on Petitions calls on the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following suggestions in its motion for a resolution: 1.] |
V + * + * + ENT | reanuda + * + * + ENT | M | 2 | TIME: 2 | La reunión se reanuda a las 14.33 horas bajo la presidencia de Tatjana Ždanoka vicepresidenta primera) [The meeting resumed at 14:33, with Tatjana Ždanoka (1st Vice – Chair) presiding] |
ENT + V + * | ENT + seguirá + * | A | 1 | ORG: 1 | Conclusiones La Comisión seguirá planteando la cuestión en todos los foros posibles [Conclusion The Commission will continue to raise the issue in every possible forum] |
V + * + * + * + ENT | aprobado + * + * + * + ENT | M | 1 | DATE: 1 | DOCUMENTO INFORMATIVO Sección de Empleo, Asuntos Sociales y Ciudadanía El derecho real de voto en las elecciones al Parlamento Europeo de las personas con discapacidad Ponente: Krzysztof PATER Fundamento jurídico Artículo 31 del Reglamento interno Sección competente Sección de Empleo, Asuntos Sociales y Ciudadanía Aprobación en sección 06/03/2019 Aprobado en el pleno 20/03/2019 [INFORMATION REPORT Section for Employment, Social Affairs and Citizenship Real rights of persons with disabilities to vote in European Parliament elections Rapporteur: Krzysztof PATER Legal basis Rule 31 of the Rules of Procedure Section responsible Section for Employment, Social Affairs and Citizenship Adopted in section 06/03/2019 Adopted at plenary 20/03/2019] |
Another difference with ORIG_ES is that these past forms (5/11 patterns, 45%) are not completely hegemonic, but coexist with present simple (2/11 patterns, 18%) and future simple forms (1/11 pattern, 9%). This could also be compatible with normalization, evidenced by a decreased use of passive forms in Spanish and some differences in textual conventions between languages (see minutes, where resumed + * + ENT shifts to reanuda + * + * + ENT). Finally, explicitation is also observed through translation shifts. For instance, the subpattern apruebe + * + ENT typically occurs in MED_ES. It refers to a future process in which a second EP committee would approve (or not) a motion of resolution helped by the opinion of the Committee on Petitions (incorpore las siguientes sugerencias la propuesta de resolución que apruebe). The non-translated version is less explicit and does not make reference to the autonomy of the neighbouring committee (incorporate the following suggestions into its motion for a resolution).
Pattern | Subpattern | Retrieval | Hits | NE type | Example |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
V + * + * + * + ENT | tiene + * + * + * + ENT | M | 7 | PER: 5 TIME: 1 ORG: 1 |
// tiene la palabra por .. bienvenidos // tiene la palabra por cinco minutos // [you have the floor for … welcome five minutes // you have the floor for five minutes] |
V + * + ENT | presentada + * + ENT | M | 6 | PER: 6 | Petición 827/2018 presentada por Olga Daskali de nacionalidad griega [Petition 0827/2008 presented by Olga Daskali (Greek)] |
V + ENT | tiene + ENT | M | 5 | TIME: 3 LOC: 1 ORG: 1 |
tiene cinco minutos para plantear su intervención // adelante // [you have five minutes to present your petition // go ahead //] |
V + * + * + * + ENT | pasaríamos + * + * + * + ENT | M | 2 | CARDINAL: 2 | pues damos por concluida esta petición y pasaríamos a la petición 23 [that concludes that item on our agenda and brings us to item 23] |
V + * + * + * + ENT | terminar + * + * + * + ENT | M | 1 | CARDINAL: 1 | para terminar // los puntos 8 9 y 10 del orden del día se realizarán mediante procedimiento escrito [to conclude items 8 9 and 10 of the agenda will be carried out via the written procedure] |
ENT + V | tomaron + V | A | 1 | ORG: 1 | en la reunión de 19 de febrero del 2020 los coordinadores de PETI tomaron las siguientes decisiones [at the meeting of 19 February 2020 the PETI coordinators decided the following] |
Text-organizing patterns in the non-interpreted Spanish speeches (Table 8) are strongly associated with PER entities (11/22). Most of the ritualized, repeated forms are used either to present the initiators of the petitions (presentada por Olga Daskali) or to give the floor to them. In the first case, it is worth noting that the oral pattern seems to borrow the above-mentioned phraseme appearing in the title of Spanish petitions (presentada por). In the second case, the complex structure tiene la palabra is used not only to give the floor to certain participants, but also to remind them of the intervention time available, as in the example tiene la palabra por cinco minutos. This introduction, however, seems to have more frequent associations with simpler patterns, such as V + ENT (tiene cinco minutos).
TEXT-ORGANIZING PATTERNS (MED_EN) | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Pattern | Subpattern | Retrieval | Hits | NE type | Example |
V + * + ENT | presented + * + ENT | S | 6 | PER: 5 NORP: 1 |
this is the petition 0827/2008 presented by Olga Daskali // Greek // |
V + ENT | have + ENT | M | 6 | TIME: 6 | // you have five minutes // tell us about your petition // go ahead // |
V + * + * + * + ENT | brings + * + * + * + ENT | S | 1 | CARDINAL: 1 | that concludes that item on our agenda // that brings us to item 23 // |
V + * + * + * + ENT | move + * + * + * + ENT | S | 1 | CARDINAL: 1 | thank you very much // we can move on to point 12 // |
V + * + ENT | conclude + * + ENT | S | 1 | CARDINAL: 1 | to conclude items 8 9 and 10 of the agenda will be carried out via the written procedure |
When interpreted into English, text-organizing patterns (Table 9) occurs less frequently (34%) than in original subcorpora of Spanish (55%) and English (68%). Variation is also smaller in mediated English when compared to both originals (ORIG_EN 46%, ORIG_ES 33%, MED_EN 31%), although in the case of ORIG_ES there is almost no difference. These figures point towards simplification in the interpreted discourse, which can be additionally supported by two shifts. The interpreted concordance you have five minutes // tell us about your petition has a simpler syntax than the non-interpreted Spanish tiene cinco minutos para plantear su intervención). Another example of simplification is petition 0827/2008 presented by Olga Daskali // Greek //, in which the original Spanish de nacionalidad griega is condensed in only one word. Negative transfer (i.e. interference) can also be observed in the use of the subpattern presented + * + ENT.
4.3Grammatical patterns
Grammatical patterns (Table 10) are the second most frequent category in ORIG_EN (28/139, 20%). They are highly associated with ORG NEs (20/28, 71%) and mostly feature entity-as-subject patterns (4/6, 67%). Deontic modal verbs represent most findings in this category,2020.It must also be noted that different modal verbs appear in different types of patterns. Consider for example will, which was previously associated to text-organizing patterns (see Table 10). although important differences between them should be established. Weaker obligation patterns, such as should (7/28) and may (3/28), are more numerous than the stronger shall (6/28) and must (3/28). As an example, the opinion PETI should not draft is weaker than the sentence The European Parliament shall draw up a proposal, which is in fact a quotation from the EC Treaty. Two impersonal structures were also detected, with different forms: one is passive (provided + V + ENT) and the other one is a third-person-singular present tense (calls on the Commission to…).
Pattern | Subpattern | Retrieval | Hits | NE type | Example |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
ENT + V + * | ENT + should + * | A | 7 | ORG: 6 LAW: 1 |
Opinions (a) Coordinators decided that PETI should not draft an opinion to the AFET Annual report on arms export |
ENT + V + * | ENT + shall + * | A | 6 | ORG: 5 GPE: 1 |
The European Parliament shall draw up a proposal for elections by direct universal suffrage |
V + * + ENT | provided + * + ENT | S | 6 | ORG: 3 CARDINAL: 1 DATE: 1 NORP: 1 |
According to information provided by the European Investment Bank, the promoter undertakes also to exclusively use biomass |
ENT + V + * | ENT + may + * | S | 3 | ORG: 2 GPE: 1 |
correct transposition of the Directive, failing which the Commission may refer the case to the 1 European Nuclear Safety Regulators Group |
ENT + V + * | ENT + must + * | A | 3 | GPE: 2 ORG: 1 |
According to this conditionality, Member States must have in place and implement a national strategic policy framework for poverty reduction |
V + * + ENT | calls + * + ENT | A | 3 | ORG: 3 | calls on the Commission to respect the commitments made in its 2019 communication |
Grammatical patterns in MED_ES (Table 11) are more numerous than in ORIG_EN (27% vs. 20%), which could be an indicator of aggregate transfer. Another indicator of transfer would be the stability of the relative percentage of entity-as-subject patterns, which remains practically the same as in ORIG_EN (25% vs. 29%).
Together with transfer, normalisation is hypothesized at the microtextual level on the basis of three shifts. Deontic modal verbs are not always calqued into Spanish, even when possible, which reflects the preference of the target language for alternative forms of expressing modality. This is the case for two example patterns which share the same verb (elaborar).2121.This may be regarded as an additional hint of simplification and/or convergence. In the first, Coordinators decided that PETI should not draft changes to Los coordinadores deciden que la Comisión PETI no elabore (subjunctive).2222.Also, the use of subjunctive with the verb decidir conveys a higher degree of assertiveness than the alternatives debería elaborar and debe elaborar. In the second example, The European Parliament shall draw up a proposal changes to el Parlamento Europeo elaborará un proyecto (future simple). Even when equivalent periphrastic structures are used, involuntary errors occur due to the influence of target language rules. In the example the Commission may refer the case to the European Nuclear Safety Regulators Group → la Comisión puede remitir el asunto al Tribunal de Justicia de la Unión Europea, the second NE is a human mistake, probably caused by the usual association of the term case with the Court of Justice of the European Union.
Pattern | Subpattern | Retrieval | Hits | NE type | Example |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
V + * + * + ENT | pide + * + * + ENT | M | 36 | ORG: 35 MISC: 1 |
pide a la Comisión que respete los compromisos asumidos en su Comunicación de 2019 [calls on the Commission to respect the commitments made in its 2019 communication] |
ENT + V + * | ENT + deben + * | M | 7 | GPE: 5 ORG: 2 |
Según esta condición, los Estados miembros deben crear y aplicar un marco estratégico nacional para la reducción de la pobreza [According to this conditionality, Member States must have in place and implement a national strategic policy framework for poverty reduction] |
ENT + V + * | ENT + puede + * | M | 3 | ORG: 3 | correcta transposición de la Directiva; en su defecto, la Comisión puede remitir el asunto al Tribunal de Justicia de la Unión Europea [correct transposition of the Directive, failing which the Commission may refer the case to the 1 European Nuclear Safety Regulators] |
ENT + * + V | ENT + * + elabore | S | 2 | ORG: 2 | Los coordinadores deciden que la Comisión PETI no elabore una opinión sobre el Informe anual de la Comisión AFET sobre la exportación de armas [Coordinators decided that PETI should not draft an opinion to the AFET Annual report on arms export] |
ENT + V | ENT + elaborará | M | 2 | ORG: 2 | el Parlamento Europeo elaborará un proyecto encaminado a hacer posible su elección por sufragio universal directo [The European Parliament shall draw up a proposal for elections by direct universal suffrage] |
V + * + ENT | facilitada + * + ENT | M | 1 | ORG: 1 | Según la información facilitada por el Banco Europeo de Inversiones, el promotor se compromete, asimismo, a emplear en el proyecto exclusivamente biomasa [According to information provided by the European Investment Bank, the promoter undertakes also to exclusively use biomass] |
Grammatical patterns associated with entities in the non-mediated Spanish subcorpus (Table 12) are less numerous than in the mediated subcorpus. Occurrence percentages of grammatical patterns grow steadily from ORIG_EN (20%) and MED_ES (26%) to ORIG_ES (28%). As in non-translated English (71%) and translated Spanish (88%), NEs are mostly ORG (82%). Similarly to text-organizing patterns, these progressively increased percentages can be read as a sign of transposition. Additional evidence might be that 3/5 verbs were already present in MED_ES (pedir, facilitar, deber) and that such patterns present two subtle shifts apparently caused by a remote, indirect influence of the source language. Consider the NE associated with the pattern pedimos + * + ENT (Comité PETI), literally borrowed from PETI Committee, and the subpattern pedir + * + ENT, a grammatical mistake in standard Spanish possibly influenced by English.
In the interpreted English subcorpus, two new grammatical patterns (Table 13) are introduced. The first one is ask + * + ENT, which functions as a register-down alternative to call + * + ENT. In fact, it presents more occurrences (nine against six), which will again confirm the informality of the interpreted English subcorpus. Another new pattern is ENT + would + *. The PER entity functioning as subject (Sánchez) is an informal alternative to Pedro Sánchez. In a further example, the subpattern ENT + should + * reveals another register-down shift which additionally decreases the number of words in the interpreted corpus (el Mar Menor debe ser una cuestión de Estado → Mar Menor should be tackled by the State). As it happened in MED_ES, shifts in modal verbs imply shifts of meaning and register also in the main verb.
Pattern | Subpattern | Retrieval | Hits | NE type | Example |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
V + * + ENT | pedimos + * + ENT | M | 4 | ORG: 4 | pedimos que el Comité PETI solicite a la Comisión Europea que asuma su responsabilidad [we call on the PETI Committee to ask the European Commission to assume its responsibilities] |
V + * + ENT | pedir + * + ENT | M | 4 | ORG: 4 | y cómo no… también pedir a la Comisión Europea que informe sobre los motivos [and of course… also call on the European commission to inform us about the reasons…] |
ENT + V + * | ENT + tiene + * | S | 1 | ORG: 1 | eso es un recurso normal presentado por unos ciudadanos y por lo tanto el Supremo tiene que decidir sobre esa petición de nulidad [this is an ordinary appeal filed by citizens and therefore the Supreme Court has to decide on this petition for annulment] |
ENT + V | ENT + debe | M | 1 | LOC: 1 | el Mar Menor debe ser un asunto de Estado [The Mar Menor should be tackled by the State] |
V + * + ENT | facilitado + * + ENT | M | 1 | DATE: 1 | según la información que se nos ha facilitado en el año 2012 siendo el peticionario alcalde [according to the information provided to us in 2012 when the petitioner was the lord mayor] |
Pattern | Subpattern | Retrieval | Hits | NE type | Example |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
V + * + ENT | ask + * + ENT | M | 9 | ORG:7 GPE: 1 LOC: 1 |
we will ask the Belgian government as the Petitions Committee to provide information about the file |
V + * + ENT | call + * + ENT | M | 6 | NORP: 4 ORG: 2 |
we would also call on the Commission to draw up some guidelines on the appropriate use of lighting so it causes less damage |
ENT + V + * | ENT + should + * | A | 4 | ORG: 2 LOC: 2 |
Mar Menor should be tackled by the State |
ENT + V + * | ENT + would + * | M | 1 | PER: 1 | Sánchez wouldn’t loan this to the region and prevented the recovery plans for the Mar Menor |
4.4Term-embedding collocations
Term-embedding collocations display some similar numbers in all subcorpora because prototypical NEs (Commission/European Commission) and similar patterns (N + V) were searched for to offer an exemplification. 100% of the total occurrences are associated with ORG NEs and relate to a subject entity. The rest of the indicators, however, show certain differences between components (see below). Although these numbers may be biased by our conscious choice, the findings might also suggest transfer in translated and interpreted subcorpora.
This category is least frequent (17/139, 12%) in non-translated English (Table 14). Even though the subpatterns are distributed among ENT + V (43%) and ENT + V + * (57%), personification is a common feature of all term-embedding collocations found in ORIG_EN. The European Commission is construed as a human being with the ability of performing both mental and physical tasks. The first group (12/17, 71%) describes the often diplomatic postures maintained by this body in relation to the citizens’ petitions (Commission + is + aware, Commission + considers + that, Commission + would + like, Commission + maintains, Commission + understands).2323.A further note on these patterns would be their similarity with other categories. The example The Commission would like to reiterate contains a grammatical pattern, but it conveys a specific idiomatic meaning (“The Commission sends a friendly reminder”). Conversely, the patterns Commission + maintains and Commission + understands could be also classified as text-organizing, given that they are embedded in the concluding section of petitions. In the second group (5/17, 29%), the auxiliary can is introduced as a mechanism to limit more direct actions available for this entity. The main verb take can be spotted in both examples (The Commission cannot take on the role… and The Commission can take legal action…).
Pattern | Subpattern | Retrieval | Hits | NE type | Example |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
ENT + V + * | Commission + is + aware | M | 4 | ORG: 4 | The Commission is aware of the concerns raised by the petitioners on the threats and problems affecting the Mar Menor lagoon |
ENT + V + * | Commission + can + not | A | 4 | ORG: 4 | the Commission can not take on the role of an independent monitoring mechanism to ensure the implementation of the Convention in the EU |
ENT + V + * | Commission + considers + that | A | 3 | ORG: 3 | The Commission considers that the difficult situation concerning the citrus market in Spain was caused by the particular conditions of production |
ENT + V + * | Commission + would + like | A | 2 | ORG: 2 | The Commission would like to reiterate that, in line with the division of responsibilities under EU law, the decision to operate a nuclear power plant remains with the Member State |
ENT + V | Commission + maintains | A | 2 | ORG: 2 | Conclusion The Commission maintains its previous conclusions in relation to this Petition |
ENT + V | Commission + can | A | 1 | ORG: 1 | the Commission can take legal action against Member States failing to comply with the new requirements. |
ENT + V | Commission + understands | A | 1 | ORG: 1 | Conclusion Based on the information provided, the Commission understands that the situation has not been normalised yet |
Collocates of Commission in translated Spanish (Table 15) are lower in numbers compared to the non-translated English corpus (7% vs. 12%), and equally reflect personification. Nevertheless, some patterns are redistributed because of alternative verb choices. Comisión + entiende, for example, presents one more hit because the verb entender has been used for translating both understand and consider. Similarly, the pattern Commission + would + like is split into two (Comisión + desea and Comisión + querría). The example La Comisión desea reiterar que… is considerably less distant than The Commission would like to reiterate, adding an affective nuance not found in the English personifications.
Pattern | Subpattern | Retrieval | Hits | NE type | Example |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
ENT + V + * | Comisión + es + consciente | M | 4 | ORG: 4 | La Comisión es consciente de las preocupaciones que señalan los peticionarios sobre los problemas y amenazas que afectan a la laguna del Mar Menor [The Commission is aware of the concerns raised by the petitioners on the threats and problems affecting the Mar Menor lagoon] |
ENT + * + V | Comisión + no + puede | M | 3 | ORG: 3 | la Comisión no puede asumir el papel de un mecanismo de supervisión independiente para garantizar la aplicación de la Convención en la Unión [the Commission cannot take on the role of an independent monitoring mechanism to ensure the implementation of the Convention in the EU] |
ENT + V + * | Comisión + considera + que | S | 2 | ORG: 2 | La Comisión considera que la información contenida en la petición no requiere, en principio, la adopción de medida adicional alguna en el caso en cuestión por lo que respecta a la aplicación del Tratado Euratom y del Derecho derivado de este [The Commission considers that the information contained in the petition does not, in principle, require any further action to be taken in the case in question as regards the application of the Euratom Treaty and secondary legislation deriving from it] |
ENT + V | Comisión + entiende | A | 2 | ORG: 2 | La Comisión entiende que la difícil situación del mercado de los cítricos en España se produjo por las condiciones particulares de la producción [The Commission considers that the difficult situation concerning the citrus market in Spain was caused by the particular conditions of production] |
ENT + V | Comisión + desea | A | 1 | ORG: 1 | La Comisión desea reiterar que, en consonancia con el reparto de responsabilidades en virtud de la legislación de la Unión, la decisión de explotar una central nuclear incumbe al Estado miembro [The Commission would like to reiterate that, in line with the division of responsibilities under EU law, the decision to operate a nuclear power plant remains with the Member State] |
ENT + V | Comisión + querría | S | 1 | ORG: 1 | la Comisión querría indicar que la Directiva 2014/52/UE8 (Directiva sobre la evaluación de impacto ambiental (EIA)) exige [the Commission would like to point out that Directive 2014/52/EU8 (the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Directive) requires] |
ENT + V | Comisión + puede | M | 1 | ORG: 1 | la Comisión puede emprender acciones legales contra los Estados miembros que no cumplan los nuevos requisitos. [the Commission can take legal action against Member States failing to comply with the new requirements] |
Non-mediated Spanish term-embedding collocations (Table 16) are more frequent (17%) than in the corresponding mediated subcorpus (7%), which supports the hypothesis of simplification of mediated discourse. Other translationese traits are reflected in the percentage of subpatterns. Only 29% (two out of seven) are shared between original and mediated Spanish. Despite a more reduced number of occurrences (7), collocations also reflect personification phenomena in the non-interpreted Spanish corpus. Indeed, metaphors acquire more diverse forms than in the written corpora. The affective verb desear is repeated in this subcorpus and is linked to two perception verbs which embody (and thus personify) the institution (la Comisión desea siempre escuchar a todas las partes… conocer su visión //). Additionally, new affective meanings are introduced (la Comisión comparte la preocupación…), together with verbs of speech (la Comisión Europea afirma…) and others by which the institution performs tasks humans would (la Comisión Europea incoó un procedimiento… and la Comisión Europea publicó…). This could be a hedging mechanism, designed to hide the real human subject of such procedures. As can be observed, ENT + V patterns with Comisión Europea can be found in this subcorpus, but not in the written collections. It is possible that this terminological variant is introduced in non-interpreted Spanish for better distinguishing the executive Commission and the PETI Committee.
Pattern | Subpattern | Retrieval | Hits | NE type | Example |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
ENT + V | Comisión + desea | A | 1 | ORG: 1 | la Comisión desea siempre escuchar a todas las partes // conocer su visión // [the Commission is always willing to listen to all parties // to hear their views //] |
ENT + V | Comisión + comparte | A | 1 | ORG: 1 | la Comisión comparte la preocupación existente por las distintas presiones que el Mar Menor está sufriendo [The Commission shares the concern about the different pressures that the Mar Menor is undergoing] |
ENT + V | Comisión + considera | A | 1 | ORG: 1 | Comisión considera en general que España no monitoriza de manera adecuada sus aguas [The Commission considers that, in general, Spain is not adequately surveying its waters] |
ENT + V | Comisión Europea + incoó | A | 1 | ORG: 1 | La Comisión Europea incoó un procedimiento de infracción contra España en el año 2015 [The European Commission opened an infringement proceeding against Spain in 2015] |
ENT + V | Comisión Europea + considera | A | 1 | ORG: 1 | la Comisión Europea considera en efecto que la aplicación efectiva de la política medioambiental de la Unión Europea… [the European Commission considers that the effective implementation of the EU environmental policy…] |
ENT + V | Comisión Europea + afirma | A | 1 | ORG: 1 | la Comisión Europea afirma que las autoridades regionales han emprendido una serie de medidas jurídicas y técnicas [European Commission states that the regional authorities have undertaken a number of legal and technical measures] |
ENT + V | Comisión Europea + publicó | M | 1 | ORG: 1 | …Comisión Europea publicó el año pasado en 2019 su… en un informe que remitió al Consejo… […European Commission published last year in 2019 its… in a report to the Council…] |
In the interpreted English subcorpus (Table 17), the total number of term-embedding collocations (9) remains quite similar to non-interpreted Spanish. Even though a new mental verb is introduced (believe), the rest of the examples are associated with more physical meanings, even with an idea of movement and urgency which cannot be found in the non-interpreted Spanish (the Commission needs to inform us, measures the Commission takes, the Parliament but also the Commission act to find a solution…).
Pattern | Subpattern | Retrieval | Hits | NE type | Example |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
ENT + V | Commission + said | A | 2 | ORG: 2 | there were three parliamentary groups present here // socialist ECR and EPP // and they too heard what the Commission said // |
ENT + V | Commission + needs | A | 2 | ORG: 2 | the Commission needs to inform us about what steps are being taken |
ENT + V | European Commission + needs | A | 1 | ORG: 1 | the European Commission needs to guarantee the reciprocity clauses |
ENT + V | European Commission + remains | A | 1 | ORG: 1 | the infringement process continues its path and the European Commission remains alert |
ENT + V | European Commission + believes | A | 1 | ORG: 1 | the European Commission believes that effective application of EU environmental law |
ENT + V | Commission + takes | A | 1 | ORG: 1 | we ‘ll look to see what measures the Commission takes in the future on the safety of asbestos |
ENT + V | Commission + act | M | 1 | ORG: 1 | to keep this petition open so that the Parliament but also the Commission act to find a solution |
Finally, these data are in line with our previous findings (Corpas Pastor and Sánchez Rodas, 2022Corpas Pastor, Gloria & Fernando Sánchez Rodas 2022 NLP-enhanced Shift Analysis of Named Entities in an English Spanish Intermodal Corpus of European
Petitions. In Marta Kajzer-Wietrzny, Adriano Ferraresi, Ilmari Ivaska & Silvia Bernardini (eds.), Mediated discourse at the European Parliament: Empirical investigations, 219–251. Berlin: Language Science Press. https://langsci-press.org/catalog/book/343). Simplification appears to be a contingent feature which
depends on the mediation mode and the source languages involved
(and also on the topic of the source text). Another relevant finding of this study is that there are clear
differences in shifts between EN-ES translations and ES-EN interpretations of NEs in the Petitions Committee, as
well as normalisation of specialized phraseology, especially in interpreted English (from Spanish).
5.Conclusion
EP institutional texts exhibit an argument-structure text-organizing pattern centred around named entities (NEs) and their phraseology. This study is one of the first computer-assisted analyses of named entities in an English<>Spanish intermodal corpora derived from the activities of the PETI Committee at the European Parliament. To uncover their formulaic patterns we have used an NLP-enhanced methodology which combines corpus work and NER. The most represented NE categories are PER, DATE, ORG, LAW and MISC, although their frequency ranks vary across subcorpora.
In terms of NE frequency and distribution, translations (mediated Spanish) tend to show explicitation
traits, whereas interpretations (mediated English) appear to be more prone to simplification. Regarding NE
formulaicity, text-organizing patterns are the most frequent type and present higher numbers of patterns and
subpatterns. In translated Spanish, text-organizing patterns tend to conform to Spanish norms and exhibit some degree
of explicitation. By contrast, interpreted English exhibits fewer patterns and less variation, which also points to
simplification. Grammatical patterns reveal differences between mediated and non-mediated discourse. Our findings
suggest the existence of negative transfer in translated Spanish, whereas interpreted English reveals register-down
shifts (simplification). On the other hand, term-embedding collocations are heavily associated with personification
across subcorpora. In mediated Spanish, they instantiate cases of transfer and/or simplification. In mediated English,
however, term-embedding collocations are a clear case of source language shining through (Teich 2003Teich, Elke 2003 Cross-Linguistic Variation in System and Text: A Methodology for the Investigation of Translations and
Comparable Texts. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. ).
Finally, NER-enhanced corpus analysis has proved to be a powerful methodology to discover translationese traits through NEs’ phraseological patterns. In this line, several cases of negative transfer have been found to operate mostly from non-translated English to translated Spanish. Further studies are needed to establish whether this is only typical of the PETIMOD corpus or whether it can also be a feature of other types of Eurolects.