Contrastive Linguistics and Translation Studies

Sonia Vandepitte & Gert De Sutter

Table of contents

Today Translation Studies and Contrastive Linguistics are considered distinct fields of study because of their different research objects and perspectives: Contrastive Linguistics, which started in 1820 with von Humboldt, focuses on differences between languages both in terms of system and usage, whereas Translation Studies, whose (normative) approach has been traced as far back as Antiquity with Cicero and Horace, describes and explains the typical characteristics, and individual and social functions and contexts of translation products and processes. These narrowly-defined fields of research, both of which developed considerably in the latter decades of the last century, still have one basic element in common: translations, which necessarily arise in the context of two different languages (or language varieties) and are therefore useful data types for both domains. Often, and depending on the focus, questions that attend translation are seen as either translation studies questions or as contrastive linguistic ones. At the same time, however, Translation Studies can be informed by Contrastive Linguistics when describing, explaining and predicting linguistic features of translation products and processes (Section 2); and, vice versa, Contrastive Linguistics can be informed by Translation Studies when describing and hypothesizing about different languages, building on translations and their source texts (Section 3).

Full-text access is restricted to subscribers. Log in to obtain additional credentials. For subscription information see Subscription & Price.

References

Albrecht, Jörn
2004“The different branches of descriptive linguistics and translation.” In Übersetzung. Translation. Traduction. Ein internationales Handbuch zur Übersetzungsforschung. An international Encyclopedia of Translation Studies. Encyclopédie internationale de la recherche sur la traduction, Harald Kittel, Armin Paul Frank, Norbert Greiner, Theo Hermans, Werner Koller, José Lambert & Fritz Paul (eds), Vol. I, 243–259. Berlin/New York: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Bernardini, Silvia & Ferraresi, Adriano
2011“Practice, description and theory come together: ­Normalization or interference in Italian technical translation?” Meta 56 (2): 226–246. Crossref logo  TSBGoogle Scholar
Bowker, Lynne
1998“Using specialized monolingual native-language corpora as a translation resource: A pilot study.” Meta 43 (4): 631–651. Crossref logo  TSBGoogle Scholar
Catford, J.C
1965A Linguistic Theory of Translation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Chesterman, Andrew
1998Contrastive Functional Analysis. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Crossref logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
De Sutter, Gert, Goethals, Patrick, Leuschner, Torsten & Vandepitte, Sonia
2012“Towards a methodologically more rigorous corpus-based Translation Studies.” Across Languages and Cultures 12: 137–143 Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Hatim, Basil
1997Communication Across Cultures: Translation Theory and Contrastive Text Linguistics. Exeter: University of Exeter Press.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Koller, Werner
1979/2004Einführung in die Übersetzungswissenschaft. Wiebelsheim: Quelle & Meyer.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Laviosa, Sara
1998“The corpus-based approach: A new paradigm in Translation Studies.” Meta 43 (4): 474–479. Crossref logo  TSBGoogle Scholar
Macken, Lieve, De Clercq, Orphée & Paulussen, Hans
2011“Dutch parallel corpus: A balanced copyright-cleared parallel corpus.” Meta, 56 (2): 374–390. Crossref logo  TSBGoogle Scholar
Malmkjær, Kirsten
1999“Descriptive linguistics and Translation Studies: Interface and differences.” Platform Papers on Translation Studies. https://​lra​.le​.ac​.uk​/jspui​/bitstream​/2381​/10960​/5​/utrecht​.doc%5B1%5D​.pdf [Accessed 23 June 2013].Google Scholar
Mason, Ian
2001“Translator behaviour and language usage: Some constraints on contrastive ­studies.” Hermes, Journal of Linguistics 26: 65–80.  TSBGoogle Scholar
Vinay, Jean-Paul & Darbelnet, Jean
1958Stylistique comparée du français et de ľanglais. Méthode de traduction. Paris: Didier.  TSBGoogle Scholar

Further reading

Granger, Sylviane
2003“The corpus approach: A common way forward for Contrastive Linguistics and Translation Studies ?” In Corpus-based approaches to Contrastive Linguistics and Translation Studies, Sylviane Granger, Jacques Lerot & Stephanie Petch-Tyson (eds), 17–30. Amsterdam: Rodopi.  TSBGoogle Scholar
Hansen-Schirra, Silvia, Neumann, Stella & Steiner, Erich
2012Cross-Linguistic Corpora for the Study of Translations. Insights from the Language Pair English-German. Berlin/Boston: de Gruyter. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Johansson, Stig
2007Seeing through multilingual corpora. On the use of corpora in contrastive ­linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Crossref logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
Ramon, Noelia Garcia
2002“Contrastive Linguistics and Translation Studies interconnected: the corpus-based approach.” Linguistica Antverpiensia New Series 1: 393–406.Google Scholar
Toury, Gideon
1980“Contrastive Linguistics and Translation Studies: Towards a tripartite model”. In In Search of a Theory of Translation, 19–34. Tel Aviv: The Porter Institute for Poetics and Semiotics.  TSBGoogle Scholar