Book review
Meng Ji, Michael Oakes, Li Defeng & Lidun Hareide, eds. Corpus Methodologies Explained: An Empirical Approach to Translation Studies
London: Routledge, 2016. x, 234 pp.

Reviewed by Feng (Robin) Wang and Philippe Humblé
College of Foreign Languages, Jilin University | Vrije Universiteit Brussel
Publication history
Table of contents

Since the 1990s, translation studies based on, driven by, or assisted by corpora and electronic tools have achieved considerable progress in that the methodology allows a combination of quantitative measurement and qualitative interpretation. Corpus-based/driven/assisted Translation Studies (hereafter CTS) gives continuing vitality to the discipline, either in terms of descriptive or theoretical studies, while also shedding new light on the applied branch. Corpus Methodologies Explained: An Empirical Approach to Translation Studies reflects the latest developments on key topics of CTS such as machine translation (Chapter 1, by Michael Oakes), translational stylistics (Chapter 2, by Meng Ji, and Chapter 3, by Defeng Li) and translation universals, including testing the Gravitational Pull Hypothesis (Chapters 4 and 5, by Lidun Hareide). The contents take both theoretical discussions and illustrative case studies into account, satisfying the needs of different paradigms under the umbrella of CTS. From Chapter 1 to Chapter 5, the level of theoretical conceptualization grows, as the research methods employed gradually move from essentially corpus-driven (Chapter 1 and 2) via corpus-assisted (Chapter 3) to typical corpus-based translation studies (Chapters 4 and 5). The boundary between these three paradigms sometimes is quite blurry. No paradigm is superior to the others, with preferences hinging on the research purposes and the nature of empirical evidence. For instance, Chapters 2 and 3 are both on translation stylistics, but Chapter 2 is completely data-driven, as it investigates the holistic generic shifting in the English-Chinese translation process, while Chapter 3 employs triangulation that combines the voice of the translator and recurring patterns retrieved from the corpus in order to determine the style of individual translators.

Full-text access is restricted to subscribers. Log in to obtain additional credentials. For subscription information see Subscription & Price. Direct PDF access to this article can be purchased through our e-platform.


Baker, Mona
1993 “Corpus Linguistics and Translation Studies: Implications and Applications.” In Text and Technology: In Honour of John Sinclair, edited by Mona Baker, Gill Francis, and Elena Tognini-Bonelli, 233–250. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2000 “Towards a Methodology for Investigating the Style of a Literary Translator.” Target 12 (2): 241–266. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halverson, Sandra
2003 “The Cognitive Basis of Translation Universals.” Target 15 (2): 197–241. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hermans, Theo
1996 “The Translator’s Voice in Translated Narrative.” Target 8 (1): 23–48. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Somers, Harold
2009 “Corpora and Machine Translation.” In Corpus Linguistics: An International Handbook, edited by Anke Lüdeling and Merja Kyto, 1175–1196. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Tirkkonen-Condit, Sonja
2004 “Unique Items – Over- or Under-represented in Translated Language?” In Translation Universals: Do They Exist?, edited by Anna Mauranen and Pekka Kujamäki, 177–184. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Venuti, Lawrence
2008The Translator’s Invisibility: A History of Translation. London: Routledge.Google Scholar