Third code research has documented the distinctiveness of translated language and singled out recurrent tendencies framing them as translation universals. This paper aims to identify the interaction between interference, explicitation, implicitation and normalization and their potential relationship(s) with other variables, such as register. The focus of the study is on Spanish discourse markers (DMs) translated from English. This study uses interference, explicitation, implicitation and normalization as methodological tools to unveil these patterns. Evidence comes from a bilingual parallel corpus (P-ACTRES 2.0), a corpus of translated Spanish (CETRI), and a reference corpus of contemporary Spanish (CORPES XXI). We select the input DMs according to two criteria: first, we focus on DMs showing cross-linguistic formal correspondence, indicating the possibility of grammatical interference; second, we consider different procedural meanings for the DMs to anticipate potential regularity distortions. Results indicate that DM underuse in the target texts generally co-occurs with explicitation. Register is an important variable: implicitation is more frequent in non-fiction and, together with normalization, affects the majority of DMs. Evidence also points to the DMs' semantics influencing implicitation and explicitation.
Baker, M. (1993). Corpus linguistics and translation studies – implications and applications. In M. Baker, G. Francis, & E. Tognini-Bonelli (Eds.), Text and technology. In honour of John Sinclair (pp. 233–250). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/z.64.15bak.
Baumgarten, N.; Meyer B., & Özçetin, D. (2008). Explicitness in translation and interpreting: A critical review and some empirical evidence (of an elusive concept). Across Languages and Cultures, 9(2), 177–203. https://doi.org/10.1556/Acr.9.2008.2.2.
Becher, V. (2010). Abandoning the notion of “translation-inherent” explicitation. Against a dogma of translation studies. Across Languages and Cultures, 11(1), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1556/Acr.11.2010.1.1.
Bernardini, S., & Ferraresi, A. (2011). Practice, description, and theory come together – Normalization or interference in Italian technical translation? Meta, 56(2), 226–246. https://doi.org/10.7202/1006174ar.
Blum-Kulka, S. (1986). Shifts of cohesion and coherence in translation. In J. House, & S. Blum-Kulka (Eds.), Interlingual and intercultural communication: Discourse and cognition in translation and second language acquisition studies (pp. 17–35). Gunter Narr.
Brumme, J. (Ed.) (2008). La oralidad fingida: descripción y traducción. Teatro, cómic y medios audiovisuales. Iberoamericana/Vervuert.
Brumme, J. (Ed.) (2012). The translation of fictive dialogue. Brill.
Cuenca, M. J., & Bach, C. (2007). Contrasting the form and use of reformulation markers. Discourse Studies, 9(2), 149–175. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445607075347.
Daems, J., De Clercq, O., & Macken, L. (2017). Translationese and post-editese: How comparable is comparable quality? Linguistica Antverpiensia, New Series: Themes in Translation Studies, 16, 89–103. https://doi.org/10.52034/lanstts.v16i0.434.
De Sutter, G., & Lefer, M.-A. (2020). On the need for a new research agenda for corpus-based translation studies: A multi-methodological, multifactorial and interdisciplinary approach. Perspectives, 28(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.2019.1611891.
Echeverría Arriagada, C. (2016). La interferencia lingüística de frecuencia. Boletín de Filología, 51(1), 93–115. https://boletinfilologia.uchile.cl/index.php/BDF/article/view/42101/44050.
Fraser, B. (1999). What are discourse markers? Journal of Pragmatics, 31, 931–952. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(98)00101-5.
Fraser, B. (2006). Towards a theory of discourse markers. In K. Fischer (Ed.), Approaches to discourse particles (pp. 189–204). Elsevier.
Frawley, W. (1984). Prolegomenon to a theory of translation. In W. Frawley (Ed.), Translation: Literary, linguistic and philosophical perspectives (pp. 159–175). Associated University Press.
Halverson, S. (2003). The cognitive basis of translation universals. Target, 15(2), 197–241. https://doi.org/10.1075/target.15.2.02hal.
Halverson, S. (2016). Cognitive translation ttudies and the merging of empirical paradigms. Translation Spaces, 4, 310–340. https://doi.org/10.1075/ts.4.2.07hal.
Hareide, L. (2017). The translation of formal source-language lacunas: An empirical study of the over-representation of target-language-specific features and the unique items hypotheses. In M. Ji, M. Oakes, L. Defeng, & L. Hareide (Eds.), Corpus methodologies explained. An empirical approach to translation studies (pp. 147–197). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315694122.
House, J. (2008). Beyond intervention: Universals in translation? trans-kom, 1, 6–19.
Jiménez-Crespo, M. A., & Tercedor Sánchez, M. (2021). Explicitation and implicitation in translation: Combining comparable and parallel corpus methodologies. In M. Calzada, & S. Laviosa (Eds.), Reflexión crítica en los estudios de traducción basados en corpus/CTS spring-cleaning: A critical reflection. MonTI (Vol. 13, pp. 62–92). https://doi.org/10.6035/MonTI.2021.13.02.
Klaudy, K. (1993). On explicitation hypothesis. In J. Kohn, & K. Klaudy et al. (Eds.), Transferre necesse est. Current Issues of translation theory. In honour of György Radó on his 80th birthday (pp. 69–77). Dániel Berzsenyi College.
Klaudy, K. (2001). Explicitation. In M. Baker (Ed.), Encyclopedia of translation studies (pp. 80–85). Routledge.
Klaudy, K., & Károly, K. (2005). Implicitation in translation. Empirical evidence for operational asymmetry in translation. Across Languages and Cultures, 6(1), 13–29. https://doi.org/10.1556/ACR.6.2005.1.2.
Kotze, H. (2012). Register and the features of translated language. Across Languages and Cultures, 13, 33–65. https://doi.org/10.1556/Acr.13.2012.1.3.
Krüger, R. (2020). Explicitation in neural machine translation. Across Languages and Cultures, 21(2), 195–216. https://doi.org/10.1556/084.2020.00012.
Kruger, H., & Van Rooy, G. (2016). Constrained language. A multidimensional analysis of translated English and a non-native indigenized variety of English. English World-Wide, 37(1), 26–57. https://doi.org/10.1075/eww.37.1.02kru.
Lanstyák, I., & Heltai, P. (2012). Universals in language contact and translation. Across Languages and Cultures, 13(1), 99–121. https://doi.org/10.1556/Acr.13.2012.1.6.
Lefer, M.-A., & Vogeleer, S. (2013). Interference and normalization in genre-controlled multilingual corpora: Introduction. Belgian Journal of Linguistics, 27, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1075/BJL.27.01LEF.
Llopis, A. (2016). Significado y funciones en los marcadores discursivos. Verba, 1(43), 227–264. https://doi.org/10.15304/verba.43.2112.
Loureda Ó., & Acín, E. (Eds.) (2010). Los estudios sobre marcadores del discurso en español, hoy. Arco.
Martín Zorraquino, M. A., & Portolés Lázaro, J. (1999). Los marcadores del discurso. In I. Bosque, & V. Demonte (Eds.), Gramática Descriptiva de la Lengua Española (pp. 4051–4213). Espasa Calpe.
Murtisari, E. T. (2016). Explicitation in translation studies: The journey of an elusive concept. Translation and Interpreting, 8(2), 64–81. https://doi.org/10.12807/ti.108202.2016.a05.
Olohan, M., & Baker, M. (2000). Reporting “that” in translated English: Evidence for subconscious processes of explicitation? Across Languages and Cultures, 1(2), 141–158. https://doi.org/10.1556/Acr.1.2000.2.1.
Pons Bordería, S. (2006). A functional approach to the study of discourse markers. In K. Fischer (Ed.), Approaches to discourse particles (pp. 77–101). Elsevier.
Portolés Lázaro, J. (2007). Marcadores del discurso. Ariel.
Rabadán, R. (2008). Refining the idea of 'applied extension'. In A. Pym, M. Shlesinger, & D. Simeoni (Eds.), Beyond descriptive translation studies (pp. 103–117). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.75.09rab.
Rabadán, R. (2020). El tercer código: ¿Universales en conflicto? In M. Á. Vega Cernuda, P. Mračková Vavroušová, P. Martino Alba, & M. Cuenca Drouhard (Eds.), Hispanística y traductología: Dos pasiones. Jana Králová In honorem (pp. 165–179). Ommpress Traducción.
Rabadán, R., & Gutiérrez-Lanza, C. (2020). Developing awareness of interference errors in translation: An English-Spanish pilot study in popular science and audiovisual transcripts. Lingue e Linguaggi, 40, 379–404. https://doi.org/10.1285/i22390359v40p379.
Schiffrin, D. (1987). Discourse markers. Cambridge University Press.
Smith, K. S. (2017). On integrating discourse in machine translation. In B. Webber, A. Popescu-Belis, & J. Tiedemann (Eds.), Proceedings of the third workshop on discourse in machine translation (September 2017, Copenhagen, Denmark) (pp. 110–121). Association for Computational Linguistics. https://aclanthology.org/W17-48.pdf.
Tirkkonen-Condit, S. (2004). Unique items — over- or under-represented in translated language? In A. Mauranen, & P. Kujamäki (Eds.), Translation universals: Do they exist? (pp. 177–184). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.48.14tir.
Toury, G. (1995/2012). Descriptive translation studies and beyond. John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.100.
Volansky, V., Ordan, N., & Wintner, S. (2015). On the features of translationese. Digital Scholarship in the Humanities, 30(1), 98–118. https://doi.org/10.1093/llc/fqt031.
Zufferey, S. (2016). Discourse connectives across languages. Factors influencing their explicit or implicit translation. Languages in Contrast, 16(2), 264–279. https://doi.org/10.1075/lic.16.2.05zuf.
Zufferey, S., & Cartoni, B. (2014). A multifactorial analysis of explicitation in translation. Target, 26, 361–384. https://doi.org/10.1075/target.26.3.02zuf.
Zufferey, S., & Popescu-Belis, A. (2017). Discourse connectives: Theoretical models and empirical validations in humans and computers. In J. Blochowiak, C. Grisot, S. Durrleman, & C. Laenzlinger (Eds.), Formal models in the study of language (pp. 375–390). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-48832-5_20.
CETRI. (2019). Corpus de español traducido del inglés. https://actres.unileon.es/wp/monolingual-corpora/.
CORPES XXI. (2021). Corpus del español del siglo XXI (0.93 version). https://www.rae.es/banco-de-datos/corpes-xxi.
P-ACTRES 2.0. (2018). English/Spanish parallel corpus. https://actres.unileon.es/wp/parallel-corpora/.
PETRA 1.0©. (2013). A semi-automated aid for the evaluation of the grammatical quality of English-into-Spanish translations. https://actres.unileon.es/wp/petra-1-0-evaluation-of-translations/.