explicitation seems to be particularly well-suited to test the pragmatic performance of NMT for the following reason: explicitation can be understood as an indicator of translational text– context interaction, where a translator infers a piece of information
Klaudy, K. 2000. Explicitation Strategies within Lexical and Grammatical Translational Operations. In: Lendvai, E. (ed.) Applied Russian Studies. Pécs: University of Pécs.
Explicitation Strategies within Lexical
One of the best-known hypotheses of translation studies, the Explicitation Hypothesis, postulates that explicitation is “inherent” in the process of translation and may therefore be regarded as a “universal of translation”. In recent years, a number of corpus-based studies on explicitation have been produced, most of which purport to offer evidence in favor of this hypothesis. As a consequence, the alleged universality of explicitation has achieved the status of dogma in translation studies. The aim of the present article is to show that the dogma of translation-inherent explicitation rests on fallacious theoretical considerations and premature interpretations of empirical data. In the first place, it will be argued that the Explicitation Hypothesis strictly speaking does not even qualify as a scientific hypothesis, since it is unmotivated, unparsimonious and vaguely formulated. In the second place, it will be shown that previous studies on explicitation fail to provide conclusive evidence for the translation-inherent nature of explicitation due to a number of methodological shortcomings.
The present paper discusses the asymmetry hypothesis (Klaudy 2003) through a bidirectional qualitative translation analysis with reference to the expression of causal relations. Bidirectional analysis allows researchers to verify whether explicitations in one translation direction are counterbalanced by implicitations in the other translation direction. According to Klaudy’s (2009) asymmetry hypothesis, this is not the case since translators prefer operations involving explicitation over operations involving implicitation. The asymmetry hypothesis, studying translation in two translation directions of one language pair provides proof for the explicitation hypothesis as a universal strategy of translation. In this study we consider one language pair (French and Dutch), one text genre (novels) and one type of cohesive markers, i.e. causal conjunctions, to reveal the extent and nature of explicitation and implicitation in either direction. To this purpose, a bidirectional parallel corpus was compiled and the translations of sentences with one of four connectives in each language were scrutinized. The results show that, while there are indeed many instances of explicitation in both translation directions, a fair number of explicit causal markers were omitted in translation, suggesting that explicitation is counterbalanced by implicitation, thus contradicting the asymmetry hypothesis.
This paper examines explicitation in my translation of Jeremy Munday’s Introducing Translation Studies: Theories and Applications into Arabic. Explicitation can be triggered by a TL-oriented strategy that demands a translation to sound lucid, cohesive, coherent and original in its own right. One problem facing many Arab translators negotiating meaning between English and Arabic is how to undo the constraints imposed by the ST textual patterns and whether to decode embedded messages and encode them explicitly in the TT. Unlike English whose modes of expression are generally characterized by overriding variation in terms of cross-referencing, synonymy, ellipsis, etc., Arabic allows more tolerant modes with repetition being a prominent feature. One way of rendering the ST is replacing patterns of variation with patterns of explicitating repetition in the TT. The asymmetric explicitation hypothesis (Klaudy 2003) is interestingly applicable to the Arabic translating situation where the translator has two options, i.e. either to perform asymmetric explicitation or maintain ST implicitation in a translation. It is hypothesised that the Arabic TT will show a higher level of explicitness so as to cement textual cohesion, establish coherence and explicate meaning. Randomly selected examples will be discussed to test the validity of this hypothesis.
During recent years, scholars have stressed the need to combine corpus-based translation studies (CBTS) and cognitive translatology to gain insights into the cognitive foundation for the general features of translated language (Halverson 2010; Alves and Vale 2011). This paper responds to previous calls to test explicitation phenomena on different translation modalities and types (Chesterman 2004a:47), and their cognitive basis (Halverson 2010, 2003). The paper presents a triangulation model on the basis of which hypotheses from descriptive corpus-based studies are generated, testing instruments are developed using previous corpora and the results of experimental studies are triangulated using these same corpora. The empirical study departs from two previous comparable corpus studies that focus on corporate (Jiménez-Crespo 2011a) and social networking sites (Jiménez-Crespo 2013). It uses their results and corpora to develop an experimental design to test the explicitation hypothesis. The study tests and compares explicitation on two production processes (1) translating segments directly or (2) selecting the translation from a range of valid non-translated lexical units identified in the previous study to accomplish the same communicative function. If explicitation is a general or even a universal tendency, it should be similarly present regardless of the genre, translation modality or specifics of the translation process. Although the explicitation hypothesis was confirmed in Jiménez-Crespo (2011a), the results of the present study show that the levels of explicitation vary between different production conditions, with the selection condition producing higher levels of explicitation than the regular translation condition. The results suggest procedural aspects are at play during the production stage.
In this paper, we will try to grasp the elusive and controversial concept of explicitness which has been considered from different perspectives in linguistics and will take a special look at different approaches in translation and interpretation studies. Thereby, the often postulated assumption that explicitness is a universal feature appearing in all kinds and all instances of language mediation will be questioned. We will show that explicitness does not result from the translation or interpreting process per se but that other factors (also) need to be taken into account, especially conventional differences between the languages involved and the different interpreting strategies of the interpreters. Our investigation is based on data from a parallel corpus of German-English popular science texts and a corpus of interpreter-mediated discourse in a conference setting.
The present paper focuses on the phenomenon of explicitation in simultaneous interpreting. In an attempt to provide an answer to one of the most contentious issues in the translation & interpreting studies community, this study aims at investigating the causes triggering shifts leading to greater explicitness of the target texts. The scope of the analysed explicitating shifts encompasses all linguistic strata, ranging from syntax and lexis to pragmatics. The analysis of both product and process data (retrospective comments) indicates that the vast majority of explicitating shifts in simultaneous interpreting are not attributable to the interpreters' conscious strategic behaviour.
The so-called explicitation hypothesis was first formulated by Blum-Kulka (1986) and later put forward as a possible translation universal by corpus-based translation scholars. Even though it has given rise to a considerable body of literature, the notion is far from unproblematic as regards definition, nature of the findings and reasons underlying explicitating techniques. After providing a brief overview of the kinds of problems just mentioned, the present article attempts to determine to what extent explicitating techniques are used in the English-Catalan sub-corpus of the COVALT corpus with regard to a specific cohesive device, the substituting pronoun one(s). A number of translation techniques for dealing with the substituting pronoun are first identified and then arranged on the explicitation-implicitation scale. The results of the quantitative analysis provide evidence of explicitation, as explicitating techniques account for 17.89% of the total number of segment pairs where either explicitating or neutral techniques have been used. A qualitative analysis suggests that explicitating techniques tend to occur when clarity or even intelligibility are at stake. In line with previous research, the present study indicates that explicitation is used to make reference more unambiguous and to avoid repetition through the use of synonyms, both features making for more readable target texts.
The paper focuses on a textual shift that was observed in a comparison between the Italian nominalized infinitive and its Slovene translations. The nominalized infinitive essentially allows a process to be worded as a nominal structure, while (at least partly) retaining its verbal nature; in the framework of systemic functional grammar, it is explained as a type of grammatical metaphor, i.e. nominalization. The absence of a parallel structure in the grammar of Slovene requires the translator to look for other means of expression. A corpus analysis, carried out with the aid of a parallel corpus which comprises both literary and non-literary Italian texts and their Slovene translations, shows that the dual (nominal and verbal) nature of the nominalized infinitive is reflected in two main types of translation equivalents and several minor ones. It is argued that the strategies displayed in the choice of these translation equivalents can be viewed as instances of obligatory explicitation, either norm-governed or strategic. Thus the main goals of the paper are to identify the textual shifts and strategies found in the parallel corpus and to see whether they can be explained as manifestations of explicitation.