A bird's eye view of lexical creativity in original vs. translated Slovene fiction

References

• Attridge, D. (2004). The singularity of literature. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Baker, M. (1993). Corpus linguistics and translation studies — implications and applications. In M. Baker, F. Gill, & E. Tognini-Bonelli (Eds.), Text and technology: In honour of John Sinclair (pp. 233–250). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Baker, M. (1996). Corpus-based translation studies: The challenges that lie ahead. In H. Somers (Ed.), Terminology, LSP and translation: Studies in language engineering in honour of Juan C. Sager (pp. 175–186). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Bayer-Hohenwarter, G. (2009). Translational creativity: Measuring the unmeasurable. In S. Göpferich, A. L. Jakobsen, & I. M. Mees (Eds.), Behind the mind: Methods, models and results in translation process research (Copenhagen Studies in Language 37) (pp. 39–59). Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur.
   Google Scholar
• Ben-Ari, N. (1998). The ambivalent case of repetitions in literary translation. Avoiding repetitions: A “universal” of translation? Meta: Journal des traducteurs, 43(1), 68–78. doi:10.7202/002054ar
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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). Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
   Google Scholar
• Blum-Kulka, S., & Levenston, E. A. (1983). Universals of lexical simplification. In C. Faerch & G. Kasper (Eds.), Strategies in interlanguage communication (pp. 119–139). London/New York: Longman.
   Google Scholar
• Carter, R. A., & McCarthy, M. J. (2004). Talking, creating: Interactional language, creativity and context. Applied Linguistics, 25(1), 62–88. doi:10.1093/applin/25.1.62
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Erjavec, T. (2012). SPOOK morphosyntactic specifications. Retrieved from http://nl.ijs.si/spook/msd/html-en/
   Google Scholar
• Erjavec, T., Ignat, C., Pouliquen, B., & Steinberger, R. (2005). Massive multi-lingual corpus compilation: Acquis communautaire and ToTaLe. In Proceedings of the 2nd Language & Technology conference (pp. 32–36). Poznan: University of Poznan.
   Google Scholar
• Holst, J. L. F. (2010). Creativity in translation (BA Thesis). Department of Language and Business Communication, Aarhus University.
   Google Scholar
• Ivir, V. (1987). Procedures and strategies for the translation of culture. In G. Toury (Ed.), Translation across cultures (pp. 36–48). New Delhi: Bahri.
   Google Scholar
• Jakubíček, M., Kilgarriff, A., Kovář, V., Rychlý, P., & Suchomel, V. (2013). The TenTen corpus family. In Proceedings of the 7th International Corpus Linguistics Conference (pp. 125–127). Lancaster: Lancaster University.
   Google Scholar
• Jordanous, A. (2010). Defining creativity: Finding keywords for creativity using corpus linguistics techniques. In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Computational Creativity (ICCCX) (pp. 278–287). Coimbra: University of Coimbra.
   Google Scholar
• Kenny, D. (2001). Lexis and creativity in translation. Manchester: St. Jerome.
   Google Scholar
• Kußmaul, P. (2000). Kreatives Übersetzen. (Studien zur Translation 10.). Tübingen: Stauffenburg.
   Google Scholar
• Laviosa, S. (2002). Corpus-based translation studies: Theory, findings, applications. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
   Google Scholar
• Logar Berginc, N., & Kosem, I. (2011). Gigafida – the new corpus of modern Slovene: What is really in there? In Proceedings of the Second Conference on Slavic Corpora (SlaviCorp). Dubrovnik, Croatia.
   Google Scholar
• Manning, C., & Schütze, H. (1999). Foundations of Statistical Natural Language Processing. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Newmark, P. (1988). A textbook of translation. Hemel Hempstead: Prentice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Schjoldager, A. (2008). Understanding translation. Aarhus: Academica.
   Google Scholar
• Schmid, H. (1994). Probabilistic part-of-speech tagging using decision trees. In Proceedings of international conference on new methods in language processing (Vol. 12, pp. 44–49). Manchester, UK.
   Google Scholar
• Shlesinger, M. (1991). Interpreter latitude vs. due process. Simultaneous and consecutive interpretation in multilingual trials. In S. Tirkkonen-Condit (Ed.), Empirical research in translation and intercultural studies (pp. 147–155). Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
   Google Scholar
• Tirkkonen-Condit, S. (2001). Metaphors in translation processes and products. Quaderns: revista de traducció, 6, 11–15.
   Google Scholar
• Tirkkonen-Condit, S. (2002). Metaphoric expressions in translation processes. Across Languages and Cultures, 3(1), 101–116. doi:10.1556/Acr.3.2002.1.8
   Google Scholar
• Toury, G. (1980). In search of a theory of translation. Tel Aviv: The Porter Institute for Poetics and Semiotics.
   Google Scholar
• Toury, G. (1991). Experimentation in translation studies: Achievements, prospects and some pitfalls. In S. Tirkkonen-Condit (Ed.), Empirical research in translation and intercultural studies (pp. 45–66). Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
   Google Scholar
• Toury, G. (1995). Descriptive translation studies and beyond. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Vanderauwera, R. (1985). Dutch novels translated into English: The transformation of a minority literature. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
   Google Scholar
• Veale, T., & Butnariu, C. (2006). Exploring linguistic creativity via predictive lexicology. In Proceedings of ECAI'06: Third Joint Workshop on Computational Creativity. Retrieved from http://afflatus.ucd.ie/Papers/predictiveLex.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Veale, T., & Hao, Y. (2008). Generating and understanding creative comparisons. In Proceedings of AAAI Spring Symposium: Creative Intelligent Systems (pp. 123–127). Menlo Park: AAAI Press.
   Google Scholar
• Veale, T., & Hao, Y. (2009). Support structures for linguistic creativity: A computational analysis of creative irony in similes. In Proceedings of CogSci (pp. 1376–1381). Amsterdam, Netherlands.
   Google Scholar
• Venuti, L. (1995). The translator's invisibility: A history of translation. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Vintar, Š. (2013). Uvodnik: O rojstvu korpusa SPOOK in njegovih prvih sadovih. In Š. Vintar (Ed.), Slovenski prevodi skozi korpusno prizmo (pp. 6–13). Ljubljana: Filozofska fakulteta.
   Google Scholar
• Zawada, B. (2006). Linguistic creativity from a cognitive perspective. Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies, 24(2), 235–254. doi:10.2989/16073610609486419
   Google Scholar