Conjunctive markers in translation from English to Arabic: a corpus-based studyFootnote^*

* This article is based on a thesis entitled ‘Conjunction in translation from English to Arabic: A corpus-based study”, submitted in fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Master of Research (Translation Studies) at Macquarie University.

References

• Al-Amri, K. (2004). Arabic/English/Arabic translation: Shifts of cohesive markers in the translation of argumentative texts. A contrastive Arabic-English text-linguistic study (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Durham University, Durham.
   Google Scholar
• Al-Batal, M. (1990). Connectives as cohesive elements in a modern expository Arabic text. In M. Eid, & J. McCarthy (Eds.), Perspectives on Arabic linguistics: Papers from the annual symposium on Arabic linguistics (pp. 234–268). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Al-Jubouri, A. (1984). The role of repetition in Arabic argumentative discourse. In J. Swales, & H. Mustafa (Eds.), English for specific purposes in the Arab world (pp. 100–125). Birmingham: University of Aston.
   Google Scholar
• Al-Kashef, Y. (2011). Cohesion in Arabic into English translation: A corpus-based investigation of the translation universals (Unpublished master’s thesis). Ain Shams University, Cairo.
   Google Scholar
• Al-Shabab, O. (1996). Interpretation and the language of translation: Creativity and conventions in translation. Edinburgh: Janus.
   Google Scholar
• Alasmri, I. (2016). Conjunction in translation from English to Arabic: A corpus-based study (Master’s thesis). Macquarie University ResearchOnline. (mq:70116).
   Google Scholar
• Alsaif, A. (2012). Human and automatic annotation of discourse relations for Arabic (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Leeds, Leeds.
   Google Scholar
• 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. 17–45). 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
• Baker, M. (2011). In other words: A coursebook on translation (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Beeston, A. F. L. (1983). The role of parallelism in Arabic prose. In A. F. L. Beeston, T. M. Johnstone, R. B. Serjeant, & G. R. Smith (Eds.), Arabic literature to the end of the Umayyad period (pp. 180–185). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bernardini, S., & Ferraresi, A. (2011). Practice, description and theory come together – Normalization or interference in Italian technical translation? Meta: Journal des Traducteurs/Meta: Translators’ Journal, 56(2), 226–246. doi: 10.7202/1006174ar
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Biber, D. (1988). Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bystrova-McIntyre, T. (2012). Cohesion in translation: A corpus study of human-translated, machine-translated, and non-translated texts (Russian into English) (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Kent State University, Kent, OH.
   Google Scholar
• Cantarino, V. (1975). Syntax of modern Arabic prose. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press for the International Affairs Center.
   Google Scholar
• Dayrell, C. (2007). A quantitative approach to compare collocational patterns in translated and non-translated texts. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 12(3), 375–414. doi: 10.1075/ijcl.12.3.04day
   Google Scholar
• Delaere, I., De Sutter, G., & Plevoets, K. (2012). Is translated language more standardized than non-translated language? Using profile-based correspondence analysis for measuring linguistic distances between language varieties. Target, 24(2), 203–224. doi: 10.1075/target.24.2.01del
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eid, M. (1975). Al nahw al mussafah [The refined grammar]. Cairo: Maktabat al-shabab.
   Google Scholar
• Fattah, A. (2010). A corpus-based study of conjunctive explicitation in Arabic translated and non-translated texts written by the same translators/authors (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Manchester, Manchester.
   Google Scholar
• Halliday, M., & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London: Longman.
   Google Scholar
• Halliday, M., & Matthiessen, C. (2004). An introduction to functional grammar. London: Arnold.
   Google Scholar
• Hansen-Schirra, S. (2011). Between normalization and shining-through: Specific properties of English-German translations and their influence on the target language. In S. Kranich, V. Becher, S. Höder, & J. House (Eds.), Multilingual discourse production: Diachronic and synchronic perspectives (pp. 133–162). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Hansen-Schirra, S., Neumann, S., & Steiner, E. (2007). Cohesive explicitness and explicitation in an English-German translation corpus. Languages in Contrast, 7(2), 241–266. doi: 10.1075/lic.7.2.09han
   Google Scholar
• Hassan, T. (1979). Allughah alarabiyyah: Ma’naahaa wa mabnaahaa [Arabic language: Its structure and meaning]. Cairo: General Egyptian Book Organization.
   Google Scholar
• Hill, T., & Lewicki, P. (2006). Statistics: Methods and applications. Cape Town: StatSoft.
   Google Scholar
• Holes, C. (2004). Modern Standard Arabic: Structure, functions and varieties (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jantunen, J. (2004). Untypical patterns in translations: Issues on corpus methodology and synonymity. In A. Mauranen, & P. Kujamäki (Eds.), Translation universals: Do they exist? (pp. 101–128). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Kenny, D. (2001). Lexis and creativity in translation: A corpus-based study. Manchester: St. Jerome.
   Google Scholar
• Klaudy, K. (2008). Explicitation. In M. Baker & G. Saldanha (Eds.), Routledge encyclopaedia of translation studies (pp. 104–108). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Kruger, H., & Van Rooy, B. (2012). Register and the features of translated language. Across Languages and Cultures, 13(1), 33–65. doi: 10.1556/Acr.13.2012.1.3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Laviosa, S. (1998). The corpus-based approach: A new paradigm in translation studies. Meta: Journal des Traducteurs/Meta: Translators’ Journal, 43(4), 474–479. doi: 10.7202/003424ar
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mauranen, A. (2000). Strange strings in translated language: A study on corpora. In M. Olohan (Ed.), Intercultural faultlines: Research models in translation studies 1: Textual and cognitive aspects (pp. 119–141). Manchester: St Jerome.
   Google Scholar
• Mauranen, A. (2004). Corpora, universals and interference. In A. Mauranen, & P. Kujamäki (Eds.), Translation universals: Do they exist? (pp. 65–82). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Mauranen, A., & Kujamäki, P. (Eds.). (2004). Translation universals: Do they exist? Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Menzel, K., Lapshinova-Koltunski, E., & Kunz, K. (Eds.). (2017). New perspectives on cohesion and coherence: Implications for translation. Berlin: Language Science Press.
   Google Scholar
• Neumann, S. (2014). Cross-linguistic register studies: Theoretical and methodological considerations. Languages in Contrast, 14(1), 35–57. doi: 10.1075/lic.14.1.03neu
   Google Scholar
• Oakes, M., & Ji, M. (2012). Quantitative methods in corpus-based translation studies: A practical guide to descriptive translation research. Amterdam: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Olohan, M., & Baker, M. (2000). Reporting THAT in translated English: Evidence for subconscious processes of explicitation? Across Languages and Cultures, 1(2), 141–158. doi: 10.1556/Acr.1.2000.2.1
   Google Scholar
• Pápai, V. (2004). Explicitation: A universal of translated text? In A. Mauranen, & P. Kujamäki (Eds.), Translation universals: Do they exist? (pp. 143–164). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Puurtinen, T. (2004). Explicitation of clausal relations: A corpus-based analysis of clause connectives in translated and non-translated Finnish children’s literature. In A. Mauranen, & P. Kujamäki (Eds.), Translation universals: Do they exist? (pp. 165–176). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Pym, A. (2005). Explaining explicitation. In K. Karoly, & A. Fóris (Eds.), New trends in translation studies. In honour of Kinga Klaudy (pp. 29–34). Budapest: Akadémia Kiadó.
   Google Scholar
• R Core Team. (2016). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Retrieved from http://www.R-project.org
   Google Scholar
• Redelinghuys, K., & Kruger, H. (2015). Using the features of translated language to investigate translation expertise: A corpus-based study. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 20(3), 293–325. doi: 10.1075/ijcl.20.3.02red
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Redelinghuys, K. (2016). Levelling-out and register variation in the translations of experienced and inexperienced translators: a corpus-based study. Stellenbosch Papers in Linguistics, 45(1), 189–220.
   Google Scholar
• Ryding, K. (2005). A reference grammar of modern standard Arabic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Scott, M. (2016). Wordsmith tools (Version 7). Stroud: Lexical Analysis Software.
   Google Scholar
• Shamaa, N. (1978). A linguistic analysis of some problems of Arabic to English translation (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Oxford, Oxford.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, R., & Frawley, W. (1983). Conjunctive cohesion in four English genres. Text: Interdisciplinary Journal for the Study of Discourse, 3(4), 347–374. doi: 10.1515/text.1.1983.3.4.347
   Google Scholar
• Teich, E. (2003). Cross-linguistic variation in system and text: A methodology for the investigation of translations and comparable texts. Berlin: De Gruyter.
   Google Scholar
• 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. 177–186). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Toury, G. (2012). Descriptive translation studies and beyond: Revised edition. Amterdam: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Zanettin, F. (2014). Translation-driven corpora: Corpus resources for descriptive and applied translation studies. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar